(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's 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 .."

INVESTIGATION OF ORGANIZED CRIME 
IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



U.4,(Wv^ HEARINGS 

(VOnv^W*, * BEFORE THE 

SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE 

ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

EIGHTY-SECOND CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 
TURSUANT TO 

S. Res. 202 

(81st Congress) 
AND 

S. Res. 129 

(82d Congress) 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INVESTIGATION OF 

ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



PART 16 



FLORIDA 



JUNE 21 AND 22, 1951 



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





UNITED STATES 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON : 1951 




PO I 



SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE ORGANIZED CRIME IN 
INTERSTATE COMMERCE OCT 
HERBERT R. O'CONOR, Maryland, Chairman 
LESTER C. HUNT, Wyoming CHARLES W. TOBEY, New Hampshire 

ESTES KEFAUVER, Tennessee ALEXANDER WILEY, Wisconsin 

Richakd G. Moser, Chief Counsel 
Joyce W. Mack, Editor 
11 



CONTENTS 



Testimony of — Page 

Accardo, Martin Leo, alias Lee Martin, Miami Beach, Fla 4 

Attaway, Thomas J., Hollywood, Fla 129 

Austin, Homer L., West Hollywood, Fla 127 

Boggs, Lester C, mayor, Hollywood, Fla., accompanied by T. D. 

Ellis, Jr., attorney, Hollywood, Fla 168, 205 

Carroll, Mrs. Oreeta Yelverton Accardo, Miami, Fla 44, 198 

Clein, Reubin, Miami, Fla 3 

Daniel, Angel, Tampa, Fla 11, 148 

Drug Addict "A" _ 54 

Drug Addict "B" 169 

Drug Addict "C" 172 

Drug Peddler "A" 176 

Drug Peddler "B" 177 

Hall, David W., Coral Gables, Fla 92 

Hubbard, Albert D., attorney, Miami, Fla 82 

Lee, William H., Keyes Co., Miami, Fla 12 

Malone, Francis P., Miami, Fla 216 

Marijuana Smoker "A" 179 

Marijuana Smoker "B" 181 

Mason, Lee, Miami, Fla 59 

Mears, David James, Hollywood, Fla 124 

Muskoff, John W., attorney, Jacksonville, Fla 7 

Oswill, Mrs. Betty Jane, Miami, Fla 79 

Raskin, Jack Louis, patrolman, Miami Beach (Fla.) Police Depart- 
ment 4, 74 

Sullivan, Daniel P., operating director, Crime Commission of Greater 

Miami, Miami, Fla 13 

Sullivan, Mrs. Ethel Gertrude, Miami, Fla., accompanied by Jack 

Kahoe, attorney, Miami, Fla 133 

Sullivan, James Alexander, Miami, Fla., accompanied by Jack Kahoe, 

attorney, Miami, Fla 95, 113 

Voiler, Harry O., Miami, Fla 21, 112, 186 

Wentworth, Lee A., Hollywood, Fla 119 

ni x 



SCHEDULE OF EXHIBITS 



9. 



Number and summary of exhibits 



Letter dated November 4, 1950, to N. P. Cronin, Aberdeen, 
Md., from John W. Mnskoff, attorney, Jacksonville, Fla. 

Photostatic copy of a deed dated December 1, 1949, from 
Ethel G. and James Sullivan, to Thomas A. and Ruth M. 
Rice. 



Photostatic copy of deed dated November 6, 1950, from 
Ethel G. and James Sullivan, to Thomas A. and Ruth M. 



Rice- 



Affidavit sworn by Fuller Warren, Governor of the State of 
Florida, re amount of money spent in his campaign 

Schedule furnished by Southern Bell Telephone Co. show- 
ing removal of 12 telephones from Palm Court Hotel on 
March 2, 1950 

Photostatic copy of a check dated June 20, 1949, on the 
account of the S. & G. Service, payable to Hampshire 
House, with a notation in the upper left-hand corner 
"Account of S. P. Cohen and H. Voiler" ■-. 

Promissory note dated January 31, 1950, signed by Harry 
O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler, as officers of Oliver Pub- 
lishing Corp., in the amount of $125,000 with interest at 
3 percent per annum until maturity, and attached chattel 
mortgage securing composing-room equipment, press 
equipment, stereotype equipment, and mailing equip- 
ment of Oliver Publishing Corp., to Oreeta Yelverton 

Criminal record compiled by the FBI, of Martin Accardo_. 

Record of the department of public safety, division of police, 
Miami, Fla., Firearms Registration Certificate No. 13560, 
October 31, 1949, registering a revolver owned by Martin 
Accardo 

Record of Harry Voiler, No. 104354, of the United States 
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation^. 

Telegrams to the committee from Governor Fuller Warren 
of Florida, dated June 20 and 22, 1951 

Blackstone Hotel record of April 21, 1949, showing registra- 
tion of Albert D. Hubbard at 4:59 p. m., and check-out 
at 9:36 p. m. same dav, and assignment of rooms 1204, 
1205, and 1206 '_ 

Blackstone Hotel record of April 21, 1949, showing regis- 
tration of R. M. Craig at 4:59 p. m., and check-out at 
9:36 p. m. same dav, and assignment of rooms 1204, 1205, 
and 1206 . 

Letter dated November 6, 1950, from David W. Hall, 

C. P. A., to N. Paul Cronin, Aberdeen, Md 

Wire 1<> the committee from Harry O. Voiler, dated June 
21, 1951 

Letter to the committee from James A. Sullivan, dated 
July 6, 1950 

Deposit receipt showing signatures of Jimmy Sullivan and 
Ethel Sullivan 



1 Written into record. 

2 On file with committee. 



Appears 
on p. — 



0) 



219 



221 



0) 



223 



225 



226 

228 



228 
229 
229 

231 

233 



( 2 ) 
( 2 ) 



IV 



SCHEDULE OF EXHIBITS 



Number and summary of exhibits 




Appears 
on p.— 


18. Document dated December 8, 1949, a real-estate receipt 
bearing the purported signatures of J. A. Sullivan and 
Ethel Sullivan. . _ ______ _ _ 




234 


19. Agreement of sale of November 1949 between Ethel Sullivan 
and James Sullivan, to Thomas A. and Ruth M. Rice. _ 




( 2 ) 


20. Letter dated October 2, 1945, from Ethel G. Sullivan to 
Ernest Volkart, attorney, Baltimore, Md __ _ 




235 


21. Editorial from the Morning Mail, January 26, 1950 




236 









2 On file with committee. 



INVESTIGATION OF OEGANIZED CKIME IN INTEKSTATE 

COMMERCE 



THURSDAY, JUNE 21, 1951 

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

Miami, Fla. 

The committee met, pursuant to call of the chairman, at 9 : 30 a. m., 
Thursday, June 21, 1951, in room 401, Dade County Courthouse, 
Miami, Fla., Senator Herbert R. O'Conor (chairman) presiding. 

Present : Senator O'Conor. 

Also present: Richard G. Moser, chief counsel- Downey Rice, asso- 
ciate counsel; George Martin, director of information; Fred V. 
Bruch, narcotics investigator ; and T. S. Smith and Murray Jackson, 
investigators. 

The Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now call the meet- 
ing to order. At the outset I should like to make this statement : 

This committee is reconvening in Miami because developments since 
our last investigation regarding Florida make it imperative that we 
elicit further information. The Senate Crime Investigating Com- 
mittee has already established the tentacles of interstate gangsterism, 
with particular emphasis on big-scale gambling, having extended into 
Florida from many parts of the country, with New York, Chicago, 
Cleveland, New Orleans, and other cities figuring prominently in the 
over-all picture. 

The Accardo-Fischetti-Guzik syndicate in Chicago, which has car- 
ried over from the days when Al Capone was the ruling power there, 
and the Costello-Erickson, Aclonis-Lansky combine in New York, 
both have been shown conclusively to have conducted extensive crimi- 
nal operations in the Miami area. Numerous other racketeers oi vary- 
ing importance have been attracted to Florida and have become 
firmly entrenched in a number of communities in this State. 

It might be well at this point to reemphasize that this is not a 
prosecuting body, and that it is limited in its functions to the gather- 
ing of facts and information to be used in the preparation and enact- 
ment of legislation and procedures which will curb, if not eliminate, 
the evils which have been shown to exist. 

I am happy to be able to report that this committee has already 
taken action to secure remedial legislation. Since the committee 
submitted its third interim report on May 1 approximately a dozen 
measures have been introduced which have as their objective the 
tightening of Federal statutes which affect the operations of racketeer- 
ing elements. This hearing, and others which are to follow, have the 



2 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

broad intent of securing further facts to demonstrate the need for 
additional sound legislation. 

Of particular concern at this time is the narcotics problem, and 
during the course of our stay here in Miami we expect that a portion 
of our inquiry will be directed toward the examination of conditions 
prevailing here. 

Since the last visit to Miami and since the filing of the third interim 
report, this committee has been greatly heartened by the great awak- 
ening of interest in better law enforcement manifested by private 
citizens and organizations located in this State. We applaud this 
renewal of activity to exert proper control over the sinister opera- 
tions of those choosing to live outside the law, and we exhort these 
groups to maintain constant vigilance against a return to the condi- 
tions of recent years, which were indeed appalling and which demon- 
strated greatly the national menace that crime has become. The Sen- 
ate committee is fully aware of the belief that the general citizenry of 
Florida is law-abiding and of the highest order. It must not be 
thought that we reflect on the good name of this great State by con- 
cluding to have hearings here. 

The committee also desires to reiterate what it has said a good 
many times before, namely, that local government is a matter com- 
pletely in the hands of the people themselves. The Federal Govern- 
ment cannot intervene in the problems at the community level. 

It is the intention of this committee to hold sessions in Miami today, 
tomorrow and possibly Saturday, depending on the progress we make 
in the examination of witnesses who have been subpenaed. It may 
or may not be possible to hear all the witnesses whose attendance has 
been considered necessary by this committee. However, we do hope 
to be more fully informed about some phases of the Florida crime 
conditions which hitherto were not developed completely before we 
adjourn and return to Washington. 

Because it was impossible for the committee to obtain the courtroom 
in the Federal building, we are deeply indebted to Judge George E. 
Holt of the circuit court who has so graciously made available this 
splendid courtroom for these hearings. On behalf of the committee 
I want to express my sincere appreciation for this courtesy. At this 
time I also want to express to Mr. J. Norton Peters, the superintendent 
of the building here in the Dade County Courthouse, and his fine staff, 
appreciation for the cooperation they have given us in rearranging the 
courtroom to provide suitable accommodations for all concerned. 

In order to assure Judge Holt that proper decorum will prevail, 
I am now advising the spectators and everybody in fact that no smok- 
ing will be permitted, and that we will endeavor to conduct these 
proceedings with special regard for the dignity that can be expected 
of a senatorial proceeding. 

I want to say a word of thanks at this time to the regular bailiffs 
of this court and to the deputy United States marshals under Al Gates 
who are collaborating in maintaining order. 

It has been customary in the past for the committee to advise the 
newspaper photographers that the photographing of witnesses by use 
of flash bulbs will be permitted only at the timp the witness is sworn 
in. Should a photographer decide that he wants a picture of the 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 3 

witness during the time the witness is testifying, it will have to be on a 
time-exposure basis. 

I am sure that if everybody adheres to the rules I have thus laid 
down, this hearing will move along expeditiously and with a minimum 
of confusion. 

It is customary at this stage of the opening hearing to call for the 
production of books and records which have been subpenaed for ex- 
amination by the committee or its staff, and as chairman I would 
suggest to the counsel for the committee that we proceed at this time 
to call up these witnesses and ask them to turn over these records. 

We will proceed, Mr. Rice, to that phase of our activities. 

Mr. Rice. Is Reubin Clein in the room? 

Mr. Clein. Here. 

Mr. Rice. Will you be sworn, please? 

The Chairman. Do you before Almighty God swear to tell the 
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Clein. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF &EUBIN CLEIN, MIAMI, FLA. 

Mr. Rice. You are Reubin Clein? 

Mr. Clein. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where do you live, Mr. Clein ? 

Mr. Clein. 1860 Southwest Fourth Street. 

Mr. Rice. You are appearing here in response to a subpena duces 
tecum ? 

Mr. Clein. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Have you brought with you certain books and records ? 

Mr. Clein. Well, I had them and arranged for them to be at the 
Federal Building this morning, and when I got there this morning 
I was informed that the hearings would be held here, so they are 
available. 

Mr. Rice. Suppose you get 

Mr. Clein. I imagine you have what you want, copies of them. 
I don't have to have them to refresh my memory. 

Mr. Rice. You say they are over at the Federal Building? 

Mr. Clein. Yes, sir. I had them sent over there because I thought 
the hearing would be held there. 

Mr. Rice. Suppose you make arrangements to get them over here, 
and when you have them over here let us know and we will call you. 

Mr. Clein. I don't have to have them to refresh my memory. 

Mr. Rice. The subpena calls for the records, and we would like to 
introduce them. 

Mr. Clein. As soon as I get them, can I go back on the stand. 

Mr. Rice. We will do our best to accommodate you. 

Mr. Clein. Thank you. 

Mr. Rice. Is Mr. Raskin in the room ? 

Mr. Raskin. Here. 

The Chairman. Mr. Raskin, before Almighty God do you swear 
that the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Raskin. I do. 



4 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

TESTIMONY OF JACK LOUIS RASKIN, PATROLMAN, MIAMI BEACH 
(FLA.) POLICE DEPARTMENT 

The Chairman. Have a chair. 

Mr. Rice. What is your full name ? 

Mr. Raskin. Jack Louis Raskin. 

Mr. Rice. Is your name Jack or John ? 

Mr. Raskin. Jack. 

Mr. Rice. Is that your legal name ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where do you live, Mr. Raskin? 

Mr. Raskin. 934 Michigan Avenue, Miami Beach. 

Mr. Rice. What is your occupation? 

Mr. Raskin. I am a patrolman of the city of Miami Beach. 

Mr. Rice. Are you appearing here in response to a subpena duces 
tecum — — 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Calling for the production of certain records? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have those with you ? 

Mr. Raskin. I do. 

Mr. Rice. May we see them ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What do you have there ? 

Mr. Raskin. I have my income tax and I have some mortgages. 
My wife was also subpenaed for this hearing. 

Mr. Rice. Yes, I understand she was. I take it that your records 
are more or less joint. 

Mr. Raskin. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. If you will produce these, we will be glad to excuse you. 

Mr. Raskin. But my wife was also 

Mr. Rice. I understand. 

Mr. Raskin. You can look at these. 

Mr. Rice. What do you have in your hand there ? 

Mr. Raskin. This is the subpena. 

Mr. Rice. You will be excused during the examination of your 
records, and Ave will call you a little later. 

Mr. Raskin. Thank you. 

Mr. Rice. Is Martin Accardo in the room ? 

Mr. Accardo. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Please come forward. 

The Chairman. Will you be sworn, Mr. Accardo? Do you swear 
before Almighty God that the testimony you will give will be the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? 

Mr. Accardo. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF MARTIN LEO ACCARDO, MIAMI BEACH, FLA. 

The Chairman. Your full name, please. 
Mr. Accardo. Martin Accardo. 
The Chairman. And your address ? 

Mr. Accardo. Senator 

The Chairman. Just answer so we can identify you. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 5 

Mr. Accaedo. I have a statement I would like to read. 

The Chairman. Just so we may know who you are. 

Mr. Accardo. I have a statement I would like to go down on the 
record. 

The Chairman. What is your address? 

Mr. Accardo. I have a statement that I would like 

The Chairman. Do you decline to give your address; "Yes" or 
"No"? 

Mr. Accardo. I stand on my constitutional rights. 

The Chairman. Answer the question whether you decline to give 
your address. 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question 

The Chairman. All right, you decline. 

Mr. Accardo. Upon the ground that the answer may tend to incrim- 
inate me. 

The Chairman. Is the committee to understand that you refuse to 
answer all questions, even those pertaining to other people and not 
involving you ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question upon the ground that 
the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The committee is desirous of questioning you not 
with regard to your own activities but with regard to the activities of 
others. Are you prepared to answer the questions relating to others 
but not to yourself ? 

Mr. Accardo. I stand on my constitutional rights, and I decline to 
answer the question upon the ground that the answer may tend to 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Eice. Where do you live? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question upon the ground that 
the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. Are you reading from a piece of paper? 

Mr. Accardo. A statement. 

Mr. Rice. What does it say ; what does the paper say ? Let the rec- 
ord indicate that the witness does not answer the question. 

Mr. Accardo. I stand upon my constitutional rights. I decline to 
answer the question upon the ground 

The Chairman. The committee directs you to answer. 

Mr. Accardo. Upon the ground that the answer may tend to in- 
criminate me. 

The Chairman. The committee directs you to answer that question 
and also the other questions propounded to you by counsel. 

Mr. Moser. Have you heard the questions that have been directed to 
you; did you hear the questions that have been directed to you? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question upon the ground that 
the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. With respect to the question about where your residence 
is, do you decline to answer on the ground that it may tend to incrimi- 
nate you on a Federal or State offense — State crime or Federal crime? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer that question upon the ground 
that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. Yes, but do you refuse to answer whether it might in- 
criminate you on a Federal or State offense? What is your answer? 



6 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Do you decline to answer that question, too? Do you understand the 
question ? In your refusal to answer you are asserting your privilege 
that it might tend to incriminate you. Will it tend to incriminate you 
on a Federal or State offense— State crime or Federal crime? 

Mr. Accardo. It might. 

Mr. Rice. It might what? 

Mr. Accardo. It might incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. Of what ; it might tend to incriminate you of what, a Fed- 
eral or State offense ? 

Mr. Accardo. Both. 

Mr. Rice. It might tend to incriminate you of both ? 

Mr. Accardo. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. This offense that you have in mind, is that a specific 
offense or something you think it might be ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question upon the ground 
that it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. The offense that you have in mind for which you fear 
prosecution, did that occur more than 10 years ago ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question upon the ground that 
it might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. Did it occur less than 10 years ago ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer. I stand on my constitutional 
rights. 

Mr. Rice. Was it more than 3 years ago ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer. 

Mr. Rice, Now, sir, where were you born ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer that question upon the ground 
that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. How old are you ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question upon the ground that 
the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any information about organized crime in 
interstate commerce ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer. 

Mr. Rice. Relating to other individuals ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question upon the ground that 
the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. Have you read about any organized crime in interstate 
commerce in newspapers ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question. 

Mr. Rice. Are you married, Mr. Accardo ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question. 

Mr. Rice. On what ground ? 

Mr. Accardo. Upon the ground that the answer may tend to incrim- 
inate me. 

The Chairman. The spectators will kindly refrain from any audible 
demonstration, please. 

Mr. Moser. May I ask a question ? Do you know that the purpose of 
this committee is to investigate organized crime in interstate com- 
merce? Do you have any knowledge of any facts regarding organ- 
ized crime in interstate commerce, which facts would not incriminate 
you? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 7 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer the question on the ground that 
the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Moser. Even though it would not incriminate you ? 

Mr. Accardo. I decline to answer. 

The Chairman. The committee is definitely of the opinion that the 
witness is in contempt. He has shown a flagrant disregard of the 
rights and duties of the Senate committee. We will recommend to 
the full committee that the witness be cited for contempt. 

You are excused. 

Mr. Rice. Mr. John W. Muskoff ? 

Mr. Muskoff. Yes, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN W. MUSKOFF, ATTORNEY, JACKSONVILLE, 

FLA. 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God do you solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Muskoff. I do. I wish you would put a stop to that photog- 
rapher pointing that thing at me. I do not think it is at all proper 
decorum in a courtroom. 

The Chairman. The newspaper photographers will kindly refrain 
from taking any more pictures while the witness is being questioned. 

Mr. Muskoff. He just took a picture and I would request that he 
be instructed to destroy it. 

Mr. Rice. Will you state your name? 

Mr. Muskoff. John W. Muskoff. 

Mr. Rice. You are a member of the bar ? 

Mr. Muskoff. I am. Not of Dade County. I am from Jacksonville, 
Fla., but I have practiced law here. I wish you would quit pointing 
that thing at me. I don't think it is proper decorum for a courtroom. 

The Chairman. We will take care of that. The newspaper photog- 
raphers will kindly refrain from taking pictures of the witness while 
he is testifying. 

Mr. Muskoff. I am trying to concentrate, and he just took a picture 
since you told him to kindly refrain. This gentleman here just took 
one. 

The Chairman. We must insist on the photographers refraining 
from that during the questioning of the witness. Incidentally, you 
are just being called now for the production of records. You were 
subpenaed to produce records. 

Mr. Muskoff. I realize that, but I can't at all understand why I 
was subpenaed. I am an attorney, and I would like a little explana- 
tion of that. 

The Chairman. If you will just be a little patient, you will find out. 

Mr. Muskoff. I wish you would have this picture destroyed that 
he took in violation of the committee's order. 

The Chairman. Yes. The committee will kindly ask that the pic- 
ture which was taken in violation of the Chair's order be not published. 

Mr. Rice. Where is your office located ? 

Mr. Muskoff. 1105 Graham Building, Jacksonville, Fla. 

Mr. Rice. You are appearing here in response to a subpena? 

Mr. Muskoff. I am. 



8 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Do you have a copy of tlie subpena with you ? 
Mr. Muskoff. I do not have the subpena. I have something that 
purports to be written words, with no signature or anything on it — 
it is not what I would call a subpena. 

Mr. Rice. For your information, the Senate rules call for the bring- 
ing of the original subpena with you, and an inspection of the original 
with the copy. 

Mr. Muskoff. I have a copy. 
Mr. Rice. You have an unsigned copy ? 
Mr. Muskoff. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. The subpena asked you to bring with you all correspond- 
ence and records pertaining to any transactions and business dealings 
with James A. Sullivan, Mrs. Ethel Sullivan, of Miami, Fla., N. JP. 
Cronin, of Aberdeen, Md., and David W. Hall, of Miami, Fla. 
Mr. Muskoff. Yes. 
Mr. Rice. Do you have those files ? 

Mr. Muskoff. I do not. In answer to that, I have had no business 
relationships with Mr. Cronin other than to address a letter to him, 
and have sent to him a deed that was executed here in my presence in 
Dade County by Mr. and Mrs. Sullivan. I made no copy of that deed. 
I retained none, which is usual in the State of Florida. You merely 
send on the deed. I have the letter here that I wrote Mr. Cronin at 
that time. As to Mr. and Mrs. Sullivan, the only business transactions 
I have had with them have been as a confidential adviser to Mr. and 
Mrs. Sullivan as a duly authorized practicing attorney in the State 
of Florida. I think that covers it. 

Mr. Rice. I take it that you are refusing to comply ? 
Mr. Muskoff. I am not refusing to comply. 

Mr. Rice. You are asserting your attorney-and-client relation- 
ship? 

Mr. Muskoff. That is right, but I have no papers. I cannot com- 
ply. I have never done any business other than to be retained and 
to advise them. I have never written Mr. Sullivan a letter in my 
life. All of my correspondence — all of my contact with either he or 
Mrs. Sullivan — was either telephone or by direct contact. It never 
reached the stage where it took on a correspondence aspect. 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, have you ever been retained by either Mrs. 
Sullivan or Mr. Sullivan, referring to Jimmy Sullivan, as counsel? 
Mr. Muskoff. Indeed, yes. 
Mr. Rice. When did that take place ? 

Mr. Muskoff. Possibly the first time I was ever retained by Mr. 
Sullivan was before or shortly after he took office. For many years 
I represented the Sheriffs' Association of the State of Florida, and 
as such have advised incoming sheriffs, outgoing sheriffs, and all kinds 
of sheriffs with reference to many facts or matters, and I couldn't 
recall just how many. 

Mr. Rice. Was that on a fee basis that you represented the sheriff? 
Mr. Muskoff. I work for money ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. I take it, from that, that if Mr. Sullivan went in office in 

1944 you have from time to time been advising him since that time. 

Mr. Muskoff. Only in occasional matters. For instance, maybe I 

erroneously consider myself an expert, but for 20 years or more I have 

come in contact with thousands of types of writs, questions of whether 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 9 

or not in certain situations there would be any liability on the sheriff's 
bond and so forth. 

Mr. Eice. Have you ever represented Sullivan for a fee ? 

Mr. Muskoff. For a fee ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Muskoff. I am now. 

Mr. Rice. Can you tell us the date of any of those occasions, ap- 
proximately ? 

Mr. Muskoff. I would say approximately a year ago. 

Mr. Rice. A year ago ? 

Mr. Muskoff. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. That would be the first time that you represented Mr. 
and Mrs. Sullivan ? 

Mr. Muskoff. I cannot say that. I believe I drafted some paper 
or something for the daughter of Mrs. Sullivan with reference to go- 
ing to school. 

Mr. Rice. Have you handled any matters relating to real estate for 
them? 

Mr. Muskoff. With one exception, I never did. 

Mr. Rice. This one exception, I take it, was the Cronin matter? 

Mr. Muskoff. The Cronin matter where I learned, as you learned, 
Mr. Rice, when you went to Maryland, that Mrs. Neu, who witnessed 
the deed — -my understanding was that under the law of Maryland — 
I at one time came a little in contact with it — I had gone to George 
Washington University where we sometimes learned something 

Mr. Rice. Is that so ? 

Mr. Muskoff. It is my understanding of the law that the witness 
had to be present upon the signing of a deed, and when I ascertained 
that fact I consulted my clients and had a new deed executed and 
sent on, because I knew they wanted to do absolutely the honest and 
honorable thing, and I therefore thought it my duty as a lawyer to 
correct an improper deed, and that is the only transaction with refer- 
ence to real estate that I have ever handled for them. 

Mr. Rice. So long as we are going into that — we merely called for 
the production of records, but we will talk about that a little bit — 
what was the proposition up there that was presented to you by the 
Sullivans. Before you answer that, just as a matter of curiosity, why 
were you consulted in Jacksonville by Sullivan, who I believe is a 
resident of Dade County, some three or four hundred miles away ? 

Mr. Muskoff. I have known him; I have advised with him; he 
has talked with me. I advise with people in Washington and in the 
State of Washington. I have tried cases in California, and I don't 
think that one is necessarily limited to the practice of law with their 
home-town people. 

Mr. Rice. Did they tell you why they came to you? 

Mr. Muskoff. I was conceited enough to think they thought I knew 
enough to help them as a lawyer, and I assume that I was hired for 
the same reason the committee hired you. 

Mr. Rice. All right, I will show you a photographic copy of a deed 
dated December 1, 1949, running from Ethel and Jimmy Sullivan, her 

husband 

Mr. Muskoff. You mean purporting to run ? 

Mr. Rice. I am reading from the deed, Mr. Muskoff. 



10 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Muskoff. Very well. 

Mr. Rice. Running to Thomas A. Rice and Ruth M. Rice, his wife, 
purportedly signed by Ethel G. Sullivan and James Sullivan. Is that 
the deed about which you are referring ? 

Mr. Muskoff. If you will give me a moment, since my photo- 
graphic copy is a little larger than yours, and I being not quite as 
young as you are. Let me get mine. I think it is the same deed. I 
imagine they are the same. 

Mr. Rice. I think we can stipulate, sir, that this is a deed that was 
recorded in 1949, witnessed by Gladys F. Neu. Is that the witnessing 
to which you referred ? 

Mr. Muskoff. December 1, 1949. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What was your explanation about the reason for specify- 
ing a different date? 

Mr. Muskoff. That was the advice that I gave my client as an 
attorney at law. 

Mr. Rice. What was wrong with the deed ? 

Mr. Muskoff. I came to the legal conclusion by a process of mind 
supposed to be trained in a legal way that the deed was incorrect. 

Mr. Rice. Why? 

Mr. Muskoff. Among other things, I had learned, as you did when 
you preceded me to Maryland, that Gladys Neu had not been and 
could not have been in Florida on or about the 1st day of December 
1949, and could not have witnessed the signatures that purported to 
be on that deed, as she was in Maryland in a hospital for a cancer 
operation at exactly that time; so she couldn't have. The Maryland 
lawyer there, a fellow by the name of Mr. Cronin, had apparently 
procured her signature. Now, this is supposition. I thought that it 
was wrong, and I still think it was wrong. I thought that the people 
who paid money for that property didn't have a sound deed, and I 
sent them on what I knew was a sound deed. 

Mr. Rice. How did you happen to find out that it was wrong? 

Mr. Muskoff. I was following you around. I thought my clients 
would be prosecuted, and I was attempting to defend my clients the 
best way I knew how. 

Mr. Rice. When you found out that that deed was wrong, did you 
find that it was wrong in any other respect? 

Mr. Muskoff. That is a legal matter that I do not care to discuss ; 
it was confidential. 

Mr. Rice. As the result of finding out that there was something 
wrong with that deed, you prepared another deed; did you? 

Mr. Muskoff. I did. 

Mr. Rick. I show you a second deed dated November 6, 1950, run- 
ning from Ethel G. Sullivan and James Sullivan, her husband, to the 
saint 1 grantees. 

Mr. Muskoff, Exactly the same deed. 

Mr. Rice. To Thomas A. Rice and Ruth M. Rice, his wife? 

Mr. Muskoff. Yes. That was prepared in my office under my 
direction, sir, by my secretary or clerk. 

Mr. RidE. And these signatures here are witnessed by David W* 
Hall and Verta A. Smith '(' 

Mr. Muskoff. I can vouch for the signatures. 

Mr. Rice. You then wrote a letter to Mr. N. P. Cronin ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 11 

Mr. Muskoff. If you can term that a business transaction, that is 
the only paper that I have in mind that might be called a business 
transaction. 

Mr. Kick. It is dated November 4, 1950, and it reads as follows : 

It has come to my attention that the deed dated December 1, 1040, and recorded 
December 2. 1040, to Major Rice's home in Aberdeen, Md., was incorrectly 
executed. Under separate cover from Miami, Fla., I am having mailed to yon 
a correct and proper deed, the correctness of which the writer is in a position 
to verify. 

Please have this deed recorded immediately and send me a bill for the expense 
of recording, and I will forward you a check as soon as the bill is received. 
Very truly yours, 

John W. Muskoff. 

The Chairman. We will ask that the letter just read by Mr. Rice 
be designated "Exhibit No. 1." 

Mr. Rice. I w T ould like to offer at this time, Mr. Chairman, a 
photostatic copy of the deed dated December 1, 1949, as exhibit No. 2; 
and a photostatic copy of the deed dated November 6, 1950, as exhibit 
No. 3. 

The Chairman. The documents w T ill be admitted and marked by 
the reporter accordingly. 

(Said instruments were marked "Exhibits No. 2, and 3," respec- 
tively, and appear in the appendix on pp. 219 and 221.) 

Mr. Muskoff. Am I excused? I don't know whether I will be 
retained by my clients any longer after this questioning. It is a sure 
way to kill an attorney's earning power to call him as a witness. 

Mr. Rice. I am certain that with your ability you will not have 
any difficulty finding other clients. 

Air. Rice. Mr. Daniel in the room ? 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God, do you solemnly swear 
that the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth and 
nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Daniel. I do. • 

TESTIMONY OF ANGEL DANIEL, TAMPA, FLA. 

Air. Rice. What is your name? 

Mr. Daniel. Angel Daniel. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you say you lived ? 

Mr. Daniel. Tampa, Fla. 

Air. Rice. Where were you born ? 

Air. Daniel. Florida. 

Mr. Rice. Whereabouts ? 

Mr. Daniel. Key West, 

Mr. Rice. When? 

Mr. Daniel. 1888. 

Mr. Rice. What date ? 

Mr. Daniel. 22nd of August. 

Air. Rice. You are apppearing here in response to a subpena? 

Mr. Daniel. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have a copy of that with you? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Just what is your main business? 

85277— 51— pt. 16 2 



12 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Daniel. Most of my business is just a bolita peddler; I sell 
bolita sometimes, and I bank a little bolita. 

Mr. Rice. Are these your records that you have brought with you ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I wonder if the bailiff will take care of these records. 
We will excuse you for the moment, Mr. Daniel. 

Morton B. Wellings ? I saw Mr. Wellings earlier this morning, and 
I believe he can be found downstairs. 

The Chairman. All right. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Rice. William H. Lee? 

Mr. Pritchard. Mr. Chairman, I represent Mr. Lee. I am the at- 
torney of Dade county. 

The Chairman. What is your name? 

Mr. Pritchard. James W. Pritchard. 

The Chairman. We are pleased to have you, Mr. Pritchard. 

Before Almighty God do you solemnly swear that the testimony you 
will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Lee. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM H. LEE 

Mr. Rice. Your name is William H. Lee ? 

Mr. Lee. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You are employed where ? 

Mr. Lee. I am an associate of the Keyes Co. 

Mr. Rice. You are appearing here in response to a subpena calling 
for records? 

Mr. Lee. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. We would like to ask you at this time if you will be good 
enough to obtain available records either in your custody of which 
you could obtain access to through the Keyes Co. relating to two pieces 
of property at 216 Northeast Twenty-eighth Street and 261 Southwest 
Thirtieth Street. I think you have those records. 

Mr. Lee. Your Honor, I have been examined by the Kef auver com- 
mittee, by the Internal Revenue Department, and by several private 
investigators connected with the Internal Revenue Department, and 
I wonder if those records would not be available to you through one 
of those departments. I don't have a copy of them, and it is a matter 
that I have testified so much about that it amounts to persecution. 

Mr. Rice. You have no further records. Is that your position? 

Mr. Lee. I submitted them all of the records I had. 

Mr. Rice. AVhen you submitted them, did you get them back? 

Mr. Lee. I don't recall. My attorney may have gotten them back; 
not Mr. Pritchard but Mr. Roman. 

Mr. PiUTcirARD. I would like to make this statement. Mr. Lee does 
not have charge of the records of the Keyes Co. 

Mr. Rice. 1 understand that, but I think he can obtain them. 

Mr. Pritchard. If we can find those records, we will produce them. 

Mr. Rice. We would like to see the records this afternoon, and at 
that time we will examine you further, or it may not be necessary to 
examine your further. 

(Witness temporarily excused.) 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 13 

TESTIMONY OF DANIEL P. SULLIVAN, OPERATING DIRECTOR, 
CRIME COMMISSION OF GREATER MIAMI 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God do you swear that the tes- 
timony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I do. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Sullivan, please state your name. 

Mr. Sullivan. Daniel P. Sullivan. 

Mr. Moser. And your address ? 

Mr. Sullivan. 460 North East One Hundred Third Street. 

Mr. Moser. What is your position ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I am operating director of the Crime Commission 
of Greater Miami. 

Mr. Moser. You have testified before this committee previously, 
have you not ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, I did, last summer. 

Mr. Moser. Your organization was of great assistance to the com- 
mittee in furnishing us with information regarding criminal activi- 
ties here. Would you be so good as to tell us generally what has 
happened with regard to the situation in Florida since your last 
testimony. I ask you particularly with respect to what has hap- 
pened to law-enforcement officers, for example, whose names have 
appeared in the testimony. I will ask you other questions as we 
go along. 

Mr. Sullivan. I might just briefly say that as a result of the hear- 
ings that were held last May, June, and August, there were a num- 
ber of grand- jury investigations conducted here in this county, in 
Broward County, the adjacent county to the north, Hillsborough 
County, and various other counties in the State. 

The committee's hearings, I believe, acted more or less as an ignit- 
ing spark which aroused a great deal of public concern on the break- 
down of law enforcement and the influence of rackets down here. 
As the result of these various grand-jury investigations, there were 
a very large number of indictments returned involving rackets and 
racketeers in this county and other counties in the State of Florida. 
In this county alone there were racket indictments returned against 
over TO people. However, the record of success has not been at all 
in keeping with the popular conception of what it should be. 

However, we have been in a position where these indictments have 
been knocked out on technicalities of one type or another, here and 
in various parts of the State. In cases where there was a conviction, 
it was generally done on a guilty plea, and there was a nominal fine 
of some type. For instance, in Broward County, to the north, there 
were indictments returned against the major gambling operators, in- 
cluding the New York gang of Jake Lansky and Meyer Lansky and 
Vincent Alo. There were George Sadley and Claude Littoral and 
another number of local operator's up there. These men were brought 
into court on Saturday afternoon. They all pleaded guilty and were 
fined $1,000, the fines amounting to $16,000. In other words, the 
public reacted properly, but I think I can properly say that the law 
enforcement officials, particularly the prosecutors, have not shown 



14 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

energy and desire to in fact enforce the laws that the public wants 
enforced. 

As the result of the investigations that were conducted, there were 
a number of sheriffs that were either indicted or removed from office. 
Among the sheriffs removed was Sheriff Culbreath of Tampa, Fla. ; 
James Sullivan, the sheriff of this county; Alex Littlefield, of Day- 
tona Beach; Walter Clark, of Broward County, who recently died; 
Frank M. Williams, of Polk County; and I believe one or two others. 

Now, these sheriffs, Culbreath and Sullivan and Littlefield, were 
reinstated by the Governor. Williams was convicted of conspiracy 
to accept bribes. 

Mr. Moser. You say three were reinstated by the Governor? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Are they still in office ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Culbreath is in office. Sullivan recently resigned, 
and Littlefield is still in office. 

Mr. Moser. How long ago did Sullivan resign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, just a few days ago. 

Mr. Moser. After notice of this hearing had appeared in the press, 
I presume ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I think after this hearing was announced. 

Mr. Rice. As a matter of fact, it was after he was subpenaed, was 
it not, according to what you read in the newspapers? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't know that. I think so, from what I read. 
The suspension of sheriffs in this State is covered in a portion of the 
State constitution. It places this power in the hands of the Gover- 
nor. Article IV, section 15, places this power in the hands of the 
Governor. The article and section is entitled, "Suspension or Re- 
moval of An Officer." It says that all officers may be suspended by 
the Governor for malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty, and in- 
competency, and the cause of suspension should be communicated to 
the officer suspended. It starts off with the first sentence, saying: 

All officers that shall have been appointed or elected and that are not liable 
to impeachment may be suspended from office by the Governor for malfeasance, 
or misfeasance or neglect of duty in office, or for the commission of a felony, 
or tor drunkenness or incompetency, and the cause of suspension shall be 
communicated to the officer suspended and to the senate at its next session. 

Tn the case of Sullivan, of this county, he was suspended prior to 
tin- legislature convening in April, and at the time the legislature 
convened his name was not given to the senate by the Governor. 

The Governor, of his own volition and own action, reinstated him 
on the grounds that he found no willful misconduct or willful neglect 
of duty. 

The causes set out in the constitution are extremely broad. For 
instance, neglect of duty or incompetency, or misfeasance or mal- 
feasance. To my mind, the general conception is so broad that it 
would give the Governor the same power as an employer would have 
over his employee. In other words, if he is an incompetent employee, 
not doing his job. he could let him go. There is no indication in the 
instrument that the cause for suspension can he sustained by a crimi- 
nal charge. There is no indication that the man had to do' anything 
criminally wrong or that yon have to have a criminal indictment. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 15 

Mr. Moser. Is it true that the sheriffs removed in this State since 
our last hearing are those that were actually indicted? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. I think that Littlefield was removed, and then 
there was a hearing. I believe his is one of the few cases where there 
was a hearing held, and I don't think he was ever indicted. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Sullivan, what is the law in Florida with regard 
to making contributions toward political campaigns by people en- 
gaged in gambling activities ? 

Mr. Sullivan. There are two different sections of the law. One is 
section 875.19 of the Florida Statutes, and refers to corporations; 
and the other one is more restricted, section 550.07, of the Florida 
Statutes, and that refers particularly to persons holding licenses, 
racing licenses, under the State law. The last section is shorter and 
it sets out explicitly : 

rt is unlawful for any licensee under this chapter (referring to the racing 
law) directly or indirectly to make any contribution whatsoever to any political 
party or candidate for any State, county, district, or municipal office, and the 
commission, upon proof of any contribution having been made, sball immedi- 
ately revoke the permit of such licensee, and no such permit shall therefore be 
issued to such licensee. 

This particular statute is not a criminal statute. The punishment 
of the violation is suspension of the racing license by the racing 
commission. 

Mr. Moser. In any such case such contributions are forbidden by 
law, are they not ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. The other section is broader, section 875.19 : 

No foreign or nonresident corporation or corporation organized under the laws 
of the United States, doing business in this State, nor any domestic corporation, 
shall pay or contribute, or offer, consent, or agree to pay or contribute, directly 
or indirectly, any money, property, or thing of value to any political party, or- 
ganization, committee, or individual for any political purpose whatsoever, or for 
the purpose of influencing legislation of any kind, or to promote or defeat the 
candidacy of any person for nomination, appointment, or election to any political 
office. 

Any officer, employee, agent, or attorney or other representative of any corpo- 
ration, acting for and on behalf of such corporation, who shall violate this sec- 
tion shall be punished upon conviction by a fine or not less than one thousand 
dollars nor more than ten thousand dollars, or by imprisonment in the state 
prison for a period of not less than two nor more than five years. 

Mr. Moser. Are candidates for office in this State required to file 
affidavits showing the amounts of their contributions? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes; they were, at least in 1948, and I think still 
are. 

Mr. Moser. In the 1948 gubernatorial election? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know whether such a statement was filed by 
Gov. Fuller Warren ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes ; there was one filed. There were three different 
statements. 

Mr. Moser. Do you have a photostatic copy or copies of them 
there? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, I have a photostatic, certified copy, certified to 
by R. A. Gray, secretary of state, as of April 17, 1951. 

Mr. Moser. Will you tell us what the total amount of contributions 
shown by those papers is ? 



16 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Sullivan. The total amount of contributions, as given on this 
schedule, is $8,825. 

Mr. Moser. So the total amount reported by the Governor as hav- 
ing been contributed toward his campaign in 1948, was that figure 
of roughly $8,000? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is right, according to this statement, as given 
by him under oath and notarized. 

Mr. Moser. Notarized and under oath ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Previous testimony given before this committee has 
indicated that there were substantial additional payments, amounts, 
contributed toward that campaign; is that right? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is right- 
Mr. Moser. In summary, what were those? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I don't think any kind of a comprehensive 
record of the total amount of money that was raised in a campaign ; 
however, in the case of three major contributors, Lou Wolfson ad- 
mitted he gave $154,000. C. V. Griffin admitted to matching the same 
amount of money. William H. Johnston admitted to $100,000, which 
he raised and which he says a part of which came from his brother. 
Between these three there was an admitted amount of about $408,000. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Griffin matched one of the others in that he gave 
$150,000? 

Mr. Sullivan. $154,000. Subsequently, in the testimony given be- 
fore the Haley Florida Legislative Committee a month or so ago 
Mr. Griffin was supenaed and he testified that there was $150,000 of 
this money, at least, that Governor Warren knew had been raised by 
him and his associates, that is, of the total amount of money that 
they contributed. 

Mr. Moser. The Governor knew that $150,000 was contributed when 
he filed his SAvorn affidavit that only approximately $8,000 was con- 
tributed ? 

Mr. Sullivan. This affidavit speaks for itself : 

State of Florida, 

County of Charlotte, ss: 

Before me this day came the above-named candidate Fuller Warren to me per- 
sonally known, who being by me sworn, deposes and says : "I do solemnly swear 
that the statement herewith filed embraces all money spent by me or in my 
behalf, with my knowledge and consent through or by any other person; that 
I have neither directly or indirectly arranged, encouraged, or connived at the 
spending of any money other than as shown in my said statement; that I have 
not repaid any money so spent, or claimed to have been so spent, and that I will 
not do so, and that I have not violated any of the provisions or the laws gov- 
erning primary elections and the expenditure of funds in connection with a 
candidacy for a nomination in a primary, in letter or in spirit, so help me God." 

Fuller Warren. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this April 6, A. D. 1948. 

[seal] Louvenia M. Smith, 

Notary Public. 

The Chairman. We will designate the affidavit just read as "Ex- 
hibit No. 4" for the record. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Sullivan, will you summarize briefly the amounts 
that have come from gambling interests as contributions to that 
campaign ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 17 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't think there is even any estimate of the total 
amount of money contributed by gamblers. 

Mr. Moser. But there are specific gamblers who have contributed 
money ? 

Mr. Sullivan. There are specific gamblers who have been identi- 
fied as having contributed money. The records introduced in evidence 
at the hearings last summer show sums of money having been con- 
tributed by Abe Allenberg, Sammy Clark, Harry Levinson, now de- 
ceased, Ben Cohen, attorney for the S. & G. Syndicate, and' other 
gamblers. 

Mr. Moser. How about William Johnston ? There is evidence that 
Mr. Johnston contributed. 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And William Johnston owns a gambling interest, does 
he not ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, he is a legal gambler. He is the owner of a 
dog track. 

Sir. Moser. Well, the iaw forbids contributions to a political cam- 
paign by dog- or horse-track interests, doesn't it ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. As to dog-track contributions to a campaign, I believe 
that the statute provides that any such contributing interest, con- 
tributing directly or indirectly, will be subjected to a loss of license; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Has there been any action taken in that respect in con- 
nection with Johnston's contribution, to your knowledge? 

Mr. Sullivan. No ; there has not. The matter has constantly been 
put before the Governor's attention for the last year and a half by us. 
In fact, an extensive report was given February 24, 1950. The Racing 
Commission announced that they were making a big investigation, 
and nobody has ever gotten a report out of them, and there is no 
indication that they are going to do anything. 

Richard Ervin, the attorney general, who submitted a brief on the 
law and an opinion, said that to his mind a contribution by an officer 
or director of a corporation under the section that refers to the racing 
license, or the section of the law I read you referring to corporations 
generally, constitutes practically prima facie evidence that he was 
acting as an agent of the corporation and contracting for and on be- 
half of the corporation, and it was up to the corporation to disprove 
that. And it must be understood that an officer of a corporation who 
contributes huge money is not doing it as an individual ; he is doing 
it for and on behalf of the corporation. 

Mr. Rice. Have you been able to obtain any replies from Fuller 
Warren to your communications relating to these questions? 

Mr. Sullivan. We have a book full of them. To some of them 
the law doesn't apply. 

Mr. Rice. And in spite of that the Attorney General has indicated 
at rebuttable presumption that there is a prima facie case there ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That's right. Of course they got an opinion from 
the racing commission which went off on a tangent to say that they 
didn't think there was any violation of the law, but the point is that 
we have attempted to have an investigation made, an investigation of 



18 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

the Capone interests in racing in this State. Of course this thing goes 
along with it, more or less, as to whether the Capone interests have 
contributed money or whether they have the money that has gone into 
gubernatorial elections, whether it has come out of Chicago or other 
ganglands. We have a file that thick [indicating] asking that some 
investigation be conducted, and there hasn't been any conducted that 
I know of as yet. 

As to the racing commission that was in, the legislature had this 
legislative investigation, and they first of all refused to approve their 
reappointments and, secondly, they sent some kind of a proclamation 
over to the Senate and asked that the entire five of them be fired, and 
all five of them were replaced here about a week or two ago by five 
new men. There were about three on that commission who con- 
sistently reinstated bookmakers, for instance, spent money rather 
freely, expense money, and, generally speaking, misconducted them- 
selves, without any regard at all for the racing laws, the intent of the 
racing laws or anything else. One of them, in fact, was a man who 
lived at the Wofford Hotel during the time that all the mobsters and 
gangsters lived there; and later, when Abe Allenberg moved to the 
Boulevard Hotel, he moved to the Boulevard Hotel, too. 

Mr. Rice. Which one was he? 

Mr. Sullivan. Roy Patience. 

Mr. Rice. You indicated that there were strong indications that 
the Capone interests were interested or connected in the dog track 
interests here. Would you amplify that particular question? Would 
you say that Jake (Greasy Thumb) Guzik or Tony Accardo or that 
group which has taken the place of the Capone interests in Chicago, 
are connected with the racing situation in this State? 

Mr. Sullivan. I certainly think there is more than ample reason 
to believe that that is so. There is a tremendous quantity of infor- 
mation showing there is. In February of last year a report given to 
the Governor set forth specifically that there was reason to believe 
that the Capone mob had interests in the Miami Beach Kennel Club, 
and the report went on further and stated that there was reason to 
believe that John Patton was a major stockholder in that corpora- 
tion, that he had been comptroller, and his name doesn't show on 
the records of the racing commission as to his owning any stock. You 
must include this information. Johnnie Patton's name does not show 
on it, because I have seen the records. 

Mr. Rice. John Patton was known as the Boy Mayor of Burnham, 
111., one of the heads of the Capone mob ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That's right. In the same report that was sent to 
the Governor and discussed with the Governor (and that has been 
almost a year and a half ago), it was set forth that not only did John 
Patton own stock but that probably the stock was held falsely and 
improperly in the name of his son-in-law, and that is a fact that was 
corroborated by your own committee, because when they got John 
Patton on the stand in Chicago he said that he and Bill Johnston con- 
trolled a Miami Beach dog track. There never has been any inves- 
tigation conducted in this State on that. 

Mr. Rice. There never has been an investigation on that conducted 
at the State level ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 19 

Mr. Sullivan. No. There was an announcement made of an inves- 
tigation that was to be held last fall, or August, of a sweeping inves- 
tigation, and they hired accountants, and that is all that has ever 
happened. Nobody has got a report from them, no report on Miami 
Beach, Jacksonville tracks or Tampa tracks. 

Mr. Eice. Would you have any notion or could you account for 
any reason why there was no investigation when it would seem that 
one is certainly called for ? 

Mr. Sullivan. There is no question in my mind. I think the reason 
is because Johnston controls the tracks, and he is very close to the 
State administration. 

Mr. Rice. In other words, there is such a tremendous influence 
wielded by this man, who is associated with the Capone mobsters, 
that he is able to stifle and cut off any attempt at investigation? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't think there is any question about it. 

Mr. Moser. Have you talked to the Governor personally about these 
things ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Recently. 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Moser. Have you attempted to communicate with the Governor 
recently % 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, I don't know; up until about a month or two 
ago. Yes, we write to him every once in a while. 

Mr. Moser. Do you get answers to your letters ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Sometimes. 

Mr. Moser. Do you get letters from him personally ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Sometimes telegrams. 

Mr. Moser. Signed by him ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Sometimes or sometimes he puts them on the AP 
or UP wires, or a telegram is sent to the newspapers. Sometimes he 
sends telegrams to the newspapers. 

Mr. Moser. You don't know whether they come from him per- 
sonally ? 

Mr. Sullivan. It is kind of hard to say. He has his name on them, 
Fuller Warren, and you have to assume that he sent them. He sent 
me one about that long [indicating]. 

Mr. Moser. Do you have any letters with his signature on them? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Then he does answer letters ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Sometimes. We tried to get hold of him about 5 
months after he went into office, but he would not answer letters or 
telephone calls or anything else. We wanted to talk to him about 
the situation down here. 

Mr. Rice. So did we. 

Mr. Moser. As you know, we have sent invitations for him to come 
here. We don't know for sure that he gets them. We get replies 
from his press secretary, but we have no assurance that his press 
secretary advises him of our invitations. 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, you will probably hear from him after you 
leave. We have found, for instance, when we were trying to get some 
kind of an investigation conducted on these race tracks and dog tracks, 



20 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

that there were responses, but generally the responses were evasive 
or to the effect that legally this couldn't be done or this does not 
come within the law, such and such law and what not. 

There is no question but that the racing commission has tremendous 
power. They are supervising what amounts to a precarious occupa- 
tion. They are supervising gambling, which is always dangerous, 
surrounded as it is by sharpsters and people who are trying to take 
advantage of the State or anybody else, and we just have not been 
successful in reaching an attentive ear or a listening ear. 

Mr. Moser. In other words, it is extremely important that the rac- 
ing commission be honest? 

Mr. Sullivan. Absolutely. I think there are two major occupa- 
tions in the history of the United States which are sometimes legalized 
and which are generally thought to be illegal ; but controls must be 
thrown around them. Those are the liquor industry and the gambling 
interests. If you don't have these controls they get out of hand. If 
too many liquor licenses and gambling licenses go out, the first thing 
you know there are too many liquor or beer parlor operators who don't 
have enough business, and then they run bolita out of the places or 
run after hours and sell to juveniles. The whole history of liquor 
shows that it must be strictly under supervision, and the same thing 
applies to gambling. When they do legalize it, it is susceptible to 
sharp practices. There is a strong motive for gangster interests to 
get control of racing. There must be strong safeguards thrown about 
it, because by its very nature it is subject to sharp practices, bribery, 
and so forth. So when they did lift the lid a little bit, then the super- 
visors or commissioners are given very strong powers to clamp down. 
There is no other person who can come into your business and tell 
you when to close or who can come into your business and go searching 
through your back-rooms, which is the general practice on liquor. 
Unusual powers are given to the State on liquor violations, and the 
same with gambling. 

Mr. Moser. There would be a very strong motive for gangster inter- 
ests to get control of racing authorities or other law-enforcement 
agencies ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Terrific, terrific. 

Mr. Moser. And it would be worth a lot of money to them, wouldn't 
it? 

Mr. Sullivan. It is worth millions of dollars to them. 

Mr. Moser. It might be worth $450,000 for them to contribute that 
amount toward a campaign? 

Mr. Sullivan. That would be nothing. For instance, with the 
extent of organized bookmaking in the United States, the power that 
the wire services wield over organized syndicates, it would be safe to 
say that 1 day's bets would amount to not less than that. For instance, 
in the betting at Hialeah, the total amount of money bet there equals 
that bet by all bettors in New York and all over. That runs into 
millions, untold amounts, of money. So that the control of that rac- 
ing there, the proper supervision of that particular race track, requires 
very strong powers of the racing commission to inquire into the 
jockeys, to inquire into and lay down rules and conditions as to the 
races, the examination of the horses before and after races to see 
whether the races are fixed, to see whether the gambling syndicates 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 21 

have rigged odds. They use come-back money, telephoned within the 
track and, of course, the wire services are rigging and manipulating 
the odds. 

Mr. Moser. Then $450,000 would be a small price to pay for all 
of that? 

Mr. Sullivan. It would be very minor. 

The Chairman. I feel, Mr. Sullivan, that it is only in order to state 
that the committee are of the opinion that your commission, under 
Colonel Younger and yourself and your associates, is entitled to the 
gratitude of the decent -thinking people, not only of this State but of 
other States of the Union. What you gentlemen have done is entirely 
in accordance with the recommendations of our committee under Sen- 
ator Kefauver, because you are attempting; to handle it at the local 
level, and you certainly, all of you, have shown vigilance and a forth- 
right attitude, which is to be commended very highly. 

Just cue other question: In my opening statement I attempted to 
picture conditions which we found here, and I was wondering whether 
you found those statements to be well-founded. 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe they are entirely well-founded, Senator. 

The Chairman. I have particular reference to two statements ; one, 
that the committee had already established that the tentacles of inter- 
state gambling interests were extending into Florida, and also that 
numerous racketeers have been attracted to Florida, and have become 
firmly entrenched here. Do you think those statements are accurate? 

Mr. Sullivan. I think they are understated. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Sullivan. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF HARRY 0. VOILER, MIAMI BEACH, FLA. 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God do you solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Voiler. I do. 

The Chairman. Your full name, please? 

Mr. Voiler. Harry O. Voiler. 

The Chairman. And your address? 

Mr. Voiler. 334 Twentieth Street, Miami Beach, Fla. 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, may I ask you to keep your voice up, 
if you can, without too much difficulty, if you please? 

Mr. Voiler. May I make a statement, sir ? 

The Chairman. Well, you may when you are asked a question. Will 
you just wait until the question is asked? 

Mr. Voiler. Just before the question is asked ? 

The Chairman. Just after the question is asked. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, did you at one time own the stock of a cor- 
poration known as Oliver Publishing Corp. ? 

Mr. Voiler. At one time? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. I still own it. 

Mr. Moser. You do? 

Mr. Voiler. Just a moment, please. May I make a statement now ? 

Mr. Moser. You have answered that question. 



22 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. Let us get the one before which you desire to make 
a statement. 

Mr. Voiler. Of course, you understand, Mr. Chairman, I am de- 
pending upon you to make a statement. Will you repeat the question, 
please ? 

Mr. Moser. What is the total amount of outstanding shares of Oliver 
Publishing Co.? 

The Chairman. Do you want to make a statement in advance of 
that? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

The Chairman. Well, now you have the opportunity of doing that. 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, I would like very much to have the 
record show that I appear here because I have been subpenaed. I 
would also like the record to show that 34 years ago I was arrested, 
convicted of a crime, sent to a penitentiary, and served 4 years. I 
would like the record to show that there is a suit pending against 
Miami Daily News for $300,000 by me. I would greatly appreciate 
it if the Chair (and I presume he is a member of the bar, is a statesman, 
and is a gentleman) will consult with the attorneys and ask them to 
submit their questions in such a way that what I have just stated will 
remain status quo and that I shall be able to give them straight answers 
without trying to appeal to what has now become famous, that "I 
refuse to answer for fear that it might incriminate me." 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, we are very glad to have your state- 
ment, and it is duly noted in the record. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, we want you to know that we are not asking 
questions to condemn you; we are not attempting to get you into 
trouble; we are trying to get information to help guide the Senate. 
This is not an attack upon you. 

Mr. Voiler. Thank you. 

Mr. Moser. If we ask questions that are embarrassing to you, we 
are sorry, but they are asked for the purpose of bringing out facts. 

Mr. Voiler. I think that if you bear in mind what I have stated 

Mr. Moser. I can't guarantee that. We don't know the nature of 
your suit. 

Mr. Voiler. I think this committee should acquaint itself with all 
phases, with all facts. 

The Chairman. That is why you are here. 

Mr. Voiler. Thank you. 

Mr. Moser. You mentioned the fact that you were convicted of a 
crime many years ago? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. The crime was armed robbery ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Have you been arrested since then ? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, that is rather a catchy question, sir. I would 
prefer that you specify. Of course, anyone could go down the street 
and be arrested, get picked up. 

Mr. Moser. In 1930 you were arrested in 'Chicago ? 

Mr. Voiler. Would you be specific and say what it was for? 

Mr. Moser. The indications are that you were arrested for at- 
tempted murder; is that correct? 

Mr. Voiler. The information— that is what 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 23 

Mr. Moser. We have information to the effect that on March 23, 
1930, you were arrested in Chicago, 111., for attempted murder; is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. We also have evidence that you were arrested in Bur- 
bank, Calif., in November 1933, on suspicion of murder; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; that is not correct, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Weren't you arrested by the Los Angeles police in 
1933? 

Mr. Voiler. Not by the Los Angeles police; by the district attorney, 
investigator for the district attorney, Burron Fitts. 

Mr. Moser. By the sheriff's office? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. By whom were you arrested? 

Mr. Voiler. By the investigator for the district attorney, Burron 
Fitts, of Los Angeles County. 

Mr. Moser. Enforcement officers? 

Mr. Voiler. I wouldn't call them enforcement officers. 

Mr. Moser. But in anj' event you were arrested by law-enforcement 
officers of some kind ; is that true ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. For suspicion of murder; were you fingerprinted on 
each of these occasions? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe that the legal procedure has always been to 
fingerprint one when one is arrested. 

Mr. Moser. In February 1934 were you arrested in Miami ? 

Mr. Voiler. I wish you would be more specific, please. 

Mr. Moser. Were you arrested in Miami, Fla., as a fugitive from 
California on a charge of robbery ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. Mr. Chairman, please 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. Voiler. I think that these questions that are being asked are 
leading. However, they put a bad slant. Counsel does not say what 
happened. He does not go any further. He just says, "Were you 
arrested ?" I will greatly appreciate it if the record could show what 
transpired and what happened in all of these arrests. Let us come to 
that conclusion so the record would be clean. 

The Chairman. Very good, sir. You are at liberty to tell us what 
happened. 

Mr. Voiler. He only asks me questions 

Mr. Rice. You asked him to ask you questions, to lead you, to sug- 
gest what the answer was. 

Mr. Moser. I will ask the questions. 

Mr. Voiler. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You were arrested for armed robbery in 1918 and you 
%vere given a sentence of how many years? 

Mr. Voiler. Thirty years. 

Mr. Moser. How many of those years did you serve ? 

Mr. Voiler. Four. 

Mr. Moser. Why did you serve only 4 out of 30 years ? 



24 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. Because the police had the governor of the State inves- 
tigate the crime and he saw fit to release me after 4 years. He thought 
I was not guilty. The governor is still living. 

Mr. Moser. In November 1933, you were arrested on suspicion of 
murder by the police in Burbank, Calif., were you not? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Were you arrested at all in November 1933 ? 

Mr. Voiler. I was arrested in Hollywood, Fla. — Hollywood, Calif., 
in 1933. 

Mr. Moser. On what charge ? 

Mr. Voiler. No charge. I was kidnaped and taken to Burbank, 
Calif., and there placed incognito and held on the presumption of 
suspicion of murder. 

Mr. Moser. Were you held by the district attorney's office ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. In 1934 you were arrested by the Miami police, were 
you not, on a charge of being a fugitive from a charge of armed 
robbery ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What happened then ? 

Mr. Voiler. The governor of the State refused to extradite me to 
California. 

Mr. Moser. Were you held under a $10,000 bond at that time ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. In 1937 in Miami, Fla., were you arrested again for 
permitting construction work to be done on Sunday ? 

Mr. Voiler. Now, that is a rather ridiculous charge, isn't it ? 

Mr. Moser. Were you also arrested on the charge of interfering 
with an officer ? 

Mr. Voiler. I can't be responsible for anything that an officer may 
charge me with. My recourse is when I appear before some court. 

Mr. Moser. Did you appear before a court at that time? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What happened ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think I was discharged. 

Mr. Moser. Would it surprise you if you were told that you were 
fine $25 and costs, and given 30 days on a suspended sentence ? 

Mr. Voiler. I would be surprised, sir. 

Mr. Moser. I have a record to that effect, sir. Is it true that in 
1937 you were arrested by the Miami police as a fugitive from justice 
from Los Angeles on a charge of robbery; 1937. December 30, 1937? 

Mr. Voiler. 1937? I am afraid that I was arrested in 1907. 

Mr. Moser. 1937. 

Mr. Voiler. In 1937 ? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. As a fugitive from justice? 

Mr. Moser. You have gone back a long way to 1907; I didn't know 
about that one. Was there one in 1907 ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. I am sorry. 

Mr. Voiler. You have the record in front of you. 

Mr. Moser. You haven't answered my question. 

Mr. Voiler. You want to ask me whether I was arrested in 1937? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 25 

Mr. Moser. December 1937 ; yes. 

Mr. Voiler. If I remember correctly, Governor Cone extradited me 
to California. 

Mr. Moser. What was the charge? 

Mr. Voiler. I think it was robbery. 

Mr. Moser. What was the disposition ? 

Mr. Voiler. Discharged. 

Mr. Moser. Whom were you accused of robbing? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't know. 

Mr. Moser. Could it have been Mae West? 

Mr. Voiler. It could have been. 

Mr. Moser. In 1944, in November, you were arrested in Miami 
for violation of the State beverage law ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. What was the disposition ? 

Mr. Voiler. Discharged. 

Mr. Moser. AVould it surprise you if I told you you were fined costs 
or 10 days in jail ; your choice? 

Mr. Voiler. May I answer that question ? 

Mr. Moser. Surely. Please do. 

Mr. Voiler. We had a restaurant and it had a bar license. The 
law specifies that one must renew their license in October. We were 
a little bit late, I think 2 or 3 days, and that is how the charge came 
about. When we renewed our license, I think the charge automati- 
cally was dropped. 

Mr. Moser. In 1950, November 15, were you arrested by the police, 
by the sheriff's office in Miami for renting a room for gambling pur- 
poses ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. I think I was indicted by the Dade County Grand 
Jury. 

Mr. Moser. Were you indicted ? 

Mr. Voiler. For permitting a tenant to use a room that they thought 
was for gambling purposes. 

Mr. Moser. It was for renting a room to someone for gambling 
purposes ; is that right ; that is correct, is it not ? 

Mr. Voiler. I was indicted on that. 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. It is still pending. 

Mr. Moser. Oh, it is still pending ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. When did you come to Miami ? 

Mr. Voiler. 1933. 

Mr. Moser. Will you please repeat the date when you came to Miami, 
when you moved to Miami ? 

Mr. Voiler. (No response.) 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, would you please repeat the date when you 
came to Miami ? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe it was sometime in February of 1933. 

Mr. Moser. Did you register here as a person who had been con- 
victed of a crime? 

Mr. Voiler. I didn't have to ; I did on my own volition. 

Mr. Moser. What is your business; what has your business been 
since you have been in Florida ? 



26 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. Well, my last occupation was as a newsboy. 

Mr. Moser. You started off as a newsboy ? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; that is my profession. 

Mr. Moser. Your profession is as a newsboy ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. What is your connection with the Palm Court Hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. I am the president. 

Mr. Moser. You are the president? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Are you also a director of that corporation ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Who is Louise Voiler? 

Mr. Voiler. She is my wife. 

Mr. Moser. Is she also a director of that corporation ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Who owns the stock of that corporation ? 

Mr. Voiler. Mrs. Louise Voiler and Harry O. Voiler. 

Mr. Moser. Together? 

Mr. Voiler. No, not together. 

Mr. Moser. You each own some of the stock ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. What percentage of the stock do you own ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think I own three shares. 

Mr. Moser. What is the business of that corporation? 

Mr. Voiler. It owns a valuable piece of property, 309 Twenty-third 
Street, Miami Beach, Fla. 

Mr. Moser. That is the piece of property known as Palm Court 
Hotel? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. And have you operated that hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. We operated it up to 2 years ago. We leased it out 
2 years ago. 

Mr. Moser. You leased it out 2 years ago ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. To whom did you lease it ? 

Mr. Voiler. To Herman and Beatrice Kohen, K-o-h-e-n. 

Mr. Moser. In 1950, March 2, did the telephone company remove 
some telephones from there ? 

Mr. Voiler. Not from the hotel. 

Mr. Moser. Not from the hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What did they remove them from ? 

Mr. Voiler. They may have removed them from some particular 
room. 

Mr. Moser. From some particular room? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Do you remember which room? 

Mr. Voiler. (No response.) 

Mr. Moser. Yon don't remember which room? 

Mr. Voiler. I think it was rooms 102 and 5. 

Mr. Moser. 102 and 5; two rooms? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How many telephones were removed on that occasion? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 27 

Mr. Voiler. I wouldn't know, sir. 

Mr. Moser. I offer in evidence as Exhibit No. 5 a schedule furnished 
to us by the telephone company, Southern Bell Telephone Co., show- 
ing the removal of 12 telephones from that address on March 2, 1950. 

(Said document as above identified received and marked "Exhibit 
No. 5," and appears in the appendix on p. 223.) 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, please, the evidence that is being offered 
is against the Palm Court Hotel, and I don't think that is right. 

The Chairman. Why do you object to having a record that pertains 
to them if it doesn't pertain to you ? 

Mr. Voiler. Because that particular room has been leased out to a 
tenant, The tenant's name is Charlie Friedman. I don't think 

Mr. Rice. Is that the Charles Friedman that is a member of the 
S.&G. Syndicate? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't know. It may be. 

Mr. Rice. You read your paper, don't you ? 

Mr. Voiler. Do I read my paper? Very thoroughly. 

Mr. Rice. You know who Charlie Friedman is ? 

Mr. Voiler. I mustn't believe everything I read. 

The Chairman. Don't you read your own paper, and don't you 
believe what you read in your own paper ? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe what I read in my paper ; yes. 

The Chairman. Do you still object to that record going in? 

Mr. Voiler. I would like the record to show, if you please, that 
those telephones in question are not telephones of the Palm Court 
Hotel, Inc. 

Mr. Moser. The records speaks for itself, Mr. Voiler. I refer to 
exhibit No. 5, and it points out that telephones removed were listed as 
follows [reading] : 

Trocadero Restaurant, billed to Harry O. Voiler; Palm Court Hotel, billed 
to Palm Court hotel, Inc. ; Palm Court Tailoring Co., billed to Palm Court Hotel, 
Inc. ; Palm Court Hotel, billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. ; Palm Court Hotel, billed 
to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. ; George McElroy, billed to George McElroy ; Palm 
Court Hotel, billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. ; Liberty Bridge Club, billed to 
Ruby Lazarus ; Palm Court Hotel, billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. ; Jack's, fruit 
shippers, billed to Mabel M. Cummings ; Mary's Flower Shop, billed to Alice 
Hodge ; Palm Court Hotel, billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. — all removed from one 
room. 

The Chairman. What do you have to say to that? 

Mr. Voiler. I object to it. 

The Chairman. Is it true or not ? 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer that. 

The Chairman. It will be received in evidence. 

Mr. Moser. On July 25, 1950, do you know that more telephones 
were removed from the Palm Court Hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, I don't. 

Mr. Moser. You do not know \ 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. You never heard of that ? 

Mr. Voiler. I know that there has been some sort of commotion 
there ; I don't know what transpired. 

Mr. Moser. On that date 11 telephones were removed from the Palm 
Court Hotel and you were manager of the hotel, were you not? 

85277— 51— pt. 16- 3 



28 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. In 1950? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. Definitely not. 

Mr. Moser. When did you cease being manager of the hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think I stated in the record there that it shows we had 
leased the Palm Court Hotel out October 1, 1949. 

Mr. Moser. To Mr. Kohen? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. The Palm Court Hotel Corp. still exists, doesn't it? 

Mr. Voiler. Definitely. 

Mr. Moser. You are the resident agent of that hotel, are you not? 

Mr. Voiler. I am not living there at the present time. 

Mr. Moser. You are the resident agent for corporate purposes, are 
you not? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And the hotel is now not operated by the hotel, Palm 
Court Hotel Corp. ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What was your source of income during the time you 
were occupying the Palm Court Hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. What year are you referring to, sir ? 

Mr. Moser. I was asking you about the period when you ran the 
Palm Court Hotel, which would be the years prior to October 1949? 

Mr. Voiler. They started them in 1936 and then they would of 
course come up to date, for that matter, although we had leased the 
hotel out. 

Mr. Moser. Let us start with the year 1944 ; can you tell me what 
your income was from the Palm Court Hotel at that time ? 

Mr. Voiler. I will have to refer to some records, sir. 

Mr. Moser. All right. 

Mr. Voiler. I am afraid you subpenaed here and asked me to come 
here with records from 1945 ; therefore, I didn't bring any records for 
1944. 

Mr. Moser. In 1944 did you sell stock, corporation stock, in the name 
of New Lee Corp. ? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe I did, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What was the nature of that corporation ; what was its 
business ? 

Mr. Voiler. The New Lee Corp. ? 

Mr. Moser. The New Lee Corp. 

Mr. Voiler. It had a drug store, a sundries store, in the Wofford 
Hotel. 

Mr. Moser. How much, roughly, does the stock cost? 

Mr. Voiler. Originally the stock cost approximately $13,500. 

M r. Moser. For how much did you sell it ? 

Mr. Voiler. $10,000. 

Mr. Moser. You sold it in 1944? 

Mr. Voiler. Somewhere around that. 

Mr. Moser. What is your source of income other than Palm Court 
Hotel ; any ? 

Mi-. Voiler. Would you please be specific? 

Mr. Moser. In 1944. 

Mr. Voiler. In 1944 I think the hotel was operating. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 29 

Mr. Moser. You think the hotel was operating and you reported 
in your income-tax return that you received $3,000 from that hotel 
that year and that you received approximately $1,G00 from other 
sources. Is that your only income for that year? 

Mr. Voiler. 1944? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. Whatever the record shows that must be it. 

Mr. Moser. So your only income was $4,600, your gross income, 
for that year? 

Mr.VoiLER. I wouldn't know, sir; whatever the record shows. I 
haven't got the returns for 1944. 

Mr. Moser. Was the Trocadero Restaurant in the hotel in 1944, 
in the Palm Court Hotel in 1944? 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, may I make an observation here, please? 

The Chairman". Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. I think there is a statute, section 55, title 26, Internal 
Revenue Code, that I think should be observed here. 

The Chairman. To what effect? 

Mr. Voiler. I am not familiar with any of these questions that man 
asks me. He should subpena my auditors. 

The Chairman. Well, if you are not familiar with the questions, 
you can so state. You are being asked direct questions as to whether 
you yourself didn't make certain returns concerning items. 

Mr. Voiler. We made those returns and they appear on files which 
the Government has. 

The Chairman. There may be some information which you possess 
that the Government does not possess. 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, that is a terrible statement to make. 

The Chairman. No. 

Mr. Voiler. Indeed it is. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, you signed your tax returns, did you not? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. In those years you probably signed them under oath. 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Were they correct in all respects? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. In 1944 your tax return showed your income was $4,600 ; 
is that correct? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And the only income you received from the Palm Court 
that year was $3,000, if the record so states? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Was the Trocadero restaurant running that year? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Was its income included in that of the Palm Court 
Hotel? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. , Moser. In the year 1945 your return shows an income of 
$10,400 from the Palm Court Hotel, an increase of $7,400; does that 
sound right? 

Mr. Voiler. Why not? 

Mr. Moser. It is a sudden increase. In the year 1946 you received 
no income whatever from the Palm Court Hotel ; how do you account 
for that ? 



30 ORGANIZED CRIME IN LNTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. Probably had a bad year. 

Mr. Moser. I think the business must fluctuate quite a bit. In 1947 
you reported no income from the Palm Court Hotel at all ; your only 
income reported was $1,266.17; can that be true? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. In 1948 you again reported income from the Palm 
Court Hotel, $2,600, or rather $4,400 total; is that the only income 
from the Palm Court Hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What is the Western Packing Corp.? 

Mr. Voiler. That was a meat-packing corporation that was in 
business. 

Mr. Moser. In what year? 

Mr. Voiler. I think it was in 1946 and approximately 1947. 

Mr. Moser. In 1946 and 1947 ? The only income you received that 
year was $2,300 in 1946, and was income from the Western Packing 
Corp. ? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe my salary was $100 a week, and that was my 
income. 

Mr. Moser. And that is all you lived on ? 

Mr. Voiler. I live on less, if it pleases you. 

Mr. Moser. Does your wife have any income ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 
• Mr. Moser. And you live on that small amount of money ? 

Mr. Voiler. On less. 

Mr. Moser. In 1950 you showed total income of $900; is that ap- 
proximately what you are living on ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. I might live on a little more than that. 

Mr. Moser. On your capital? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What does your capital consist of, stocks and bonds? 

Mr. Voiler. Today? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. I am afraid it doesn't consist of very much. 

Mr. Moser. You live only on the interest and dividends from your 
capital ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. I may live on my capital, not on the interest. 

Mr. Moser. You just use the capital? 

Mr. Voiler. One has to dig into capital. 

Mr. Moser. Where do you work now ? 

Mr. Voiler. I am not working at all. 

Mr. Moser. Are you familiar with a banquet that was held at the 
restaurant in your hotel given for the benefit of Barry College? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You do know about that banquet ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you attend? 

Mr. Voiler. Did I attend? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. I was the chairman. 

Mr. Moser. Who paid for the banquet ? 

Mr. Voiler. I did. 

Mr. Moser. You paid for it out of your own pocket? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 31 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. The previous testimony of this committee found a 
check payable by the S. & G. Syndicate, which had marked on it, pay- 
able to your restaurant, the Trocadero restaurant, and it had the nota- 
tion, "For entertainment of Barry College," with funds furnished by 
the S. & G. Syndicate, arranged by William Burbridge, Miami Beach 
councilman ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. He was the cochairman. 

Mr. Moser. And he supplied the money ? 

Mr. Voiler. He supplied the money? 

Mr. Moser. Yes ; so the check indicates, and it came from the S. & G. 
Syndicate. 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer that question, because the Barry 
College received $7,500, of which $6,000 was donations and $1,500 that 
the Trocadero restaurant had donated from the entire receipts that 
day. 

Mr. Moser. Why did the S. & G. Syndicate contribute money to 
that dinner? 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer that question. 

Mr. Moser. Did the S. & G. Syndicate ever pay any money to the 
Palm Court Hotel, Inc. ? 

Mr. Voiler. For what purpose ? 

Mr. Moser. I am asking you if it ever paid money ? 

Mr. Voiler. No; the S. & G. never paid. I have a tenant by the 
name of Charlie Friedman that you have identified in your question- 
ing as a member of the S. & G. Syndicate ; but the S. & G. Syndicate 
never paid any money to the Palm Court Hotel. 

Mr. Moser. What is the Hampshire House? 

(No response.) 

Mr. Moser. What is the Hampshire House ? 

Mr. Voiler. Not knowing, I cannot answer. 

Mr. Moser. You never heard of the Hampshire House? 

Mr. Voiler. I have lived in the Hampshire House in New York 
City. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever go to New York with Sam Cohen and stay 
at the Hampshire House ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. You never went to the Hampshire House with Sam 
Cohen ? 

Mr. Voiler. I went to register at the Hampshire House. 

Mr. Moser. You registered there? 

Mr. Voiler. At the Hampshire House, and the house was full, 
and 



Mr. Moser. Yes, and- 



Mr. Voiler. And Sam Cohen came into the lobby and said, "What 
is the trouble?" I said, "I have a reservation here, but they have no 
rooms." 

Mr. Moser. So you stayed in his room ? 

Mr. Voiler. So" he says, "Well, I have an extra bedroom; you can 
have my bedroom." 

Mr. Moser. Who paid the bill ? 

Mr. Voiler. He paid it. 

Mr. Moser. Was it paid by the S. & G. Service ? 



32 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer that. 

Mr. Moser. You don't know ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. I offer in evidence a photostatic copy of check dated 
June 20, 1949, on the account of the S. & G. Service, payable to Hamp- 
shire House, with a notation in the upper left-hand corner, "Account 
of S. P. Cohen and H. Voiler." 

The Chairman. It will be received in evidence. 

(Said document as above identified received and marked "Exhibit 
No. 6," and appears in the appendix on p. 225.) 

Mr. Moser. How do you account for the other checks payable to the 
Palm Court Hotel from the S. & G. Syndicate ? 

Mr. Voiler. You see, a hotel cashes all kinds of checks for all kinds 
of people. Suppose you were a client, a guest of the Palm Court 
Hotel, and you asked me to cash you a check and, if I knew you, and 
you wanted it, I would be happy to cash it : it's a matter of courtesy. 

Mr. Moser. So you think all the checks from the S. & G. Syndicate 
were merely cashed checks ? 

Mr. Voiler. I wouldn't say that. If you were cashing a check, you 
would not have it payable to Palm Court Hotel; you would have it 
payable to cash. If it was made payable to Palm Court Hotel, it could 
either be payable to rent or as a loan. 

Mr. Moser. Isn't it customary to pay it out in cash ? 

Mr. Voiler. Not necessarily. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Tom McGinty of Cleveland, Ohio? 

Mr. Voiler. I have known him for over 40 years. 

Mr. Moser. And do you know Herman H. Kohen ? 

Mr. Voiler. I have known him practically that long. 

Mr. Moser. He purchased the Palm Court Hotel from you, did he? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. He rented it from you ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Tom McGinty 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, may I have some water, please ? 

The Chairman. Yes, indeed, you may. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, do you know that Tom McGinty is a mem- 
ber of the Cleveland syndicate of gamblers ? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; I couldn't say that. 

Mr. Moser. You know nothing of his business activities? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; I couldn't say that. I knew him as a newsboy. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Jack Friedlander, of Newark? 

Mr. Voiler. I know a Jack Friedlander, of Miami Beach. 

Mr. Moser. Was he formerly of Newark ? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't know. 

Mr. Moser. What was his business, newsboy ? 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer that. 

Mr. Moser. Do you have any idea ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. He is not a gambler? 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Charles Friedman? 

Mr. Voiler. Very well. 

Mr. Moser. You do ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 33 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Where does he come from ? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't know, but he has been my tenant over 17 years. 

Mr. Moser. Where, at the Palm Court Hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. At the Palm Court Hotel. 

Mr. Moser. Has the Trocadero restaurant a liquor license? 

Mr. Voiler. It did have one. 

Mr. Moser. It did while you were running it ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Was it obtained in your name or the name of the 
restaurant ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think it was obtained in the name of either the Palm 
Court Hotel or Mrs. Louise Voiler. 

Mr. Moser. Perhaps in Mrs. Voiler's name? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have to sign the liquor-license application at 
all? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. Why didn't you sign it ? 

Mr. Voiler. You understand why. I think I paraphrased my state- 
ment originally. You, being an attorney, you know. Perhaps you 
would like keep on using the word "ex-convict" ; if it pleases you, I will 
smile ; I will smile with you. 

Mr. Moser. I just want you to understand that we are trying to find 
out 

Mr. Voiler. I don't think you are trying to find out anything that 
is of benefit to this committee when you are trying to inquire about me 
being an ex-convict. 

Mr. Moser. I am not trying to show that you are an ex-convict. 

Mr. Voiler. Oh, yes ; you are. I tried to help you by helping you 
out — by paraphrasing my statem'ent to the chairman. 

Mr. Moser. I think that we have shown that you have associations 
among gamblers ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; I don't think so. You haven't shown anything yet. 

The Chairman. That is for the committee to decide. 

Mr. Voiler. I am a party of this committee right now. 

The Chairman. You are a witness now, involuntary. 

Mr. Voiler. Voluntary. 

The Chairman. I thought you came in response to a summons. 

Mr. Voiler. I would have come if you had called me up. 

Mr. Moser. You are the sole owner of the Oliver Publishing Corp., 
are you not ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. That was organized for the purpose of publishing a 
newspaper called the Morning Mail ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. It was organized in the fall of 1949 ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did that newspaper have printing equipment and a 
building? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Where was it located ? 

Mr. Voiler. 1521 and 1523 Alton Road, Miami Beach, Fla. 



34 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. How much did the building cost you ? 

Mr. Voiler. $70,000. 

Mr. Moser. How much did the equipment cost? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, it originally was — the original equipment that 
I bought in Washington, D. C, was $41,000. 

Mr. Moser. How much rent do you pay on your apartment? 

Mr. Voiler. Where ? 

Mr. Moser. At the place you live ? 

Mr. Voiler. When? 

Mr. Moser. At the present time. 

Mr. Voiler. $100 a month. 

Mr. Moser. How many rooms? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, it has a bedroom and a living room and a half 
dinette and a half sort of kitchen. 

Mr. Moser. And an outside terrace? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And it is only $100 a month ? 

Mr. Voiler. That is all. 

Mr. Moser. Do you drive an automobile? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You do not? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. How do you pay $100 a month for rent when your in- 
come is only $900 a year ? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, I think I have a credit in this town after living 
here for some 17 or 18 years. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you get the $70,000 that you paid for that 
building? — that the corporation paid for that building? 

Mr. Voiler. I didn't buy the building. 

Mr. Moser. The corporation bought it? 

Mr. Voiler. No. I am sorry. 

Mr. Moser. Who owns the building? 

Mr. Voiler. Mrs. Louise Voiler. 

Mr. Moser. Mrs. Louise Voiler; where did she get the $70,000 to 
buy the building with? 

Mr. Voiler. I am afraid you will have to ask her that question. 

Mr. Moser. She has no income, does she ? 

Mr. Voiler. She has no income whatever. 

Mr. Moser. But she had $70,000 with which to buy the building? 
Is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't know, sir. You are asking the question and you 
want me to answer it. 

Mr. Moser. Do you recommend that we call Mrs. Voiler to testify ? 

Mr. Voiler. If you wish ; yes. 

The Chairman. Can't you tell us? 

Mr. Voiler. I can ; yes. 

The Chairman. Why don't you answer the question ? You said be- 
fore you wanted to cooperate ; why don't you tell us the truth ? 

Mr. Voiler. I said I wanted to cooperate. 

The Chairman. Why don't you tell us the truth ? 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, I object. Have you insinuated that I 
am not telling the truth ? I want the record to show that I object to 
the Chair accusing me of using falsehoods. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 35 

The Chairman. We are not concerned about that. 

Mr. Voiler. I am concerned. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, you are not accused of telling a falsehood. 
He asked you to tell the truth. 

Mr. Voiler. What do you think I have been doing all this time on 
this chair? 

Mr. Moser. You refused to answer a question. 

Mr. Voiler. I haven't. I haven't refused to answer. 

Mr. Moser. You said we should ask your wife. Where did your 
wife get the $70,000 to buy the building? 

Mr. Voiler. She didn't pay $70,000 ; she only bought it for $70,000. 
Does that insinuate that she had to pay cash? 

Mr. Moser. How much cash did she pay ? 

Mr. Voiler. $20,000. 

Mr. Moser. Where did she get the cash? 

Mr. Voiler. She may have drawn it out of the Palm Court Hotel ; 
she may have sold some jewelry. 

The Chairman. What did she do ? 

Mr. Voiler. What did she do ? 

The Chairman. Yes ; what did she do, or do you know ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think that I gave a check originally for $7,500, for 
her. 

The Chairman. You gave a check for $7,500 ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

The Chairman. For her? 

Mr. Voiler. For her. 

The Chairman. Not your money ? 

Mr. Voiler. My money and her money must be classified, I think, 
as one. 

The Chairman. When we asked you if you paid $70,000 for the 
hotel, you said, no, your wife did ; now, you tell us that your money and 
hers are classified as one ? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, it could have been classed as one, couldn't it, after 
living with the woman for almost 25 years ? 

The Chairman. Were you avoiding the question when you said you 
did not pay it? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. I am trying to be as honest with you as you 
want me to be. 

The Chairman. We want you to be completely honest. 

Mr. Voiler. All you have to do is ask me honest questions and you 
will get honest answers. 

The Chairman. I asked you how much did you pay for the hotel ? 

Mr. Voiler. The hotel is not in question here ; you are talking about 
something else. 

The Chairman. I mean, the building; I asked you how much you 
paid for the building, and you said you didn't buy it ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

The Chairman. You said your wife bought it? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

The Chairman. I asked you where she got the money ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

The Chairman. Now, I asked you where did you get the $20,000, 
you and your wife together, to pay for that building ? 



36 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. Well, would it please you to know that of the $143,500, 
which is recorded in Dade County, and for which I sold the Palm 
Court Hotel, there remains a balance ? 

The Chairman. Did anybody else contribute toward the purchase 
of the building, besides yourself ? 

Mr. Voiler. Definitely not. 

The Chairman. Who put up the remaining $50,000 for the purchase 
of the building ? 

Mr. Voiler. I sold the assets of the Oliver Publishing Corp. for 
$154,490, 1 believe. 

The Chairman. When did you sell those assets ?^ 

Mr. Voiler. We had been negotiating for some time, and I think we 
consummated the deal on March 22 or 23, or the final deal, I think, 
was April 2 of 1951. 

The Chairman. Of 1951 ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

The Chairman. You have told us what you sold the assets for in 
1951 ; we are asking you about the purchase of the assets in 1949. 

Mr. Voiler. O. K. 

The Chairman. We have asked you about the building. 

Mr. Voiler. I shall answer you. 

The Chairman. You said you paid $70,000 for the building? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

The Chairman. Of which you put up $20,000 in cash ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

The Chairman. Who put up the $50,000? 

Mr. Voiler. As of that sale ? 

The Chairman. As of this sale that occurred 3 years later ? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; I am sorry sir, out of this sale that happened on 
April 2 which was consummated in 1951. We are in the year 1951. 

The Chairman. You purchased the building in 1949 ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. The final payment was made sometime 
in April or March of 1951. 

The Chairman. So that you bought the building in 1949 but didn't 
pay for it until 1951 ? 

Mr. Voiler. The balance, sir, the balance. 

The Chairman. The $50,000? 

Mr. Voiler. That's correct, sir. 

The Chairman. From whom did you buy that building ? 

Mr. Voiler (referring to documents). I know the man's name is 
Diamond, but I can't remember his first name. I think it was George, 
George Diamond, and Mrs. George Diamond. 

Mr. Moser. You owed them $50,000 on account of the balance of the 
purchase price after the purchase, did you not ? 

Mr. Voiler. Sir, you see, this man is distracting my attention. 
[Witness refers to photographer.] 

Mr. Moser. He is taking your picture ? 

Mr. Voiler. He is trying to earn a living. 

The Chairman. We must repeat our admonition to the photogra- 
phers. Kindly do not take pictures of the witness while he is testify- 
ing. If it interferes with your testimony. 

Mr. Voiler. No, it doesn't interfere ; but you know how it is. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 37 

Mr. Moser. I am trying to find out about the $50,000 that you didn't 
pay that you owed to George Diamond and his wife. 

Mr. Voiler. He has since died. We paid it to the estate. 

Mr. Moser. You owed it all that time ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did he take the mortgage back ? 

Mr. Voiler. He took the mortgage back for $50,000. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you buy the printing presses and so forth? 

Mr. Voiler. I bought the equipment from the Washington Printers, 
Inc., in Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Moser. Washington Printers? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Is that a corporation? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. With whom did you deal in Washington ; who was the 
individual ? 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. George DeWitt, Jr. 

Mr. Rice. Is he the man who lives in Silver Springs ? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe so, sir, yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Is he the man that was connected with that St. Helena 
proposition they had in Maryland ? 

Mr. Voiler. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Voiler. He was in the printing business at that time. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in now ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think right now he is selling lumber. 

Mr. Rice. Is he also a lawyer? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; he is not. 

Mr. Moser. Is he in any way connected with the International 
Typographical Union ? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't think so. 

Mr. Moser. Does the International Typographical Union own any 
stock in the- corporation from which you bought the equipment ? 

Mr. Voiler. I would like to have you rephrase that, please. 

Mr. Moser. You told us that you had bought the equipment from a 
corporation in Washington? 

Mr. Voiler. It is called the Washington Printers, Inc. 

Mr. Moser. The Washington Printers, Inc. ? 

Mr. Voiler. In Washington, D. C. ; yes. 

Mr. Moser. Is any of of the stock of that corporation owned by the 
International Typographical Union ? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't think so. 

Mr. Rice. How much did you pay for the equipment ? 

Mr. Voiler. $41,000. 

Mr. Moser. $41,000; and you paid $70,000 for the building? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What else did you buy ? 

Mr. Voiler. We bought three linotype machines from the Linotype 
Co. in Brooklyn, N. Y., for $30,000, of which we paid $10,000 cash. 

Mr. Moser. That makes $141,000 as the total purchase for the build- 
ing and equipment necessary to publish the paper ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. You mean the total amount ? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 



38 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. $141,000 ; that is the total ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. Now, there may have been some other small 
purchases. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you get the $10,000 in cash ? 

Mr. Voiler. Which $10,000 are you speaking of ? 

Mr. Moser. The $10,000 which you paid for the machinery which 
you purchased from the Washington Press. 

Mr. Voiler. You are a little bit mixed up, sir, I am sorry. 

Mr. Moser. No ; I am not mixed up. 

Mr. Voiler. Yes ; you are. You asked me if I bought the machinery 
for $10,000; you are talking about the International Typographi- 
cal 

Mr. Moser. To the Linotype Co. you paid $30,000, $10,000 in cash, 
and $20,000 for what ? A chattel mortgage for $20,000 ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you get the $10,000 that you paid to the 
Linotype Co. ? 

Mr. Voiler. I borrowed it from a friend of mine who is a very 
prominent man. 

Mr. Moser. What is his name? 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Max Orovitz. 

Mr. Moser. You paid $41,000 for the other equipment; how much 
in cash ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think the first, the initial payment, was $25,000. 
Then I think there was another $10,000 payment made, and then there 
was another $5,000 payment made, and the final payment, I think, 
was $1,000, and that applied for the rental of the building while we 
were dismantling. It took us that length of time, or we wanted an 
extra 2 months' time so that we could have plenty of time to dis- 
mantle it. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you get the $41,000 that was paid for that 
equipment? 

Mr. Voiler. I think the records will show in Dade County that I 
have a mortgage on the Palm Court Hotel with the First Federal Bank 
that originally started in 1946 for $55,000. It is now down — at that 
time it was down to $22,000 — $15,000 was loaned to me by Mr. Herman 
Kohen. 

Mr. Moser. $15,000 was loaned to you by Herman Kohen? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right; and $106,500 was loaned to me by Mr. 
Max Menkin and R. H. Hardy and his wife. 

Mr. Moser. So you borrowed $106,500 from R. H. Hardy and his 
wife and Max Menkin, and you borrowed $10,000 from Mr, Max 
Orovitz; you borrowed $15,000 from Herman Kohen; that is a total 
of $131,500? 

Mr. Voiler. And I borrowed $10,000 personally from the Mercantile 
National Bank. 

Mr. Moser. And you borrowed $10,000 from the Mercantile National 
Bank. In 1946 did you borrow $55,000 from the First Federal and 
Loan Bank of Miami? 

Mr. Voiler. If you remember, I said that. 

Mr. Moser. In 1946? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir ; I said that. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 39 

Mr. Moser. That was a loan on the Palm Court Hotel ? 
Mr. Voiler. That's right; it's a first mortgage. 
Mr. Moser. How was that related to this '. 

Mr. Voiler. I said that at the end of 1949 we still owed $22,000. 
Mr. Moser. How much did you pay for your stock in Western 
Packing Co. ? 

Mr. Voiler. I paid $26,000. 
Mr. Moser. Where did you get that? 

Mr. Voiler. That was the loan you were referring to, the First 
Federal loan. 

Mr. Moser. I thought you said the First Federal Loan was a mort- 
gage for the purpose of working on the Palm Court Hotel? 
Mr. Voiler. You are talking about 1946 ? 
Mr. Moser. That's correct. 
Mr. Voiler. That's what I say. 

Mr. Moser. You borrowed that money to go into the packing 
business ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Was the packing company engaged in black market 
activities at all ? 

Mr. Voiler. Not while I was connected with it. 
Mr. Moser. Who owns it now ? 
Mr. Voiler. Nobody ; it is out of business. 
Mr. Moser. Who owned it before you bought it ? 
Mr. Voiler. The Western Packing Corp.,. I think, was owned by 
Mr. I. R. Miller and his wife, I believe. There was other officers that 
I don't know about. 

Mr. Moser. You bought it in 1946 ? 
Mr. Voiler. I only bought 50 percent of it. 
Mr. Moser. In 1946? 
Mr Voiler. Late in 1946. 

Mr. Moser. How soon did it go out of business? 
Mr. Voiler. The following year or, I might say, I put it in bank- 
ruptcy myself late in that year or November of the following year, I 
am not sure. 
Mr. Moser. So you lost $26,000 ? 

Mr. Voiler. I didn't lose anything. I got my money back. 
Mr. Moser. Out of the bankruptcy? 

Mr. Voiler. I sued them in court and the court granted me all the 
money. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know a man named Shaf kin ? 
Mr. Voiler. It's rather a tricky question, sir. 
Mr. Moser. Louis Shaf kin? 
Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 
Mr. Moser. How well do you know him ? 
Mr. Voiler. I could say I know him very well. 
Mr. Moser. Is he an intimate friend of yours? 
Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did he help finance the Oliver Publishing Corp.? 
Mr. Voiler. He loaned me a little money. 

Mr. Moser. He loaned you a little bit of money; do you mean, in 
addition to all of these other loans, you borrowed money from him? 
Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 



40 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. How much from him? 

Mr. Voiler. $4,000. 

Mr. Moser. Did Mr. Shafkin attend the opening of the paper? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe he did, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Were you there? 

Mr. Voiler. Definitely. 

Mr. Moser. Who else was there? 

Mr. Voiler. Oh, there were hundreds of people there that I 
couldn't 

Mr. Moser. Mrs. Voiler was there? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you approach anybody else for money ? 

Mr. Voiler. Did I? 

Mr. Moser. Yes ; in connection with the purchase of this paper, the 
building of the paper? 

Mr. Voiler. Not while I was building the paper ; not while I was 
eating up the physical assets, the assets, as we would call it. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Murray Humphreys of Chicago? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. Murray Humphreys ; I sokl theater tickets to him 
in Chicago when I was in the theatrical business. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ask him for money ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Tony Accardo ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, I don't. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ask him for money ? 

Mr. Voiler. How can I ask a man if I don't know him ? 

Mr. Moser. You didn't ask indirectly? 

Mr Voiler. I don't know Tony Accardo. 

Mr. Moser. You know who he is, don't you. 

Mr. Voiler. No; I don't. 

Mr. Moser. You never heard of him ? 

Mr. Voiler. O, I have read in the paper; but I don't know any- 
thing about Tony Accardo. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know his brother, Martin ? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't know his brother. 

Mr. Moser. You do not know his brother, Martin ? 

Mr. Voiler. I know a man by the name of Leo Martin ; that may be 
Martin Accardo. 

Mr. Moser. How well do you know him ? 

Mr. Voiler. Not too well. 

Mr. Moser. Is Leo Martin the same man who refused to testify here 
this morning? 

Mr. Voiler. I originally knew him as Leo Martin. 

Mr. Moser. But that man whom we called as Martin Accardo is 
the same man that you know as Leo Martin? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And you don't know him very well ? 

Mr. Voiler. Not too well. I know him. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ask him for any money in connection with the 
building of this paper? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You did not? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 41 

Mr. Moser. After your paper got going, the Morning Mail, did you 
need more money? 

Mr. Voiler. A newspaper always needs money. 

Mr. Moser. Did you borrow more? 

(No response.) 

Mr. Moser. Did you borrow more money after your paper started 
going? 

Mr. Voiler. I really couldn't answer. 

Mr. Moser. You don't remember whether you borrowed any more 
money ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have losses as you were operating? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you get the money to pay the help ? 

Mr. Voiler. Where did I get the money to pay the help ? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. I think it was in the bank, wasn't it ? 

Mr. Moser. I don't know where it was ; I am asking you. 

Mr. Voiler. I must have got it from the bank. 

Mr. Moser. You don't remember whether you borrowed any money 
afterward for the operation of the paper ? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, there were several friends that J think had loaned 
me some money. 

Mr. Moser. Did they lend you any money ? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe so. 

Mr. Moser. How much? 

Mr. Voiler. I think one man loaned me $7,500. 

Mr. Moser. $7,500 ; who was he ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think Charlie Friedman loaned me $7,500. 

Mr. Moser. Do you still owe it to him ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did the paper get into financial difficulties ? 

Mr. Voiler. We closed up. 

Mr. Moser. And who supplied the money to pay the expenses while 
you were having financial difficulties ? 

Mr. Voiler. When we ran out of money we ceased publication. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ask Murray Humphreys for any money ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ask Martin Accardo or Tony Accardo for any 
money ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Is your answer still "No" ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. My answer is "No." 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Oreeta Yelverton ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes; I do. 

Mr. Moser. Who is she? 

Mr. Voiler. A lady that lives out in Coral Gables. 

Mr. Moser. Is she the former wife of Martin Accardo or Leo 
Martin ? 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer that ; I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Moser. Did you borrow any money from her ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You did not? 



42 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did Oliver Publishing Corp. borrow any money from 
her? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; we didn't. 

Mr. Moser. You did not? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Was Oliver Publishing Corp. indebted to her? 

Mr. Voiler. Mrs. Yelverton tried to make us a loan. She said she 
was going to make us a loan, but she never did. 

Mr. Moser. Did you execute a promissory note payable to her? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. You said, "No" ? 

Mr. Voiler. Just a minute. Can I enlighten on it, or would you 
just want a straight answer ? 

Mr. Moser. I want an answer ; I don't care what kind j ust so it is 
truthful. 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. Did Oliver Publishing Co. sign a note payable to her? 

Mr. Voiler. I think we have to amplify that. 

The Chairman. Suppose you do. 

Mr. Voiler. All right. Mrs. Yelverton came in to see us and asked 
us, after she had seen the place — I think she was there opening night; 
liked the place — she thought she would like the business. She said 
she had a friend that would like to make an investment. I said, "How 
much of an investment would you want to make?" She said, "It 
doesn't matter, whatever you think." I said, "Well, we could use 
$125,000." 

Mr. Moser. Did she lend it to you ? 

Mr. Voiler. Just a minute. I am not through yet, sir. And I said 
I would be willing to sell half of the place, half of the stock, for 
that amount of money. She liked the idea, and she said she would 
let me know. A little time went by and then she asked me if I could 
give her an agreement to that effect. I said, "Are you serious ?" And 
she said, "Yes." So I went and executed an agreement, which would 
also apply as a note, signed it, put a stamp on it, had Mrs. Voiler sign 
it, and handed it to her. 

Mr. Moser. In other words, you did give her a promissory note for 
$125,000. 

I hereby offer in evidence promissory note dated January 31, 1950, 
signed by Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler, as officers of Oliver 
Publishing Corp., in the amount of $125,000, with interest at 3 percent 
per annum until maturity. Attached to it is a chattel mortgage secur- 
ing that by the composing room equipment and the press equipment 
and stereotype equipment and the mailing equipment of Oliver Pub- 
lishing Corp. 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, if you please 

Mr. Moser. I am offering this in evidence. 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. What do you want to say? 

Mr. Voiler. I think that the record should show that the counsel 
should read the entire record so that it would be fair to this com- 
mittee, to the people who are listening and would like to know the 
facts, as well as to me, who am now the witness, and it concerns me. 
I would be grateful if you would read the entire letter. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 43 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, the document is in evidence. It will 
be incorporated into the record in full. 

(Said document as above identified received and marked "Exhibit 
No. 7," and appears in the appendix on p. 226.) 

Mr. Voiler. That is not fair to the witness, by counsel not reading 
the entire contents of it. 

The Chairman. What do you want to say? We have a limited 
amount of time. 

Mr. Voiler. It is stipulated that we would put up the stock as col- 
lateral, and that is one of the things that counsel has omitted. 

Mr. Rice. You mean additional collateral? 

Mr. Voiler. Not additional ; it doesn't say nothing about additional. 
I think in justice to every one of us you should read that letter. 

Mr. Rice (reading) : 

It is further agreed that the 50 shares of stock which is the capital stock of 
the Oliver Publishing Corp. shall be put up as collateral with Oretta Yelverton 
as further good faith on the part of Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler and 
the Oliver Publishing Corp. in redeeming its pledge. It is also understood that 
there are no bonds of any kind issued or outstanding by the Oliver Publishing 
Corp., a Florida corporation. 

Mr. Voiler. That is what I wanted to show; the stock had never 
been put up, and, therefore, that is not valid as an exhibit by the State. 
That is what I wanted to show. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Moser. Did you get $125,000 ? 

Mr. Voller. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You did not? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. I show you a photograph taken at the opening of the 
Morning Mail ; do you recognize yourself in that picture ? 

Mr. Voiler. I do, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you recognize Louis Shaf kin ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you recognize Martin Accardo or Leo Martin? 

Mr. Voiler. I would like the record to show that I know him as 
Leo Martin. You may know him as Martin Accardo. 

Mr. Moser. Do you recognize Oreeta Yelverton ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, I do. 

Mr. Moser. Standing next to Leo Martin? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir; I do. 

Mr. Moser. Was she then married to Leo Martin? 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't say that ; I don't know. I don't think so. 

Mr. Moser. Is it true that about the time your newspaper began to 
have financial difficulties a robbery occurred next door to Louis 
Shaf kin's store? Is that true? 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, I think it is time that the counsel ought 
to be admonished. These questions are really presumptuous and 
are trying to — I don't know what the counsel is trying to bring out, 
whether there was a robbery next door to Louis Shafkin's — was it any 
concern of mine? 

Mr. Moser. That is all I want to ask. 

The Chairman. You are excused. 



S5277— 51— pt. 16- 



44 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman, am I excused ? Can I go home or do 
you want me to remain here ? 

The Chairman. You are still under subpena, but you are excused 
at this time. 

Mr. Voiler. I can go home then? 

The Chairman. Yes, sir. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF MRS. OREETA YELVERTON ACCARDO CARROLL, 

MIAMI, ELA. 

The Chairman. The Chair desires to make a statement in con- 
nection with the next witness. It is respectfully requested that the 
cameras not be placed on the witness and that her picture not be taken. 

Will the witness kindly advance, please? 

Do you solemnly swear before Almighty God that the testimony 
you will give this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth? 

Mrs. Carroll. I do. 

The Chairman. Mrs. Carroll, you are assured that no pictures 
will be taken. Your full name, please ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Oretta Yelverton Carroll. 

The Chairman. And your address, please? 

Mrs. Carroll. 7235 Southwest Thirty-ninth Terrace, Miami, Fla. 

The Chairman. Will you be good enough to keep your voice up so 
that we may all hear you, please ? Mrs. Carroll, you understand that 
the television cameras will not show you at all ? 

Mrs. Carroll. How about the newsreel ? 

The Chairman. The newsreel camera will not be on you. Is that 
understood ? It is understood. Mr. Moser ? 

Mr. Moser. You were formerly married to Martin Leo Accardo; 
were you not? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir; I was. 

Mr. Moser. Does he also go under the name of Leo Martin ? 

Mrs. Carroll. At times I think he does. 

Mr. Moser. When were you married to him ? 

Mrs. Carroll. 1944. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you work at the time you were married to 
him? 

Mrs. Carroll. I was working at the club he bought in Cicero. In 
fact, that is how I met him. 

Mr. Moser. The Circle Club? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. What is the address of the Circle Club? 

Mrs. Carroll. 5534 West Surmac Road. 

Mr. Moser. In Chicago? 

Mrs. Carroll. In Cicero, 111. 

Mr. Moser. When you were married to him what was his busi- 
ness — running the club? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Will you tell us some of the people that frequented that 
club? If I name some to you will you tell me whether they were 
there ? Louis "Little New York" Campagna ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 45 

Mrs. Carroll. I would rather not answer those questions. 

Mr. Moser. You would rather not say whether they were there? 

Mrs. Carroll. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you say they were not? 

Mrs. Carroll. I didn't say, Mr. Rice. I said I would rather not 
answer that. 

Mr. Moser. What was the nature of the business that was being 
conducted at that place? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, you mean — you want me to describe the place ? 

Mr. Moser. Describe it and tell what went on. 

Mrs. Carroll. In the front it was a cocktail lounge, and in the 
back it was a gambling room. They bet horses. A bookie place, 
I suppose it is called. 

Mr. Moser. It was a bookie place and gambling room ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; that's right. 

Mr. Moser. But you would rather not state who the people were 
who came and went there ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, if you care to name some, I could answer it that 
way, but I don't care to mention them. 

Mr. Moser. I will name some. Jake Guzik, Tony Accardo, Martin 
Accardo, Joe Fischetti, Rocco Fischetti, Matthew Coppini, Tony 
Consentino. Do you want to say whether any of them were there? 

Mrs. Carroll. All of them. 

Mr. Moser. What was Martin Accardo's income at that time? 

Mrs. Carroll. You mean the amount? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mrs. Carroll. I couldn't tell you that. His income-tax returns 
showed a total income of $600 a month at that time. That is the only 
reported income. 

Mr. Moser. Was that income actually received by him ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, that income wasn't in connection with the 
club. 

Mr. Moser. Not in connection with the club? 

Mrs. Carroll. No ; that was another job. 

Mr. Moser. Did he have income from the club ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. He did ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What is the O. K. Motors, Inc. ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That is what he was paying $600 a month income 
tax on. 

Mr. Moser. Did he receive money from that company ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, he is supposed to have been a road supervisor 
for that company, I believe, for the last 6 or 7 years. 

Mr. Moser. A road supervisor. Did he do any work for the com- 
pany ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Moser. He had no duties with the company ? 

Mrs. Carroll. No. 

Mr. Moser. But he received $600 a month from it ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did he pay $600 back to it? 

-Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 



46 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Did he pay that in cash? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. • • . 

Mr Moser. But he had income from the club, but he did not report 
it in his income tax return. I am not asking you that ; but that is the 
fact. In whose name was the club carried ? 

Mrs. Carroll. It was in my name. 

Mr. Moser. The title was in your name? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right, What it is now I don't know. 

Mr. Moser. When did you move to Miami ? 

Mrs. Carroll. In 1946. 

Mr. Moser. Where do you live in Miami ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Where I live now ? 

Mr. Moser. Do you live in Coral Gables? 

Mrs. Carroll. I did. 

Mr. Moser. Where is Martin Accardo living? 

Mrs. Carroll. At the present time I believe he is m Coral Gables. 

Mr. Moser. In what title is that property ? 

Mrs. Carroll. In his name now. 

Mr. Moser. In whose name was it last week? 

Mrs. Carroll. His. 

Mr. Moser. Was it ever in your name ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Moser. It was at one time ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How much did it cost ? 

Mrs. Carroll. $46,000. 

Mr. Moser. $46,000; and the telephone in that place is registered m 
the name of Leo Martin ; is that correct ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I believe it is ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did Martin Accardo invest any money in the newspaper 
that was owned by Mr. Voiler? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, he did. 

Mr. Moser. How much did he invest? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, it was — he gave him different sums at different 
times. 

Mr. Moser. When did he start giving them to him? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, I knew about it about 2 or 3 days before the 
newspaper opened, and at that time he had already given $50,000. 

Mr. Moser. He had given 50,000 before it opened ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Did he give him more after that ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; he did. 

Mr. Moser. He finally gave him a total of how much ? 

Mrs. Carroll Well, when I stopped keeping track of it, it was close 
to $100,000. And his agreement, I think, between he and Mr. Voilei\ 
was $125,000. 

Mr. Moser. He had agreed to give the Oliver Publishing Co. 
$125,000, and he actually gave it; did he? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. I know that he gave approximately 
$100,000. 

The Chairman. Is the man to whom you refer the man who just 
left the stand? 

Mrs. Carroll. Mr. Harry Voiler. 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 47 

The Chairman. And he actually received it? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. In what form was it given ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Cash. 

Mr. Moser. All given in cash? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. What consideration did Martin Accardo get for putting 
up that money ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That piece of paper you just presented as evidence. 

Mr. Moser. This promissory note, dated January 31, 1950, was se- 
curity for that money? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Did Martin Accardo get any other promises from the 
Oliver Publishing Corp. or from Mr. Voiler ; any other promises ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, no, except I think their agreement, to begin 
with, was that he was only to invest $50,000 and' he would be half 
owner of the paper. Of course, $50,000 didn't last very long after 
it opened. I remember the incident of the Linotype machines that he 
mentioned that he bought and borrowed money for. I remember Mr. 
Accardo giving him money for those and, on several occasions, for 
the payroll. In fact, everything from the time that the paper 
opened, including the $50,000 that he had given him previous to the 
opening, was paid by Mr. Accardo, up to the date of the closing of the 
paper. 

Mr. Moser. Has he received any of it back ? 

Mrs. Carroll. No, sir ; not to my knowledge he hasn't. 

Mr. Moser. Is Martin Accardo the brother of Tony Accardo? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; he is. 

Mr. Moser. Did Martin Accardo get any promise from Mr. Voiler 
as to what the editorial policy and the news-reporting policy of the 
paper would be? 

Mrs. Carroll. I can't tell you that either. The only time that I 
brought up the subject, I think, was when Frank Costello was here, 
and I suppose everyone remembers the editorial that Mr. Voiler gave 
him at that time. And I happened to mention it to him, and he 
evaded the subject altogether, in a nice way, but he didn't care to 
discuss it at all. 

Mr. Moser. He did not tell you ? 

Mrs. Carroll. No. I mentioned that I thought it was very foolish. 
I never heard Mr. Accardo discuss the editorial at all. 

Mr. Moser. That was an editorial of January 26, 1950, entitled 
""Who's the Bogeyman" ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I don't remember exactly. I remember he was wel- 
coming Frank Costello to our sunshine, our fair city. I don't remem- 
ber the rest of the editorial. 

Mr. Moser. Could you identify the editorial if I showed you a copy 
of it? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; oh, yes. [Witness handed document] That 
is it. 

Mr. Moser. Why did you object to that favorable publicity of 
Costello? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, after all, a newspaper, regardless of the in- 
tentions — I don't know exactly what Mr. Accardo's intentions were of 



48 ORGANIZED CRIME EST ESTTERSTATE COMMERCE 

getting involved in a thing like that, to begin with ; but I have two 
small children, and any sort of publicity of any kind naturally reflects 
upon them. And at the beginning I had no idea of who Mr. Voiler 
was or what his policy was or his ideas; but it didn't take me long 
to find out ; so, naturally, I would ask about it. 

Mr. Moser. You say you found out what Mr. Voiler's policies 
were ; how would you describe them ? 

Mrs. Carroll. As I am not a newspaperman, it would be hard to 
describe. I don't know what his policies were. He was in favor of 
gambling. He seemed so underhanded about everything he did. I 
couldn't help but overhear conversations between people who would 
visit him. I was in the office many times and overheard telephone 
conversations about people he associated with. 

Mr. Moser. In these conversations, did they say anything about 
the policy of the paper as being in support of gangsters ?' 

Mrs. Carroll. Everything indicated it was such. 

Mr. Moser. Did they indicate that Martin Accardo had taken any" 
interest in the paper for the purpose of controlling it or with the 
hope of controlling it ? 

Mrs. Carroll. No, sir ; I can't say that. 

Mr. Moser. Did they indicate that 

Mrs. Carroll. Martin Accardo — I want to say this : Never at any 
time Mr. Voiler ran that paper Mr. Accardo had nothing to say about 
it. He was putting up the money for it, and that is the impression 
that I received. In fact, to my knowledge, Mr. Accardo never even 
saw the books or anything else. 

Mr. Moser. In these discussions that they had with regard to the 
paper, was anything said to the effect that they wanted to have a paper 
that could give race-wire news ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I know Mr. Voiler was trying very hard at that time 
to get the support — well, have Tony Accardo, for one, because he 
talked to me about it. 

Mr. Moser. What did he say about Tony Accardo ? 

Mrs. Carroll. He wanted me to try to get Tony Accardo to help 
him with the news, the movie theaters, for one, and with night-club- 
advertisements here in Miami. He wasn't able to get as much adver- 
tisement as he had planned. He explained to me that he was plan- 
ning on that money to keep the paper going and he wasn't receiving 
the kind of advertisement he had planned on when he opened. 

Mr. Moser. So he asked you to get Tony Accardo to put pressure 
on the movie houses ; is that right? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Through what means could he put pressure on the 
movie houses ? 

Mrs. Carroll. It seems that he felt that Tony had the connections 
that would be able to do that. 

Mr. Moser. That is, he had a connection with the unions ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. The unions that cover the movie houses? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. x\nd he hoped that through these means Tony Accardo 
could get their advertisements to appear in the Morning Mail ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 49 

Mr. Moser. Did he indicate at all that he expected to use the paper 
principally for publication of racing news? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; he did. He mentioned he wanted to be able 
to get that paper out before the News. 

Mr. Moser. Before the Miami News ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right; before the News. I don't know what 
time that edition comes out. Anyway, his original plans were this : 
to beat the News on the street. 

Mr. Moser. Did Mr. Voiler ever ask Tony Accardo to put up any 
money, as far as you know ? 

Mrs. Carroll. To my knowledge he has never met him. 

Mr. Moser. You don't know whether he approached Murray 
Humphreys for money ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I know that he said that he did. 

Mr. Moser. You know that he said that he did ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes ; and I heard it from other places here. 

Mr. Moser. At the time the paper was getting into financial diffi- 
culties, did Mr. Voiler come and ask for more money ? 

Mrs. Carroll. He didn't have to come and ask for it ; Mr. Accardo 
was there all the time. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Accardo was at the paper there most of the time ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Watching the operations ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Did he have anything to do with the editorial part 
of it? 

Mrs. Carroll. Nothing whatsoever. 

Mr. Moser. He was just watching the production of the paper? 

Mrs. Carroll. That is about all he did, spend money and watch it, 
or watch Mr. Voiler spend his money. 

Mr. Moser. And you were worried about the $125,000 ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That was money that was supposed to have gone into 
a trust fund for my children. That is how I found out about the 
newspaper business in the first place. That was the agreement at 
the time of the divorce. 

Mr. Moser. It was to be a trust fund for your children ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes ; and when I insisted he make an arrangement 
for the children he told me what he had done about the available cash. 
That is when I received that paper. 

The Chairman. One question in regard to that, Mrs. Carroll : You 
were seated — we observed — on the aisle of the third row while Mr. 
Voiler was testifying. You heard his testimony regarding that docu- 
ment. Was that document true or false ? 

Mrs. Carroll. It was false. 

The Chairman. Was that perjured testimony? 

Mrs. Carroll. Every word of it. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Moser. Mrs. Carroll, you said that this testimony was false; 
would you state specifically in what regard it was false? 

Mrs. Carroll. Everything he said in connection with my coming 
there. 

Mr. Moser. Everything he said with regard to your 



50 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mrs. Carroll. In regard to that paper is absolutely false; every 
word of it. 

Mr. Moser. Is what he said with regard to the places he borrowed 
money for purposes of financing the paper false? 

Mrs. Carroll. I know it to be false. 

Mr. Moser. You know it to be false ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I know it to be false ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. During what years were you married to Martin Accardo ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I married — it was 1944, I think, until 2 years — ■ 
Mr. Rice 

Mr. Rice. 1944 until when ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Possibly 1944 to 1949. 

Mr. Rice. 1948? 

Mrs. Carroll. 1948 ; I am sorry, I can't remember the dates too well. 

Mr. Rice. During the time you were married to Mr. Accardo, were 
you known as Mrs. Accardo, Mrs. Martin Accardo ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever go under the name of Mrs. Leo Martin? 

Mrs. Carroll. Never, never. 

Mr. Rice. How was Martin Accardo generally known? 

Mrs. Carroll. As Martin Accardo. The only time that I ever have 
known him to use Leo Martin was when he was traveling or if he 
didn't want someone to know who he was. His friends never knew him 
as Leo Martin. 

Mr. Rice. When you were with Harry Voiler, the witness who was 
just here, were you present when he was talking with the Accardos? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes ; he brought them out to my home. 

Mr. Rice. What would Voiler call Martin Accardo ? 

Mrs. Carroll. He called him Marty .when he would introduce him; 
I will say that out socially when he would introduce him to someone. 

Mr. Rice. How would he introduce him ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Leo Martin; Mr. Martin. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever hear him call him Accardo to anyone? 

Mrs. Carroll. No. 

Mr. Rice. But he knew him as Accardo ; did he not ? 

Mrs. Carroll. You see, the only times I have been around Mr. 
Voiler has been at the paper or either if we went out with them 
socially, when there were other people around that didn't know Mr. 
Accardo, and he would refer to him as Mr. Martin; but it isn't true 
that Mr. Voiler doesn't know that Leo Martin is Martin Accardo. He 
is very familiar with the fact. He lived in Chicago for years. News- 
papers have been full of it for years; so, it is impossible that he 
wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. During the time that you lived with Martin Accardo 
did you ever see him have a firearm, a revolver ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Many times? 

Mrs. Carroll. He owned two. 

Mr. Rice. He owned two ; what did they look like ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I don't know the first thing about the guns. One of 
them was a large one, and the other one was real small. 

Mr. Rick. A sort of a hand-arm? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; it was a pretty little thing; it had a pearl 
handle on it, and it was just real short. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 51 

Mr. Rice. Did he carry that with him at all times? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did he carry it with him on many occasions? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. He carried it in Florida ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. When you traveled with him he carried it ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes ; he had it in the car. 

Mr. Rice. What did he do with the other one ? 

Mrs. Carroll. When I moved from 1217 Granada he still owned 
that one. 

Mr. Rice. He still owned it when you left him ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did he ever tell you that he was arrested ? 

Mrs. Carroll. After I found out through other sources he told me 
about his arrest. 

Mr. Rice. What did he tell you ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, I really found out from the Coral Gables 
Police Department that came out for him to register, and that he told 
me then he had served 2 years, I believe, in Leavenworth. That was 
some years before I knew him. 

Mr. Rice. He served 2 years in Leavenworth ; what was that for ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I don't know. It was back during prohibition days. 
I don't know what the charge was. 

Mr. Rice. Mr. Chairman, I have a record of the FBI here, contain- 
ing the criminal record of Martin Accardo, No. 506,958, indicating an 
arrest, November 16, 1931, for violation of the Prohibition Act, for 
which crime he was sentenced to 4% years and $1,500 fine. He was 
thereafter received at the United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, 
Kans., where he served 2 years. 

The Chairman. The record will be received in evidence. 

(Said document as above identified, received and marked "Exhibit 
No. 8," and appears in the appendix on p. 228.) 

Mr. Rice. Do you know where Martin Accardo was born? 

Mrs. Carroll. Italy. 

Mr. Rice. Is he a citizen ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I don't — I suppose that he is ; I don't know exactly 
what the laws are on that. He was brought here when he was 2 or 3 
years of age, I think. He was just a small baby. 

Mr. Rice. During the time Martin Accardo was carrying a revolver 
here in Miami did he ever register that with the police department, to 
your knowledge ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I have learned this past week that he bought one 
gun here in Miami and said that he registered it with the department 
here at the place where he bought it. I think — I am pretty sure that 
is what he told the court. 

Mr. Rice. I have a record here, Mr. Chairman, indicating, that the 
Department of Public Safety, Division of Police, Miami, Fla., firearms 
registration, issued a firearms registration certificate No. 13560, on 
October 31, 1949, registering a revolver of Martin Accardo. 

The Chairman. That will be introduced in evidence. 

( Said document above identified received and marked "Exhibit No. 
9," and appears in the appendix on p. 228.) 



52 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. That concludes the examination. Mrs. Carroll, we 
think that you are entitled to the thanks of the committee and also 
Mr. Carroll for your cooperation. 

Mrs. Carroll. I am finished. 

The Chairman. Yes. For the record, Mrs. Carroll, we are obliged 
to you. 

( Witness excused. ) 

The Chairman. The suggestion has been made that the record of 
Harry Voiler, No. 104354 of the United States Department of Justice, 
Federal Bureau of Investigation, be offered in evidence. It will be 
received and marked and made a part of the record. 

(Said document above identified received and marked "Exhibit 
No. 10," and appears in the appendix on p. 229.) 

The Chairman. At this time we will take a recess for an hour. 

(Adjournment taken to 1 : 30 p. m. of the same day.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Chairman. The afternoon session will now come to order, 
please. Prior to the opening of this hearing there has been an ex- 
change of communications between our committee and the office of the 
Governor of this State, Gov. Fuller Warren. I desire to put into the 
record the various communications which were passed from the Sen- 
ate committee, addressed to the Governor, and the replies received to 
those inquiries, and then to read a statement concerning this situation, 
as follows : 

Statement of Senator O'Conor re Gov. Fuller Warren 

This committee has issued several invitations to Gov. Fuller Warren to appear 
at this hearing for the purpose of aiding the committee in its search for evidence 
regarding organized crime in interstate commerce. We are now advised that 
the Governor will not accept the invitation. 

We think every public official, especially one occupying the high office of Gov- 
ernor of this State, has a duty to cooperate with the committee when invited to 
do so. His duty in this regard is even greater than that of a private citizen. 
This is particularly true when he is the Governor of a State in which illegal 
activities have been open and widespread — and condoned by local law-enforce- 
ment officers whom he has the constitutional power to suspend. 

Evidence previously submitted to this committee has shown a clear connec- 
tion between local gambling activities and national gangster syndicates having 
their bases of operation in Chicago, New York, and elsewhere outside 
Florida. These syndicates could not continue to operate without the active 
connivance of public officials, particularly law-enforcement officials. Sheriffs, 
who are the chief law-enforcement officials in each county of this State, are 
ultimately responsible to the Governor. Accordingly it is the opinion of this 
committee that Governor Warren is obligated not only to the people of his own 
State but also to the people of this Nation as a whole to give us such informa- 
tion as he may possess regarding any arrangement under which these illegal 
activities are allowed. 

The following are some of the matters on which we would like to obtain in- 
formation from Governor Warren : 

1. Any knowledge of the large contributions made to his 1948 campaign for 
Governor and whether any of these sums were, to his knowledge, received from 
gambling interests or gangster syndicates. 

2. Whether commitments were made to those making the substantial con- 
tributions, regarding tolerance of gambling operations. 

3. Whether steps were taken after the election to carry out any such com- 
mitments. 

4. Whether arrangements were made after the election to permit and control 
activities of the bookie race wire service coming into Florida. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 53 

5. Whether the Governor had any information regarding the relationship be- 
tween the operation of rackets with an interstate aspect and the conduct of Flor- 
ida law-enforcement officials subject to the Governor's constitutional powers. 

6. What knowledge the Governor may have as to the penetration of Chicago, 
New York and other out-of-State gangsters into legitimate businesses in Florida. 

Our every intention has been to afford the Governor all reasonable opportunity 
to appear before us. It is a matter of surprise that the Governor of a sovereign 
State is showing what appears to be indifference to the grave organized and crim- 
inal menace posed by the very evident widespread racketeering in Florida. Since 
much of it is of an interstate character this committee is seeking information 
upon which to base Federal statutes and procedures to check it. We need and 
have appealed for the personal assistance of every citizen of this Nation who 
can assist us in any way. It is our feeling that Governor Warren, as a citizen 
of the United States, should cooperate. 

The statement, therefore, will be admitted as a matter of record and 
the replies from Governor Warren will be identified as "Exhibit No. 
11." 

(Exhibit No. 11 appears in the appendix on p. 229.) 

I also want to make one other announcement on another matter. It 
is customary for the committee to announce that any person whose 
name is mentioned in connection with any testimony and who desires 
to reply or to make any comment concerning it, shall be afforded the 
opportunity to do so at the earliest possible time. If any individual, 
whose name may have been mentioned this morning in the testimony 
or whose name may be mentioned during- the course of the proceedings, 
will make that known to counsel or to the staff of the committee, we 
will be very glad to afford that person the opportunity of making 
any reply or response in the event he or she may feel aggrieved. All 
right, Mr. Moser. 

Mr. Moser. The next witness is a drug addict. We are calling her 
under very restricted circumstances. It has been agreed that her 
name will not be revealed. Her identity will not be revealed. No 
pictures of her will be taken, and the television will not be directed 
toward her under any circumstances. 

Now, it is understood; the television people understand that; the 
radio may stay on; but no pictures of any kind, under any circum- 
stances, will be taken. The girl's name will not be revealed, and any- 
body in the press who knows her name and her identity must leave 
the room unless he or she agrees right now that he will not reveal her 
identity to anyone under any circumstances. Any member of the 
press who stays in the room is subject to that condition and is bound 
by it. 

I might also say that this girl has volunteered to give this testi- 
mony as a matter of public service, and I think we should all abide 
by these commitments as a matter of gratitude to her. 

While we are waiting for her to come I should state a few of the 
terms used by drug addicts so that her testimony will be more easily 
understood. One term is "hooked." It is a term used by drug addicts 
who have become addicted and have to have the drug as a matter of 
compulsion. 

The Chairman. Do you before Almighty God swear that the testi- 
mony you will give this committee will be the truth, the whole truth 
;and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

The Witness. I do. 



, r ,.| ORGANIZED CRIME FN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. There are two kinds of drugs involved in this testi- 
mony. One of them is marijuana :i n< I the oilier one is heroin. I 
Hunk 1 will just go ahead with the testimony and if any terms are 
used that may require explanation I will describe them in time. 

Will the bailiff please supply the name and address of the witness 

BO I led it will nol be n-vcii led ''. 

I The name of 1 he wil ness was supplied to I he committee.) 

TESTIMONY OF DRUG ADDICT "A" 
Mr. Moser. Will you please state your age ? 

The WITNESS. 1 J7. 

Mr. Moser. Haye^ you been married and divorced ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Have you used any marijuana? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mohkk. How lone ; ago did you start using ni;i ri juaua ? 

The Witness. About 7 years ago. 

Mr. Moser. About 7 years ago? 

The Witness. JTes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Were other people you knew using it \ 

The Witness. 5Tes, sir. 

Mr. MOSER. Was it quite commonly used among your circle of 

friends? 
The Witness. Some of them. 
Mr. Moser. Some, hut not :i great many? 
TheWiTNESS. 1 have quite a few that did it also. 
Mr Moser. Do you know where 1 the marijuana came from? 
The Witness. We purchased it in Miami. 1 believe it originally 

e:iine from Soul h Ainerii'n. 

Mr. MOSER, You believe it came from South America? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. By what route \ 

The Witness, l imagine by boat. 

Mr. Moser. By boat I 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. How did you buy it; did you buy it from peddlers? 

The W 1 in 1 SS, FeS, h\ 1 lie ouuee. 

Mr. Moser. ¥ou knew who they were and you knew where to go 
for 11 ; 
The Witness. Yes; 1 always knew. 
Mi Moser, Werethey hard to find? 

The \\ [TNBB8. Hard except for someone they knew. 
Mr. MOSER, Thai is, von h:id to know (horn \ 
The WITNESS, 1 had to know them. 

Mr. Moser, Were there quite a few of them available 5 ? 

TheWiTNESS, Never more than a few at a time. 

Mr Moser. Did they change often! 

The Wi i\i sv Yes. sir ; they changed often. 

Mr. Moser, How did you find out who the now one was when they 

chanced 

The U itness, By the grapevine) 1 guess. 
Mr. Moser, Bji the grapevine? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 55 

The Witness. Yes ; by the grapevine. 

Mr. Moser. Other addicts knew ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you move on from marijuana to heroin at a later 
date? 

The Witness. Yes ; about 4 years later, four or five. 

Mr. Moser. You would say that marijuana is a stepping stone to 
heroin addiction ? 

The Witness. Not exactly ; but it does give you a step into the un- 
derworld, where you can make connections with other sort of narcotics. 

Mr. Moser. So that once you use marijuana you meet other under- 
world characters who put you in contact with marijuana? 

The Witness. It does ; but it does not in itself produce it. 

Mr. Moser. How did yow start using heroin ? 

The Witness. I was drinking, and I was with some acquaintances, 
and they went somewhere to use heroin, and I went along with them. 

Mr. Moser. And you tried it because they did ? 

The Witness ; Yes; I didn't let any of them know I had it before. 

Mr. Moser. You pretended that you already knew about it ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did you know that if you started using heroin you 
might become "hooked'' ? 

The Witness. I had heard of it, but no one really knows the danger 
unless they had been part of it. 

Mr. Moser. Do you think that if it were impressed on them, if the 
danger of drugs were impressed upon the public, they would stay 
away from the drugs? 

The AVitxess. I hope so. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know where the heroin came from that you 
started with ( 

The Witness. I believe it was originally from Chicago. 

Mr. Moser. Was it bought from a peddler here? 

The Witx'ess. I think that it was sent through the mails to some- 
one here. I never met the actual confederate. 

Mr. Moser. You started using heroin, and how long was it before 
you were '"hooked V 

The Witness. I really don't know. I didn't realize it until a 
couple of months, until I became sick. I always attributed my ill- 
ness to something else, until after a couple of months. 

Mr. Moser. You were ill, and you thought you were ill for other 
reasons J 

The Witness. Yes. sir. 

Mr. Moser. How did you know you were "hooked"' finally I 

The Witness. I don't know. It finallv sinks in that that is what 
it is. 

Mr. Moser. You say you were sick: did you find that after you had 
taken heroin a little while eventually you found you were sick unless 
you had it ! 

The Witness. Yes: that's right. 

Mr. Moser. And that is the usual effect of heroin addiction? 

The Witness. That is always the effect. You are always ill. 
There is a craving along with the pain. 

Mr. Moser. There is a craving along with the pain ? 



56 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Witness. Yes ; it is stronger than hunger. 

Mr. Moser. And if you don't have it you feel sick? 

The Witness. Very sick. 

Mr. Moser. So you have to find it ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever go to other cities to get heroin ? 

The Witness. I got it in other cities, when I would be in other 
cities, and wherever I was I would have to have it. 

Mr. Moser. You traveled around to get it ? 

The Witness. I didn't travel for that purpose, but I would go for 
a vacation and, naturally, when I was there I had to get it. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have difficulty finding it ? 

The Witness. Not in any of the big cities. 

Mr. Moser. Tell us some of the cities ; did you go to Washington ? 

The Witness. No ; I never went to Washington. 

Mr. Moser. Did you go to New York? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did you go to Philadelphia ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir; to Philadelphia. 

Mr. Moser. Did you find it hard to get there ? 

The Witness. Not in New York. In Philadelphia it was; but it 
was available. 

Mr. Moser. How much did it cost in New York ? 

The Witness. Less than 50 cents per capsule. 

Mr. Moser. I think that I should explain that a capsule means a 
small quantity in which heroin is sold. 

How much was it in Philadelphia ? 

The Witness. It was $3 for the same amount. 

Mr. Moser. How do you account for the enormous difference? 

The Witness. There aren't as many addicts in Philadelphia. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever buy it in Chicago ? 

The Witness. No ; I never was in Chicago. 

Mr. Moser. In what other cities did you get it ? 

The Witness. Miami, of course. 

Mr. Moser. Miami? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know where the heroin came from that you 
purchased here in Miami ? 

The Witness. It was always either from New York or Washington 
or Chicago or Philadelphia. 

Mr. Moser. Was it always shipped in here ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir; through the mails, I believe. 

Mr. Moser. From Washington, New York, Philadelphia, and 
Chicago ? 

The Witness. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. When you got to the height of your habit how much 
were you spending a clay for heroin ? 

The Witness. I couldn't say exactly. It was a tremendous amount. 
I spent whatever I could manage to get, beg, or borrow. 

Mr. Moser. Whatever money you had you spent for that? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Can you tell us approximately how much it was, on 
the average ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 57 

The Witness. Well, it was anywhere between $20 and $50 a day, 
I imagine. 

Mr. Moser. Between $20 and $50 a day? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How long did that go on ? 

The Witness. Until I was arrested. 

Mr. Moser. Until yon were arrested ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Over how long a period did yon spend from $20 to $50 
a day for it ? 

The Witness. About a year. 

Mr. Moser. About a year ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. When you needed money for heroin, where did you go 
for it? 

The Witness. I was working two jobs, and I would borrow it, and 
sometimes I would get it at a cheaper price, since I used a lot; and 
then I would resell it to friends who didn't use so much, for a higher 
price. 

Mr. Moser. Some you got by borrowing and some from your job? 

The Witness. Most of it was from my two jobs. 

Mr. Moser. Most of it was from your two jobs ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. And some you got by buying it at a lower price and 
reselling it to your friends at a higher price ? 

The Witness. Yes ; who didn't use so much of it. 

Mr. Moser. Did you find that the use of heroin interfered with your 
work, with your jobs ? 

The Witness. Only when I didn't have it. 

Mr. Moser. When you didn't have it, you didn't 

The Witness. Then I would be forced to save the rest until I would 
be well. 

Mr. Moser. So you were irregular at your work then, at least in 
your efficiency ? 

The Witness. I would force myself to do the work that had to be 
done and save the rest for when I had it. I don't know whether it 
showed or not, because I would eventually catch up on it, because 
I would always go in one day and have enough that I could do it on. 
, Mr. Moser. Did the quality of the heroin vary ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. It varied quite a great deal ? 

The Witness.. Yes ; it did. 

Mr. Moser. The peddlers were cutting it ? 

The Witness. Yes ; they always cut it. It depended on how many 
hands it got in before it got to you. 

Mr. Moser. I should explain here that heroin comes in concentrated 
form, and each confederate that gets it cuts it down, dilutes it by 
mixing it with powdered sugar so that when it gets to the addict it 
comes in a very diluted form. As a result of this, the addict pays a 
very high price for a very diluted form ; is that correct ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did your desire for heroin ever drive you to crime? 



58 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

1 he Witness. Yes, sir ; but it wasn't the heroin itself but the fact 
that I couldn't get it. . 

Mr. Moser. You couldn't get it and you needed money to buy it? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. In order to get money you had to turn to the committing 
of crimes ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What kind of crimes did you commit, more than one ? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Just one ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You got caught the first time ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Would you mind telling us what the crime was? 

The Witness. I stole something. 

Mr. Moser. You stole something ? 

The Witness. Yes, drugs. 

Mr. Moser. You stole drugs ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. From a drug store ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You were with somebody else at the same time ; the two 
of you did it together ? You don't have to name them. 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Two of you did it together ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know any other addicts in Florida ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir ; I know quite a few. 

Mr. Moser. How many do you think are around here or can't you 
guess? 

The Witness. Well, I really couldn't say, as far as local people are 
concerned. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever try to overcome your habit voluntarily? 

The Witness. Yes, sir ; I once went to a sanitarium. 

Mr. Moser. You went to a sanitarium ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. In what city ? 

The Witness. In Miami. 

Mr. Moser. In Miami; was that expensive? 

The Witness. Was that expensive? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

The Witness. Extremely expensive. • 

Mr. Moser. How much did you have to pay? 

The Witness. Oh, I believe it was about $300 a week, or something. 

Mr. Moser. $300 a week. What did they do for you? 

The Witness. Very gradual reduction over a long period of time; 
but I finally left before the cure had been effected. 

Mr. Moser. You left voluntarily ? 

The Witness. After 5 weeks, "yes, sir, because they still hadn't 
stopped me. 

Mi-. Moser. In other words, they gave you a treatment consisting of 
the drugs in constantly reduced quantities; is that right? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 59 

Mr. Moser. But it was a little too slow, and you left? 

The Witness. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. You left because you felt that they couldn't finish the 
treatment ? 

The Witness. Yes. It was taking too long and it was much too 
expensive. 

Mr. Moser. And you felt you weren't accomplishing your objective? 

The Witness. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Do you feel that the addiction to drugs is something 
that other people should avoid ? 

The Witness. Oh, very much so ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Would you like to state how strongly you feel about 
that? 

The Witness. It is the most miserable life you can possibly imagine. 

Mr. Moser. It is the most miserable life you can imagine ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you think that if other people knew that, they 
would stay away? 

The Witness. I hope so ; but I don't know. 

Mr. Moser. Thank you very much. We appreciate your testimony 
very much. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF LEE MASON, MIAMI, FLA. 

The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand, please? Do you 
swear before Almighty God that the testimony you will give will be 
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Mason. I do. 

The Chairman. Your full name, please ? 

Mr. Mason. Lee Mason. 

The Chairman. What is your address? 

Mr. Mason. 866 Northeast Seventy-second Street, Miami, Fla. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. Could I ask you to keep 
up at that rate and keep your voice up so that it is clear and very 
distinct ? We will be obliged. 

Mr. Rice. How do you make your livelihood, sir? 

Mr. Mason. Radio commentator, broadcasting, writing and lectur- 
ing, sales promotion. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, are you known by any other name than Lee 
Mason ? 

Mr. Mason. No, no ; Lee Mason is my legal name. 

Mr. Rice. Where were you born? 

Mr. Mason. Chicago, 111., August 9, 1895. 

Mr. Rice. What are the names of your parents ? 

Mr. Mason. My parents ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Mason. What parents; which parents? 

Mr. Rice. What are their names? 

Mr. Mason. My father was Charles Friedlander. My mother was 
» Fanny Lee Mason Levy. 

Mr. Rice. And she married Charles Friedlander? 



85277—51 — pt. 16- 



60 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Mason. And my name was Phillip Lee Mason Friedlander. 
Subsequently when I came here 14 or 15 years ago and had been living 
here about 2 years, my name was changed by order of the Dade County 
Court to Lee Mason. 

Mr. Rice. When you lived in Chicago what was your name? 

Mr. Mason. Phillip Lee Mason Friedlander, same as here. I 
worked here as Phil Friedlander. 

Mr. Rice. What was your occupation when you were in Chicago ? 

Mr. Mason. Radio broadcasting. 

Mr. Rice. In connection with what programs, Mr. Mason? 

Mr. Mason. Well, I have had several various well-known programs. 
I was with WCFL and WBBM. 

Mr. Rice. These were programs of your own ? 

Mr. Mason. All of my programs are my own. I have been in the 
business for 30 years. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have a program known as Voice of the Air? 

Mr. Mason. Voice of the Air was a program ; the Voice of the Air 
was a signature. 

Mr. Rice. Were you the Voice of the Air? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir ; I am the Voice of the Air. 

Mr. Rice. On what station was that? 

Mr. Mason. WBBM and WCFL. I did the fair for 2 years, 1933 
and 1934, Viewing the Fair with the Voice of the Air. 

Mr. Rice. What are you doing today ? By whom are you employed ? 

Mr. Mason. I am self-employed and have been for a number of 
years. 

Mr. Moser. Are you connected with any stations here ? 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. I am self-employed. 

Mr. Rice. What did you do in your self-employment ? 

Mr. Mason. My self-employment — I do mostly sales promotion. 
In other words, I devise the program, go to you, and if you are in 
business, I try to sell it to you, put it on the station. 

Mr. Rice. Dj you do that occasionally? 

Mr. Mason. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Have you done any of that recently ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, not within the past few months. I have been 
very ill, as you probably know. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any recollection of what your last program 
was over the air, over what station? 

Mr. Mason. The last program that I had over the air, I believe 
was over WINZ, and it was a night show, commentary. 

Mr. Rice. It was a night show and you were the commentator? 

Mr. Mason. Yes. 

Mr. Rtce.^ Do you have victrola records along with your program ; 
is it a disk-jockey set-up? 

Mr. Mason. Presumably a disk-jockey set-up, but I use very few 
records. 

Mr. Rice. And you comment part of the time on what matters? 

Mr. Mason. Well, generally a program of that type is dependent 
upon the audience. Whatever the audience calls in those are the 
things you comment on. 

Mr. Rice. Were these sponsored shows with advertisements? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 61 

Mr. Mason. Most of them, mine in particular, sell what are known 
as spot announcements. In other words, no one sponsors the en- 
tire show. 

Mr. Rice. If you didn't have a spot announcement, what would 
you talk about ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, as I said before, general news, news of the day, 
or whatever was telephoned in, the idea being on those shows to 
attract the public by getting the public to call you and then arguing 
with the public. 

Mr. Rice. Then the argument with the public would be your opinion 
about current events ; is that the idea ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Would you discuss law-enforcement matters from time 
to time with people who called in ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, in a small way I am considered more or less of 
an authority on law-enforcement matters. For 15 years I did a 
program known as Criminal Court Notes. 

Mr. Rice. What? 

Mr. Mason. Criminal Court Notes. 

Mr. Rice. You say you are an authority on criminal matters ? 

Mr. Mason. In a small way. 

Mr. Rice. How did you establish your rating as an authority on 
criminal matters? 

Mr. Mason. By very keen study. 

Mr. Rice. Very keen study ; by first-hand knowledge ? 

Mr. Mason. I am sorry, you will have to explain what you mean 
by "first-hand knowledge." 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever do any research in jail ? 

Mr. Mason. I am afraid not. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been in jail ? 

Mr. Mason. Have I ever been in jail ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What was that for? 

Mr. Mason. In connection with a divorce action about 35 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. Where was that? 

Mr. Mason. In Chicago. 

Mr. Rice. In Chicago? 

Mr. Mason. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You went to jail in connection with that? 

Mr. Mason. I was held on what was known as a writ of ne exeat 
for a short period of time. Is that what you mean ? 

Mr. Rice. That means "don't leave" ? 

Mr. Mason. Don't leave the State ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Were you ever held in jail on any other occasion? 

Mr. Mason. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever serve any time for any other violation ? 

Mr. Mason. Never for any crime. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been arrested at any time, at any other 
time? 

Mr. Mason. Yes ; I have been arrested. 

Mr. Rice. What were they for ? 



62 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Mason. I was arrested for speeding here about 8 or 9 months 
ago. 

Mr. Rice. Anything else ? 

Mr. Mason. Within the last 5 years ; no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Were you ever arrested in Chicago for anything else ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What were they? 

(No response.) 

Mr. Rice. What were those things you were arrested for ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, I am sorry, I was arrested for disorderly con- 
duct. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Mason. I was arrested for disorderly conduct, and I was ar- 
rested in connection with a brokerage firm 30 years ago or somewhere 
in there called the H. B. Arthur Co. 

Mr. Rice. What was the trouble then ? 

Mr. Mason. It wasn't my firm, it was my brother's firm, and I came 
here from New York trying to assist my brother, and wound up by 
getting myself in some difficulties. I was indicted and was never tried. 

Mr. Rice. What was the reason for the arrest ; what did they charge 
you with? 

Mr. Mason. Well, now, I am very fair to tell you that I don't 
remember now. I know that they tried my brother and the case was 
reversed by the Supreme Court, and no other cases were tried. 

Mr. Rice. What was the charge, if you recall; you are a crimi- 
nologist, I believe you said ? 

Mr. Mason. I didn't say I was a criminologist. Those are your 
words, not mine. 

Mr. Rice. What was the name of your program ? 

Mr. Mason. Criminal Court Notes. It was a digest of the doings 
of the criminal court day by day, with a rundown on the testimony 
and evidence. 

Mr. Rice. In what area? 

Mr. Mason. Sir? 

Mr. Rice. Was that here in this area ? 

Mr. Mason. No ; in Chicago. 

Mr. Rice. In Chicago? 

Mr. Mason. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And your program was Criminal Court Notes? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What did that program talk about? 

Mr. Mason. The doings of the criminal court day by day. 

Mr. Rice. Just a factual report? 

Mr. Mason. A factual report ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any opinion about the cases that came 
before the court ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, I don't think it is possible for anybody to go 
into anything like that without having some opinions, but of course 
you, as an attorney, know that you are guided and bound in your 
opinions by certain rules of the court, and any comments you might 
make as to opinion would have to be after a case closed. I might 
say that the record will show that every judge of the criminal cir- 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 63 

cuit and municipal courts of the city of Chicago attended my banquet 
when I left and commented on the program, commended it. 

Mr. Rice. Let me ask you this : Did you appear on WCFL in Chi- 
cago? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Was your sponsor the A. J. Canfield Beverage Co.? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Let me read you something, and I don't vouch for the 
accuracy of it or the authenticity of it, and I would appreciate your 
comment after I read it to you : 

Phil Friedlander, who had the title of "Voice of the Air," which was conferred 
on him during the period 1934 to 1938, when he was broadcasting a program 
for Station WCFL in Chicago. He was sponsored for a time by A. J. Canfield 
Beverage Co., and the programs were made up daily in the public interest. 
According to Sgt. John Martin, Friedlander was discharged by the station be- 
cause he injected personal opinions which were not based on fact. Friedlander 
was discharged by the radio station because he would not confine his broadcast 
to the script ; instead he injected his personal opinions, which were usually 
colorful, but were not based on fact. 

Mr. Mason. Well, I am sorry, that isn't so. 

Mr. Rice. No? 

Mr. Mason. The record will show that the Canfield broadcast was 
renewed, twice renewed, and I think three times renewed, and, fur- 
thermore, following the Canfield broadcast the Voice of the Air was 
used for the Chicago Elevated Co. on a broadcast of the World Fair 
in 1934. 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. Now, we have talked a little bit about radio 
matters here; do you have any other line of business; for instance, 
do you write a column or a periodical ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What is that ? 

Mr. Mason. I write a column called Mason at Midnight. 

Mr. Rice. Where does that column appear ? 

Mr. Mason. It is in Miami Life. 

Mr. Rice. What is that? 

Mr. Mason. Miami Life is a weekly publication. 

Mr. Rice. Who is the owner or publisher of that? 

Mr. Mason. Reubin Clein. 

Mr. Rice. What are your arrangements with Miami Life? 

Mr. Mason. Well, they are rather tenuous arrangements. I don't 
know what you mean by "arrangements." Reubin Clein happens to 
be an acquaintance of mine ever since I have been in Miami but 

Mr. Rice. Are you paid on a weekly salary basis, so much per 
word, or so much per column, or what? 

Mr. Mason. I am paid on a very, very loose basis, sir. In other 
words, Reubin has been unable to pay anybody anything. 

Mr. Rice. Let us tighten up this loose thing and see what was the 
basis or what was supposed to be the basis. 

Mr. Mason. The basis supposedly was that I was going to handle 
the cafe advertising on the paper and instead of getting paid from 
the columns to take my money from the commissions from the ad- 
vertising ; but Reubin has been in financial difficulties for quite some 
while. It hasn't amounted to much. I haven't asked him for an 
accounting. I have gone ahead and done the column. 



64 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Have you received any money recently? 

Mr. Mason. No. 

Mr. Rice. When was the last time you received any money ? 

Mr. Mason. Around the first of the year. 

Mr. Rice. It seems to me I read the Miami Life 2 or 3 weeks ago, 
and again last week, and you had a column under your byline; are 
you doing that gratuitously ? 

(No response.) 

Mr. Rice. I didn't hear your answer. 

Mr. Mason. I didn't have an opportunity to answer. I thought 
you were paying attention to the Senator and I wanted to give you 
an opportunity to hear me. If I may, may I ask counsel if it is 
counsel's purpose to determine whether or not I do things gratui- 
tously ? 

Mr. Rice. No; I want to know whether you were on a salary, et 
cetera. 

Mr. Mason. I told you the arrangement by which it was, and I 
told you I had received no money since January 1 or thereabouts; I 
wouldn't swear to that. That being the case, Counsel, I am testi- 
fying under oath 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir; do you do any reporting for Miami Life 
other than your column ? 

Mr. Mason. None whatever. The only thing I have done from time 
to time is do what is known as leg work. 

Mr. Rice. Advertising and soliciting? 

Mr. Mason. No, no, no; you were speaking editorially. I am 
speaking of leg work. The leg man is the man who gets the facts 
and brings them in. He has nothing to do with the writing of the 
story. 

Mr. Rice. What do you do with the facts when you bring them in? 

Mr. Mason. I generally give them to Reubin. 

Mr. Rice. Do you later see the facts as you report them printed? 
What does he do with them ? 

Mr. Mason. I imagine he writes the stories. He has his own staff 
there, and that I don't know. May I say to you, sir 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sure. 

Mr. Mason. In all the time I have been with Reubin Clein he has 
never asked me what I am going to write in the column. He has 
never taken one word from the column, and there are many, many 
times when I have violently disagreed with him. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. Who makes the assignments on the leg 
work? 

Mr. Mason. I wouldn't have any idea. 

Mr. Rice. You say you do leg work? 

Mr. Mason. I said when I was asked I do it. 

Mr. Rice. Who asked you? 

Mr. Mason. Reubin has asked me on a couple of occasions. 

Mr. Rice. When Reubin asked you to do leg work, you went out and 
did leg work for him ; is that a fair representation ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you still consider yourself connected with the Miami 
Life? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 65 

Mr. Mason. Insofar as that connection is concerned, and the matter 
of the column, yes. I haven't been told that the column wouldn't 
appear. 

Mr. Rice. Just for our own information, how long do you intend 
to continue without compensation? 

Mr. Mason. Just for your own information, and no one else's 
except the television and radio audience, Counselor 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Mason (continuing). I might say that I will probably continue 
it as long as I feel I can help him and so long as we maintain the 
same friendship toward each other, which I believe is my right. 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. Now, in the meantime what is the source of 
income ; what do you use to support yourself % 

Mr. Mason. "Well, my present source of income has been the fact 
that I had to put another plaster on my house ; as I said before, I have 
been very ill and I haven't been able to work. Now, I have two or 
three things in the fire that I believe I will be able to do. 

Mr. Rice. You say you have recently put a mortgage on the home- 
stead ? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. You had some difficulty with your wife back in Chicago ? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. I have a record here that I will read 

Mr. Mason. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Mason. Unless this record, which the gentleman purposes to 
read, can be directly connected with criminal activity of any kind 
that is interstate, because of the fact that I have been married 30 
years, and my children are grown and I am raising grandchildren 

The Chairman. Then you needn't say any more. 

Mr. Rice. We will disregard it. 

The Chairman. The record will not be read. 

Mr. Mason. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Rice. Let me ask you this: On February 25, 1925, you were 
arrested in Chicago, according to a record I have here — at least a 
Phillip Friedlander was arrested — and charged with violation No. 
358, chapter 38, of the State statutes, which is murder. Have you 
ever been charged with murder ? 

Mr. Mason. I have not. 

Mr. Rice. On May 21, 1925, Friedlander was tried before a jury 
in the courtroom of Judge Albert B. George in the municipal court ; 
do you remember that ? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and a motion was 
entered for a new trial, and it was continued to May 27, 1925. After 
seven continuances the defendant was fined $100 and costs; what 
was that for ? 

Mr. Mason. That was a mix-up that came in when I was working 
for a man by the name of Pollock. I had signed a statement in the 
Morrison Hotel in Chicago. The hotel went out of business, and 
the hotel went after me for the payments. I didn't think I ought to 
pay it. They couldn't get me in the civil court, and they went after 



66 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

me on the fact that I had signed this statement, which was true ; I 
signed it. 

Mr. KrcE. Was the charge defrauding an innkeeper? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir; something like that. That is the general 
statute, as you know. 

Mr. Rice. Let us see if you remember this one. An arrest of 
Phillip Friedlander at the Fort Dearborn Hotel; did you ever hear 
of that? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. An American salesman arrested by Officers Piper and 
Smith, detective bureau, on January 23, 1923, for a confidence game; 
is that right? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. The case was dismissed in the municipal 
court. 

Mr. Rice. Discharged by Judge Schulman. That was in January. 
And in March of 1923 on the 12th, was another arrest, by Officers 
Seymour and Conolly; charge, confidence game. Is that right? 

Mr. Mason. Well, now, you see that is quite a while ago, and I may 
be mixed up. I explained to you when I started in, there were some 
indictments returned. 

Mr. Rice. Were you ever convicted on a charge of a confidence 
game ? 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You were charged a number of times with that; were 
you not ? 

Mr. Mason. Twice, I believe. 

Mr. Rice. What is a confidence game ? 

Mr. Mason. Are you an attorney ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. In your parlance what is a confidence game ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, why in my parlance ? 

Mr. Rice. Well, you were arrested many times for it. 

Mr. Mason. May I ask the purpose of this inquiry ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. I think the Senator would like to be enlightened. 

Mr. Mason. The Senator is also a gentleman who has studied law. 
I believe he knows what a confidence game is. 

Mr. Rice. What is a confidence game; what did they charge you 
with ? It is a swindle ; isn't it ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, it might be called that. The obtaining unlaw- 
fully of goods and money. Now, may I ask the Chair there 

The Chairman. Nothing now, except you will be given a chance to 
express yourself. 

Mr. Mason. I have absolutely no objection to answering questions 
here, Mr. Chairman, but everything that is being spoken of is a quarter 
of a century old, or thereabouts. I would like to know if it is the 
purpose of this committee to rattle old skeletons or if this attorney 
honestly believes that he can, by inference, connect anything that is 
25 or 30 years old with me today. Of course, you realize this pillory, 
especially under these circumstances, will drive me out of business 
entirely. Now, I don't know what the purpose is, but I feel that I, 
like any other person who is very happy to come before a committee of 
this kind and testify, am entitled to the protections that are guaran- 
teed by the Constitution of the United States. I feel that when you 
bring people here who want to help you and then go into a matter of 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 67 

this kind, unless it can be shown that I am today a criminal, or that 
I have committed in any way, shape, or form — aided and abetted a 
criminal act — then I say that is a crime and should not be counte- 
nanced. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir ; when were you last arrested ? 

Mr. Mason. I told you I was arrested for speeding. 

Mr. Rice. That was recently, wasn't it, and you were arrested be- 
fore that, too ; weren't you ? 

Mr. Mason. When ? 

Mr. Rice. How about May 4, 1939; that is not so terribly long 
ago ; do you remember that ? 

Mr. Mason. 1939? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Mason. Where ? 

Mr. Rice. Criminal court, Chicago, Phil Friedlander, April 26, 
1939. 

Mr. Mason. Well, that couldn't have been me, sir, because I was in 
Miami in 1939. 

Mr. Rice. Well, fingerprint card shows you were arrested for an 
attempt to commit an offense of disorderly conduct. It came before 
Judge Hermes. 

Mr. Mason. That was in 1936. 

The Chairman. That was the case, but it was 1936, not 1939. 

Mr. Mason. 1936, not 1939. 

Mr. Rice. Did you know a man by the name of Terry O'Bannion 
in Chicago, or James Rafter ? 

Mr. Mason. I am afraid I can't recall those names. 

Mr. Rice. You don't remember ? 

Mr. Mason. Will you connect them with something? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Would you want to say that right at the moment 
you can't remember those names ? 

Mr. Mason. No ; I don't recall them. Wasn't Terry O'Bannion the 
one that was in the clerk's office in Chicago ? 

Mr. Rice. I don't know about that. He lived at 608 Belmont 
Avenue, and Rafter lived at 1950 Lincoln Avenue ; do you remember 
them ? 

Mr. Mason. I don't recall. 

Mr. Rice. Let me read this to you. The record shows that Fried- 
lander operates telephone "boiler rooms" and solicits funds for phony 
organizations, using the names of prominent citizens as associates. 
O'Bannion, Williams, and Rafter — referring to Bernard Williams — 
and Friedlander represented a fictitious newspaper called the Irish - 
American. Did you ever hear of that ? 

Mr. Mason. No. 

Mr. Rice. They had arranged with Friedlander to meet them every 
night. Friedlander has a record of indictments in the State's attor- 
ney's office for confidence games, murder, and so forth, during the 
period 1923 to 1926. He was arrested for nonsupport of his wife, 
Rose, a resident of the Clarendon Beach Hotel, October 19, 1922. Do 
you know anything about that "boiler room" thing? 

Mr. Mason. No; I don't know anything about the "boiler room." 
I think back at that time — I never had a telephone then, so I don't 
know what it is. There was something in that, and in some way 



68 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

they tried to hook me in. I don't remember. I don't remember those 
names. You said there is another Friedlander. 

Mr. Rice. Well, this fellow Williams was also known as Fried- 
lander. 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you recall O'Bannion ? 

Mr. Mason. I really don't ; no. 

Mr. Rice. This is Harry O'Bannion in this "boiler room" thing; 
you want to say you don't know him ? 

Mr. Mason. I couldn't say I don't know him, because I don't know 
the name. 

Mr. Rice. So you can't say whether you do or whether you don't: 
do you want to leave it like that ? 

Mr. Mason. I would rather leave it like that; yes. 

Mr. Rice. It is possible, then, that you did know him? 

Mr. Mason. Of course, it is possible. 

Mr. Rice. How about the other fellow, Rafter ? 

Mr. Mason. Him I don't even know at all. 

Mr. Rice. Is it possible you were involved with Rafter and O'Ban- 
nion in something you can't remember ? 

Mr. Mason. I scarcely think so. 

Mr. Rice. Your memory was pretty good on that 1922 thing? 

Mr. Mason. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Rice. I say your memory was pretty good on that 1922 thing. 

Mr. Mason. Mr. Chairman, may I again ask you to ask counsel not 
to quarrel with me or argue with me. 

Mr. Rice. How about the Irish- American ; did you ever hear of 
that? 

Mr. Mason. I don't think so ; no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You lived at the Clarendon Beach, didn't you? 

Mr. Mason. At the Clarendon Beach? 

Mr. Rice. You lived there with your wife, Rose; you were arrested 
there three times. 

Mr. Mason. I was arrested ? 

Mr. Rice. No ; I am mistaken. Fort Dearborn ; I am sorry. 

Mr. Mason. Will you please clarify yourself ? 

Mr. Rice. Did yoa live at the Clarendon Beach? 

Mr. Mason. I lived at the Clarendon Beach Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. That is an answer. 

Mr. Mason. In 1919. 

Mr. Rice. That is an answer. Now, then, referring back to the 
statement I read about the "boiler room" and the Irish- American 
outfit, would you say that the only part of that that is right is the 
part that says that you lived at the Clarendon Beach ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, you read a very exhaustive and lengthy state- 
ment. 

Mr. Rice. Do you want me to read again ? 

Mr. Mason. If it would please you. I haven't anything to do except 
be at the service of the committee. 

The Chairman. You heard the statement read, and our interest 
is to ascertain whether or not that could have referred to you and 
whether you might have been involved in that episode. 

Mr. Mason. It could have referred to me, and I might have been 
involved. Let's leave it at that. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 69 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, coming down to — incidentally, what is a "boiler 
room"? 

Mr. Mason. You know, it is remarkable, really and truly remark- 
able. 

The Chairman. Now, you started to remonstrate a moment ago 
for some people quarreling with you. 

Mr. Mason. Well, now, the slang term "boiler room" refers to a 
series of telephones that are placed for the purpose of solicitation. 

Mr. Rice. What do the solicit ? 

Mr. Mason. Oh, anything. 

Mr. Rice. Why do they call it a "boiler room" ? 

Mr. Mason. They call it a "boiler room" because someone stands 
there with a mental whip over the men and women employed and 
keeps them working over those phones. Today, you probably don't 
realize it, but at least 20 percent of the merchandise in the United 
States is sold by means of "boiler rooms." 

Mr. Rice. They still do that? 

Mr. Mason. Sir? 

Mr. Rice. They still do that? 

Mr. Mason. Probably more today than ever before. The cost of 
going into a person's home by telephone, particularly in the territory 
where calls are not individually charged, is so little that a good 
telephone solicitor can call a hundred calls a day on iceboxes, on 
ventilators, on phonographs, on anything. And they do. They sell 
everything from magazines to heaters. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever heard of a "boiler room" used in con- 
nection with soliciting money for something that isn't there ? 

Mr. Mason. Have I ever heard of the "dues?" 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Mason. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Wouldn't that be a more apropos term of a "boiler 
room," of an operation that was soliciting for a campaign that was 
in the nature of a fraud; wouldn't it be more of a fair statement? 

Mr. Mason. Well, I don't know what you mean by a "fair state- 
ment." I don't have your idea of values evidently. You asked me 
for a generic term and what it means, and I explained it to you to the 
best of my ability. 

Mr. Rice. You are the criminal court fellow that had that pro- 
gram. I though you might know a little bit more about it. 

Mr. Mason. What is it you wish to know ? 

Mr. Rice. If the term wasn't more generally applied to fraud? 

Mr. Mason. As far as I know, the term is applied to any series of 
telephones that are used for the solicitation of anything. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever appear on WIOD, the radio station here? 

Mr. Mason. Of course. 

Mr. Rice. How recently was that ? 

Mr. Mason. That hasn't been more than 10 years last past. 

Mr. Rice. How many years? 

Mr. Mason. Ten. 

Mr. Rice. Ten years; for 10 years you haven't appeared on WIOD? 

Mr. Mason. I don't think so. 

Mr. Rice. What was the type of program you had on WIOD ? 



70 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Mason. I had what is known as a morning show. 

Mr. Rice. 6 : 30 a. m. each day except Sundays ? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Except Sundays? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Why did you terminate that broadcast every morning? 

Mr. Mason. It wasn't a case of termination ; I got fired. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have some difficulty with the station or with 
someone else ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, I don't exactly know what difficulty it was except 
that perhaps the program had started to make too much money. 

Mr. Rice. In the nature of something that you would say would 
cause a firing ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, let's leave it that way. 

Mr. Rice. Well, I would rather not leave it that way when I have 
a record here that says: 

Mason was making a daily broadcast at 6:30 a. m., except Sundays. About 
3 weeks of the date of this communication a very offensive broadcast was made 
concerning the police department. 

Mr. Mason. That is beyond my knowledge. There wouldn't be any 
reason for it. 

Mr. Rice. Was that for making more money when you offended the 
police department? 

Mr. Mason. Well, now, you have made the statement. You see, 
I happen to be under oath. I am bound by what I say, and you 
unfortunately have the privilege of doing almost as you please. I 
can tell you very definitely that the reason that I was forced to leave 
WIOD was from a thing very similar to this, where somebody went 
back to dig up a lot of skeletons that were in the closet. And I 
want to tell you this, and let you know it; I stayed in Miami and 
I fought it out, and I worked on the streets, and I saved my home 
and raised my children, and those things that I think are right I 
will continue to fight for. No, sir; there was no broadcast to the 
police department that was offensive to the police department, because 
if you knew what you were saying, at 6 : 30 in the morning there 
wouldn't be any reason for it. 

Mr. Rice. All right. Did you ever appear over WMIE ? 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever sold WMIE any programs that you pro- 
moted ? 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you had any connection with any programs with 
WMIE? J l & 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. With any principals or operators of WMIE ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, the gentleman who is the manager of WMIE 
was the manager of WGBS at the time he was there. It was then 
known as WFCL— WFTL, pardon me. 

Mr. Rice. Is your wife's name Viola ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any daughters ? 

Mr. Mason. No. 

Mr. Rice. Who is Marie Mason ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 71 

Mr. Mason. That is my wife's sister. It is not spelled like mine. 
It is M-a-e-s-o-n. 

Mr. Rice. Is she Marie M. Maeson ? 

Mr. Mason. I am not positive as to her middle initial. 

Mr. Rice. Does she live with you ? 

Mr. Mason. No. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know a woman by the name of M. M. Mason? 

Mr. Mason. Well, the only Marie Mason I know is my wife's sister. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know whether or not she has any stock in WMIE ? 

Mr. Mason. I am positive not. 

Mr. Rice. Why are you positive? 

Mr. Mason. Well, sir, unfortunately, Mrs. Marie Mason is in very 
dire financial circumstances. And I am quite positive that she has 
no stock in WMIE. 

Mr. Rice. I have a record here — the reason I asked — I will clear it 
up. Do 3^011 know a Margaret Mason? 

Mr. Mason. Margaret ? 

Mr. Rice. Margaret Mason ; yes. 

Mr. Mason. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever live at 2875 Northwest Forty-second 
Avenue ? 

Mr. Mason. No. No ; I have lived in the present home that I built 
12 years ago, I have lived there ever since. 

Mr. Rice. I am sure this is no relation. M. M. Mason, 2875 North- 
west Forty-second Avenue, owned five shares in Station WMIE. She 
is no kin of yours ? 

Mr. Mason. No relation. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, do you know Mai Clark out in Chicago ? 

Mr. Mason. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Rice. Do you know Mai Clark out in Chicago ? 

Mr. Mason. Not under that name ; no, sir. That is, the name means 
nothing to me. But let me say this, you are probably going to ask 
me a lot of names, and names don't mean anything to me. 

Mr. Rice. Not under that name, what name do you know him under ? 

Mr. Mason. If I don't know him under that name, I don't know 
him under any name. 

Mr. Rice. Does he know you ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, now, that, sir, I couldn't answer for you. ^You 
will have to ask him. 

Mr. Rice. I have a record here. I think it shows that Mai Clark — 
we call him one of the big five bookies out in Chicago — may know you. 

Mr. Mason. It could be very possible. I was born there, lived there 
all my life until I came here. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, let us see here ; Mai Clark & Co. maintains offices 
at 217 North Clark Street. It is a large betting commission house. 
They made a call to a number in Miami. Did you ever live on Twenty- 
third Street? 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. 309 Twenty-third Street? 

Mr. Mason. No ; I never lived there. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever have a telephone there ? 

Mr. Mason. I had an office there. 

Mr. Rice. What sort of office was that? 



72 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Mason. I was in the theatrical booking business, and I had an 
office in the lobby of the hotel, and I gave up the business and left the 
phone. 

Mr. Rice. What kind of business, booking business ? 

Mr. Mason. Theatrical booking. 

Mr. Kice. Was the number in Miami 5-4911? 

Mr. Mason. It might have been. 

Mr. Rice. It might have been ? It was your office. 

Mr. Mason. I haven't been anywhere near it for years. 

Mr. Rice. You haven't been where ? 

Mr. Mason. I haven't been anywhere near the office. 

Mr. Rice. What was the number when you were in there ? 

Mr. Mason. I think that it would be very easy for me to find out. 

Mr. Rice. There was a person-to-person call to Lee Mason, to Miami 
5-4911, from Mai Clark from Chicago. 

Mr. Mason. What was the date ? 

Mr. Rice. 1949. 

Mr. Mason. (No response.) 

Mr. Rice. You don't want to say anything about that ? 

Mr. Mason. I couldn't say anything about that; it wasn't me; I 
wasn't there. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know anything about it ; you did not take the 
call? 

Mr. Mason. No. 

Mr. Rice. Do you want to say that you haven't had any calls from 
Mai Clark? 

Mr. Mason. I am positive I didn't have any calls from Mai Clark. 
1 don't even know who Mai Clark is. 

Mr. Rice. Would you want to say that you haven't had any calls 
from a bookie in Chicago ? 

Mr. Mason. As far as I know, if you will just straighten that out 
and say that I had calls from a bookie in Chicago, knowing that he 
was a bookie, I haven't, but, you see, anybody that you talk to might 
or might not be a bookie. That I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. I am sure that is very possible. In your business as a 
theatrical agent what did you do ? 

Mr. Mason. I don't do anything. I haven't been in the business. 

Mr. Rice. When did you get out of the business ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, I would have to look up the records. I think it 
was in 1948 or 1947. 

Mr. Rice. What did you do when you were in the business ? 

Mr. Mason. Sold acts. 

Mr. Rice. What did you do ? 

Mr. Mason. Sold acts. 

Mr. Rice. Sold ads? 

Mr. Mason. Sold acts, a-c-t-s. 

Mr. Rice. You were in that business from when ; what year ? 

Mr. Mason. 1947 or 1948 ; I was only in it for a short while. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know a man by the name of Jack Friedlander, 
a very well-known man here on the beach? 

Mr. Mason. Well, now, if you mean the same man I do, I most 
certainly do know him, but I am not sure that we mean the same person. 

Mr. Rice. I think he was a guest at one of our hearings at one time 
in Washington. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 73 

Mr. Mason. Could have been. Then if that is the man, I probably 
know him. 

Mr. Rice. He is originally from New Jersey. 

Mr. Mason. That I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. Some say that he is a bookie and gambler on the beach? 

Mr. Mason. That also I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. You wouldn't know about that ? 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Is he any relation to you ? 

Mr. Mason. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. He is no relation ; you are sure about that ? 

Mr. Mason. Well, I am quite positive. 

Mr. Rice. You never told anyone that he is your cousin? 

Mr. Mason. We have been ribbing for about 10 or 11 years; that is 
the length of time I know him; and because his name is Friedlander 
and my name is Friedlander we always said "Cousin," and his wife 
Sally with whom I am very well acquainted, we always call each other 
"Cousin Sally" and "Cousin Bill." 

Mr. Rice. Strictly a ribbing proposition ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. I take it then, you are fairly closely acquainted with him ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Mason. I haven't the faintest idea. Wait a minute; let me 
amplify that. I seem to hear a little tittering on that statement. And 
I would like to amplify that. I probably am a little more cautious in 
making answers because I am under oath, and may be held strictly 
accountable for my answers. If you wish, you can answer it in this 
manner, that my only knowledge as to Jack's business was confined in 
an article in the Miami Herald which, according to the Miami Herald, 
presented a statement reportedly by Jack, in which he said he was a 
gambler; but that is the extent of my knowledge of his business. 

Mr. Rice. About a year ago we were down here in Miami, and it 
seems to me I saw you then with a movie camera ? 

Mr. Mason. Yes, sir, a movie camera and a still camera. 

Mr. Rice. What were you doing ? 

Mr. Mason. Making pictures. 

Mr. Rice. What were they for ? 

Mr. Mason. For the very thing they have in here now. At -that 
time it was a very good idea. I had no idea these hearings would 
ever be open to television, and inasmuch as you can take still movies, 
a set for television would be a very good thing. Another thing, I 
lecture. 

Mr. Rice. Let us keep on the subject of the movies. You took 
movies of the hearings? 

Mr. Mason. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. And still pictures of the persons who came before the 
staff and other people, investigators and sheriffs, and people like 
that? 

Mr. Mason. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And what did you do with those films ? 

Mr. Mason. I wasn't able to do anything with them. I went to 
Washington. 

Mr. Rice. What did you intend to do with them ? 



74 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Mason. I was going to sell them to television. When I came 
to Washington, I stopped in Senator Wiley's office and we exhibited 
them to Senator Wiley. They were not bad. They are not good ; but 
they are not bad. Refilmed for television they would be good; but 
by the time I got to New York there had already been a TV agree- 
ment reached, and there wasn't any sense in going on. 

Mr. Rice. What did you do with the films ? 

Mr. Mason. I was never able to sell them. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever offer those films to any racket interests? 

Mr. Mason. Good grief, no. 

The Chairman. That is all. 

Mr. Mason. Thank you, Senator. 

(Witness excused.) 

The Chairman. The audience now is kindly requested to refrain 
from any audible demonstrations, please. The next witness is Mr. 
Jack Raskin. Mr. Raskin, you have been previously sworn? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Before proceeding with this witness, I would like to offer 
the criminal record of Lee Mason into the record. This is the record 
obtained from the FBI. 

Mr. Mason. If the chairman please, I am going to object to the 
introduction of that record unless each and every item on that record 
is proven to be the Lee Mason who stands before you and testifies. 

The Chairman. As a matter of fact, I think it is already in evi- 
dence, that is to say, each of the details has been testified to, with 
explanations by you. I think that is sufficient. 

Mr. Mason. But you see, there are a number of them; only two 
are mine. Unfortunately, there were three Phil Friedlanders in Chi- 
cago at the time. 

Mr. Rice. I think it is fair to say to you that if you think there will 
be any difficulty about that, we would like to receive from you any 
written statement that you might wish to make, denying those things. 

Mr. Mason. I think the onus is upon you, not upon me, if you are 
going to put that into a public record. 

Mr. Rice. The record has been obtained from the FBI, and we find 
those records usually sufficient. We find them accurate. 

Mr. Mason. This time it is not accurate. 

The Chairman. Well, the record was given in detail, and that was 
given as you asked. 

FURTHER TESTIMONY OF JACK LOUIS RASKIN, MIAMI BEACH 
(FLA.) POLICE DEPARTMENT 

Mr. Rice. Mr. Raskin, you were sworn this morning, is that correct ? 
Mr. Raskin. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. You said your name was 

Mr. Raskin. Jack Raskin. 
Mr. Rice. You live where? 

Mr. Raskin. 934 Michigan Avenue, Miami Beach, Fla. 
Mr. Rice. Your employment? 
Mr. Raskin. Patrolman, city of Miami Beach. 
Mr. Rice. Patrolman on the city of Miami Beach Police Depart- 
ment ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 75 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How long have you been a patrolman on the city of Miami 
Beach Police Department? 

Mr. Raskin. About 5 years. 

Mr. Rice. Do you remember exactly how many years you have been 
a member of the Miami Beach Police Department? 

Mr. Raskin. I think it was February of 1947. 

Mr. Rice. How did it happen that you joined the police department 
in February 1947 ? 

Mr. Raskin. I was looking for a steady job, and that was the first 
opportunity I had to get one since I got out of the service. 

Mr. Rice. When did you leave the service ? You are talking about 
the service of the United States now ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes. I left the service, I think it was the early part 
of 1946. 

Mr. Rice. Early in 1946? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. So that you had a span there of a year from early 1946 
to February of 1947. What were you doing during that time? 

Mr. Raskin. I worked for S. & G. 

Mr. Rice. S. & G. Syndicate? S. & G. Service? 

Mr. Raskin. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. A different service? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What did you do for S. & G. Service? 

Mr. Raskin. I was a calculator. 

Mr. Rice. Calculator ? 

Mr. Raskin. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you calculate? 

Mr. Raskin. In an office, sir. 

Mr. Rice, Where was that office located? 

Mr. Raskin. 309 Twenty-third Street. 

Mr. Rice. 309 Twenty-third Street? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. That is the same place we just heard about, isn't it ? 

Mr. Raskin. That's right. I was in their employ for 2 or 3 weeks. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever seen the witness who just preceded you 
here ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir ; I have seen him. 

Mr. Rice. What was he doing there ? 

Mr. Raskin. Did I ever see him in the premises? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Raskin. No. I thought that you said did I know him? 

Mr. Rice. You haven't seen him at 309 Twenty-third Street? 

Mr. Raskin. No. 

Mr. Rice. With what individual did you deal when you became em- 
ployed by S. & G. Service ; who hired you ? 

Mr. Raskin. My wife. 

Mr. Rice. Your wife hired you? 

Mr. Raskin. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. What is her name ? 

Mr. Raskin. Ann Raskin. 

Mr. Rice. What is her capacity or position ? 

85277— 51— pt. 16 6 



76 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Raskin. She was working in the office. When I got out of 
the service I couldn't get a job ; I tried different organizations ; I had 
been wounded, knocked around a good bit, and I had a good case of 
claustrophobia and a couple of hunks of shrapnel. I tried to get a 
job in the Florida Power & Light Co. and the Bell Telephone. They 
offered me a big $28 a week. 

When I went overseas my wife was 3 months' pregnant and when I 
came back the baby was 20 months old. I was a front-line infantry- 
man in a rifle company. When I got home I couldn't get a job. My 
wife was working for the office. 

Mr. Rice. Were you receiving compensation from the Government? 

Mr. Raskin. A big 10 percent — $15. At that time it was $10 a 
month. 

Mr. Rice. So your wife hired you for S. & G. ? What is the busi- 
ness of S.&G.? 

Mr. Raskin. They receive bets from outside concessions, or they 
took off bets — I still don't know what it was all about. 

Mr. Rice. What sort of bets? 

Mr. Raskin. Horse bets. 

Mr. Rice. Is that an illegal business or is it a legal business? 

Mr. Raskin. Did you say is that illegal? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Raskin. Well, the policy is pretty liberal on the beach. 

Mr. Rice. I asked you if it was legal or illegal? 

Mr. Raskin. I guess it is illegal. 

Mr. Rice. So then you joined up in au illegal business in which your 
wife was participating; is that the idea? 

Mr. Raskin. We were paying taxes on everything we made. 

Mr. Rice. I asked you if you were in an illegal business, knowing 
it was illegal ? 

Mr. Raskin. No; I didn't know it was illegal. 

Mr. Rice. Did you know at that time that horse bets were illegal ? 

Mr. Raskin. At that time I didn't. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know it now ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. When did you learn that ? 

Mr. Raskin. In the course of time, newspapers — from the news- 
papers. I thought the way the policy was on the beach — it was liberal 
and open. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't even know that it was against the law ? 

Mr. Raskin. Nol the way they were operating. 

Mr. Rice. Is that what you want us to believe? 

Mr. Raskin. No ; I don't. 

Mr. Rice. What do you want us to believe? 

Mr. Raskin. I was just in a muddle, that's all. I was confused. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. When you got out of your muddle you 
learned that it was against the law, didn't you ? 

Mr. Raskin. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. So that was in 1947, at least, that you learned that it was 
against the law ? 

Mr. Raskin. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Did your wile leave the business? 

Mr. Raskin. No, she didn't. 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 77 

Mr. Kice. What did she do ? 

Mr. Raskin. I tried to convince her to leave quite a few times. We 
had some pretty good scraps and arguments. My wife is a redhead. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Raskin. I went through this before. I was questioned by the 
Federal grand jury here just recently, and so was my wife. I don't 
know if you have access to those questions or not. 

Mr. Rice. It is immaterial, but you can tell us about it. 

Mr. Raskin. It is the same line of questioning, only I get very 
nervous. 

Mr. Rice. Frankly, we would be interested in knowing the answer 
to a proposition where you are a member of the Police Department of 
Miami Beach and your wife, at least until very recently, was a full- 
time employee of S. & G. Service. 

Mr. Raskin. Well, what is the question ? 

Mr. Rice. We would like to know the answer to that ; how can that 
exist ? 

Mr. Raskin. I just have nothing to do with my wife that way. We 
argued; just didn't discuss it anymore. We have not discussed it for 
the past 2 or 3 years. She goes her way and I go mine. 

Mr. Rice. You are living with her, are you not ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, I am. 

Mr. Rice. And it is your sworn duty to uphold the law, is it not ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, it is. 

Mr. Rice. Isn't that a violation of the law ? 

Mr. Raskin. Well, I am a traffic policeman. 

Mr. Rice. I take it then that you are a full-time policeman, are you 
not ? You have a badge, don't you % 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir, I have. 

Mr. Rice. And you have a gun ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. I see. 

Mr. Raskin. And a summons book, a blackjack, a flashlight, and 
an extra belt. 

Mr. Rice. And you have taken an oath of office ; you were sworn in 
to uphold all the laws ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How do you reconcile that position with the fact that you 
are a traffic policeman but you don't enforce other laws ; do you make 
a distinction between them? 

Mr. Raskin. I have seen no signs of bookmaking. You mean why 
didn't I arrest my wife ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Raskin. I never saw her after I left the office. I never saw her 
work in the office. 

Mr. Rice. You know what she is doing, do you not ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever report to your superiors what she was doing ? 

Mr. Raskin. No . 

Mr. Rice. I have here a record that shows a joint return filed by 
you in 1949, 1 believe, up through 1950, in which you show income from 
the police department and also from S. & Gr. Service. 

Mr. Raskin. That's right. 



78 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. It is a little paradoxical, don't you think? 

Mr. Raskin. Well, when I got out of the service that $15 a day that 
they were offering me looked pretty big. I had been living on $12 a 
month for by 2 years prior to that — no, 3 years, and it looked pretty 
good to get a nice start. 

Mr. Rice. Do you feel that you are a representative of the police 
department on which you serve, that you are a typical representative? 

Mr. Raskin. I wouldn't say that I am a typical representative. I 
think I am a very good representative. 

Mr. Rice. I see. All right, sir. 

Mr. Raskin. I have made some very good catches. 

Mr. Rice. Oh, you have made good catches ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, I have. 

Mr. Rice. What kind of catches? 

Mr. Raskin. Stick-up men. 

Mr. Rice. Stick-up men? 

Mr. Raskin. Molesters, young hoodlums. 

Mr. Rice. Gamblers? 

Mr. Raskin. Gamblers? 

Mr. Rice. What gamblers did you ever catch ? 

Mr. Raskin. Gamblers? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Raskin. I never saw any gambling. 
• Mr. Rice. So that you do something besides direct traffic, don't you ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, I do. I give information also. 

Mr. Rice. You do what? 

Mr. Raskin. I give general information about the beach, to people 
who want to know directions. 

Mr. Rice. Suppose someone asked you directions to a bookie room, 
would you know where to direct them ? 

Mr. Raskin. No ; I would not. 

Mr. Rice. You know where your wife works ; don't you ? 

Mr. Raskin. That was not a bookie joint. 

Mr. Rice. What was that? 

Mr. Raskin. That was an office. They do not take bets there. 
They are called in. 

Mr. Rice. The S. & G. Service is a gambling syndicate; is it not? 

(No response.) 

Mr. Rice. Did it occur to you to direct them to the office to find out 
where they could place a bet ? 

Mr. Raskin. No ; it never did occur to me ; no. 

Mr. Rice. Now, I see that you have a gun. How many guns do you 
have ? 

Mr. Raskin. Two guns. 

Mr. Rice. Two guns? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you carry them both at the same time? 

Mr. Raskin. No; I don't. 

Mr. Rice. What is the reason for the two guns ? 

Mr. Raskin. I carry a gun while I am on duty and one I leave in 
the house. 

Mr. Rice. Are they the same type of guns ? 

Mr. Raskin. No, sir ; they are not. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 79 

Mr. Rice. Both of them are revolvers ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes ; they are. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever patrol a beat near the Club Collins? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes ; I did. I still do. 

Mr. Rice. You still do ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. There was some testimony in the committee previously 
by Chief Short ; do you remember him ? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes ; I do. 

Mr. Rice. That there was a raid made on the Club Collins and that 
when the officers arrived there the gambling game, which was said to 
be in progress — when the officers arrived there the gambling game 
which was said to be in progress, had deteriorated into a card game. 
He said that the only person who knew that raid was going to be 
conducted was the officer on the beat. Do you know anything about 
that raid? 

Mr. Raskin. Yes ; I know about that raid. 

Mr. Rice. Tell us about that. 

Mr. Raskin. The raid was planned by Lieutenant Short, ex-Police 
Chief Short, and it was going to take place sometimes around 10, 11, 
or 12 o'clock. They told me to come in about 7 in the evening or 6, 
and then for the next 3 hours he was on the police radio calling cars 
and motorcycles from all over the beach, and they even knew what was 
happening in Coral Gables ; but the only one he had mentioned it to 
was to me, yet everyone else in the Department, when they were called, 
knew about it, but I was the only one he spoke to. That is all I know. 
Then we took the club. 

When we got there the door was open. When we got there the guys 
that were in there were just sitting around holding cards. I don't 
know what the game was. One was holding eight cards and the other 
was holding two cards. 

Mr. Rice. It was a game of tip-off, I imagine. 

The Chairman. That is all. You are excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF BETTY JANE OSWILL, MIAMI, FLORIDA 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God do you solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth and 
nothing but the truth, so help your God ? 

Mrs. Oswill. I do. 

Mr. Rice. What is your name ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Betty Jane Oswill. 

Mr. Rice. How do you spell that? 

Mrs. Oswill. O-s-w-i-1-1. 

Mr. Rice. Where do you live? 

Mrs. Oswill. 1860 Coral Gate Drive, Miami, Fla. 

Mr. Rice. Where are you employed ? 

Mrs. Oswill. In the sheriff's department. 

Mr. Rice. Where? 

Mrs. Oswill. Sheriff's department. 

Mr. Rice. What is your job there? 

Mrs. Oswill. I am a deputy sheriff. 

Mr. Rice. Are you also a notary public ? 



80 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have a commission from the State of Florida as 
a notary public? 

Mrs. Oswill. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And is it still in full force and effect ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Was it in effect in 1949 ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. I show you a photostatic copy of a document, copy of 
which was introduced into the record this morning, being a deed dated 
the 1st day of December 1949, running from Ethel G. Sullivan and 
James Sullivan to Thomas A. Rice and Ruth M. Rice, in Harford 
County, Md. It bears the typewritten name of Ethel G. Sullivan 
and the typewritten name James Sullivan, with some writing above, 
which appears to be signatures. It also indicates that it was witnessed 
by Gladys F. Neu. On the second page of the document there is an 
acknowledgment reading — 

State of Florida, city of Miami. I hereby certify that on this 28th day of 
November, in the year 1949, before me, the subscriber, a notary public of the 
State of Florida, city of Miami, duly commissioned and qualified, personally 
appeared Ethel G. Sullivan and James Sullivan, her husband, and acknowledged 
the foregoing to be their act and deed. As witness my hand and notarial seal — 

and there follows a signature. Is that your signature? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you recognize that? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Is that your stamp, rubber stamp, underneath that? 

Mrs. Oswill. That is correct. 

Mr. Rice. I notice that the name is spelled Oswell. 

Mrs. Oswill. No; it is O-s-w-i-1-1. 

Mr. Rice. Did you take that acknowledgment? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes ; I did. 

Mr. Rice. What were the circumstances surrounding the taking of 
that acknowledgment? 

Mrs. Oswill. This paper was handed to me by the man who was 
chief deputy at the time. He is dead now — George Holley. 

Mr. Rice. He handed you the paper? 

Mrs. Oswill. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. What did he say ? 

Mrs. Oswill. He asked me if I would notarize it. I said "Yes." 
In the course of the day I am asked to notarize 15 or 20 papers that 
bear the signatures of deputy sheriffs who have made service of papers 
that are sent to the sheriff's department from other States. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mrs. Oswill. And they are not always able to be there, and I am 
asked to notarize their signatures. 

Mr. Rice. I take it from that that this fellow asked you to take 
the acknowledgment? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did the people who signed it appear before you? 

Mrs. Oswill. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did they admit that they signed it ? 

Mrs. Oswill. No. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 81 

Mr. Rice. How did you take the acknowledgment without the people 
being there or confirming it with them ? 

Mrs. Oswill. I was asked to do it. 

Mr. Rice. You did it as an accommodation ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. For the chief deputy? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you examine the signatures on the front page that 
you acknowledged ? 

Mrs. Oswill. No ; I didn't. As a matter of fact, I didn't even notice 
what kind of paper it was. 

Mr. Rice. How do you recall it now, then ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Well, it runs in my mind — I mean I think I remem- 
ber the occasion. Of course, as I say, I have notarized the sheriff's 
signature on papers that he had to sign in advance. 

Mr. Rice. Oh, you have ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You mean, you put your notarial seal on before he signs? 

Mrs. Oswill. He signs and then on bills of sale, where sales are 
made, and the sheriff isn't always available and, well, the bills of 
sale have to be delivered 

Mr. Rice. I don't follow you. You mean he signs them ? 

Mrs. Oswill. He signs them and they are held by the chief deputy. 

Mr. Rice. And he hands them to you ? 

Mrs. Oswill. That's correct, the chief deputy. 

Mr. Rice. You feel that you are familiar enough with his signature, 
even when you don't see him sign ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How about Ethel Sullivan's ; you don't feel that you are 
familiar with her signature, do you? 

Mrs. Oswill. No. 

Mr. Rice. How would you be able to acknowledge her signature 
if .you didn't see her sign it and you are not familiar with it? 

Mrs. Oswill. Because I was requested to sign it. 

Mr. Rice. You were requested to acknowledge it ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Are you familiar with Mrs. Sullivan's signature? 

Mrs. Oswill. No ; I don't think I am. 

Mr. Rice. Take a look at that and see if you recognize it [handing 
witness document]. 

Mrs. Oswill. No, sir ; I don't recognize it. 

Mr. Rice. All right, how about Jimmy Sullivan's ; do you recognize 
that? 

Mrs. Oswill. That is definitely not his signature. 

Mr. Rice. That is definitely not his signature? 

Mrs. Oswill. Not ; no. 

Mr. Rice. Why do you say that ? 

Mrs. Oswill. Because I am familiar with his signature. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know whether it is her or not ? 

Mrs. Oswill. No. 

Mr. Rice. Well, then, you take the position that there is something 
wrong with this document since it wasn't signed by him ? 

Mrs. Oswill. It definitely wasn't signed by him. 



82 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. It is his name, though, isn't it ? 

Mrs. Oswill. It is his name. 

Mr. Rice. Do you take other acknowledgments, by accommodation, 
of signatures that you don't know ? 

Mrs. Oswill. No ; only in the course of my work which, as I said 
before, signatures of our deputy sheriffs, signatures that I am familiar 
with, affidavits of service only that they have made of papers that are 
sent to us from other States. We have to have an affidavit when that 
service is made. I have been there long enough to be familiar with 
everyone and their signatures. 

Mr. Rice. I think that is all. 

The Chairman. You are excused, Mrs. Oswill. Thank you very 
much. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF ALBERT D. HUBBARD 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God do you solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I do. 

The Chairman. Your full name, please ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Albert D. Hubbard. 

The Chairman. Mr. Hubbard, your profession is ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Attorney at law. 

The Chairman. And you are a resident of? 

Mr. Hubbard. Miami, Fla. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. Will you keep your voice 
up so that we may all hear you ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, I will. 

Mr. Rice. Where is your office located ? 

Mr. Hubbard. 1007 Biscayne Building, Miami, Fla. 

Mr. Rice. You are appearing here in response to a subpena? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you represent a man by the name of Raymond Craig? 

Mr. Hubbard. My firm is attorney of record for Mr. Craig in the 
criminal court of record, yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know where Mr. Craig is? 

Mr. Hubbard. At his home, I guess, or his office. 

Mr. Rice. We have made some inquiry in an effort to locate Mr. 
Craig. 

Mr. Hubbard. I haven't seen him in over a week or had any com- 
munication from him since last Thursday. 

Mr. Rice. I wonder if you could give us any help in locating Mr. 
Craig ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I am not a detective. I don't know whether I could 
find him if I sent out to get him or not. 

Mr. Rice. You are his lawyer? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Presumably, as an act of courtesy to the committee, I 
thought possibly you could help us get in touch with Mr. Craig. 

Mr. Hubbard. I am happy to cooperate in any way I can. 

Mr. Rice. We certainly appreciate it. Now, sir, going back to 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 83 

the year 1948, were you Raymond Craig's attorney at that time? 

Mr. Hubbard. I was on a specific matter, yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. On a specific matter. What was that? 

Mr. Hubbard. I was employed to draft a bill legalizing off-track 
betting. 

Mr. Rice. A bill to legalize off-track betting ; what were the terms 
of that bill, sir, according to his instructions ? 

Mr. Hubbard. It is a rather lengthy thing. I couldn't delineate 
it at this moment. To legalize and give the State a percentage of 
the moneys taken by people making book outside of the enclosure 
of a race course. 

Mr. Rice. Under a licensing arrangement? 

Mr. Hubbard. Under a licensing arrangement. 

Mr. Rice. As a result of that did you prepare a bill ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And what was done then ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Mr. Chairman, I deem that I would violate the 
rule B, paragraph 37, of the canons of legal ethics if I divulged any 
of my efforts in connection with my employment by Mr. Craig on 
his legal work or in his legal work in connection with the matter 
sought to be inquired about. 

The Chairman. Mr. Hubbard, do you claim the privilege? 

Mr. Hubbard. I do, sir. 

The Chairman. As being in a confidential relationship with Mr. 
Craig ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I do. 

The Chairman. And is the matter that you are being interrogated 
about now one that comes within your knowledge as an attorney ? 

Mr. Hubbard. That's correct. 

The Chairman. You will not be required to answer anything that 
is within the confidential relationship. 

Mr. Rice. Unless you have been released by your client. Have you 
been released? 

Mr. Hubbard. I understood that Mr. Craig had not appeared here 
as yet. 

Mr. Rice. Have you discussed a release ? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, I have not. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I have discussed with him the facts, but I have not 
received any release from him. And I doubt that I would testify if 
he should release me. 

The Chairman. You may be required to. 

Mr. Hubbard. It would be in violation of the canons of legal ethics, 
as I recited. 

Mr. Rice. Do you recall the conversation that you and I and Mr. 
Mills had the other day? 

Mr. Hubbard. That was an informal conversation. 

Mr. Rice. Do 3^011 recall what was said about a release? 

Mr. Hubbard. You told me, I believe, that Mr. Craig had released 
me from any privileged communication. I said, "Well, he is the boss," 
or words to that effect. 

Mr. Rice. Did you confirm that fact that you had been released ? 

Mr. Hubbard. If you told me so, yes. 



§4 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Did you confirm it? 

Mr. Hubbard. How could I? I had no knowledge that he had 
released me except through you. 

Mr. Rice. Do you take the position that you had not discussed a 
release at all with Mr. Craig ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I will not answer that question. 

Mr. Rice. You don't want to answer that question ? 

The Chairman. Mr. Hubbard, we think that that is an eminently 
proper question, because if the client has released the attorney from 
that confidential relationship, then you are in the same status as a 
witness, as any other witness. 

Mr. Hubbard. Mr. Craig has not, to my knowledge, released me 
from the confidential relationship of attorney and client. I probably 
violated the code when I discussed some matters privately with counsel 
for this committee the other day, that he refers to, but I don't care to 
publicly violate those canons. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir; did you tell us that your representation 
in this case was something of a lobbyist nature — in the nature of being 
a lobbyist? 

Mr. Hubbard. I don't care to discuss what I discussed with you 
privately, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You don't care to discuss it. Is it all right if I discuss it ? 

Mr. Hubbard. You can testify all you wish, sir. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir ; will you deny or affirm what I have to say ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I can't prophesy what I will do, sir, until you ask 
me something. 

Mr. Rice. Let me refresh your recollection. It is my impression 
that in talking about the representation of Raymond Craig and his bill 
you felt that you were in somewhat of the nature of a lobbyist ; is that 
right ? 

Mr. Hubbard. My recollection of the word "lobbyist" is this, sir: 
As you were getting up to leave, in company with Mr. Mills, and 
handed me a subpena, I said, "I will probably refuse to answer your 
questions before the committee, before the public, because of the canons 
of ethics," and you replied, "Well, you can tell them that." And I 
said, "Perhaps you will contend that I was merely a lobbyist and can't 
claim an attorney's privilege." I believe that was the conversation, 
as I recall it, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I believe that you volunteered the fact during the con- 
versation ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Well, volunteer or not, that was my recollection of 
what was said about my being a lobbyist. I was a poor one. 

Mr. Rice. Wasn't the fact discussed that you were released by your 
client and you admitted that you were released ? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, I didn't admit that I was released, because I had 
not been released. You asked me if I had heard from Mr. Craig, to 
advise him to call you, and I said I would be glad to. I haven't heard 
from him since I talked with you. If I knew where to get him I 
would seek his release, because I am in sympathy with the chairman 
and his committee. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Hubbard, I believe that the attorney-client privilege 
applies to communications between you and your client? 

Mr. Hubbard. Any action taken by me m connection with my em- 
ployment 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 85 

Mr. Moser. I think not. It implies the communications between 
jou and the client and not letters and conversations between you and 
the client, but any steps taken by you, I think, should not be ex- 
cluded. 

Mr. Hubbard. The rule reads as follows. I copied it a moment 
ago from volume 31 of the Florida Statutes Annotated, page 417: 
"It is the duty of a lawyer to preserve his client's confidences." 

Now, if you are going to interpret the word "confidences" to mean 
communications between us, that is one thing. I interpret it as being 
any action I took in connection with the matter he employed me on. 
The fact that a person should come into my office and inquire of me 
as to whether or not I should take a case, and if I decline the case, 
that is a privileged communication. 

The Chairman. Mr. Hubbard, would you carry that so far, just 
taking a hypothetical case, if you had been engaged by a client and 
he had certain conversation and you had gone out, or an attorney had 
gone out — forgetting yourself; I don't mean to imply that it would 
happen in your case — but an attorney had gone out and committed 
some wrongful act or was guilty of a violation of a law, he would 
be protected by reason of the fact that he wasn't in on his client's 
business? 

Mr. Hubbard. If he divulged to me that he was in any illegal busi- 
ness. Mr. Craig never did any illegal business. 

The Chairman. If the attorney had gone out pursuing his client's 
business, had been engaged in some illegal act or done something 
wrongful, that he would be protected from discussing it just because 
he had a case or client? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, I don't believe so. I am conscious that I have 
done no wrongful act. 

The Chairman. It is a hypothetical case. 

Mr. Moser. I think the decisions are different from your own view. 
I think they indicate that the privilege is limited to communications 
between the client and his lawyer, but not with respect to actions 
taken by the lawyer pursuant to those communications. 

Mr. Hubbard. Will you raise your voice a little? 

Mr. Moser. I think the communications are limited, and do not ex- 
tend to action taken by a lawyer. For example, if you have a con- 
versation with your client and he tells you to go to Tallahassee, and 
you go to Tallahassee, the fact that you went there is not privileged. 
The conversation between you and the client is privileged, but not 
the fact that you went there. 

Mr. Hubbard. We differ on opinion. 

Mr. Rice. Do you recall when I called on you the other day and I 
introduced myself as a representative of the Senate Crime Commit- 
tee? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You knew who I was ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And we had a conversation; didn't we? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And we talked about many things ? 

Mr. Hubbard. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you feel that there is a possibility that you are now 
in a position to assert a privilege that you waived at that time ? 



86 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Hubbard. I told you, at the outset, that I thought I had prob- 
ably technically violated the canons of legal ethics when I discussed 
it privately with you and Mr. Mills, but I didn't care to violate it again 
in public. 

Mr. Rice. You feel that at that time you did waive or violate your 
attorney-client relationship ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I can talk to you as one attorney to another; yes, 
sir. 

Mr. Rice. Having once opened the door, you feel that it is possible 
to close the door later on ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, I do. I think it should be publicly brought 
out that you would have to testify. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. I show you several documents, and ask 
you if you know what they are? 

Mr. Hubbard. They are not marked for identification ; but the first 
paper you handed me reads, "The Blackstone, Chicago," and there 
appears in my handwriting my name and address. 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hubbard. As registering and having been assigned to rooms 
1204, 5, and 6. A paper attached to that is labeled, "City Ledger 
Transfer," of the Blackstone Hotel, showing certain charges for the 
accommodations. 

Mr. Rice. What is the date of that, Mr. Hubbard ? 

Mr. Hubbard. The registration is April 21, 1949, 4:59 p. m. The 
checkout the same day is 9 :36 p. m. 

The next paper is the registration of one R. M. Craig, 136 Northeast 
First Street, Miami, Fla., dated April 21, at 4 :59 p. m. He is assigned 
to the same suite of rooms. And the next yellow copy, attached to 
it, is a ledger account showing the amounts paid ; check-out at 9 :36 
p. m. the same day. 

Mr. Rice. So that you have there two cards indicating registration 
of yourself and Raymond Craig at the Blackstone in April 1949, in 
the same suite ; is that right ? 

Mr. Hubbard. That is what they appear to be. 

Mr. Rice. Is that what they are ? 

Mr. Hubbard. That is what they appear to be. 

Mr. Rice. What were they? 

Mr. Hubbard. I refuse to answer on the ground that it would be a 
violation to my oath of the canons of ethics of the American bar. 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. We will offer those records, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. They will be admitted. 

(Said documents as above identified received, marked "Exhibits 
Nos. 12 and 13," respectively, and appear in the appendix on pp. 231 
and 233.) 

Mr. Rice. What were you doing in Chicago on that occasion ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I refuse to answer on the ground that it would be a 
violation of rule B, paragraph 37, of the canons of ethics of the 
American bar. 

Mr. Rice. While you were in Chicago on an occasion did you see 
William H. Johnston, sometimes known as Bill Johnston? 

Mr. Hubbard. I again refuse to answer on the ground that it would 
be a violation of rule B, paragraph 37, of the canons of the American 
bar. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 87 

The Chairman. May I ask you, were you counsel for Mr. Johnston ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I was counsel for Mr. Craig. 

The Chairman. You were not asked anything with regard to Mr. 
Craig in this connection, as I understand it. The question merely 
goes to the point of whether you had conversations with Mr. Johnston 
in Chicago on or about that date. 

Mr. Hubbard. I did have in connection with Mr. Craig's business; 
yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You have answered the question then. Next ques- 
tion, Mr. Rice. 

Mr. Rice. Did you say that you saw Johnston, that you had con- 
versations with Johnston at that time? 

Mr. Hubbard. In connection with Mr. Craig's employment. 

Mr. Rice. At that time did you discuss the off-track bookie bill with 
Johnston ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I refuse to answer on the ground previously stated, 
that it would be a violation of my employment by Mr. Craig, under 
rule B, paragraph 37, of the canons of legal ethics. 

Mr. Rice. I ask that the Chair direct the witness. 

The Chairman. You stated that you had the conversations with 
Mr. Johnston. Were those conversations held with him alone or in 
the presence of anybody else. 

Mr. Hubbard. In the presence of Mr. Craig. 

The Chairman. Did you have many such conversations? 

Mr. Hubbard. About 20 or 30 words. 

The Chairman. How many times did you meet? 

Mr. Hubbard. Once. 

The Chairman. That was the extent of your contact? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Was the entire conversation in Mr. Craig's 
presence ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did that take place in the office at Sportsman's Park? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did Mr. Johnston's car meet you at the airport? 

Mr. Hubbard. I don't know whose car it was. It was some car. 

Mr. Rice. How did it happen that you went to the Blackstone? 

Mr. Hubbard. That is where I had had reservations made. 

Mr. Rice. By whom? 

Mr. Hubbard. By Mr. Johnston. 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, Johnston lived there; did he not? 

Mr. Hubbard. I never have been in Mr. Johnston's home. I think 
he lives in Jacksonville. 

Mr. Rice. You say you didn't know who he was or where he 
lived? 

Mr. Hubbard. Sir? 

Mr. Rice. You say you didn't know who he was or where he lived ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I didn't know who met me at the plane and took me 
to the Blackstone Hotel or to the Sportsman's Park office. It was 
some driver in a car. 

Mr. Rice. What communications did you have with Mr. Johnston 
by which he arranged your reservations at the Blackstone? 

Mr. Hubbard. It was a conversation over the telephone, long dis- 
tance from Jacksonville, Fla. 



88 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. I take it that you called Johnston on the telephone from 
Jacksonville ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Where in Jacksonville? 

Mr. Hubbard. Roosevelt Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. You were staying at the Roosevelt then? 

Mr. Hubbard. I had gone to Jacksonville looking for Mr. Johnston 
in Jacksonville, where he wasn't home, and when he wasn't there, I 
was referred to Sportsman's Park, where he wasn't at home. 

Mr. Rice. Why were you referred to Mr. Johnston ; why were you 
looking for Mr. Johnston? 

Mr. Hubbard. In connection with Mr. Craig's business that he had 
employed me about. 

The Chairman. Has Mr. Johnston any business interests here in 
Florida? 

Mr. Hubbard. I understand from your committee reports that 
he has. 

The Chairman. What is your knowledge of that? 

Mr. Hubbard. I understood he owned a dog race track at Miami 
Beach or has an interest in it, and is an officer of it, and has a dog 
racing track in Jacksonville or thereabouts. 

The Chairman. That is the same Johnston we were talking about? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. I wanted to identify him. 

Mr. Rice. As a result of that telephone call you took an airplane 
and went to Chicago; is that right, from Atlanta, from Atlanta to 
Chicago ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Changed at Atlanta. 

Mr. Rice. And then to the Blackstone Hotel, and then to Sport- 
man's Park, and you conferred with Johnston? 

Mr. Hubbard. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Then you left there, checked out of the hotel, and went 
to Tallahassee; is that right? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did vou see Fuller Warren in Tallahassee? 

Mr. Hubbard. When? 

Mr. Rice. On that trip ? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have breakfast at Fuller Warren's house or 
mansion ? 

Mr. Hubbard. On several occasions. He was not present, however. 

Mr. Rice. He was not present? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you want to say that you did not see Fuller Warren 
on this trip, either going to Chicago or coming from 

Mr. Hubbard. I had not seen Fuller Warren except at his public 
appearances since his inauguration until after the legislature met and 
adjourned that year. I saw him on the occasion of the night after the 
legislature adjourned getting into his car down in front of the capitol 
to go to the mansion. We just exchanged words. 

Mr. Rice. You went to the mansion for breakfast, but you did not 
see Governor Warren ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Hubbard. That's right. 

The Chairman. Governor Warren? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 89 

Mr. Hubbard. Governor Warren, that's right. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you stay in Tallahassee? 

Mr. Hubbard. At the Prince Murad Motor Court. 

Mr. Rice. Is that Cy Deeve's place there ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I think it is owned by one of Cy Deeve's corporations. 

Mr. Rice. You know Cy Deeves ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I have known Cy Deeves for many years. 

Mr. Rice. That was the reason you stayed at the Prince Murad; 
isn't that right ? 

Mr. Hubbard. That's correct, and because I couldn't get reserva- 
tions at any of the downtown hotels. 

Mr. Rice. Before or after leaving Chicago on this trip did you talk 
withB. K.Roberts? 

Mr. Hubbard. No. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I am positive. I talked with him, but not about Mr. 
Craig's business. 

Mr. Rice. When did that conversation take place ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I employed Mr. Roberts to represent my firm in con- 
nection with the appeal of the writ of habeas corpus in the Cecil H. 
Connors case before the Supreme Court, but I didn't discuss any of the 
matters that I was in Tallahassee for when I was up there at the legis- 
lrture with Mr. B. K. Roberts. 

Mr. Rice. Did you see Mr. Roberts before you went to Chicago ? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did this all take place after your return ? 

Mr. Hubbard. During the interim of 30 days that I was in Talla- 
hassee — in and out of Tallahassee — I discussed the matter of a lawsuit 
with Mr. Roberts, the Connors case, and employed him to represent us. 

Mr. Rice. Did Mr. Craig remain up there with you during that 
time ? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, sir. Mr. Craig was in and out of town. 

Mr. Rice. He was in and out of town ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Yes, sir. We had a three-room cottage at the Prince 
Murad, and he was either in Tallahassee or in Miami, back and forth, 
much the same as I was. 

Mr. Rice. Did you see John Rush while you were there ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Persons always see John Rush in Tallahassee. Dur- 
ing the legislative session I saw him. 

Mr. Rice. Did you discuss this off-track bookie bill with him? 

Mr. Hubbard. Mr. Rush stated he was for it, and he would help us 
any way he could. I didn't know why until your committee took some 
testimony some months ago, and he admitted to the committee that he 
had gotten a fee from somebody at the beach to draw a bill like ours. 

Mr. Rice. I believe that was George Bowers, of the S. & G. Syn- 
dicate ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I don't know it was. All I know is what I read in the 
papers, and I rarely believe that. 

Mr. Rice. Did he indicate that he had a communication from Bill 
Johnston about your trip out there ? 

Mr. Hubbard. About my trip from Chicago ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. I think you had indicated to me the other day, 
to refresh your recollection, that Rush came to you and said something 



90 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

about the Craig bill, which indicated that he knew that you had been 
in Chicago discussing it with Johnson. 

Mr. Hubbard. I don't believe that I said that Mr. Kush knew I had 
been to Chicago, because at that time I didn't think anyone knew that 
I had been to Chicago besides Mr. Craig, Mr. Johnston, and myself. 
1 stated that Mr. Rush told me that Mr. Johnston had seen Mr. 
Craig's bill and was very much pleased with it. In the event they 
didn't pass a sales tax, he wanted Fuller Warren to be the best Gov- 
ernor Florida had ever had, and he thought that it would be a rev- 
enue measure which would make up the differences in the budget. 

Mr. Rice. Was there any discussion about the reduction of the 
residence required from 10 to 5 years ? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you discuss the bill with or did you run into Benny 
Cohen, S. & G. Syndicate lawyer, while you were in Tallahassee ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I didn't run into him. I met him in some restaurant 
there when I was eating lunch. He is a brother lawyer here in Miami, 
and I have high regard for him. 

Mr. Rice. Did you discuss the bill with him ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I discussed the bill with everybody who would listen 
to me discuss it. 

Mr. Rice. Did he indicate that the S. & G. was behind the bill ? 

Mr. Hubbard. He indicated that they were going to get behind it 
if the sales tax did not pass. I said, "It will be too late now," or 
words to that effect. 

Mr. Rice. To Benny Cohen ? 

Mr. Hubbard. That's correct. 

Mr. Rice. What did he say to that? 

Mr. Hubbard. He said, "Well, we will be behind it." Well, I said, 
"you are all the way behind it," and then some facetious remark or 
other, and then we left each other. 

Mr. Rice. Didn't he say they had already obtained the backing 
of S. & G., or were talking about financial backing? 

Mr. Hubbard. I didn't state the financial backing of S. & G. or any 
other gamblers. 

Mr. Rice. Didn't he indicate that financial backing had already been 
supplied by S. & G. ? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, sir; he did not. He indicated that he was up 
there to kill some bill that would take away the licenses of the hotels 
or innkeepers where they were convicted of bookmaking on their 
premises, and he was laughing that he had successfully defeated the 
bill. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever discuss the bill with Fuller Warren ? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, sir; I had not. 

Mr. Rice. With Governor Fuller Warren ; did you ever discuss the 
bill with him? 

Mr. Hubbard. No, sir, I never have ; no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You never have discussed the bill with him. Why did 
you go to see Bill Johnston in connection with this bill ? 

Mr. Hubbard. The bill was introduced with some thirty-odd co- 
signers or i ill roducers in the house and several in the senate. The bill 
was then pending before the committees of both houses, both the house 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 91 

and senate, and it was thought by several members of the house in 
their discussions with me that it was sure of passage should it make 
the floor of the house and senate. I thought that if it did pass there 
was danger that Governor Warren would veto it. I knew that Mr. 
Johnston was a long-time friend of Governor Warren's. I knew that 
he was in the racing business and I knew that he would be the logical 
man to whom Governor Warren would turn for advice concerning 
racing legislation. 

Mr. Rice. Did you feel that 

Mr. Hubbard. I thought that I was being smart by going to try 
to sell a bill of goods to Mr. Johnston in Chicago. I wasn't asking 
him for any support, financially or otherwise, but to edit and go over 
the bill in a lefthanded sort of way in my mind, to have him primed 
when Governor Warren asked him what he thought of it. I wanted to 
know what his natural objections were, so that I could eliminate them 
if possible. 

The Chairman. Are we to understand that you thought that it 
would be inevitable that the Governor would seek Mr. Johnston as 
to his, the Governor's, action in the final analysis ? 

Mr. Hubbard. Mr. Chairman, the only way a man can act is how 
he would do himself, and if I were Governor, and God forbid, I would 
turn to anyone who was a specialist in any particular branch of work. 
If it was a tax bill, eventually I would turn to some tax expert. If it 
was racing or something modifying racing, I would turn to my friends 
who knew about racing. I thought that, inasmuch as Mr. Johnston 
was a friend of Mr. Warren's and I knew him to be such during Mr. 
Warren's campaign for governor, he was the logical man that Governor 
Warren would turn to for advice concerning a racing measure, and I 
wanted to prime Bill Johnston with full knowledge of this bill be- 
fore it passed the house and the senate. I knew that it would pass 
the house and senate if they did not pass the sales tax, because they 
needed the revenue that it would give them. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, when you went to see Johnston did you know 
that Johnston had contributed heavily to Governor Warren's cam- 
paign ? 

Mr. Hubbard. I didn't, and I don't know yet how heavily, but I 
knew he was a contributor to his campaign, and I knew that he was 
vitally interested in Mr. Warren's campaign. I had met him in 
Jacksonville at the Roosevelt Hotel during Mr. Warren's campaign 
for governor, in connection with the rally up there. 

Mr. Rice. I want to thank you, Mr. Hubbard, and again I ask you 
to help us out in locating Mr. Craig. We would like to see him before 
we leave town. 

Mr. Hubbard. Mr. Chairman, I am due before the supreme court to 
argue a matter tomorrow morning at Tallahassee, which will make it 
necessary for me to leave at 7 : 05 on Eastern Airline. I shall call 
Mr. Craig's office and social acquaintances when I leave the room and 
do everything I can to get him for you. 

The Chairman. Thank you. That is as much as we will ask you. 
We are most anxious to have him. We wouldn't expect you to forego 
that important legal commitment; however, if you can do that, we 
would be much obliged to you. 

85277 — 51 — pt. 16 7 



92 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Hubbard. Do I understand that I am excused from further 
attendance on the committee? 
The Chairman. Yes, sir. 
(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID W. HALL, CORAL GABLES, FLA. 

The Chairman. Do you before Almighty God solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth and 
nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Hall. I do. 

The Chairman. Your full name, please. 

Mr. Hall. David W. Hall. 

The Chairman. And your address? 

Mr. Hall. Coral Gables, Fla. 

The Chairman. Will you be good enough to keep your voice up so 
that we can all hear you ? 

Mr. Rice. You are an accountant, Mr. Hall? 

Mr. Hall. Certified public accountant. 

Mr. Rice. Where are your offices? 

Mr. Hall. 1216 Ingraham Building, Miami, Fla. 

Mr. Rice. I show you a letter of November 6, 1950, bearing your 
signature, and directed to Mr. N. Paul Cronin, Aberdeen, Md., and ask 
you if you recognize it? 

Mr. Hall. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What does it say? 

Mr. Hall (reading) : 

I herewith hand you a corrected deed by Ethel G. Sullivan and James Sullivan, 
her husband, to Thomas A. Rice and Ruth M. Rice, his wife. According to advice 
received from John W. Muskoff, attorney, this deed is to be recorded in Harford 
County, Md., and mailed to Maj. Thomas A. Rice in Aberdeen, Md., by the court 
clerk. It is also understood that recording costs and stamp taxes are to be reim- 
bursed to you by John W. Muskoff, attorney, 1105 Graham Building, Jacksonville, 
Fla. 

Very truly yours, 

David W. Hall, C. P. A. 

Mr. Rice. It is signed by you? 

Mr. Hall. Yes. 

The Chairman. It will be admitted in evidence. 

(Said letter as above identified received and marked "Exhibit No. 

14.") 

Mr. Rice. Tell us about the circumstances surrounding the writing 
of that letter; what caused you to write it? 

Mr. Hall. Mr. Muskoff sent the deed down here. 

Mr. Rice. That is the lawyer who was here this morning? 

Mr. Hall. Yes. And asked me to have it properly signed and no- 
tarized and mailed to Mr. Cronin, as the letter says. 

Mr. Rice. Why did he ask you, Mr. Hall? 

Mr. Hall. Well, he was in Jacksonville. 

Mr. Rice. Muskoff was? 

Mr. Hall. Muskoff was, and he prepared the deed. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Hall. And the persons who were to sign the deed were in 
Miami. He could have sent it to anyone else, as far as that goes. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 93 

Mr. Rice. Who were the persons who were to sign the deed ? 

Mr. Hall. Ethel G. Sullivan and James Sullivan, her husband. 

Mr. Rice. Why did he pick you out to send that deed to ; were you 
representing them? 

Air. Hall. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Were there any preliminary transactions before that \ 

Mr. Hall. Concerning the deed? 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any other correspondence with Muskoff 
about the deeds? 

Mr. Hall. I don't know that I did. 

Mr. Rice. Were you advised to receive a letter' from Muskoff in 
Jacksonville telling you to go and get the deed signed? 

Mr. Hall. No. 

Mr. Rice. What is your relationship there which made it a normal 
matter, if it was? 

Mr. Hall. I don't understand your question. He sent the deed to 
me to have it signed and mailed to Maryland. 

Mr. Rice. Were you handling some affairs for the Sullivans ? 

Mr. Hall. Oh, yes ; I had been retained by them. 

Mr. Rice. To do what ? 

Mr. Hall. As a certified public accountant, to represent them in 
an income-tax investigation. 

Mr. Rice. Oh, I see. And Mr. Muskoff, I take it, is in the same 
picture ? 

Mr. Hall. I didn't have anything to do with retaining him. 

Mr. Rice. I show you another paper and ask you if you recognize 
this? What is it? 

Mr. Hall. Yes ; I recognize it. 

Mr. Rice. What is it? 

Mr. Hall. That is a deed dated the 6th day of November 1950, by 
Ethel G. Sullivan and James Sullivan, her husband, to Thomas A. 
Rice and Ruth M. Rice, his wife, whose address is Aberdeen, Md. 
I believe that this is the same deed that the letter refers to. 

Mr. Rice. Who signed the deed ? 

Mr. Hall. Ethel G. Sullivan and James Sullivan. 

Mr. Rice. Who witnessed the signatures ? 

Mr. Hall. I witnessed the signatures and Verta A. Smith wit- 
nessed the signatures. 

Mr. Rice. Which signature did you witness ? 

Mr. Hall. I witnessed both of them. 

Mr. Rice. You witnessed both signatures ? 

Mr. Hall. I believe — now, I don't know, sir. Let's see [referring 
to document]. 

Mr. Rice. Do you recall the circumstances surrounding the signing? 

Mr. Hall. Yes ; I do. 

Mr. Rice. Did you at that time take it to the house ? 

Mr. Hall. Both of them came to my office. I had the deed in my 
office. Mr. Muskoff had mailed it to me. 

Mr. Rice. Both persons came and signed in your presence ? 

Mr. Hall. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Who is this Verta A. Smith? 

Mr. Hall. She was a young lady who worked in my office at the 
time. 



94 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. She also witnessed it at the same time ? 
Mr. Hall. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You see there a legal description of the property, and 
right underneath there is something corrected or substituted. 
Mr. Hall. It says : 

This deed is for correction of that certain deed recorded in Deed Land Record 
Book 337, G. R. G., page 77. 

Mr. Rice. What was it about the deed that needed correcting; do 
you know ? 

Mr. Hall. The other deed, as Mr. Muskoff testified this morning, 
apparently was incorrectly executed. 

Mr. Rice. In what way? 

Mr. Hall. Well, Mr. Muskoff said that the witness could not have 
been present with the signers of the deed. 

Mr. Rice. Was there anything else incorrect about it? 

Mr. Hall. I am not an expert witness. I have heard here in this 
hearing today that one of the signatures was not genuine. There 
was an opinion expressed as to that. 

Mr. Rice. Was any discussion had by you with either of the Sul- 
livans about the signatures not being genuine on the previous one ? 

Mr. Hall. Well, Mr. Rice, I hold a certificate from the State of 
Florida to practice the profession of public accountant 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hall. And I am regulated by the laws of the State, chapter 
473, section 15, of the Florida Statutes, which prohibits me from 
testifying as to any of the business or affairs of any client or clients 
for whom I make an investigation, without the written consent of 
the client or clients or their legal representatives. I do not have the 
written consent of my clients to testify in this matter, and I should 
like to say that should I do so I would lose my certificate. 

Mr. Rice. I see. 

Mr. Hall. I would also lose my enrollment before the Treasury 
Department, and also be subject to a suit for damages. 

Mr. Rice. We take it from that, Mr. Hall, that you would rather not 
answer ? 

Mr. Hall. No ; I didn't say that. I am prohibited from answering. 

Mr. Rice. I see. You are quite certain about that ? 

Mr. Hall. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. All right, we will 

Mr. Hall. I might say this, Mr. Rice ; rather than let you think I 
am trying to obstruct your work 

Mr. Rice. Oh, no. 

Mr. Hall. That I had testified fully in this matter before the 
Bureau of Internal Revenue. In order to be enrolled before the 
Bureau of Internal Revenue, it is necessary that I waive my privilege, 
which I did do, and the information that you may want to receive 
from me here today will be available to you there, and if it is not 
sufficient for your purposes, of course I will be glad to appear before 
{hem again and testify further in the matter. 

Mr. Rice. We appreciate your offer. I think the exhibit has already 
been offered. 

The Chairman. It has been accepted. 

That is all. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 95 

(Witness excused.) 

Mr. Rice. James Alexander Sullivan. 

Mr. Keiioe. Mr. Chairman, I represent Mr. Sullivan and I will tell 
him to come in as soon as these lights and cameras are turned off. 

The Chairman. Will you state your name, please ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Jack Kehoe. 

The Chairman. You are counsel for James Sullivan ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And is it your position and his position that he 
desires to testify without being televised ; is that right ? 

Mr. Kehoe. It is our position that we will not testify with the 
television cameras and these other cameras on, for his sake as well as 
for mine. I do not care to be disturbed by that constant flashing of 
bulbs. 

The Chairman. Of course, you understand that flash photographs 
are not taken during the examination ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Except that I have seen them taken here today re- 
peatedly. 

The Chairman. I must disagree with you. I think the press has 
been most cooperative. 

Mr. Kehoe. I don't know whether you call those flashlights or not. 
They are annoying ; they make it difficult to speak and are annoying 
to the eyes. 

The Chairman. All right. It is the ruling of the committee. 

Mr. Kehoe. The cameras are still on, I am informed. 

The Chairman. It is the rule of the committee that in cases where 
the witness, either personally or through his counsel, takes the posi- 
tion that he cannot testify calmly and with deliberation if the lights 
are trained on him, that those lights shall not be on and pictures shall 
not be taken. The committee adheres to that and abides by the request 
of counsel that that shall not be done during his witness' examination. 

(Note. — At this point the witness Sullivan appears in the hearing room.) 

TESTIMONY OF JAMES A. SULLIVAN, MIAMI, FLA., ACCOMPANIED 
BY JACK KEHOE, ATTORNEY 

The Chairman. Mr. Sullivan, do you before Almighty God swear 
that the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't think 

Mr. Kehoe. I don't think this gentleman (pointing to cameraman) 
understands the Chair. 

The Chairman. No pictures will be taken of the witness. You have 
been given the oath, Mr. Sullivan. Do you before Almighty God 
swear that the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole 
truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I do. 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, at this time, on behalf of Mr. Sullivan, 
I wish to advise this committee now that since last testifying before 
this Senate committee, the Federal grand jury for the southern district 
of Florida, including Dade County, has taken under its consideration 
and presently has under its consideration, questions concerning tax 



96 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

returns of Mr. and Mrs. Sullivan for prior years. That gives an 
entirely different status now from that which existed when he previ- 
ously appeared before this committee, and we hope that this com- 
mittee will see fit not to ask any questions that will be prejudicial or 
embarrassing in view of that situation. 

The Chairman. The committee has no intention of pursuing that 
line of inquiry. If the witness declares that that matter is under 
investigation, it is not our purpose to prejudice in any way at all 
the matter, and therefore we have no desire to pursue a line of ques- 
tioning^ which might bear upon any tax difficulties. 

Mr. Kehoe. I might state that the basis of the tax question is fixing 
a net worth for a period, which would include all profits and moneys 
that he has acquired through a period of years. 

The Chairman. Of course, counsel, we will meet the particular 
question when we come to it. We do not mean by that, counsel, that 
any question concerning any isolated ■ holding would be properly 
excludable, but we will meet that question when we come to it. Again 
I repeat that it is not our purpose to direct the questions so as to 
involve his tax difficulties. 

Mr. Kehoe. For the sake of brevity, may we have this stipulation 
in the record: Should such a question be propounded and a proper 
statement made as to refusal to answer, could he then thereafter refuse 
to answer further questions and read from the stipulation as previ- 
ously stated? 

The Chairman. I think so, if it would be preferable to you. 

Mr. Kehoe. If he has it written out, he can give it to you. 

The Chairman. You will remain with him ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Yes, sir; I will be with him, and he can take up just 
that much more time of the committee, if you want him to. 

The Chairman. Mr. Rice, will you proceed ? 

Mr. Rice. Your full name is James Alexander Sullivan ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, it is. 

The Chairman. Where were you born, Mr. Sullivan ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Here in Florida. 

Mr. Rice. Whereabouts? 

Mr. Sullivan. Kissimmee. 

Mr. Rice. On what date ? 

Mr. Sullivan. October 7, 1906. 

Mr. Rice. What were the names of your parents? 

Mr. Sullivan. Sullivan. 

Mr. Rice. What is your fathers name? 

Mr. Sullivan. James Sullivan. 

Mr. Rice. What was your mother's name ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Christine Sullivan. 

Mr. Rice. You have appeared before the committee before, I believe, 
and you gave some testimony about certain matters that we would 
like to clear up here a little bit. 

Mr. Kehoe. Will you refer to the page, Mr. Rice, so that I can keep 
track of you ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. I am looking at pages 317 and 318 in part 1 of the 
record. You have colloquy there in which you discussed a property 
transaction in which you bought a piece of property from a Mr. Ford. 
Do you recall that ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 97 

Mr. Kehoe. The defendant will stand on Ids constitutional right 
and decline to answer any question concerning his acquisil ion of prop- 
erty, because it will go to his net worth and will infringe upon his 
right in the fifth amendment of the Constitution. 

Mr. Rice. Who is Carvel Ford? 

Mr. Sullivan. He is my wife's uncle. 

Mr. Rice. Your wife's uncle? 

Mr. Sullivan. I think, I don't know, half-brother or, I believe, 
her father was his half-brother. 

Mr. Rice. Half-brother of Trecl Ford? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe, I am not sure 

Mr. Rice. Where is Carvel Ford now ? 

Mr. Sullivan. He is dead. 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, this photographer here apparently does 
not pay much attention to the admonition that was given to him, and 
I will make this request now : that the negatives be taken from this 
camera and destroyed here publicly. I think he has violated the ad- 
monition of the Chair. 

The Chairman. The Chair observes that ruling. We must ask the 
photographer to kindly desist from further photographing the witness 
while he is in the course of his testimony. 

Mr. Kehoe. That is the third snap that he has made. How many 
have you taken, Mr. Photographer, three? 

The Photographer. I made one. 

Mr. Kehoe. Where is the negative ? Hand it over. 

The Chairman. We will take charge of it, Counsel. 

Mr. Kehoe. I meant for him to hand it over to the committee. 

The Chairman. We will ask the photographer kindly to surrender 
the negative. You are at liberty to take them outside of the court- 
room or before the witness begins his testimony, but not during the 
testimony of the witness. 

The Photographer. As I understand it, he objected to the lights. 

The Chairman. Yes, but no photographs were to be taken during 
the interrogation. We will have to ask you to surrender it. 

Mr. Kehoe. I want to again emphasize on the snapping or the 
clicking of the shutters, just as much as with regard to the lights. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. We have Carvel Ford as being an uncle 
of your wife or at least a half-brother of your wife's father ; is that 
right ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, she calls him uncle. I don't know what; he is 
half-brother, I think. 

Mr. Rice. He left and went to Illinois and has since died? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever buy a piece of property from Carvel Ford? 

Mr. Kehoe. We refuse to answer on the same ground as stated. 

Mr. Rice. Would you mind letting the witness answer the question, 
Mr. Counsel? 

Mr. Sullivan. I refuse to answer that question at the present time. 
The Federal grand jury of the southern district of Florida has under 
consideration an investigation of my income-tax returns for prior 
years, and I feel that if I should answer that question I might incrimi- 
nate myself. I, therefore, claim my constitutional privilege upon the 
fifth amendment and will decline to answer the question. 



98 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. You are reading from a piece of paper? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you prepare that piece of paper ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You wrote that yourself ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I didn't write it ; it is typewritten. 

Mr. Rice. It is typewritten? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you write it before it was typewritten ? 

Mr. Kehoe. If the committee is interested, I prepared it and gave 
it to him, as I told you at the beginning. I told you that I prepared 
the paper and had given it him, or we can stipulate that that will 
carry over as the same objection. 

Mr. Rice. I think we are entitled to proceed with our line of inquiry 
to determine the nature of his objection from the witness himself. He 
is testifying under oath, and the witness may be held in contempt. 

Mr. Chairman. Counsel, you are free to advise him in any way at 
all, of course; but we do desire to have the response from the witness. 

Mr. Kehoe. But, as to the question that was asked about this, I 
don't think it would take too much thinking to know that some attor- 
ney had prepared it, and I stated that I did prepare it before the 
interrogation started, and I think I gave it to him to read if need be. 

Mr. Rice. With respect to the question about whether or not you 
bought a piece of property from Carvel Ford, is your refusal to an- 
swer predicated upon a fear of Federal or State prosecution ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, I will refuse to answer that ques- 
tion for the same reason. If you wish me to read it, I will do so. 

Mr. Chairman. No. You need not read that again. The question, 
Mr. Sullivan, is as to whether you fear prosecution on a State or 
Federal offense, just that narrow issue and on that single question. 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, I will read the whole thing here to 
you again, if you wish. 

Mr. Moser. It will be sufficient that you refuse to answer on the 
same ground. 

Mr. Sullivan. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. The committee directs that you answer, and you 
still persist in your refusal? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right; next question. 

Mr. Rice. Does the offense which you have in mind involve your- 
self or others ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe I quite understand you. 

Mr. Rice. You have taken the position that you refuse to answer 
because you are afraid you may incriminate yourself; is that right? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I will just have to answer you the same way 
that I have before. 

Mr. Rice. We are trying to get at the basis for what you call your 
assertion of your privilege. 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, I think this is well stated. It states 
specifically that at the present time the Federal grand jury in the 
southern district of Florida has under consideration an investigation 
of his income-tax returns. Now, that is limited to one court, to one 
district, the southern district of Florida, and to one offense, his 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 99 

income-tax returns, and it is because of that pending matter that he 
fears incrimination and claims protection under the fifth amendment 
to the Constitution ; that and nothing else. 

Mr. Moser. The privilege then is based solely on the basis of Federal 
income-tax liability? 

Mr. Kehoe. Correct. 

Mr. Moser. If he is asked any questions not based on Federal 
income-tax liability; is that correct? 

Mr. Kehoe. It is not correct. Any questions that go to his earn- 
ings, net worth, are questions that he is going to decline to answer. 

Mr. Moser. Only to the extent that they relate to his Federal 
income-tax liability ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Kehoe. No ; it is not that limited. 

The Chairman. Just a minute now. Are you counsel in this mat- 
ter [referring to Mr. Muskoff] ? 

Mr. Muskoff. I represent Mr. Sullivan along with Mr. Kehoe. 

The Chairman. We would like to have one spokesman. Do the 
two of you represent him ? 

Mr. Kehoe. We both represent him. 

The Chairman. I understood, when you came up here, that you 
were representing Mr. Sullivan. 

Mr. Kehoe. I am representing Mr. Sullivan here today. 

The Chairman. Well, we will recognize you. 

Mr. Kehoe. The question that the gentleman put there is too nar- 
row a question as a matter of law. 

Mr. Ricl. Let me ask this : Did the transaction for which you fear 
prosecution occur more than 10 years ago? 

Mr. Kehoe. I object to it, if the committee please; it is a prejudicial 
question. 

Mr. Rice. Let us hear from the witness. The witness cannot have 
a hypothetical set of facts in mind. He must have a specific viola- 
tion in mind when he asserts the privilege. 

Mr. Kehoe. Yes; and I understand the wide latitude of the Senate 
investigating committee, and I also understand the limitations of it. 
You are inquiring into a matter that will throw some light on pro- 
posed Federal laws to regulate any interstate traffic in crime. What 
happened 10 years ago as to any property that he may have acquired 
could not be, in view of the existing record and from the pages you 
quoted and stated you were basing these questions upon ■ 

Mr. Rice. We cannot agree with you on that. Let me repeat it. 

Mr. Kehoe. You said, referring to page 317 and the year 1918, so 
that the 10 years is a fictitious proposition. 

Mr. Rice. It may be. 

Mr. Kehoe. If it is fictitious, let us meet it. 

Mr. Rice. We are entitled to inquire and to fix with sufficient defi- 
niteness as to whether or not the witness is entitled to such privilege. 
That is merely our line of inquiry now. Did the transaction from 
which you fear prosecution occur more than 10 years ago ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, I don't know how to answer that 
man. I don't get it. I don't fear nothing, but I don't know how to 
answer this man here about this ; so I will refuse to answer the ques- 
tion on the same ground. 



100 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. The committee instructs you to answer it, and you 
still persist in your refusal to answer ; is that right, counsel ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The next question, please. 

Mr. Rice. I think I will suggest that the Chair direct the witness 
to answer that question. 

The Chairman. Well, he has been directed. Mr. Sullivan, do you 
still refuse to answer? Having been directed by the committee to 
answer the question, you still refuse to answer it? 

Mr. Kehoe. It is the same question ; isn't it ? 

The Chairman. What is your position ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I will refuse to answer the question for the same 
reason, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. Do you know a man by the name of John 
Mobley ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes ; I do. 

Mr. Rice. Who is John Mobley ? 

Mr. Sullivan. He is a citizen here in Miami and a businessman. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in? 

Mr. Sullivan. Tire business, service-station business. He has quite 
a number of businesses, I guess. 

Mr. Rice. Was he recently on a grand jury ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes ; he was. 

Mr. Rice. As a member of a Dade County grand jury? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes ; he was. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know that he was ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any conversations with Mr. Mobley during 
the time he was a member of that grand jury ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe possibly I talked to Mr. Mobley at one 
time. 

Mr. Rice. Out at his tire shop ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. During the time that he was a member of that grand 
jury? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What did you talk to him about ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I believe that I talked to him about having 
some member of the Crime Commission of Dade County down before 
them and finding out a little bit about him. I suggested that I thought 
that should be done. 

Mr. Rice. You were suggesting then to Mr. Mobley, a member of 
the grand jury, a technique of investigation ; is that it ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I thought that it should be inquired into. 

Mr. Rice. Was he the foreman of the grand jury ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No ; I think he was one of the members of the grand 
jury. I don't know what, assistant or secretary or something. 

Mr. Rice. Who was the guiding hand of that grand jury ; was there 
a prosecutor or a special prosecutor or a solicitor ; who handled that 
grand jury? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I don't know who it was at the time. I don't 
know whether it was Bob Givens or who it was. 

Mr. Rice. Would it have been possible for you to have found out 
who the prosecutor was at that time ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 101 

Mr. Sullivan. I suppose it would have been, but I happened to see 
John Mobley and I had known John for quite a number of years, and 
I thought it would be a mighty good thing for Dade County if that 
would happen. 

Mr. Rice. So you didn't suggest to the solicitor or the prosecutor or 
the foreman that it would be a mighty good thing, did you? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I had suggested it before ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. About this particular grand jury ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You did or you didn't ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I have ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. And did you talk to John Mobley about anything else ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I possibly could have, sir. The fact is I don't 
remember too much about when I — about what I talked to him now, 
except that particular one thing. I could have talked to him about 
some more things. I probably wasn't there more than 5 or 10 minutes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ask him if the grand jury was considering your 
activities, investigating your activities or lack of activities? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I am quite sure. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't talk to him about that ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Not personally about me. 

Mr. Rice. You are quite sure ? 

Mr. Sulli wn. I am quite sure. Not about me. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't talk to him about whether they were going to 
investigate the sheriff? 

Mr. Sullivan. No ; I didn't. 

Mr. Rice. Did Mrs. Sullivan accompany you to Mobley's place, or 
did she talk with Mobley in your presence at any time? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I am positive about that. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know John Jones ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes ; I do. 

Mr. Rice. Who is John Jones? 

Mr. Sullivan. He is an automobile dealer in Dade County. 

Mr. Rice. What sort of a dealer, what car ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Dodge-Plymouth. 

Mr. Rice. Tell us about John Jones, who he is and what your rela- 
tionship is with him? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, he is an automobile dealer. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Sullivan. He is quite a big-business man in Dade County, in 
the automobile business. 

Mr. Rice. He is an old friend of yours ? 

Mr. Sullivan. For several years ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. For how many years ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Possibly maybe 4 years or maybe 

Mr. Rice. Didn't he support you in the 1944 campaign? 

Mr. Sullivan. No ; I don't believe he did. 

Mr. Rice. Didn't he support you in the 1944 campaign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. He could have, but I don't know. 



102 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Did he support you in the 1948 campaign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. He helped me in every way that he could in the 1948 
campaign. 

Mr. Rice. Did you know him before the 1944 campaign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe I did. 

Mr. Rice. Did you know him in the 1948 campaign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. I am sure he did in every way he possibly 
could. 

Mr. Rice. Did he financially support you or contribute to your 
campaign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. He didn't contribute to your campaign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe so. 

Mr. Rice. You don't believe so. Don't you know who contributed 
to your campaign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe that he did. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know who contributed to your campaign ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No; I don't; and no one else will know who con- 
tributed to their campaign here in Dade County. 

Mr. Rice. Do you want to take the position that you don't know 
who contributed to your campaign? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is true. 

Mr. Rice. So that you may be receiving campaign contributions 
from people you don't know about ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is true. 

Mr. Rice. How do you account for that? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, the man that is running for office, he has 
to get out and work ; he doesn't stay in the office, and he couldn't be 
elected if he did. He doesn't have too much chance to be around to 
see who comes around and helps him in his office. This is quite a big 
county ; it is a big territory to cover. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have a campaign headquarters ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. In your 1948 campaign where were your headquarters 
located ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Right across the street, over here. 

Mr. Rice. Who handled your campaign there ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, different people were there most of the time. 
I mean I didn't have a campaign manager. 

Mr. Rice. Who was there at different times? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, part of the time or maybe most of the time 
my wife was there. 

Mr. Rice. Your wife was there ? Who kept charge of the money ! 

Mr. Sullivan. I am trying to tell you who was there. 

Mr. Rice. Who kept the money that came into the campaign ? 

Mr. Kehoe. If the committee please, we are going to object to that 
on the same stated grounds, claiming the privilege. 

Mr. Rice. You take the position that campaign is the subject 

Mr. Kehoe. I take the position that money of any kind or char- 
acter, property of any character, is material to the tax matter that is 
under investigation, when they are trying to determine a fraud on 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 103 

the tax returns by establishing an arbitrary net worth at an arbitrary 
period of time. 

The Chairman. Of course campaign contributions would not be 
income to this individual if they were properly handled. 

Mr. Kehoe. That might be the reason that the objection is made. 

The Chairman. You mean that they would not be properly 
handled ? 

Mr. Kehoe. I don't know. I said it might well be. 

The Chairman. I do not follow you in that. 

Mr. Kehoe. We follow that from articles that appeared after the 
last meeting, and some of the exhibits that are attached to this part 
here. 

Mr. Moser. Counsel, I think if we should ask him what he did with 
his campaign contributions after he received them, you might be on 
sound ground. If he received contributions that were not his income, 
it has no connection with income-tax liability. 

Mr. Kehoe. That might well be, but if they are using that as a 
basis for determining net worth, and it is a matter that has been 
definitely gone into previously, which has been testified to, we see 
what happens to the man, and reasonably and justifiably he fears 
danger and harm should he be now compelled to answer that question. 

Mr. Moser. What kind of danger and harm ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Danger and harm of a prosecution. 

Mr. Moser. A criminal prosecution under the income-tax laws 1 

Mr. Kehoe Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. For fraudulently filing his income-tax returns ; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Kehoe. It has been advertised in the paper over a period of 
time that the matter is being considered, and there has from time to 
time been speculation, purely speculation ; but it is there nevertheless. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Sullivan, is your fear that you might be criminally 
prosecuted under the income-tax laws for filing fraudulent tax 
returns ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe your question is put right. 

The Chairman. Suppose that you put it right. 

Mr. Kehoe. He can't put questions, if the committee please. He 
can only answer. 

The Chairman. He is the only one who said that the question was 
not put right. 

Mr. Moser. Counsel, to my mind if we address our questions to the 
witness — every time I ask a question you stand up and give an answer. 
If you wish to have your client consult with you, we have no objection, 
but this business of your getting up and answering the questions for 
him is not something that we are going to put up with. 

Mr. Kehoe. I haven't answered a question yet, and neither shall I. 
I will make objections, and I shall advise my client. I am not con- 
scious of having answered any questions. 

The Chairman. Now, the witness, Counsel, stated that the question 
had not been put right, and we now ask him in what respect it is not 
put right, and how he would right it. 

Mr. Sullivan. What was the question ? 

(Question read by the reporter.) 



104 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Sullivan, is your fear that you might be criminally 
prosecuted under the income-tax laws for filing fraudulent income- 
tax returns? 

Mr. Sullivan. That question involves my income taxes which we 
have filed supplementary returns on, and this, Mr. Chairman, has been 
thoroughly gone over ; it is in there word for word, every bit of that, 
and we have filed a supplementary return which is right, and I have 
sworn to it and I can only feel that way because I have to be so careful 
of the statements that I make here, because when we go out of this 
room you don't know them most of the time. That is the trouble that 
we have right here — I have had since the last hearing, sir. Before my 
last hearing, if you will remember, the chairman of our last hearing 
here said, "Mr. Sullivan, we think you are guilty to start with" ; seel 

Mr. Bice. I am afraid the record won't support you on that. I would 
like to ask that you find that in the record. 

Mr. Sullivan. He says, "I understand that Mr. Sullivan was a 
pretty poor boy before he was elected sheriff, and since then I under- 
stand he is a pretty wealthy boy, and we have some mighty direct 
questions we are going to ask him." 

Mr. Rice. When did you file this supplementary return that you 
made reference to just now ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, that I can't tell you. I don't know. You have 
it there. 

Mr. Rice. Was it in the last year ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I will just refuse to answer the question on the same 
grounds. You have got it there. 

Mr. Rice. You have waived your privilege there ; you have discussed 
it; you said you filed a supplementary return. Are you taking the 
position that you are going to cut it off and not say when? 

Mr. Sullivan. We stated every bit of the questions that you have 
asked me here. 

Mr. Rice. When did you file this supplementary return about which 
you have just testified ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You just don't know? 

Mr. Sullivan. No, sir. 

The Chairman. In other words, Mr. Sullivan, so that we can under- 
stand each other, you did file an income-tax return originally ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

The Chairman. Then, more recently, you have filed a supplemen- 
tary or corrected one ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Sullivan. A supplementary return ; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And that was what you volunteered to us? 

Mr. Sullivan. I volunteered that. 

The Chairman. You answered that by way of explanation. Now., 
the question is, When did you send in the corrected or supplementary 
income-tax return? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't know when I did that. It was before the 
hearing, I believe. 

Mr. Rice. Before which hearing? 

Mr. Sullivan. It must have been previous to the hearing last July. 

Mr. Rice. Have you filed any supplementary returns since then? 

Mr. Sullivan. Not supplementary ; not that I recall. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 105 

Mr. Rice. Is it possible that you may have? 

Mr. Sullivan. I filed a return since then, for this past year. 

Mr. Rice. You have filed a return this past year. How about a sup- 
plementary return on a previous year? 

Mr. Sullivan. As far as I remember, we have filed one. 

Mr. Rice. You have filed one supplementary return? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is what I mean. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know what year that was for? 

Mr. Sullivan. I am sorry I don't. I am sorry that I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Going back to John Jones, does he have a farm out here 
in the country somewhere? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe that he has. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been to his farm ? 

Mr. Sullivan. If he did have, I would know it. 

Mr. Rice. Does he have a farm somewhere near Forty Mile Bend? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know where that is ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. He doesn't have one? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know a Jack Friedlander ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Who is he? 

Mr. Sullivan. He is a reputed bookmaker here in Dade County. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever met Jack Friedlander; have you talked 
with him ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No, sir. Oh, now, I may have met him in the lobby 
of the courthouse. I may have met him in the sheriff's office. 

Mr. Rice. Let us get a little bit more definite than that. What 
other places have you met Friedlander ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, I think that that question should be 
excluded from this and should not be sent back to the Senate. The 
trick question presupposes a nonexistent fact, "What other places have 
you met him." I don't think that is fair. 

The Chairman. The question ought to be phrased, "Did you meet 
him any place" ? 

Mr. Kehoe. That is correct. I think the whole thing should be 
stricken. 

The Chairman. The question will be framed, "Did you meet him 
any other place and if so, where?" 

Mr. Sullivan. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you want to stand on your answer that you never 
met Jack Friedlander in any place but at the courthouse? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is the only place that I remember meeting him. 

Mr. Rice. Outside of the courthouse? 

Mr. Sullivan. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Let's make it very definite : Would you want to say that 
you have not met Friedlander and talked with him outside of the 
courthouse ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Not that you know of ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Now, you know about it, don't you ? 



106 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I met a lot of people and I do meet a lot of 
people and shake hands with a lot of people, whom I don't know at 
all. 

Mr. Rice. Friedlander is eliminated from that. You know Fried- 
lander ; you said you knew him. 

Mr. Sullivan. I do know him when I see his picture in the paper. 
There is his name there. 

Mr. Rice. Would you know him if he walked into this room ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I would know him now, yes, but I haven't known 
him too long. I mean, I am not intimately acquainted with him. 

Mr. Rice. When was the last time you saw him? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, that I couldn't tell you. 

Mr. Rice. Approximately? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I couldn't tell you approximately; it was 
sometime within the period of time that I have been sheriff in the 
courthouse. 

Mr. Rice. That was about 6 years, off and on ? 

Mr. Sullivan. It could have been sometime within that period. 
I know, however, I didn't meet him in the courthouse. 

Mr. Rice. When did you first meet Friedlander? 

Mr. Sullivan. I couldn't tell you that. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know where it was? 

Mr. Sullivan. It must have been in the courthouse, only thing I 
remember. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know who introduced you ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No; I don't. 

Mr. Rice. What conversation did you have with him? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I don't remember meeting him the first time, 
so I wouldn't remember the conversation. 

Mr. Rice. Do you remember meeting him or do you not remember 
meeting him ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is what I say. I don't remember meeting him 
the first time, so I wouldn't remember the conversation. 

Mr. Rice. What occasion was it when you met him which fixed it 
in your mind so that you could recognize him now ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I guess his picture has been in the paper 
quite a number of times, and possibly I met him once or twice in the 
courthouse. 

Mr. Rice. So that now you think you know him from a combination 
of seeing his picture in the papers and having met him in the court- 
house; is that right? 

Mr. Sullivan. I am quite sure I would know him if I saw him. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever seen him at any place other than having 
seen his picture in the paper or having met him at the courthouse ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever seen him at the John Jones Dodge-Ply- 
mouth place? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 

Mr. Sullivan. Never. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know a man bj the name of McWhorter? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes; I do. 

Mr. Rice. Which one do you know ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 107 

Mr. Sullivan. Mack. 

Mr. Rice. Mack? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What is his first name ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Mack is what I know. 

Mr. Rice. What work does McWhorter do ? 

Mr. Sullivan. He is a bartender. 

Mr. Rice. Is that Grady McWhorter? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe it is at that ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where does he tend bar? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I don't know. I haven't seen him in quite a 
while. 

Air. Rice. When did you last see him ? 

Mr. Sullivan. At the barroom at the El Comodoro Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. How long ago was that? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, it has been a month or two, maybe; a month 
or two ago, something like that. 

Mr. Rice. What else do you know about him ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, he worked for me for 1 month. 

Mr. Rice. I see. Tell us about that. 

Mr. Sullivan. He worked as an investigator for 1 month. 

Mr. Rice. What doing? 

Mr. Sullivan. Finding horsebooks for me. 

Mr. Rice. I see. 

Mr. Sullivan. Or horsebooks and other places. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon. 

Mr. Sullivan. Horsebooks and other places. 

Mr. Rice. Horsebooks and other places? 

Mr. Sullivan. Gambling. 

Mr. Rice. Is he an investigator or is he a bartender ? 

Mr. Sullivan. During the time he was working as a bartender he 
wasn't working for me. I used him 1 month as an investigator. 

Mr. Rice. Did you deputize him? 

Mr. Sullivan. The only way I used him was to find horsebooks for 
me or any form of gambling. 

Mr. Rice. Did you deputize him? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe I did. I can't say for sure. 

Mr. Rice. Did you give him an identification card ? 

Mr. Sullivan. If I deputized him I did, but I think, I am not sure, 
whether I did or didn't. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know whether you did or did not? 

Mr. Sullivan. That's right. The books will show it. 

Mr. Rice. What was the arrangement about compensation, about 
pay? 

Mr. Sullivan. He drew money out of the office. 

Mr. Rice. He drew money out of the office ? 

Mr. Sullivan. He drew his salary out of the sheriff's office while 
he was an investigator. 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, may I ask Mr. Sullivan a question on 
this matter? 

The Chairman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Just a moment. Tell us about his salary arrangement. 

85277— 51— pt. 16 8 



108 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, he was paid from a regular sheriff's 
check out of my office, a regular sheriff's check out of my office. 

Mr. Rice. How much did he draw ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe it was $250 for 1 month. 

Mr. Rice. Who recommended him to you ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, he came to me and he told me that he knew 
where some gambling places were. I said, "That is what I need. If 
you know where they are, I certainly need them." That is the only 
headache I had in Dade County. I asked him to get me some, and 
he turned a few of them in. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon. 

Mr. Sullivan. He had turned a few places in for me. 

Mr. Rice. What places did he turn in ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That I don't remember right offhand. 

Mr. Rice. Had he turned them in before you hired him? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, and I put him to work for a month. He turned 
in quite a number of places then, and it was during a time that it was 
quite hard to catch gambling places in Dade County. 

Mr. Rice. He was doing a good job? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, he was turning in a lot of places. 

Mr. Rice. What places did he turn in? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't know the places he turned in. 

The Chairman. Can you remember one ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, yes; one on Twenty-seventh Avenue and One 
Hundred and Sixth Street, I believe. He turned in a number of places 
downtown here on First Street. 

Mr. Rice. Whose place was that on One Hundred and Sixth or One 
Hundred and Seventh Street? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. How do you remember that ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Because I was trying to have my men catch it. I 
was trying to get my own men to catch the place, and they couldn't 
get it. 

Mr. Rice. They couldn't get it ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. And what happened? 

Mr. Sullivan. He caught it. 

Mr. Rice. Was the place raided ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes ; that's right. 

Mr. Rice. Was anybody arrested ? 

Mr. Sullivan. One or two or three were arrested. 

Mr. Rice. Were they convicted? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And that was a place at One Hundred and Seventh and 
what ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Between One Hundred and Sixth, I believe, on 
Northwest Twenty-seventh Avenue. 

Mr. Rice. Can you fix the month when he worked for you; what 
year and what month ? 

Mr. Sullivan. It is on the record in my office downstairs. 

Mr. Rice. His application is on record ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Was it in 1050, last year or this year? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 109 

Mr. Sullivan. It was sometime during the winter months. 

Mr. Rice. Of what year, this past winter? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, this past winter. I am not sure whether it 
was — I am not sure about the month. I mean, it could be found out 
mighty easy. 

Mr. Kehoe. Let me help you a little bit here. Mr. Sullivan was 
not sheriff of Dade County between a date in October and a date in 
April. 

The Chairman. That is October of 1950 to April of 1951 ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Was it during that time ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No, it was during the time I was in office. 

Mr. Rice. Then it wasn't in the winter, was it ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe on the 19th of October I went out of office. 

Mr. Rice. Was this before then ? 

Mr. Sullivan. It had to be before then, because he was on my pay- 
roll. It might have been in September; I am not sure. 

Mr. Rice. In order words, it was around September of 1950, then ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe so, but I am not sure. 

Mr. Rice. But you do have a record in your office of when it was ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. AVas he a regular employee ; did you deduct withholding 
taxes and social security from his salary ? 

Mr. Sullivan. He worked 1 month, and I don't know whether that 
was deducted or not. It may have been. You will have to look at 
my books again to find out. He was hired just like anybody else 
would be. 

Mr. Rice. On a salaiy basis ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. At so much per month ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Did you hire him yourself; did you personally deal with 
him ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I hired him ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. He gave you some information on a place around One 
Hundred and Seventh, a file on the place? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes ; a number of places down on First Street. 

Mr. Rice. Can you remember the addresses of any of the ones on 
First Street? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I believe there was a place — I would be afraid 
of the address — I think they are tearing the building down now. 
There is an old poolroom there. It is in the middle of the block on 
Northeast First Street, between Miami Avenue and First Avenue. 
Then down in the block between Second Avenue 

Mr. Rice. Before you leave that, when he gave information about 
a place did he swear to it on affidavit, or did he go out and make the 
arrest himself? What did he do? 

Mr. Sullivan. He would give me the information. 

Mr. Rice. To you personally? 

Mr. Sullivan. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. What would you do? 

Mr. Sullivan. I would send my men there to catch the place. 

Mr. Rice. Would he be called upon to testify about this ? 



110 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Sullivan. No. I don't believe you quite understand our way 
here. When things get tight in law enforcement it is mighty hard 
for the known law-enforcement officers to go out and catch these 
gambling places, and you have to have someone who will go around 
and try,"by some hook or crook, to get into these places and find this 
information out, and that is what was done. 

Mr. Rice. So that he was the undercover man, more or less? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, that is true. 

Mr. Rice. Would he go into these places and gamble? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe so. 

Mr. Rice. How would he know they were running? 

Mr. Sullivan. He would see it. 

Mr. Rice. What did he tell you ? 

Mr. Sullivan. He told me that they were gambling at these places. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know any other people named McWhorter ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No ; I don't. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever talked to this man McWhorter on the 
long-distance telephone, this undercover man? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe he has called me a time or two. 

Mr. Rice. From where ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I don't know. He might have called me 
from — I wouldn't know. He might have called me from Tampa. He 
might have called me from Jacksonville. 

Mr. Rice. What would he be doing calling you from Tampa ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, he is supposed to have a brother or uncle or 
something that lives over there. 

Mr. Rice. What is his name? 
" Mr. Sullivan. Well, McWhorter, as I understand. 

Mr. Rice. Another McWhorter; what is his first name? 

Mr. Sullivan. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. John ? 

Mr. Sullivan. It could be. I think I have heard him speak of 
John. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat was Grady doing over there with John that would 
cause him to call you over here? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't know. I know he has called me, though, at 
my home possibly a time or two. 

Mr. Rice. Were the calls collect? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe he has ever called me collect. 

Mr. Rice. You don't believe he has ever called you collect? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't believe he has. If he has, I would have 
taken it. 

Mr. Rice. If he had called you collect you would have 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. But I don't think he did. It could have been. 

Mr. Rice. What would be the nature of a call of a man who worked 
as an undercover man in Miami from some place like Tampa which 
would cause you to accept the charges? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, if the fellow was working for me he might 
have some information; however, I don't believe at the time he was 
working for me — he was here all of the time. He was here all the 
time. 

Mr. Rice. What caused him to leave your service; why did you 
terminate his employment? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 111 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, at the time lie was working in my office he 
also told me that he was working for certain members of the crime 
commission. 

Mr. Rice. You say that at the time he was working for you he said 
he was working for the crime commission ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Go ahead. 

Mr. Sullivan. At the time that he was working for me? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Sullivan. So he worked for me the 1 month, and well, I be- 
lieve — let me see ; something happened along about that time ; I don't 
know just what it was. He came to me and told me, I believe, that 
he would have to quit or have to leave, or something. I don't remem- 
ber. Anyway he did leave. 

Mr. Rice. It is very vague. Were you satisfied with his services; 
were his services satisfactory ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, he turned up a number of places. I don't 
know whether it was 8, 10, or 15, but that is quite a number of places 
for a fellow to turn up in these horse books when they are hard to get. 

Mr. Rice. Did he do any work for you before this time that you hired 
him for? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, he might have brought stuff into the office 
and what not, but — — 

Mr. Rice. Did you know him before that ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I talked with him. He said he knew me dur- 
ing election time. I might have known him a month before that, but 
I mean not too well. 

Mr. Rice. Now, I see here a telephone call that came collect to your 
home telephone on April 9, 1951, from Muskegon, Mich., from Mc- 
Whorter, collect. What was that about ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't remember, unless he said he was coming 
back or — I wouldn't know. He left the barroom down here, and, as 
I understand, he was working over at the El Comodoro Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Sullivan. And went to Muskegon, so I understand. 

Mr. Rice. And what was this conversation ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That was the first I knew where he was, when he 
sent me a wire. 

Mr. Rice. He sent you a wire? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is what you said there. 

Mr. Rice. What did he do? 

Mr. Sullivan. Up there? 

Mr. Rice. Did he send you a wire ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't know. You said he sent a wire. It could be. 

Mr. Rice. Did he telephone you? 

Mr. Sullivan. You said he sent me a wire collect. 

Mr. Rice. I am asking you. 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Did he communicate with you from Muskegon, Mich.? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe he did call me or wire me. I don't remem- 
ber which. 



112 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. About what? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't remember at the moment. 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, will the Chair have counsel repeat the 
first question that he asked about the date in April, about Muskegon ? 

The Chairman. Regarding the fixation of the date ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Counsel read from some record, and we would like 
to see what he was putting to the witness. 

Mr. Rice. I asked him about a telephone call from Muskegon, 
Mich., from McWhorter, a call from Muskegon, Mich., April 9, 1951 ; 
also a collect telephone call on April 9, 1951. 

What was that all about, Mr. Sullivan % 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, now, that other 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, I have just now been advised that the 
television is full-blast all over Dade County. The people on the 
streets are seeing it. 

The Chairman. Seeing the witness? 

Mr. Kehoe. That is what I have been told. 

The Chairman. Mr. Kehoe, we are advised by the television people 
that absolutely the witness is not being photographed. 

Mr. Kehoe. Naturally, I don't know, Mr. Chairman. I was just 
told that. 

The Chairman. While we are waiting will the meeting be in order? 
There was no recess called. 

(Note. — At this point Mr. Kehoe was called out of the hearing room 
for a telephone call, and the witness, Mr. Sullivan, was temporarily 
excused.) 

The Chairman. With this opportunity given and with the neces- 
sary suspension of the witness' testimony by reason of the telephone 
call to his counsel, the Chair wishes to announce that it is in receipt of 
a telegram from Harry O. Voiler. We observe that Mr. Voiler is 
here. Mr. Voiler, do you desire to speak to the committee about this? 

Mr. Voiler. No. I would like to have you put it in the record and 
have you read it, please. 

FURTHER TESTIMONY OF HARRY 0. VOILER, MIAMI BEACH, 

FLORIDA 

The Chairman. I assume that that is the purpose of your sending 
the telegram. If you will just step forward, please, we will be very 
glad to comply with your request. 

The telegram is dated this date from Miami Beach. It is addressed 
to the Chair, and it reads as follows : 

Mrs. Oretta Yelverton Carroll has made some statements concerning me. I 
earnestly urge that I be allowed to again appear before the committee to explain 
my side of this as soon as possible. Either she or I will be guilty of perjury, 
and I want whoever that person may be to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of 
the law. This telegram is not only being sent to you but to the Associated Press, 
United Press, and International News Service, so that the public may be aware 
that a perjury has been committed and that the culprit be punished. I hope 
you will recall me immediately before you end this session. 

Harry O. Voller. 

Mr. Voiler, did ^ou send this telegram? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes; I did. 

The Chairman. And this is the telegram ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 113 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

The Chairman. The telegram will be marked and admitted in evi- 
dence as Exhibit No. 15. 

Mr. Voiler. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, do you feel, inasmuch as the statements 
were made under oath, either person is guilty of perjury ? 

Mr. Voiler. I haven't heard what Mrs. Yelverton has said. I would 
like to get the transcript and study it tonight, and I would be happy to 
be recalled tomorrow morning. 

The Chairman. Does that change your statement here? You said 
that Mrs. Yelverton has made some statements concerning you. You 
said "either she or T will be guilty of perjury." 

Mr. Voiler. If it pleases you, Mr. Chairman, and I am at your lib- 
erty, you may recall me immediately, if you wish. 

The Chairman. You are proposing that you be recalled. My ques- 
tion to you is, Did you state that either you or she had been guilty of 
perjury today; do you answer "Yes" or "No"? 

Mr. Voiler. I just read a headline on a paper, "Voiler may be 
accused" of something, perjury, I think. 

The Chairman. Do you contend that either she or you is guilty of 
perjury? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, Mr. Chairman, I have to amplify that. Well, 
I will be to the point. A man standing before a committee, an inves- 
tigating committee, and then comes a witness who follows, it would 
be hard for me to say that that woman deliberately lied. I wouldn't 
be a gentleman if I said that, but I will say this: I think the very 
foundation that stands between that woman's imagination and memory 
has completely broken down. 

The Chairman. All right, now, your telegram, therefore, is intro- 
duced in evidence. You do not contend, therefore, we understand — 
in other words, you do not make the charge that she is guilty of 
perjury? 

Mr. Voiler. Somebody is guilty of perjury. 

The Chairman. Either you or she ? 
. Mr. Von,ER. Eight. 

(Mr. Voiler was excused and Mr. Sullivan resumed the stand.) 

The Chairman. Let the meeting come to order. 

FURTHER TESTIMONY OE JAMES ALEXANDER SULLIVAN, MIAMI, 
FLA., ACCOMPANIED BY JACK KEHOE, ATTORNEY 

Mr. Rice. Mr. Sullivan, we were talking about a telephone call from 
Muskegon, Mich., that hapened just 2 months ago, in April, from a 
man by the name of McWhorter to you. What was that telephone 
call about ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, I declare — I don't remember what 
the telephone call was about or what the telegram was about, whatever 
it happened to be. 

Mr. Rice. Do you recall getting a telephone call from Mr. Mc- 
Whorter? 

Mr. Sullivan. Either a call or a wire. I do remember getting a 
call or wire once. 



114 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. This is the same McWhorter who worked at the El Como- 
doro? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is the McWhorter, yes, sir, that did work 1 
month here for me. 

Mr. Rice. This telephone call had a substantial charge on it, 
and evidently the conversation was somewhat protracted. It was 
only 2 months ago. I wonder if you might be able to recall what that 
was all about ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I do remember getting a call, the call or 
wire — I don't know which it was. 

Mr. Rice. The telephone call ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Telephone call, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Was it collect ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. If he had called me collect, I would have ac- 
cepted it. 

Mr. Rice. I believe he called you on your nonpublic number at your 
house. 

Mr. Sullivan. No; I don't operate 

Mr. Rice. You have one that is not listed in the 'phone book, don't 
you? 

Mr. Sullivan. No ; I don't. I used to have one. 

Mr. Rice. How long ago did you have that disconnected ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, possibly 8 months or something like that. 

Mr. Rice. Let us get back to this telephone call that occurred 2 
months ago. Let's talk about that. What was that about ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I don't know. If it was about his wife — I 
don't know what it could have been about. 

Mr. Rice. We would like to know exactly what it was about. 

Mr. Sullivan. It could have been about 

Mr. Rice. I am not concerned about what it could have been. What 
was it about ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I say, it could have been 

Mr. Rice. And I say I want to know what it was about. 

Mr. Sullivan. It was probably 

Mr. Rice. I am not concerned about probably. 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I am trying to give you what it was about. 
When I get through what I am trying to think of, I will try to help 
you. 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Sullivan. It seems to me like he called me one time and asked 
me to deliver a message to his wife. 

Mr. Rice. Do you mean down at the trailer park ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That he would be home soon. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Sullivan. Now, he said, "My wife is sick" 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Sullivan. And I did know that his wife was sick while he 
worked for me. 

Mr. Rice. Was she down at the trailer ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you deliver the message to her ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. I believe I had one of my boys deliver the 
message. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 115 

Mr. Rice. What was the message again? 

Mr. Sullivan. I think it was that he would be home in a few days, 
within a week, and he wanted to know how his wife was, and his wife 
was not well, as best I can remember; that his wife was not well, that 
he would come right on home immediately, and if I found her that 
way to call him back up there. That is the best I can remember. 

Mr. Rice. That is pretty good. Now, what did you do? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I guess that I delivered that message to his 
wife. 

Mr. Rice. Which one of the boys did 3-011 use to deliver the message? 

Mr. Sullivan. Carl Holloway, I believe. 

Mr. Rice. What was the answer ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, she was all right, and he showed up in less 
than a week. 

Mr. Rice. Did you call him back? 

Mr. Sullivan. No ; I didn't call him back because his wife was all 
right. He told me if his wife was not all right, to call. 

Mr. Rice. Would you want to explain why he picked you as a 
messenger boy in that set-up there? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I suppose — I don't know, unless he had worked 
for me. 

Mr. Rice. Unless he had worked for you? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. He worked for me. He seemed to have quite 
a bit of information that I needed, and he gave me this information. 

Mr. Rice. This was calling you collect to deliver a message ; it didn't 
have anything to do with the information, did it ? 

Mr. Sullivan. No, but I am talking about the previous information 
that he had given me when he had went to work for me, after he had 
told me of some of the things that had happened. Well, I did put 
him to work for me for a month, and he got me considerable 
information. 

Mr. Rice. What was he doing up in Muskegon, Mich. ? 

Mr. Sullivan. That I don't know. Whether he was working up 
there or not, I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. When he came back from there did he see you ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe that he came back here and went to work. 

Mr. Rice. Where did he go to work ? 

Mr. Sullivan. He had a job. I don't know where he went to work. 
I think he had a job here somewhere. I don't know where. As I say, 
I was not closely intimate with him. 

Mr. Rice. But you accepted telephone calls, collect telephone calls, 
from Muskegon, Mich., from him? 

Mr. Sullivan. The sheriff gets many collect calls from all over the 
country. 

Mr. Rice. You do ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. On your home telephone? 

Mr. Sullivan. If they can't get me at my office they get me at home. 
I had many people who called me at my home, collect calls. Well, 
some of them I have turned down; some of them I have taken, 
sometimes. 

Mr. Rice. When was the last time you saw this man ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe I saw him when he got back from up there. 



116 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Where did you see him? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe he came down to the office to see me. 

Mr. Rice. Came down to the office to see you ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe so. 

Mr. Rice. What did you talk about? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, now, I don't 

Mr. Rice. Going back to that telephone call, was that all you talked 
about, just the condition of his wife? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is what he was interested in, yes. 

Mr. Rice. That is all you talked about? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. Well, if I remember right, he told me 
that his wife was quite sick, and that his wife needed an operation, 
and that his wife had been right in his home or her home, and he was 
worried that there might be some separation come up there. Her 
father or mother asked her to come on home, if I remember right. 
He was quite worried about it, and that is why he called me. 

Mr. Rice. That is the only reason for the call? 

Mr. Sullivan. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, I am showing you a letter dated July 6, 1950, 
from the sheriff's office of Dade County, written to this committee. I 
ask you if you recognize it? 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Is that your signature on the back page? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is my signature. 

Mr. Rice. Did you write that signature ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. That is my signature. 

Mr. Rice. Do you use green ink ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You do? 

Mr. Sullivan. I did. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir; let us introduce that into the record. 

The Chairman. It is not copied into the record; it is just marked 
for identification. 

(The letter dated July 6, from Sheriff Sullivan to the committee, is 
identified as Exhibit No. 16 and is on file with the committee.) 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, I show you a deed 

Mr. Kehoe. Wait until he finishes reading this, Mr. Rice, please. 

The Chairman. Do you want to say something ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, was this before or after the com- 
mittee ? 

The Chairman. I notice the date was July 1950. 

Mr. Rice. What was the date? 

Mr. Kehoe. July 6, 1950. 

Mr. Rice. There is another document there, I think; it is exhibit 
17; is that correct, Mr. Colman? 

Mr. Colman. Yes, sir. 

(The document to which Mr. Rice refers is already in the record as 
Exhibit No. 3.) 

Mr. Rice. Do you see your signature there ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. That is my signature. 

Mr. Rice. That is your signature; you wrote it? 

Mr. Sullivan. That is my signature. 

The Chairman. Did Mr. Sullivan answer? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 117 

(The reporter read the answer as above recorded.) 

Mr. Sullivan. Just a minute. This is not it here [indicating] ; 
this is it here. It looks like my signature. 

Mr. Rice. It looks like it ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. To help you a little bit, do you want to practice your 
signature a little bit ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Let me see it. Let me see — a part of this, the "a" 
looks funny ; it don't look like my signature here. 

Mr. Rice. Would you like to practice your signature a little bit? 

Mr. Sullivan. I don't need to practice my signature, Mr. Jones, or 
whatever your name is. 

Mr. Rice. Is it or isn't it ? 

Mr. Sullivan. I believe that is my signature ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. You know it is, as a matter of fact, don't you ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Let me look at it there just a minute. 

The Chairman. Now you have looked at it, Mr. $ullivan ; what is 
your answer? 

Mr. Sullivan. Well, I believe that is my signature ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. All right, here is another paper dated April 28, 1950, at 
Miami. We had better mark this as another exhibit, Mr. Colman. 

(Said document received and marked "Exhibit No. 17," and is on 
file with the committee. ) 

Mr. Rice. I show you what purports to be a deposit receipt and 
ask you if you recognize the signature on that or the signatures? I 
believe on the reverse side the names Jimmy Sullivan and Ethel Sulli- 
van appear, do they not ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, I am going to object to answering 
these questions on the same grounds that we had before. 

The Chairman. What is that? 

Mr. Sullivan (producing document) . Do you want me to read this 
to you ? 

The Chairman. No. 

Mr. Sullivan. All right. 

The Chairman. I want to understand whether or not you do stand 
on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kehoe. We do ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Rice. Let the record be clear. Is that your signature on that 
document? You refuse to answer that on the same grounds? 

Mr. Kehoe. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Counsel, in this instance the committee instructs the 
witness to answer. Are we to understand that he persists in his 
refusal to answer on the ground that he has already referred to; is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, I will answer anything that don't 
pertain to these taxes. 

The Chairman. The question is directed as to your signature, Mr. 
Sullivan. 

Mr. Sullivan. Don't they pertain to taxes? If they don't I will 
answer them. 



118 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. We are just asking you questions as to the facts. 
We are asking- you as to the fact of the signature, and I don't under- 
stand that that has any direct bearing on taxes. 

Mr. Kehoe. If you will delete the rest of the document and just 
submit the signature, we will answer the question ; but by answering 
the question as to a signature to a document there is given some 
relation to the document. 

The Chairman. The only reason that we mentioned the document 
was merely to identify it by number and not as to the text of the 
document itself, not as to what is set forth, but as to the signature 
at the end of it. That is all that we are interested in. 

Mr. Kehoe. If you will just take the signature out and ask him 
if that is his signature, you can ask him the question ; but as long as 
it is a legal document and it deals with the acquisition of property 
and the payments of money, and when it comes under consideration 
regarding his net worth — I think he is justified in declining to answer. 

The Chairman. Of course, we can't cause the signature to be taken 
from the document and destroy the document thereby, but we are not 
interested in the text of the document as such, but only as to his 
signature. 

Mr. Kehoe. Likewise. 

The Chairman. Are we to understand, Mr. Sullivan, that you refuse 
to answer the question for the reason that you have given; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. I have another paper here, Mr. Colman, 
dated December 8, 1949, a real-estate receipt of some kind bearing 
the purported signatures of J. A. Sullivan and Ethel Sullivan, and 
I ask you, Mr. Sullivan, is that your signature ? 

The Chairman. Just a moment, please. Let us have it marked for 
identification. 

(Said document received, marked "Exhibit No. 18," and appears 
on p. 234.) 

Mr. Kehoe. Is that for all of these papers or just as to this one? 

Mr. Rice. Just as to one. 

Mr. Kehoe. What about these papers preceding it? 

Mr. Rice. Take those off, if you want to. 

Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, I will make the same objections on 
this. 

The Chairman. And the Chair instructs you to answer, and you 
still refuse to answer on the grounds that you have given; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Sullivan. It is all before the Tax Court now. 

Mr. Rice. I show you exhibit No. 2 in the record, a photostatic 
copy, and ask you if the signature appearing thereon is your signa- 
ture ? That is the deed of 1949, 1st of December 1949. 

Mr. Kehoe. There are two separate instruments here. 

Mr. Rice. Two separate instruments ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Yes, sir. One is a contract for sale, and a deed. 

Mr. Rice. Take that one off the top. I think it is the second of the 
two. 

Mr. Kehoe. All right. 

Mr. Rice. On the deed itself did you examine the signature ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 119 

Mr. Kehoe. He hasn't seen that yet. 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Sullivan. I make the same objection on these, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. The Chair instructs you to answer, and you still 
refuse to answer on the grounds that you have given, Mr. Sullivan? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I show you'an agreement of sale of November 1949, be- 
tween Ethel Sullivan and James Sullivan to Thomas A. Rice and 
Ruth M. Rice, his wife, and ask you if the signature of James Sul- 
livan appearing thereon is yours ? 

(Said document marked "Exhibit No. 19," and placed on file with 
the committee.) 

Mr. Sullivan. The same objection, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. The Chair instructs you to answer. Do we under- 
stand that you still refuse to answer on the grounds that you have 
assigned ? 

Mr. Sullivan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I have no further questions at this time. I would re- 
quest that Mr. Sullivan be kept under subpena, so that we may call 
him in later if necessary. 

The Chairman. That concludes the examination of the witness for 
the time being and, as stated, he will be kept under subpena available 
for further questioning. The committee will now take a recess until 
8 :30, at which time the executive session will be held, and thereafter 
a further public hearing may be held. 

(Thereupon the hearing was adjourned at 5 :50 p. m., to reconvene 
at 8 :30 p. m., the same day.) 

NIGHT SESSION FOLLOWING EXECUTIVE SESSION 

The Chairman. The hearing will please come to order. Inasmuch 
as we have completed the record, for the time being, at least, as to 
that portion of the inquiry relating to former Sheriff James A. Sul- 
livan, I desire to make the following statement: 

Confronted as we are with the refusal of James A. Sullivan to answer ques- 
tions which clearly are pertinent to this inquiry, we are compelled to con- 
sider the question of his possible citation for contempt. 

He balks at answering even preliminary questions as to each transaction 
and then refuses even to identify purported signatures, thus blocking the 
committee effort to trace sums of money which might well have definite 
bearing on his possible relationships with gamblers or bearing on other phases 
of the performance of his sheriff's duties. 

Because former Sheriff Sullivan persisted in his refusal to answer any of 
these questions, it is concluded that we must recommend to this Senate com- 
mittee that James A. Sullivan be cited for contempt. 

Mr. Moser. Is Lee A. Wentworth here, please? 
The Chairman. Before Almighty God do you swear to tell the 
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 
Mr. Wentworth. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF LEE A. WENTWORTH, HOLLYWOOD, FLA. 

Mr. Moser. Will you please state your name ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Lee A. Wentworth. 

Mr. Moser. What is your address ? 

Mr. Wentworth. 2734 Lincoln Street, Hollywood, Fla. 



120 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. How long have you lived in Hollywood ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Since September of 1946. 

Mr. Moser. What is your business? 

Mr. Wentworth. Construction work. 

Mr. Moser. What was your business prior to the time you started 
in construction work? 

Mr. Wentworth. I was city tax assessor. 

Mr. Moser. City tax assessor? 

Mr. Wentworth. Of Hollywood ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Who is the mayor of Hollywood, Fla. ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Mr. Lester C. Boggs. 

Mr. Moser. Lester C. Boggs? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. How long has he been the mayor ? 

Mr. Wentworth. He has been commissioner; I think this is his 
eighth term. I think he has been mayor seven terms. 

Mr. Moser. How long ago was his most recent term ? 

Mr. Wentworth. [No response.] 

Mr. Moser. When was he last elected ? 

Mr. Wentworth. He was last elected in the election of April 24 of 
this year. 

Mr. Moser. 1951 ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir; 1951. 

Mr. Moser. When was he elected before that ? 

Mr. Wentworth. He was elected commissioner 2 years prior to that 
time, but he was not mayor at that time. No ; he was the mayor 2 years 
ago in the last election, and 2 years prior to that he was commissioner, 
but not mayor. 

Mr. Moser. There was a period when he was not the mayor ? 

Mr. Wentworth. From 1947 to 1949. 

Mr. Moser. Who was mayor immediately prior to 1947? 

Mr. Wentworth. I think it was Mr. Boggs. 

Mr. Moser. So that he was mayor for a period up to 1947 and was 
not mayor from 1947 to 1949 ; and then he was reelected so that he 
became mayor again in 1949, and he still serves as mayor? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. During the period that he was not mayor, 1947 through 
1949, were gambling places in Hollywood open? 

Mr. Wentworth. Not wide open; no, sir; only open on a sneak 
basis. 

Mr. Moser. On a sneak basis ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. After he took office in 1949 was there any change in that 
regard ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes. Immediately after the new commission 
took office in 1949 the gambling was open wide; wide open in Holly- 
wood. 

Mr. Moser. They all opened immediately? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What were the names of several of the places that were 
open ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Deluxe Cafe, Rainbow Grill, Valhalla Club, Jiggs 
FarrelPs place, the Wonder Bar, a place called the Smoke Shop, the 
Circus Bar, and 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 121 

Mr. Moser. That is enough. 

Mr. Wentworth. Those places were all wide open during that 
period of time. 

Mr. Moser. There was no enforcement of gambling laws at all ? 

Mr. Wentworth. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What was the nature of the gambling that occurred in 
those places ? 

Mr. Wentworth. At that time mostly booking. 

Mr. Moser. Booking, mostly? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. No other forms of gambling that you know of ? 

Mr. Wentworth. No ; not that I know of, personally ; no. 

Mr. Moser. Did you go into some of these places personally? 

Mr. Wentworth. Not personally; no, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you take any action to complain about this sit- 
uation ? 

Mr. Wentworth. I carried evidence to the chief of police, Phil A. 
Thompson, and asked him to take some action to close the places up. 

Mr. Moser. What was the name of the chief of police ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Phil A. Thompson. 

Mr. Moser. You reported the situation to him and asked him to close 
them? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What did he say? 

Mr. Wentworth. He replied, "I am not the fellow that opened them 
up, and I will have to talk to the one who did." 

Mr. Moser. Did you complain to anybody else ? 

Mr. Wentworth. I contacted the sheriff. 

Mr. Moser. What is his name ? 

Mr. Wentworth. The sheriff at that time was Walter Clark. 

Mr. Moser. What is his name ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Walter Clark, was sheriff at that time. 

Mr. Moser. Oh, Clark? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What did he say I 

Mr. Wentworth. He said, "There is just a little bookie business 
going on," that there wasn't any wide open gambling. 

Mr. Moser. Did you make any other complaints ? 

Mr. Wentworth. We sent a telegram to the Governor. 

Mr. Moser. You sent a telegram to the Governor? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. To the Governor ; what was his name ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Fuller Warren. 

Mr. Moser. Did you get any reply ? 

Mr. Wentworth. No, sir. We didn't even get an acknowledgment 
of our telegram. 

Mr. Moser. When you say "our," who were the other people in- 
volved ? 

Mr. Wentworth. At that time Mr. A. D. Brown, Dave Mears, 
Homer Austin. 

Mr. Moser. These were city people, including yourself ? 

Mr. Wentworth. And myself; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Were you working together on this ? 



122 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes ; we were working together on this campaign. 

Mr. Moser. It was a campaign, that you as a private citizen, and 
others, as private citizens, were conducting for the purpose of closing 
gambling joints ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you write any letters to Governor Warren? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. I wrote one letter to Governor Warren, 
and gave him the information. 

Mr. Moser. How long ago did you write that letter? 

Mr. Wentworth. That letter was written sometime in the latter 
part of July. I don't remember the exact date of the letter. 

Mr. Moser. In the latter part of July 1949? 

Mr. Wentworth. 1919; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. When did you send him the telegram ? 

Mr. Wentworth. About the same period of time. 

Mr. Moser. About the latter part of July 1949 ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you get any reply to the letter ? 

Mr. Wentworth. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. None whatever. 

Mr. Wentworth. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Are there any nationally known gangsters who live in 
Hollywood ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes ; sir ; several. Vincent Alo, called "Jimmy 
Blue Eyes" ; Jake Lansky ; and Frank Costello, who is now building a 
home in Hollywood. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know these people by sight ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Only Jake Lansky. I would know him by sight. 

Mr. Moser. But vou do know that these other people live there? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir ; that is a matter of common rumor and 
newspaper articles. 

Mr. Moser. Did you and your friends take any further action for 
the purpose of closing these gambling places? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. We started injunction proceedings 
against those places. 

Mr. Moser. Injunction proceedings? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you retain a lawyer for that purpose ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir ; John Toler, of Fort Lauderdale. 

Mr. Moser. What was the result of those proceedings ? 

Mr. Wentworth. We secured injunctions on three places. 

Mr. Moser. What three places? 

Mr. Wentworth. Deluxe, Valhalla, and Jiggs FarrelPs place. 

Mr. Moser. What was the result of that ; were they actually closed 
as a result of these actions? 

Mr. Wentworth. They were actually closed, upon the injunction; 
yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Are they still closed ? 

Mr. Wentworth. To my knowledge ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. After you obtained those injunctions did you have any 
communications from anybody or any dealings with anybody with 
regard to the gambling set-up ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Not after the injunction; during the period of 
time we were instigating the injunctions, I did. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 123 

Mr. Moser. While the proceedings were pending? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Tell us what happened. 

Mr. Wentworth. One night at about 8 o'clock — I don't remember 
the exact time, whether it was the latter part of August or the latter 
part of September 1949 — this car came to my house and a local attorney 
asked me- 

Mr. Moser. What kind of a car was it? 

Mr. Wentworth. It was a black Cadillac sedan. 

Mr. Moser. Go ahead. 

Mr. Wentworth. And a local attorney came to the door and asked 
me if I would come out to the car, that he would like for me to meet 
somone. I stepped over to the car ■- 

Mr. Moser. Who was the local attorney ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Joe Varon. 

Mr. Moser. Joe Varon? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Go ahead. 

Mr. Wentworth. He said, "This is Mr. Lansky, Mr. Jake Lansky." 
Then he went on and got into the car on the other side and Mr. Lansky 
was at the wheel of the car. 

Mr. Lansky said, "Mr. Wentworth, don't you think you are taking 
on a little more than you can manage?" 

I told him, "I don't know, I am going to do the best I can." 

He said, "Would you be interested in $25,000?" 

I said, "Yes, sir; I would be interested in it, but, frankly, I think 
more of my life than that," and I turned and walked into the house 
and they drove off. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever have any further discussion with them on 
that? 

Mr. Wentworth. Not that I can recall on that particular matter. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have any discussions with anybody about that? 

Mr. W'entworth. Two or three nights later another car drove up. 
It wasn't the same car and it wasn't the same parties. One of the 
parties came to the door and said he had something there he wanted 
to show me in the back of the car. I went over to the car. He was 
evidently the driver of the car. These two men were sitting on the 
back seat of the car, and one of them had a large box in his hand that 
looked like a white shoe box, and he said, "We have $25,000 here. It's 
a question of doing one of two things.'" He said, "You know how these 
things end; either these end with a silver bullet or silver dollar." 

I was a little worried about the silver bullet, so I walked in the house, 
got my shotgun, walked to the door, and told them I was going to count 
five and then start shooting. They drove off. 

Mr. Moser. And that is the last you heard of those people? 

Mr. Wentworth. The last I heard of those, yes, sir ; those particular 
ones. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever notified anybody of that event? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes. I have told certain parties of what hap- 
pened, particularly my neighbors there. 

Mr. Moser. Was a letter ever circulated in Hollywood with regard 
to this? 

85277— 51— pt. 16 9 



124 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Wentworth. During the recent election, Hollywood election,, 
in April, there was a letter circulated and rumors passed that I had 
accepted $10,000 as a payoff to lay off the gamblers. 

Mr. Moser. Is that true? 

Mr. Wentworth. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Who signed that letter ? 

Mr. Wentworth. It wasn't signed. 

Mr. Moser. Was it an anonymous, unsigned letter ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Was it printed ? 

Mr. Wentworth. On the typewriter. 

Mr. Moser. On the typewriter ? 

Mr. Wentworth. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Were copies circulated ? 

Mr. Wentworth. I only received one copy. They sent one copy in 
the mail to me. 

Mr. Moser. And you deny that that was so? 

Mr. Wentworth. I didn't do anything. I just turned it over to 
the newspaperman and said, "Publish it, if you want to." 

Mr. Moser. No further questions. 

The Chairman. No further questions. Thank you so much. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID JAMES MEAES, HOLLYWOOD, FLA. 

The Chairman. Do you before Almighty God swear that the testi- 
mony that you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth ? 

Mr. Mears. I do. 

The Chairman. Your full name, please ? 

Mr. Mears. David James Mears. 

The Chairman. Mr. Mears, what is your residence ? 

Mr. Mears. Hollywood, 2654 Johnston Street, Hollywood, Fla. 

Mr. Moser. Will you move your chair nearer the table, please ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. What is your business? 

Mr. Mears. Plumbing contractor. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know by sight Jake Lansky ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Al Cordell? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Jiggs Farrell? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. M. B. Wellons? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You know all of them by sight ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What is their business ; do you know ? 

Mr. Mears. Gamblers they are supposed to be ; yes, sir, it's rumored. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know where Mayor Boggs of Hollywood, Fla., 
lives ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you ever go near his house ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 125 

Mr. Mears. I pass there two or three times a week. 

Mr. Moser. You pass there two or three times a week? 

Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Why do you do that? 

Mr. Mears. Well, I work colored labor, and I have to go to colored 
town to pick up help. 

Mr. Moser. And you go by the house two or three times a week ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever seen any of the gamblers that I just men- 
tioned anywhere near Mr. Boggs' house ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What is the address of Mr. Boggs' house ? 

Mr. Mears. 231 Lee Street. 

Mr. Moser. And have you ever seen Jake Lansky, Al Cordell, or 
Jiggs Farrell, or M. B. Wellons at the house? 

Air. Mears. Yes, sir; I have seen Wellons there pretty regular at 
different times. During the year 1948 and 1949 and 1950 I have seen 
him there. And Mr. Lansky was there in 1947 to 1948, 1949. I have 
seen Mr. Lansky, I believe, once in his car and once standing outside 
of his car, holding onto the car door. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever seen Mr. Lansky go in the house ? 

Mr. Mears. I have seen him go in the house once, the last time. 

Mr. Moser. How about Jiggs Farrell ? 

Mr. Mears. Well, I have seen Mr. Farrell around the house in dif- 
ferent places. 

Mr. Moser. How about Al Cordell ? 

Mr. Mears. Well, Al Cordell, I have seen him around the house at 
different places in the yard, and different places. 

Mr. Moser. You were one of the men who obtained these injunc- 
tions against the three places in Hollywood, were you % 

Mr. Mears. 1 was one of the men ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You were one of the committee of citizens that were 
doing that ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Was any effort made to persuade you to withdraw the 
injunctions or to discontinue your proceedings? 

Mr. Mears. Well, I don't particularly believe — in fact, there was 
on one occasion, I believe, Mr. Peterson in a conversation with J\lr. 
Brown 

Mr. Moser. Who is Mr. Peterson ? 

Mr. Mears. He was a gambler in Hollywood. 

Mr. Moser. He was a gambler in Hollywood? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. He was in conversation with Mr. Brown; who is Mr. 
Brown ? 

Mr. Mears. A. D. Brown was a former city commissioner of Holly- 
wood. He was one of the committee that was helping prosecute. 

Mr. Moser. One of the three citizens of the committee ? 
Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You said Peterson was having a conversation with 
Brown ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Tell us what happened ? 



126 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Mears. I believe at the time he addressed himself, addressed to 
Mr. Brown, that he wondered why he was being picked on, that he 
would give most anything. to get this squared away against him. I 
believe that he offered a sum of money. If I understood correctly, I 
believe it was $12,500. 

Mr. Moser. Peterson 

Mr. Mears. Addressed that, I believe, to Mr. Brown. 

Mr. Moser. He offered that to Mr. Brown? 

Mr. Mears. At that time he was discussing — the conversation was 
directed to Mr. Brown. 

Mr. Moser. Where did that conversation take place ? 

Mr. Mears. It happened across in front of Mr. Brown's house on 
a vacant lot. 

Mr. Moser. On a vacant lot across from Mr. Brown's house ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You are a plumbing contractor, you said, and do you 
have a license? 

Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. For various things? 

Mr. Mears. Yes; including septic tanks. 

Mr. Moser. Including the installing of septic tanks; you have a 
license ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Was that license ever withdrawn ? 

Mr. Mears. Yes, sir ; in the year 1950. 

Mr. Moser. In 1950 ? 

Mr. Mears. In 1950, 1 believe, about June, the best I can remember, 
in June my license was withdrawn in Hollywood. 

Mr. Moser. It was withdrawn after the injunctions had been 
obtained ? • 

Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And did you ever have any conversation with anybody 
about that ? 

Mr. Mears. Why, Mr. Varon called me up and told me he under- 
stood I was having trouble. 

Mr. Moser. Varon ? 

Mr. Mears. Joe Varon. 

Mr. Moser. Who is he? 

Mr. Mears. An attorney in Hollywood. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know whom he represents ? 

Mr. Mears. I believe he represents the gamblers. 

Mr. Moser. Anybody in particular? 

Mr. Mears. Well, I believe he is representing at least 75 percent of 
the men that have been on trial for anything in Broward County. 

Mr. Moser. Representing Jake Lansky? 

Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. He does? 

Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Tell us about the conversation you had with Mr. Varon. 

Mr. Mears. Mr. Varon called me and told me he understood I was 
having trouble with septic license. 

Mr. Moser. I see. Go on. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 127 

Mr. Mears. He said he would be glad to straighten it out for me. 
I told him I would accept his offer as long as it didn't have any strings 
attached, so he said he would do it for me, and he did. 

Mr. Mosek. Were there any strings attached? 

Mr. Mears. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. He didn't do that as a compromise? 

Mr. Mears. Well, that was my impression, but I just informed 
him, to begin with, that I wouldn't make any compromise. 

Mr. Moser. You said you would not make any compromise in 
connection with your injunction proceedings? 

Mr. Mears. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. I think that is all. 

The Chairman. That is all. You are excused, Mr. Mears. Thank 
you very much. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF HOMER L. AUSTIN, WEST HOLLYWOOD, FLA. 

The Chairman. Do you before Almighty God swear that the testi- 
mony vou give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 
truth? 

Mr. Austin. I do. 

The Chairman. Mr. Austin, I will have to ask you to talk loudly, 
talk distinctly and loudly, so that everybody may hear. 

What is your full name ? 

Mr. Austin. Homer L. Austin. 

The Chairman. And your address ? 

Mr. Austin. West Hollywood. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Austin, that is pretty good ; it could 
be a little better, but if you will just yell out, everybody will be able to 
hear you. 

Mr. Moser. What is your form of livelihood ? 

Mr. Austin. Laborer. 

Mr. Moser. Laborer ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. For whom do you work now ? 

Mr. Austin. C B. Smith. 

Mr. Moser. For whom did you work before that ? 

Mr. Austin. L. C. Boggs. 

Mr. Moser. What was his business ? 

Mr. Austin. He was a septic-tank man. 

Mr. Moser. A septic-tank manufacturer and installer of septic 
tanks? 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever see it in 1948 and 1949 ( 

Mr. Austin. A septic tank manufacturer. 

Mr. Moser. You worked for him as an installer of septic tanks? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you spend most of your time ? 

Mr. Austin. Well, working on the yard about half the time and 
the house about half the time. 

Mr. Moser. Half the time out in the yard and the other time where? 

Mr. Austin. You see, me and the boys made them and we went and 
put them in the yard. 



128 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. What did you do when you were not installing septic 
tanks ? 

Mr. Austin. Worked around the yard, cutting grass. 

Mr. Moser. Worked around the yard cutting the grass of Mr. 
Boggs' house ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Boggs, the mayor of Hollywood ; he is the mayor of 
Hollywood ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you go inside the house ? 

Mr. Austin. Well, I went in and out a whole lot. 

Mr. Moser. You were in and out a lot ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Generally around the place? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Mert Wellons when you see him ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Jiggs Farrell when you see him ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Albert Peterson when you see him ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Ed Ventry ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. And his son ? 

Mr. Austin. His son? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Austin. I didn't know he had a son. You mean, Ventry's son 
or Boggs' son ? 

Mr. Moser. Oh, Boggs' son. Well, never mind, it isn't important. 
Do you know any other gamblers in Hollywood ? 

Mr. Austin. I know Goldie. 

Mr. Moser. Goldie ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Any others? 

Mr. Austin. No ; that is about all. 

Mr. Moser. How do you know these people ? 

Mr. Austin. Well, I gamble with them. 

Mr. Moser. You gamble with them at their places ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir; right in their places? 

Mr. Moser. Right in their places? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever see any of them at Mr. Boggs' house? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Often? 

Mr. Austin. Well, every week anyway. 

Mr. Moser. Once a week? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. When did you work for Mr. Boggs; what year? 

Mr. Austin. I started to work with him in 1935, worked with him 
about 3 or 4 years, and I quit. I went to Alabama and came back 
with him and worked with him in 1936—1946 and 1945, up to 1949. 

Mr. Moser. You worked with him in 1946 ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 129 

Mr. Moser. And you worked with him in 1949 and in 1948, as well ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes. I came back in the last of 1948, worked the 
last of 1948, and then 1949. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever see any evidence of any money around 
the place? 

Mr. Austin. Well, I seen Jiggs Farrell and Mr. Wellons come up 
there, and Jiggs Farrell had a money sack. He walked in the house 
with it in his hand ? 

Mr. Moser. When was that ? 

Mr. Austin. In 1946. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever see it in 1948 and 1949 ? 

Mr. Austin. No ; I never did see it in 1948 and 1949. 

Mr. Moser. But you did see it in 1946 ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever see any actual money ? 

Mr. Austin. No. I heard them count some money ? 

Mr. Moser. You heard them count some money ? 

Mr. Austin. I went in from a job, and, like I always do, went in 
to see if there was anything to do, anything else to do. I walked to 
the back door. I seen some cars out in front. I heard them in there 
talking. I heard money rattling. I stood in there for a few minutes. 

Mr. Moser. You heard them counting money as you went by? 

Mr. Austin. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Who is R. W. Goldie? 

Mr. Austin. Well, he is just a gambler there in town. He runs a 
beer joint. 

Mr. Moser. Did you know anything about a payoff to Boggs ? 

Mr. Austin. Yes. He told me he paid Boggs every Monday 
morning. 

Mr. Moser. Every Monday morning? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. When did he last tell you that ? 

Mr. Moser. The first of 1949? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. And you gambled at Goldie's place, did you? 

Mr. Austin. Yes, sir ; I gambled at Goldie's place. 

Mr. Moser. And you knew him ? 

Mr. Austin. I knew him well. 

Mr. Moser. I think that is all we have to ask you. 

The Chairman. All right. You are excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY BY THOMAS J. ATTAWAY, HOLLYWOOD, FLA. 

The Chairman. Do you before. Almighty God swear that the testi- 
mony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Attaway. I do. 

The Chairman. Your full name, please? 

Mr. Attaway. Thomas J. Attaway. 

The Chairman. What is your address? 

Mr. Attaway. 2314 Lee Street, Hollywood. 



130 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. Keep your voice up, please, and talk out loudly 
so that everybody may hear. 

Mr. Moser. What did you say your address was, 2314 Lee Street? 

Mr. Attaway. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. What is the address of Mayor L. C. Boggs, of Holly- 
wood \ 

Mr. Attaway. 2301 Lee Street. 

Mr. Moser. Practically across the street? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know M. B. Wellons by sight ( 

Mr. Attaway. Yes. sir. 

Mr. Moser. Who is he '. 

Mr. Attaway. He is a gambler, they say. 

Mr. Moser. He is a gambler ? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Jesse Wellons ? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. The same is also a gambler? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Let me ask you about the rest of these. Al Cordell ? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Jake Lansky? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Jake Lansky by sight ( 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Albert Cordell? 

Mi. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mi-. Moser. Meyer Lansky, by sight? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Al Peterson by sight? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes. sir. 

Mr. Moser. Jiggs Farrell? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. And they are all gamblers? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. What do you do? 

Mr. Attaway. Transport driver. 

Mi. Moser. Do you drive a truck? 

Mi-. Attaway. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever been anywhere near Boggs' house ? 

M r. Attaway. Yes. I worked with him for about 14 years. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever seen any of these gamblers at his house? 

Mr. Attaway. All of them. 

Mr. Moser. While working for Mr. Boggs? 

Mi-. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did they go there often? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Frequently? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know whether Boggs ever visited them? 

Mr. Attaway. Well, Boggs visited Wellons' house one night. I was 
in the car with him. 

Mr. Moser. You were with Boggs when he visited Wellons? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 131 

Mr. Attawat. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever see any money around? 

Mr. Attawat. Nothing, only a money sack. I couldn't swear what 
was in it. 

Mr. Moser. You said you saw a money sack, but you don't know 
what was in it? 

Mr. Attawat. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Tell us the circumstances. 

Mr. Attaway. It was in Al Cordell's car. 

Mr. Moser. What was done with it ? 

Mr. Attaway. Boggs taken it out. Now, what he did with it, I 
don't know. 

Mr. Moser. Where did that happen? 

Mr. Attaway. Out at the hog farm. 

Mr. Moser. Whose hog farm ? 

Mr. Attaway. Mr. Boggs' hog farm. 

Mr. Moser. Were you there at the time? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Was there anything in this sack? 

Mr. Attaway. Well, it could have been newspapers, from what I 
know. I couldn't sa}^. 

Mr. Moser. Anyway, it was at the hog farm? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. There was something. 

Mr. Rice. Did they carry it like it was heavy or carry it like it 
was light? 

Mr. Attaway. Like it was light. 

Mr. Rice. Like it had paper money in it ? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did Boggs ever tell you that he had ever loaned any 
money to any gambler? 

Mr. Attaway. He said he loaned old Papa Joe $10,000 to cover 
a mortgage on his home. 

Mr. Moser. Who is Papa Joe ? 

Mr. Attaway. He is around the barrooms and the bookie joints. 

Mr. Moser. Is he a bookie ? 

Mr. Attaway. They say he is. I couldn't swear to it. 
Mr. Moser. Boggs told you that he loaned Papa Joe $12,500? 

Mr. Attaway. $12,000. 

Mr. Moser. $12,500. You don't know Papa Joe's full name? 

Mr. Attaway. I don't know his full name. All I know is Papa Joe. 

Mr. Moser. He is just a character around there? 

Mr. Attaway. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Does Papa Joe own any place of business that you 
know of? 

Mr. Attaway. Well, he has bought the Gay Nineties, formerly the 
Rex Garden ; that is the Gay Nineties now. 

Mr. Moser. He owns the Gay Nineties Club in Hollywood? 

Mr. Attaway. State Road 7. 

Mr. Moser. What kind of a place it that ? 

Mr. Attaway. A bookie room and barroom. 

Mr. Moser. A gambling joint? 

Mr. Attaway. Yes, sir. 



132 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Do you know whether Boggs had any dealings with 
Governor Warren ? 

Mr. Attawat. Well, at the time of the campaign he said that he 
was for Dan McCarty; but he told all the boys that he had a big 
barbecue on the farm for Fuller Warren. 

Mr. Moser. I see. I think that is all. Thank you. 

The Chairman. That is all. We are much obliged to you, Mr. 
Attn way. 

(Witness excused.) 

The Chairman. The witnesses who responded today and were told 
that they need not come back tonight because of the possibility that 
this session might extend until this hour or later, will be here the 
first thing in the morning. 

At this time, therefore, we will adjourn for the evening and resume 
at 9 : 30 tomorrow morning. 

(Thereupon, the hearing was adjourned until 9 : 30 a. m. June 22, 
1951.) 



INVESTIGATION OF ORGANIZED CEIME IN INTERSTATE 

COMMERCE 



THURSDAY, JUNE 21, 1951 

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

Miami, Fla. 
executive session 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to the call of the Chairman, at 
8 : 30 p. m., June 21, 1951, in the Dade County Court House, Senator 
Herbert R. O'Conor (chairman) presiding. 

Present : Senator O'Conor. 

Also present: Downey Rice, associate counsel; Thomas S. Smith, 
investigator. 

The Chairman. The hearing will come to order. 

TESTIMONY OF ETHEL GERTRUDE SULLIVAN, MIAMI, FLA., 
ACCOMPANIED BY JACK KEHOE, ATTORNEY 

The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you will give 
this committee will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so 
help you God 'l 

Mrs. Sullivan. I do. 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, at this time I wish to advise the counsel 
and the committee that at the present time the grand jury of the 
southern district of Florida has under consideration an income tax 
prosecution matter concerning Mrs. Sullivan, and it is our hope that 
no questions would be asked her that would relate to those matters 
that would tend to embarrass her in any way. 

The Chairman. Well, Counsel, I might state in response to your 
objection that it is not the intention of the committee to direct its 
inquiry for the purpose of incriminating Mrs. Sullivan in any income- 
tax transactions. That is not our function, and that will not be the 
purpose or the object sought in this inquiry. 

Mr. Kehoe. In that connection I wish to further state that I have 
attempted to advise Mrs. Sullivan of her rights. I have prepared and 
furnished her a statement which she may use when she wishes to 
refuse to answer questions. 

Mr. Rice. I might ask Mr. Kehoe at this point upon what it is you 
base your statement that there is an income-tax investigation relating 
to Mrs. Sullivan ? 

Mr. Kehoe. The local paper reported it. I have heard it generally. 
I know nothing about it personally. 

133 



134 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. I mean, you have no actual notice from the tax agents 
about this matter? 

Mr. Kehoe. One time before I came into the case this tax matter 
was being negotiated or worked on, and a decision of it was reached 
through the Atlanta office. The matter was closed. Since then the 
people have been informed that that order has been ^superseded or 
overridden, that is, it has been quoted in the press. 

Mr. Rice. You say "the people have been informed." What do you 
mean ? 

Mr. Kehoe. I forget the gentleman's name. Cunningham, I be- 
lieve, according to the press. I have never seen him in my life. But 
the papers quoted him as saying that he is down here representing 
income tax matters, and they say they expect an indictment against 
James Sullivan and Mrs. Sullivan. 

Mr. Rice. To your knowledge, have there been any witnesses called 
relating to those matters ? 

Mr. Kehoe. That I wouldn't know. I have made no attempt to 
find out. 

Mr. Rice. Are you representing the Sullivans in the tax case? 

Mr. Kehoe. I don't know whether I will or not. I recognize my 
own limitations and my limitations in tax matters are great. I don't 
know whether I will represent them or not. 

Mr. Rice. As a matter of fact, there is no tax case ? 

Mr. Kehoe. I have spoken to them about it. I don't know whether 
I am qualified or not, but it looks like I am going to wind up with 
it whether I want to or not. 

Mr. Rice. To make an objection for the record, it seems to me to be 
a rather tenuous objection based upon something written in a news- 
paper, using that as the basis for asserting a privilege. 

The Chairman. We will proceed. 

Mr. Rice. All right, you have been sworn, and your name is Ethel 
Sullivan? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Ethel Ford was your maiden name ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And where does the Gertrude come in ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is my name, Ethel Gertrude Sullivan. 

Mr. Rice. And where were you born, Mrs. Sullivan ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. At Perryman, Md. 

Mr. Rice. And your parents, Mr. and Mrs. Ford, are still living 
there ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. They have lived there for years. They were born 
there, their parents were born there, and it has been their home for 
generations. 

Mr. Rice. When were you married to Jimmy Sullivan ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I just don't know. I can show it to you. It was 
in 1930, I guess. 

Mr. Rice. Where did that marriage take place? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Titusville, Fla. 

Mr. Rice. Is that your only marriage? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, of course. I have never been married before. 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, you came down to Florida in 1930, you say ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I think it was 1931 or 1932, 1 guess. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 135 

Mr. Rice. Do you have or did vou have a relative by the name of 
Carvel Ford ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes; lie was my uncle. 

Mr. Riij:. Now, on which side of the family was thai \ 

Mrs. Sullivan. He was my father's half brother. 

Mr. Rice. What was Carvel Ford's wife's name? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Edith Ford. 

Mr. Rice. Where is Edith ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I really don't know. I haven't heard from Edith. 
She kind of turned all of a sudden. She was very friendly with me 
and I just don't understand why she did. But all of a sudden she 
just kind of broke away from the family. 

Mr. Rice. I notice a telephone call to Edith out in Illinois. 

Mrs. Sullivan. I tried to get Edith two or three times to come down 
and visit with me. And I wanted her to come, I thought maybe we 
might go in a little business or something. She is a very wonderful 
restaurant woman. She always said if I saw anything down here 
that looked good, to always get in touch with her. I did try to get 
in touch with her out in Colorado last summer. 

Mr. Rice. Is that the last place you heard ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. And I wanted her to come down and visit 
with me and stay with me, because she always said I was her favorite 
niece, and then all of sudden she just completely ignored me. 

The Chairman. Mrs. Sullivan, are Mr. and Mrs. Ford still living? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

The Chairman. They are still living in Harford County? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Oh, yes; they are still living there. I think Mr. 
Rice knows. He has been up there to visit them, along with the 
Mitchells and the Bakers and the Terrys — I have just had so much 
of this, I just can't take any more of it. 

Mr. Rice. Now, did Carvel and Edith Ford 

Mrs. Sullivan. They just treat us like criminals and everything. 

Mr. Keiioe. Mrs. Sullivan, just pay attention to the questions and 
answer them just as briefly as you can. 

Mr. Rice. Did Carvel and Edith live in Aberdeen before they came 
down here? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, they did. They had a restaurant. 

Mr. Rice. They had a restaurant there and moved here in 194Q? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, I think they came down here — I don't know 
just what date it was they came down here and bought a house. 

Mr. Rice. Is that the first place they moved in there over there on 
Thirtieth? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No, they came down here every winter for years 
and years. 

Mr. Rice. Did they buy a house over there on Thirtieth? 

Mrs. Sullivan. They bought a house over on Thirtieth Road. 

Mr. Rice.- Thirtieth Road \ 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. And that is the house that Jimmy bought 
from them, from Carvel. 

Mr. Rice. Did Jimmy buy that house from Carvel ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I think so. 

Mr. Rice. What was the deal on that house ? 



136 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mrs. Sullivan. I really couln't tell you. It was the biggest mix- 
up that was ever in this world. I wouldn't even try to explain it to 
you. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. Now, just to make the record clear, that is the house at 
261 Southwest Thirtieth Road. 

Mrs. Sullivan. I didn't enter into any transactions, so I really 
don't know. 

Mr. Rice. There is a picture of it, isn't it [indicating] ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. The Fords came down from Aberdeen and bought that 
place, you say ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, they bought it. 

Mr. Rice. Did you folks have any interest in it when they bought 
it? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I really don't know. I really couldn't tell you, 
Mr. Rice. I don't know about that. I wasn't even here. I went up 
home that summer, and when I came back they had gone. I didn't 
know why. 

Mr. Rice. They were just here a few months ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I think so. 

Mr. Rice. Where did they bring their furniture from? The house 
was unfurnished, I believe, when it was bought. 

Mrs. Sullivan. It was from up there in Illinois. I don't know 
what town. 

Mr. Rice. They brought the furniture from Illinois ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, I think so. 

Mr. Rice. They didn't come down from Perryman, then ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. They came down from Illinois? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, they were from Illinois. 

Mr. Rice. And they moved the furniture ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I think so. I really don't know for sure. That is 
just a recollection from Edith's conversation. 

Mr. Rice. And you all moved in the house, didn't you? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, yes, we moved over there later. 

Mr. Rice. What happened there? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I wasn't here at the time. I was up in Aberdeen. 

Mr. Rice. When you came back from Aberdeen, what did you find ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, they were gone. I didn't find anything. 
Jimmy said he was going to rent it and then we were going to buy it 
later on. He had made some arrangement with Carvel and there was 
a mix-up, they had to have a witness, and I don't know what all. 
I know there was a mix-up with it and I don't know how they got out 
of it. I really don't, I know they had an awful time with it, it 
was back and forth, and they got mixed up there. 

Mr. Rice. Were you having family difficulties with Carvel Ford; 
was there a f ailing out among friends there ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. What was the mix-up on it? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Just later on, I don't know what happened to Edith. 
She just kind of turned against the family after Carvel died. 

Mr. Rice. You see how it is from our point of view. It appears 
to be a simple transaction if Carvel and Edith were in the house and 
you took it over from them. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 137 

Mrs. Sullivan. Certainly. But I don't know why they had such 
a mix-up. I think one man wanted it and there was a Greek that 
got it first, and Carvel had promised to sell it to Jimmy first; I think 
that was the way it was. 

And then I think he then sold to Poulos ; lam not positive. I really 
wouldn't know. I just wouldn't want you to put it down in the record, 
because I really wouldn't know for sure how it was. I really never 
delved into it too much, because I didn't know much about those real 
estate transactions. Jimmy was always buying and selling it and 
trying to make a little money. He was always trying to do that ever 
since I married him, you know that. 

Mr. Rice. When you sell the real estate, it would be necessary for 
you to sign along with him, wouldn't it ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I presume so. 

Mr. Rice. Lots of times you would have to sign ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. So you would have to know a little something about it? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. In any event you moved in that summer, and what about 
the furniture ; where did the furniture come from ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Oh, I moved some of my furniture over there, and 
some of Edith's was over there. I know she left a couple of rugs 
and two or three chairs, and I took over some things — my personal 
things and furniture. 

Mr. Rice. Was the main balance of the furniture Edith's ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. The big things like the dining room furniture and bed- 
room furniture? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, the stove and the ice box. 

Mr. Rice. But did you take that over then and keep it, or did it 
go back to her then ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No, it stayed right there. It was right in the 
house. 

Mr. Rice. It never has gone back ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No. Oh, no. We sold the house later, too, and 
sold the furniture. 

Mr. Rtce. Were you renting the place for a while from Carvel ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes; I think Jimmy was renting it. I think he 
gave him some money. I don't know how much he gave Carvel or I 
don't know what their plans were. But I know he had some kind of 
an agreement with Carvel that he was going to rent it from him for a 
while, and later on when he got the other mess straightened out, he 
was going to buy it from him. 

Mr. Rice. Now, you said something about a Greek being in there; 
who was that? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Is it the fellow Poulos, you are talking about? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did vou ever see him ? 

Mrs. Sullivan/ No. I said I wasn't here that summer. 

Mr. Rice. You just kind of halfway heard something about it; 
you don't know what the rest was ? 



138 ORGANIZED CRIME IN LNTTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, as I say, I was up home just about all that 
summer. I brought my mother down with me. It was right after 
the election then, I think, after the 1944 election. 

Mr. Rtce. Do you have a brother in New York ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I have a brother in New York and Philadelphia. 

Mr. Ktce. What is his name? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Which one? There is Carroll and Grayson. 
Grayson is in Philadelphia and Carroll is in New York. 

Mr. Pice. What does Carroll do? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Carroll works for the Government. He has worked 
for the Government for many years. 

Mr. Rice. What part of the Government ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I don't know. It is the Air Force, I don't know 
just what part. I think he left there not so long ago, though I am not 
sure. 

Mr. Rice. How about Grayson? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, he does contracting. He takes jobs like 
filling on — what do you call it? 

Mr. Rice. Let's see. Mrs. Neu is in your family, isn't she ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any other brothers and sisters? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No ; that is all. 

Mr. Rice. Mrs. Neu is up in Aberdeen, for the record ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Now, there came a time in 1945, 1 believe, when the Fords, 
your father and mother, had a mortgage paid otf up there in Perry- 
man. Did you provide that money? 

Mr. Kehoe. We are going to object to that, if the Chairman please. 

Mrs. Sullivan. I was in Washington you know, and I made a spe- 
cial trip there to see you last September, Mrs. Christman and I. We 
went to see Mr. Kefauver and he was out of town. As you know, 
Martha is a friend of the Kefauvers, and we wanted to go in and see 
him and I wanted to explain all this to him. I really did. Because, 
after all, I just wanted to tell him, but I thought we would just call you 
and we would come in to see you. And then you wanted me to stay 
over that night and I told you she had to get back. And she wanted me 
to take a plane and I couldn't fly, so I took that late train home. That 
is the reason I didn't call you the next morning. Mr. Rice. I didn't 
want my husband to know we were in Washington. I knew he 
wouldn't approve of it. But I think a woman, she can kind of explain 
things like that a little more, and I wanted to tell you all about it, 
because you had been up there to see my mother and father and my 
sister and all, and they said you were very nice to them. So I wanted 
to talk to you about it. There was nothing I was trying to hide. 

And now Jimmy is in this tax thing and I don't know what is 
going to happen. And I have had 6 years of all this, Mr. Rice, and 
I just can't take much more. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been in a situation where it didn't appear 
to you to be a good policy to make a clean breast of things ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well,' I have made a clean breast 

Mr. Kehoe. Just a moment, I object. 

Mrs. Sullivan. I have nothing to hold back. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 139 

Mr. Bjehoe. Mr. Chairman, I want to object to thai question. I 
don't think it is a fair or proper question, "Have yon ever been in a 

situation where it didn't appeal- to you to be a good policy to make 
a clean breast of things?" 'That is not a question that is ordinarily 
characteristic of a senatorial investigation. Thai borders more on a 
criminal prosecution or inquisition. 1 think it is an improper ques- 
ton to ask a witness at this type of hearing. 

The Chairman. Well, 1 take it as a preliminary matter. It doesn't 
of course shed any light upon the facts of any particular transaction, 
one way or another. But inasmuch as I assume counsel asked the 
question in view of the fact that she made the statement she had come 
to Washington and had visited Senator Kefauver's office and, not 
finding him, went to Mr. Rice. And then I assume, although I am 
just sort of making inferences, that she indicated she was coming back 
again to see Mr. Rice. Is that what you did \ 

Mrs. Sullivax. I was going to stay overnight, and then come back 
to Florida. 

Mr. Rice. I think I indicated to her that I would like to talk 
further. 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, but I thought maybe my husband — I mean, I 
had my husband to think of. 

The Chairman. You have explained that. 

Mrs. Sullivan. I just wanted to explain the whole transaction, 
how it came about and all. Certainly, anyone who has their mother 
and father involved and their sister — I just wanted to tell you about 
it. 

Mr. Rice. Well, now, did you tell me? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Rice. What you told me was right, wasn't it \ 

Mrs. Sullivan. Certainly. I hope so. Certainly, it was right. 

Mr. Rice. Well, was it? 

Mrs. Sullivax. Everything I told you Was right. Certainly. You 
have it all down there ill black and white. You talked to my mother 
and father and I don't think they told you anything misleading. 
They are not that kind of people. 

Mr. Rice. You don't believe they did. Well, now, there was a 
couple of things we didn't get to, and I did want to follow up a little 
on that. For instance, this letter; do you recognize that \ 

( Mrs. Sullivan examines letter.) 

Mr. Rice. Is that a letter you wrote? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And that is your signature on the bottom? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And that is a letter you wrote to Mr. Volkart who is a 
lawyer up there? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. We want to offer that. 

The Chairman. The letter dated October 2, 1945, handwritten, to 
Ernest Volkart, 407 Title Building, Baltimore, Md., will be received 
and marked in evidence. 

(Said letter was identified as "Exhibit No. 20" and appears in the 
appendix on p. 235.) 

85277 — 51 — pt. 16 -10 



140 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Now, I am going to take up the conversation we had, and 
you have said that everything you told me was right. If I repeat it 
and I am wrong in anything I say, please feel free to correct me be- 
cause I am not trying to impose my recollection upon you. 

Mrs. Sullivan. All right. 

Mr. Rice. Now, at this talk we had another man present whose 
name was Harold G. Robinson. And you told us at that time in dis- 
cussing these transactions up there that you felt that you wanted to 
do something for your parents, and that the mortgage on the place 
there was somewhat of a burden on them in their declining years, and 
you wanted to help them out. 

So, accordingly, you sent the money up to pay off the mortgage 
that the Mitchells held, and that in turn, in line with the instructions 
here, a mortgage was executed and returned from your parents to you 
and Jimmy. 

Now, then, you told us, if I recall correctly, that Jimmy didn't 
know anything about any of that money going up there; do you 
remember that? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Rice. Now, do you want to change that any ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. Now, you notice in the letter here it says, "My husband 
wants the proper papers made out for $7,500 for 10 years at 6 percent ?" 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, I would say that, naturally. 

Mr. Rice. You would say that? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Why, surely I would. Seven thousand five hun- 
dred dollars — I wouldn't say that he and I had never, you know, 
discussed it between us. I won't say we didn't, because I think several 
times I have said I wanted to help my mother and father, but he told 
me many times that we certainly couldn't afford to. And, of course, 
I would try to think of some way, you know, that I could without him 
knowing about it. And it wasn't that — I know he would do it, but 
he just knew that we just couldn't afford to, and I knew he certainly 
wouldn't approve of it at that time. I don't think one side of the 
family resents helping the other side, but Jimmy certainly isn't a 
person that likes to spend money. He never was. 

Mr. Rice. Well, what was the reason for putting this in there ; was 
there any need for that ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Oh, I don't know why I did it at the time. I guess 
it just came to my mind when I was writing the letter. I don't even 
remember writing the letter, to tell you the truth. Of course, I wrote 
it. but I don't know when I wrote it. I don't remember. I have read 
that, but I wouldn't be able to tell you what was in the letter right 
now. 

Mr. Rice. I appreciate that, but I was just wondering whether you 
are in the habit of putting things in a letter that weren't so? I mean, 
it looks to me like he knew about it, when you said "my husband " 

Mis. Sullivan. Well, I probably did say that, but I know I kept 
it from him, And I certainly kept things like that from the family. 
Jimmy is just not a person to spend money. He was always very 
careful of it, and when he went into office he tried to be very careful. 

Mr. Rice. Well, now, how was it possible for you to get hold of 
this money that went up there without Jimmy knowing about it? 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 141 

Mrs. Sullivan. I think I told you that in Washington. 

Mr. Rice. It is my recollection, Mrs. Sullivan, that you said that 
during the 1944 campaign, that is, the sheriff's campaign here, that 
there were campaign contributions which came into the fund for 
Jimmy and some of it was turned over to you. And I don't recall 
exactly the words you used, but you appropriated the money for your 
own use, that is, you extracted and kept it, and that was the money 
that was sent up to Aberdeen ; is right ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Is that what I told you ? 

Mr. Rice. Well, I am asking you. 

Mrs. Sullivan. Is it my recollection ? I guess it is. 

Mr. Rice. Is that right ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I think that is right. 

Mr. Rice. Later on when the house was built for the Neus up there, 
that was in the 19-18 campaign, there was considerable more money? 

Mrs. Sulliv an. Well, it was a different campaign, you know, than 
the first one. Of course, the first time it was just something that never 
occurred in Dade County. 

Mr. Rice. You mean so much money came in ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, it was just politically, you know — the papers 
were pouring this money on Palmer's side, and Jimmy's friends were 
helping him on his side. You know, it was just something — well, 
there had been nothing like it here in Dade County before of that 
kind. People from all sources and walks of life would come in and 
want to help. 

Mr. Rice. And they turned their money over to you down there at 
the campaign headquarters, and some of it he just didn't find out 
about ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. No, he didn't know about anything 
that went on in that office, because he was never there. 

Mr. Rice. I think the Neus testified that the cost was in the neigh- 
borhood of $19,000 and a garage cost $1,000, making a total of $20,000. 
Do you recall about how much of that you sent up there to them ? 

(No response.) 

Mr. Rice. Was it all of it? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No. I know the house that Major Rice bought, and 
I didn't want my sister to turn that house over to me. I never told 
her to do that. 

Mir. Rice. That is referring to the Bel Air Avenue house? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. I knew someday she wanted to be all right. 
I did want to help her, but this Major Rice was a friend of the Neus, 
and they were renting the house from her and they really wanted to 
buy the'house. They just kept after here and kept after her. 

Mr. Rice. The Rices did ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, to buy the house from her. And so she would 
keep on calling me, and I said, "Well, I just think it is terrible." 

Mr. Rice. Well, how did it get in your name in the first place? 

Mrs. Sullivan. She put it in my name. 

Mr. Rice. Why did she put it in your name ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I don't know why she did it. I just don't know 
why. That is what has caused all this trouble. It is just one of those 
unusual things. I don't know why she did it. I didn't tell her to do 
it. that she had to sign that property over to me. She could have gone 



142 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

ahead and then if she had wanted to have given me what she got out 
of it, it would have been all right. It wouldn't have made any differ- 
ence, and all of this stuff wouldn't have had to be done. 

Mr. Kice. Was it because she felt she owed it to you? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. She really didn't think the house was going 
to cost as much as it did when she started out. 

Mr. Rice. The one on Rogers Avenue didn't cost as much? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No. So she started it and just got involved in it, 
and of course I helped her out, you know, since it was more than she 
thought it was going to cost. 

Mr. Rice. So that she, without you knowing it, deeded the house on 
Bel Air Avenue to you as an individual ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And then the Rices wanted to buy it ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. They wanted that house very badly. The price 
was set at $10,500, and then a deed was drawn up. I didn't want 
any of it. I didn't want Jimmy to know that I had any part to do 
with it. I just let her go ahead and do what she wanted to do, you 
know. I just said, "Well, keep it up there and I don't want any part 
of it." 

Mr. Rice. She sent a deed down to you, though ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I think she has willed the home to the children. 
Now, I mean that was her way of trying to 

Mr. Rice. She would will the Rogers Avenue home to whose chil- 
dren, your children? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No. 

Mr. Rice. Where she lives now ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Now, when the Rices wanted to move in, there was a 
purchase contract which was evidently sent down by Mrs. Neu to 
you to be signed — -a purchase agreement. I think you have a copy 
of that? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I guess I signed it if she sent it down. I know 
she sent the deed down. 

Mr. Rice. That was this exhibit No. 19 in the record, which is a pur- 
chase agreement dated November 1949 between Ethel Sullivan to 
Thomas A. Rice and Ruth Emily Rice, ostensibly signed by Ethel and 
James Sullivan [indicating]. 

(Mrs. Sullivan examines exhibit No. 19.) 

Mr. Rice. Do you recognize that ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you sign it ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you sign both signatures ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. I think you told me before you signed it, too ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

The Chairman. Mr. Rice, it might expedite matters if you would 
give your recollection of the story and then see if she will affirm it. 

Mr. Rice. Well, as I understand it, she said, not wanting Jimmy to 
know anything about it when it came down, she signed both names. 
Later on the deed came back, or the purchase agreement, that is. 
There is a deed that came later. Isn't that right ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 143 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes, I think so. 

Mr. Rice. So that that isn't Jimmy's signature? 

Mrs. Sullivan. No, it is my signature. 

Mr. Rice. And then following that, they sent the deed down which 
was the deed dated the 1st of December 1949, of which there is a 
photostatic copy here. 

(Mrs. Sullivan examines photostatic copy of deed.) 

Mr. Kehoe. May I advise Mrs. Sullivan \ 

The Chairman. Yes, indeed. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Kehoe. Let the record show that Mrs. Sullivan will refuse to 
answer the question as follows : "I will refuse to answer that question 
for fear that by my answering the question I might incriminate my- 
self on a violation of one or more of the Federal statutes and possibly 
a State statute, and for that reason I decline to answer it." 

The Chairman. Now, Mr. Rice, you may proceed. 

Mr. Rice. As I recall, you told Mr. Robinson and myself that the 
deed was sent down to you by Mrs. Neu and that you signed both 
your own signature and Jimmy's on the deed, and that the acknowl- 
edgment which appears on the second page, showing it was signed 
purportedly in the presence of a notary, was obtained by you from the 
young lady in the sheriff's office; that you just merely told her to no- 
tarize that as an accommodation to you and she did so ; is that correct? 

Mr. Kehoe. Let it stand as though she made the objection which I 
dictated in the record here, if she wants. 

Mrs. Sullivan. I refuse to answer the question on the grounds Mr. 
Kehoe stated. 

The Chairman. Very true. But, of course, it is necessary to in- 
struct the witness to answer, and does she still persist in her refusal ? 

Mr. Kehoe. No, go ahead and answer the question, after the chair- 
man has instructed her to answer, notwithstanding the objection. 

The Chairman. As I understand the objection, counsel makes no 
point that this will have anything to do with income-tax violations. 
That is not in the picture at all ? 

Mr. Kehoe. That is correct. That is why I took the privilege of 
redictating it to show that it was her statement. 

Mrs. Sullivan. Will you repeat the question, please ? 

Mr. Rice. It was my recollection you told Mr. Robinson and my- 
self that when you received the deed sent down from Aberdeen by 
Mrs. Neu or Mr! Kronum, as the case may have been, that you signed 
both names, both yours and Jimmy's to the deed, and that the acknowl- 
edgment on page 2 by the notary was obtained by you— the young 
lady was just an employee there in the sheriff's office, and that you 
told her to go ahead and notarize this document, and you sent it on 
up there and Jimmy knew nothing about it; is that correct? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And your answer is you did ? 

Mrs. Sullivan." That is right ; I did. 

Mr. Rice. Then referring to this signature on there of Jimmy 
Sullivan, you wrote that yourself "James Sullivan" ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I refuse to answer that, 

Mr. Kehoe. Just a moment. 



144 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Well, you confirmed the statement which I made re- 
garding your conversation, did you not. You said what I said was 
right, in your opinion, or that it was your recollection of what you 
told us? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, I just don't remember. All I did tell you, 
I know it was informal conversation and I was just trying to explain 
things to you. 

Mr. Rice. Well, irrespective of whether you remember it or not, 
you remember what is the truth, don't you, and if there was anything 
in that statement that I repeated there that sounded like it wasn't 
true, you would recognize it? I mean, the truth never changes? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. So is that a true story of what happened when Mrs. Neu 
sent the deed down ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. You mean that I signed ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mrs. Sullivan. That I signed for both parties ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And now, therefore, is that your writing here or a photo- 
graphic copy of it ? 

Mr. Kehoe. It seems to me it is already answered. 

Mr. Rice. I think so, too. Isn't that right ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. I just want to tie down this particular exhibit, if possible, 
Mr. Counsel. I think you follow me on that. Is that your writing 
there [indicating] ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, now, I presume it is. 

Mr. Rice. Then, of course, Mrs. Neu didn't witness that. She was 
up in Maryland all the time? I think she has testified that she was 
up in Maryland and you were down here during the entire time? 

Mrs. Sullivan. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, do you remember talking to Don Petit, of 
the Miami Daily News, about this situation ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes. When you talk to those newspaper people, 
though, you know, they just don't 

Mr. Kehoe. He just asked if you ever talked with Don Petit. Tell 
him "yes" or "no," so we can go ahead. 

Mrs. Sullivan. Yes ; I did. 

Mr. Rice. And he reports in an article on November 8, 1950, in dis- 
cussing this transaction in part : 

The committee attached photostats which reported the sale of the house for 
$10,000 signed by Ethel G. Sullivan and James Sullivan. Mrs. Sullivan said she 
signed both names. 

Do you remember telling him that ? 

Mr. Kehoe. Mr. Chairman, we are going to object to asking this 
witness to verify what a newspaper man published in a newspaper 
article. The article will speak for itself. 

The Chairman. That is true; except I understand the inquiry is 
directed not to what was published in the paper, but what the witness 
told the reporter. 

Mrs. Sullivan. I probably didn't tell him exactly like that. You 
know how those newspaper reporters make up their own story and 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 145 

distort it. The next day when I came from Washington that was 
all in the paper, all of my sister's testimony word for word, and I 
suppose that is where they got it from. 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, there is one other thing I am a little bit inter- 
ested in. Our previous testimony indicates that the $10,000 winch 
was put up by the Rices to buy this property was drawn in two checks, 
one for $5,000 on December 2, 1949, I believe, and one for $5,000 
on December 7, 1949. Mrs. Neu testified that the $10,000 was drawn 
in two checks of $5,000 each and deposited and drawn to her, and 
she cashed them there at the bank in Aberdeen and took the money 
over to your parents and left it there in cash, in accordance with your 
instructions, and she couldn't understand why you wanted the money 
in two checks like that. 

Mrs. Sullivan. No reason at all. She just probably did it on her 
own account. I wouldn't know why. 

Mr. Rice. She said you instructed her to do that. 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, I just don't remember how I told her to do it. 
I told her to go ahead and do what she wanted to; I didn't want any 
part of it. 

Mr. Rice. You did tell her to take the money over to the Fords, 
though, and leave it there ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I don't know whether I did or not. 

Mr. Rice. She said you did. 

Mrs. Sullivan. I don't know whether I did or not. 

Mr. Rice. It may help you to know there were telephone calls be- 
tween you and Mrs. Neu on December 2 and December 7, 1949, the 
same dates those checks were drawn and deposited. 

Mr. Kehoe. May I inquire if there was any tapping of the wires 
that furnished counsel with that information. 

Mr. Rice. No. When you make a long-distance call, the telephone 
company makes a record of the number called and the person called, 
so they can charge it on your bill. We obtained it from that record. 

Mrs. Sullivan. She called me several times; yes. 

Mr. Rice. On those particular 2 days the two checks were drawn? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I don't remember that. I really don't. I couldn't 
tell you truthfully what date it was or what the conversation was. 

Mr. Rice. Is the money still up there, as far as you know? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, I refuse to answer that, Mr. Rice. 

Mr. Rice. On what grounds? It was up there on September 5, 
1950, for your information, so that brings it pretty well up to date. 
I think there is a statement in the record from Mr. and Mrs. Tredick 
Ford given along about September 1950 in which they say the money 
was up there then. Is that right ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. If they said it was there, it was there. 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, is the money still there ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Well, I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Rice. On what grounds? 

Mrs. Sullivan. At the present time the Federal grand jury for the 
southern district of Florida has taken under consideration the inves- 
tigation of income-tax returns for prior years, and if I should answer 
that question I might incriminate myself, and I therefore claim a 
constitutional privilege and refuse to answer the question. 



146 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Here is what Mrs. May Ford and Tredick Ford say in 

part: 

When the Sullivans sold the house on Bel Air Avenue to Major and Mrs. Rice 
in 1949 for $10,000, the proceeds of the sale of the house was delivered in cash 
by Gladys Neu for safekeeping at the farm. As I understand it, Ethel told her 
the money would b£ kept this way, and she would call for it when necessary. 
When Ethel was in Perryman during the summer of 1950, we reminded her we 
were holding the money for her, and she asked us to continue keeping it for 
her. As yet, she has not called for the money, and we still retain it at the 
farm. 

The Chairman. That is what I understood Mrs. Sullivan to affirm 
now. 

Mr. Rice. That is dated October 18, 1950. 

Mrs. Sullivan. It was there then ; yes. 

Mr. Bice. Now, I show you exhibits 17 and 18 in the record, ex- 
hibit 17 being a deposit receipt dated April 28, 1950, bearing the 
signature Jimmy Sullivan and Ethel Sullivan, and exhibit 18 being a 
listing of December 8, 1949, bearing the signature J. A. Sullivan and 
Ethel Sullivan, and let us see if we can handle these both and find out 
if you signed those ? 

(Mrs. Sullivan examines exhibits 17 and 18.) 

Mr. Rice. Are those your signatures on there ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I refuse to answer, Mr. Rice, at the present time. 
Shall I read this all over again ? 

The Chairman. No; it is assumed and taken for granted that the 
grounds for your refusal would be repeated. 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, your brother in New York — his name is what ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. Carroll. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever sent him any substantial amount of 
money ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I refuse to answer that question on the same 
grounds. 

Mr. Rice. Now, how about this brother, Grayson, up in Philadel- 
phia; have you ever sent him any substantial amounts of money? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I will refuse to answer that on the same grounds. 

Mr. Rice. Now, how about Mrs. Edith Ford; have you ever ad- 
vanced to her or sent her a substantial amount of money ? 

Mrs. Sullivan. I refuse to answer that on the same grounds. 

Mr. Rice. That is all. 

The Chairman. All right. That will conclude the examination, 
thank you. 

(Whereupon, at 9 : 10 p. m., June 21, 1951, the examination was 
concluded.) 



INVESTIGATION OF ORGANIZED CBIME IN INTERSTATE 

COMMERCE 



FRIDAY, JUNE 22, 1951 

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

Miami, Fla. 

The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 a. m., Friday, 
June 22, 1951, in room 401, Dade County Courthouse, Miami, Fla., 
Senator Herbert R. O'Conor (chairman) presiding. 

Present : Senator O'Conor. 

Also present: Richard G. Moser, chief counsel; Downey Rice, as- 
sociate counsel; George Martin, director of information; Fred V. 
Bruch, narcotics investigator; and T. S. Smith and Murray Jackson, 
investigators. 

The Chairman. The hearing Avill please come to order. At the 
outset I would like to make the following statement: 

One of the most challenging aspects of the crime problem is the 
infiltration of gangsters into the field of legitimate business. In 
different parts of the country we have developed the facts showing 
that the profits of hoodlums through organized crime have been in- 
vested in the legitimate enterprises which they have sought to control. 

That is a most serious matter, as it would follow that mobsters, once 
having gained a foothold, would seek to corrupt public officials, 
poison the channels of private enterprise, and resort to many ob- 
jectionable practices to achieve their ends. Particularly unfortunate 
would it be if racketeers could get control of newspaper publications. 
The United States is justly proud of the integrity of the free press 
of our country, and we want to keep the record of having the news- 
papers remain in the hands of responsible and trustworthy persons, 
who are unhampered in their publishing of the news impartially for 
the information of the general public. 

It was with these facts in mind that the committee undertook to 
secure information regarding the investment of money here in Miami 
in a newspaper. Harry O. Voiler, Martin Accardo, and Mrs. Oreeta 
Carroll, formerly Mrs. Martin Accardo, were called to testify under 
oath. The testimony of Harry O. Voiler and of Mrs. Carroll, relat- 
ing to definite facts of a written document of which both agree the 
other had knowledge, is absolutely contradictory. It is clear that 
both cannot be true, and one must be false, wilfully false. 

Therefore, perjury has been committed in our opinion regarding 
this material question. The record of these proceedings will be sub- 
mitted by us to the United States Attorney in this district for his 

147 



148 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

attention and in order that lie may take such action as he deems 
justified. 

Mr. Rice. We would like to ask if two witnesses for whom sub- 
penas have been issued are present this morning. Raymond Craig; 
is he in the room ? 

( No response. ) 

Sam Mendelsohn ; is he in the room ? 

(No response.) 

It would be appreciated if anyone having information which might 
help the committee to locate these individuals would submit that 
information to the staff. 

Mr. Angel Daniel ; is he in the room ? 

FUKTHEE, TESTIMONY OF ANGEL DANIEL, TAMPA, FLA. 

The Chairman. You were sworn yesterday, were you not, Mr. 
Daniel? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Your full name was given yesterday, but for the 
record will you again identify yourself, please? 

Mr. Daniel. Angel Daniel. 

The Chairman. Mr. Daniel, your residence is ? 

Mr. Daniel. Tampa. 

The Chairman. And for how long, sir, have you lived there 9 

Mr. Daniel. At that address? 

The Chairman. Well, in Tampa. 

Mr. Daniel. In Tampa, I have been living there since 1900. 

The Chairman. We are not able to hear you. 

Mr. Daniel. 1900. 

The Chairman. Could I ask you if during the period you are on 
the stand, you will keep your voice up and talk slowly and distinctly so 
that all may hear you ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, I think you testified you were born in Key 
West? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right- 
Mr. Rice. When was that? 

Mr. Daniel. The 22d of August, 1888. 

Mr. Rice. What were your parents' names ? 

Mr. Daniel. Daniels. 

Mr. Rice. What was your father's name; what was your father's 
first name? 

Mr. Daniel. Richard Daniel. 

Mr. Rice. What was your mother's name ? 

Mr. Daniel. Anna. 

Mr. Rice. Were you baptized down there, Mr. Daniel? 

Mr. Daniel. I think so, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know what church that was ? 

Mr. Daniel. The Catholic church. 

Mr. Rice. You don't remember that, do you ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir ; I sure don't. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure you weren't born in Cuba ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 149 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. I have my birth certificate at home now. 
I didn't bring it, but I have it at home. 

Mr. Rice. You are appearing here in response to a subpena served 
upon you ; is that right ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. At about Christmas week of 1950 the Senate committee 
was in Tampa for a hearing, at which time a subpena was issued for 
you. Would you like to tell us where you were when that subpena was 
served and where you have been since? 

Mr. Daniel. I was in Baltimore. 

Mr. Rice. Where ? 

Mr. Daniel. I was in Baltimore. 

Mr. Rice. What were you doing in Baltimore? 

Mr. Daniel. My wife was sick. 

Mr. Rice. Your wife was sick ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Was your wife in Baltimore ? 

Mr. Daniel. We were both there. 

Mr. Rice. She was in a hospital there? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, she wasn't in the hospital at the time. She was 
under the care of Doctor Bryant from the Johns Hopkins Hospital. 
She was under his care. 

Mr. Rice. Was that a mystery to the members of your family, that 
you were up there ? 

Mr. Daniel. What did you say, a mystery ? 

Mr. Rice. A mystery. The marshal was unable to locate you at 
your house in Tampa at that time. 

Mr. Daniel. Well, that was the reason why they couldn't locate 
me, because I was in Baltimore. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't tell anyone you were up there ? 

Mr. Daniel. That I was up there — no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Were you staying at a hotel while you were in Bal- 
timore ? 

Mr. Daniel. I was staying at a hotel apartment. 

Mr. Rice. Were you staying in a hotel? 

Mr. Daniel. At a hotel apartment, yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. At a hotel apartment? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Under what name ? 

Mr. Daniel. My name and her name. 

Mr. Rice. Were you registered there? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What was the name of it? 

Mr. Daniel. Of the what ? 

Mr. Rice. Of the hotel apartment. 

Mr. Daniel. I was trying to think. Royal something. I really 
can't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Was it the Mount Royal Apartments? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How long were you there? 

Mr. Daniel. I believe we stayed there almost a month. 



150 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, you stayed there a month ? 

Mr. Daniel. I think most of a month. 

Mr. Rice. Did you you go back to Tampa? 

Mr. Daniel. No ; I came back to Jacksonville. 

Mr. Rice. You came back to Jacksonville. What did you do there? 

Mr. Daniel. I stayed there with her mother. 

Mr. Rice. How long did you stay there ? 

Mr. Daniel. Until Thursday; until the morning that I read the 
paper that the committee has a subpena for me and then I came to 
Tampa Thursday. 

Mr. Rice. After the committee had left? 

Mr. Daniel. I guess so; but I read in the paper where the com- 
mittee had a subpena for me, so then I left Thursday and reported to 
the marshal's office Friday at Tampa. 

Mr. Rice. Since you have been served with a subpena this time that 
was what, last week ? 

Mr. Daniel. Tuesday morning. 

Mr. Rice. Have you consulted with any city or county official at 
Tampa or any Hillsborough County or State official about your being 
subpenaed ? 

Mr. Daniel. Not that I remember, no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Well, it is only Tuesday morning. 

Mr. Daniel. Yes ; well, I don't remember, no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You don't remember? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Would you remember if you did? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Well, think hard. You consulted with anyone, a State 
official, or with whom have you talked about this thing since you 
were served? 

Mr. Daniel. (No response.) 

Mr. Rice. Have you talked to a lawyer? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You haven't talked to a lawyer? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you talked to a sheriff? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you talked to a deputy sheriff? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 

Mr. Daniel. I am sure about that ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you talked to Canto ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you talked to K. C. Meyers? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. With whom have you talked ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, maybe some of the boys there in Tampa. I have 
told them that I have a subpena, but I don't remember exactly which 
ones I talked to. 

Mr. Rice. Have you talked to some of the Syndicate boys? 

Mr. Daniel. What do you mean by "Syndicate boys"? 

Mr. Rice. Don't you know? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 151 

Mr. Rice. Well, with whom have you talked? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, different people there; but I don't know what 
you mean by "Syndicate." 

Mr. Rice. For instance, have you talked to Flaco? 

Mr. Daniel. I believe I did; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You have talked to Flaco \ 

Mr. Daniel. I did. 

Mr. Rice. What did he say ? 

Mr. Daniel. He didn't have nothing to say. I told him I had a 
subpena, so I am going to Miami. 

Mr. Rice. Did he suggest that you tell the committee all that they 
wanted to know ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did he have any opinion about that? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you going to tell the committee all you know? 

Mr. Daniel. All I know ? What do you mean by "all I know" ? 

Mr. Rice. All you know about the truth. 

Mr. Daniel. Oh, yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You are going to try to do that? All right, sir. When 
the subpena called for you to bring with you some papers, some of 
your records and things like that, you brought a few of those in here 
yesterday. I noticed that you evidently overlooked bringing your 
Federal tax returns with you. Do you have copies of your Federal 
tax returns? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir ; except I think 1 year, I think '42. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon? 

Mr. Daniel. I think the year 1942, but I don't know whether the 
Government kept it or not. That I haven't got, because they 

Mr. Rice. How is it that you didn't bring them? 

Mr. Daniel. The returns? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know that you wanted them. I thought you 
just wanted the receipts. If I thought that you wanted the others I 
would have brought them. 

Mr. Rice. I think the subpena said Federal tax returns, but you 
have those? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You are in a position to forward those to this committee 
if we ask you to do that ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir ; we will ask you to do that. 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Now. then, you turned over some money order receipts 
which you indicate are payments from you to the internal revenue and 
some receipts for payments of taxes to the State here. I notice those 
are by money order ; do you have a bank account? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Where is that ? 

Mr. Daniel. International Bank. 

Mr. Rice. International Bank? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 



152 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Why it is you pay your taxes with money orders instead 
of drawing checks on your bank ? 

Mr. Daniel. Why? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Daniel. I don't pay the income tax with a check. 

Mr. Rice. Yes? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I don't know any reason why I don't pay it, 
because I thought they always required you to bring the cash down. 

Mr. Rice. Required what? 

Mr. Daniel. To bring the cash or certified check. 

Mr. Rice. No ; these are mailed into Jacksonville. 

Mr. Daniel. Oh, well, the man there at the office said, "Send me a 
money order, Angel." Mr. Johnson of the internal revenue at 
Tampa. 

Mr. Rice. He told you to make a money order, not checks ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right ; send a money order to Jacksonville. 

Mr. Rice. In connection with your usual dealings did you deal with 
cash or check? 

Mr. Daniel. In what kind of dealings? 

Mr. Rice. Any of your business dealings. You said yesterday you 
were a bolita peddler. 

Mr. Daniel. Well, checks. 

Mr. Rice. Checks ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And cash, both ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Now, I see that you have brought in a statement of the 
Internal International Bank of Tampa, Fla., for the month of May 
1951; evidently your account is in the name of Angel Daniel; why 
is that the only one you brought ? 

Mr. Daniel. That is the only one I had. 

Mr. Rice. Where are the canceled checks that came with that ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I guess they are at the house. I just didn't 
bring them. I thought you said bring the statement from the bank. 

Mr. Rice. You will be able to mail those in to the committee? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How about your other bank statements ? 

Mr. Daniel. I haven't got any; just said that is the only one I 
have. 

Mr. Rice. This is the only one? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I see you have a balance here of $5,444.17; what is the 
usual balance that you maintain in this account? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I don't know, Mr. Rice, about that. That all 
depends on the run of the year. I really couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know what it is ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any other bank accounts? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any accounts in any other name's? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Does your wife have a bank account? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 153 

Mr. Rice. Where is it located ? 

Mr. Daniel. At the International Bank. 

Mr. Rice. What is her name i 

Mr. Daniel. Sarah Daniel. 

Mr. Rice. What is Sarah's maiden name? 

(No response.) 

Mr. Rice. What was her name before you married her? 

Mr. Daniel. Howell. 

Mr. Rice. Howell ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Does she have a business of her own ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You support her ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes ; housewife, yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. So it is your money that is in this Sarah Daniel's account ? 

Mr. Daniel. Correct. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any safe deposit boxes ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have a safe in your home or a strongbox? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Daniel. I am sure about that. 

Mr. Rice. Where do you keep this cash that you pay your taxes 
with ? 

Mr. Daniel. I keep it at home. 

Mr. Rice. You keep it at home ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Just lying around loose ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, in the desk or maybe put it up somewhere. 

Mr. Rice. One of your payments is for over $1,000; do you keep 
over $1,000 in your house, in your desk, in cash ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How much do you keep there ? 

Mr. Daniel. You mean ? 

Mr. Rice. What is the most you have ever kept in your desk? 

Mr. Daniel. Well eight or ten thousand dollars. 

Mr. Rice. $8,000 or $10,000? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. How long a period of time will you keep that there f 

Mr. Daniel. Well, that I couldn't tell you. I could keep it 

Mr. Rice. How much do you have there now, approximately? 

Mr. Daniel. I think I have about $1,500. 

Mr. Rice. And now, sir, I see that — let's go back here to 1940 ; have 
you been in any legitimate business since 1940 ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You have been in the bolita peddling business since 1940 ; 
is that right? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. How long before that were you in it ? 

Mr. Daniel. You mean before '40 ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 



154 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Daniel. Yes; well, I had a place up there on Spring Street, a 
coffee shop there. 

Mr. Rice. What was the name of that? 

Mr. Daniel. Spring Street, a coffee shop. Spring Street Cafe. 

Mr. Rice. You closed that before 1940 ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir; after 1940. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Daniel. After 1940. 

Mr. Rice. After 1940? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Since 1940 your main source of income has been from 
your bolita business; is that right? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you still in the business? 

Mr. Daniel. No, not now ; no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When did you get out of the business ? 

Mr. Daniel. '50. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Daniel. '50. 

Mr. Rice. 1950? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. What date in 1950? 

Mr. Daniel. July; sometime I think last July. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Remember you are under oath. 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What have you been doing since July of 1950 insofar as 
gaining income? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, that is, an income — I made a little money play- 
ing the dogs in Petersburg. That is the only thing that I have made 
since then. 

Mr. Rice. So that the only thing you have done to produce income 
since July of 1950 is playing the dogs at St. Petersburg? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. How much money have you made playing the dogs since 
Julv of 1950? 

Mr. Daniel ; $1,800. Well, I made a little bit more. 

Mr. Rice. You want this committee to believe that you made $1,800 
playing the dogs at St. Petersburg? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. That is your only source of income since July of 1950 ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any stocks and bonds ? 

Mr. Daniel. The Government bonds. That is, you know 

Mr. Rice. What is the value of your bond holdings ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I really don't know, because I haven't checked 
on it just to see what the value is of it to date. I got them — I have got 
them home, but then that its all. 

Mr. Rice. On your Federal income-tax return for 1950 what did you 
put down ns your occupation? 

Mr. Daniel. Game of chance. 

Mr. Rice. What is that ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 155 

Mr. Daniel. Game of chance. 

Mr. Rice. Game of chance? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Eice. Is that that St. Petersburg thing you were talking about? 

Mr. Daniel. No, that is the bolita peddling. I was in bolita 
peddling; I mean, in 1951 1 collected for what I did in 1950 ; but 1 quit 
in 1950. 

Mr. Eice. On your 1950 return for the whole year in which the last 
part of the year you didn't work, what did you put for the income 
you made in St. Petersburg. 

Mr. Daniel. I made it this year, not last year. 

Mr. Rice. This year is 1951 ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right ; I will collect that in 1952. 

Mr. Rice. What were you doing between July of 1950 and January 
of 1951 for income? 

Mr. Daniel. I haven't been doing anything. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't have any income during that time? 

Mr. Daniel. No. I didn't fool with bolita at all. I quit in 1950. 

Mr. Rice. Weren't you making deposits in your bank account dur- 
ing that time ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't remember that I have, no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I think the bank records will show that you did. 

Mr. Daniel. Maybe $50. 

Mr. Rice. Where did that come from? 

Mr. Daniel. $50 ; maybe I cashed a check for somebody or some- 
thing like that, or maybe I deposited $50 or $100 in the bank. I don't 
know what the records show. 

Mr. Rice. Where did the money come from that you used to cash 
the checks ? 

Mr. Daniel. From my pocket. I had it at home. 

Mr. Rice. You had it at home ? 

Mr. Daniel. I had it at home, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, do you own any real estate, any property? 

Mr. Daniel. My home. 

Mr. Rice. Your home; and that is free and clear or do you have a 
mortgage against that ? 

Mr. Daniel. That is clear. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon? 

Mr. Daniel. It is clear. 

Mr. Rice. What is the value of that home? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I couldn't say what the value of it is today; I 
couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Rice. You couldn't say ? 

Mr. Daniel. Couldn't say what the price is. 

Mr. Rice. What is your best guess ? 

Mr. Daniel. $10,000. 

Mr. Rice. $17,000; will you take $17,000 for it? 

Mr. Daniel. Sure. 

Mr. Rice. Did you say 10 ? 

Mr. Daniel. I said 10, 1 think. I think it would be worth $10,000. 
You know what I mean, if a real-estate man appraised it. 

Mr. Rice. You would sell it for $10,000 ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

85277— 51— pt. 16 11 



156 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Eice. I see here that you had some transaction with Vincent 
Spoto ; what was that about ? 

Mr. Daniel. That was Tony. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Daniel. That was Tony. I didn't have any transaction with 
Spoto. I had one with Tony Italiano. 

Mr. Rice. Red's brother? 

Mr. Daniel. Red's boy. 

Mr. Rice. Red's boy ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Is Red's boy named Vincent Spoto ? 

Mr. Daniel. No. I think Vincent is president of the company. 

Mr. Rice. Tell us about that transaction. 

Mr. Daniel. Well, he just said he had to have a little money and 
asked me — he thought maybe I could let him have some money. I 
said, well 

Mr. Rice. What did he want the money for ? 

Mr. Daniel. He didn't tell me. 

Mr. Rice. What business is Tony in ? 

Mr. Daniel. He is the manager or, I think, he has something to do 
with the Anthony Distributing Co. 

Mr. Rice. That is a beer-distributing company? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. How old is this boy, Tony ? 

Mr. Daniel. That is a question I could not answer. I couldn't tell 
you how old he is. 

Mr. Rice. Is he 18 or 20? 

Mr. Daniel. I think he is older than that; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. He is the son of this Red Italiano that we have been look- 
ing for and can't find? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. This fellow that ran off to Italy? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know about that. 

Mr. Rice. Tell us about this transaction with Tony? 

Mr. Daniel. He just called me and said he wanted to see me, and 
said he had to have a little money. He said, "Could I have a little 
money?" 

I said, "Let me see how much money I have." I saw how much I 
had, and, I said, "Well, I believe I can let you have it." 

Mr. Rice. He needed this money, and did he tell vou what he needed 
it for? *' y 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. He didn't tell you what he wanted it for? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did he offer to give you any collateral or security ? 

Mr. Daniel. Only the note. 

Mr. Rice. Only the note ? 

Mr. Daniel. With 6-percent interest. 

Mr. Rice. When was that? 

Mr. Daniel. In January of 1950, 1 think. 

Mr. Rice. January when? 

Mr. Daniel. 1950. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure it wasn't 1951 ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 157 

Mr. Daniel. That was the second note. I loaned him the money 
in January 1950, for 90 days. When 90 days come up, he said is lie 
allowed to have that note extended, and I said "All right; I will allow 
you to have the interest/' I let him have the money in 1950, and he 
gave me the interest. 

Mr. Rice. I am holding a note dated January 2G, 1951, payable to 
Angel Daniel in the amount of $12,000, signed by Vincent Spoto, 
president. It doesn't say "president" of what. 

It states, "Should Mr. Daniel need this money, he may request and 
get 50 percent of the $12,000 after 3 months from this date." 

How does Spoto get into that? 

Mr. Daniel. I think he is president of the company. 

Mr. Rice. What does he have to do with Tony's note ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that. He just borrowed it from me, 
and I hold him responsible for that, and I imagine that he is' man- 
ager, or has probably— well, I wouldn't say. You know what I mean ; 
what I mean, just what he would have in it other than I just let him 
have the money. 

Mr. Rice. You can't think of any reason why you shouldn't get 
Tony's name on there ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Wouldn't it be proper procedure to have Spoto sign it 
and have Tony get it or endorse it ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't think so, because I believe that, just like the 
note says there, if I need the money I can go up there and pick up 
whatever the note says. 

Mr. Rice. Who got the money? 

Mr. Daniel. Tony. 

Mr. Rice. So, Spoto says he didn't get the money ? 

Mr. Daniel. I looked to Tony to give it to me. 

Mr. Rice. You don't have anything from him to prove that ; do you ? 

Mr. Daniel. Only that. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure that money didn't go to Red Italiano ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Why do you say that? 

Mr. Daniel. I said "No." You asked me was I sure. I don't 
know whether it went to Red Italiano or not. 

Mr. Rice. About the time he was getting ready to go to Italy? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Rice. Have you seen Red since he returned from Italy ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure? 

Mr. Daniel. I am sure. 

Mr. Rice. Have you been in touch with him? 

Mr. Daniel. He called me up a couple of times. 

Mr. Rice. Since he has been back, did he tell you he saw Luciano 
over there? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Wasn't he asked ? 

Mr. Daniel. He asked me how I was getting along? 

Mr. Rice. Did he ask you how business was ? 

Mr. Daniel. No; nothing about business. He just asked me how 
I was getting along. I said, "I'm getting along all right." 



158 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Where was he when you talked to him ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Was he in Tampa ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't remember. I don't believe he was. 

Mr. Rice. Did he call you up long distance ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know — yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Was he in New Orleans? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Where was he ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. He has been in Tampa ; hasn't he ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Rice. Has he called you from Tampa? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I don't believe he has. 

Mr. Rice. How long ago was that that you talked to him the last 
time? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I don't know; I don't remember just exactly. 
Sometime last year. 

Mr. Rice. Do you expect to be talking to him again ? 

Mr. Daniel. What did you ask me ? 

Mr. Rice. Do you expect to be talking to him again? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, unless he calls me. 

Mr. Rice. If he calls you again, we would appreciate it if you would 
let him know that the Senate committee is looking for him. 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Now, tell us a little bit more about bolita peddling. As 
a matter of fact, you are a banker, what they call a banker? 

Mr. Daniel. That is what they call it. 

Mr. Rice. How do you operate? Do you have peddlers who go 
around and pick up? 

Mr. Daniel. I had but not now. 

Mr. Rice. Back in 1950, when you were doing it, tell us about that. 

Mr. Daniel. In 1950? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Where were you doing it ? 

Mr. Daniel. Where? 

Mr. Rice. Yes, sir. Tell us about that. Where were your head- 
quarters located? 

Mr. Daniel. I had it in my home. They would call me there, and 
I had a boy there — thaj: is, this boy here had a lttle business that I 
operated — I wasn't doing anything, you know, to amount to anything 
before then. This boy came up and he said he had a little business, 
most of it out of town. I don't know what the town was, maybe 
Manatee or something like that, and he asked me if he could handle 
some of my business. So, I said "Yes." 

Mr. Rice. What was his name? 

Mr. Daniel. Robert Monue. 

Mr. Rice. Who? 

Mr. Daniel. Monue, M-o-n-u-e. 

Mr. Rice. Was your brother in this business? 

Mr. Daniel. How do you mean ? 

Mr. Rice. Did he work in your business with you ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 159 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Daniel. Sir ? 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I think he has got a restaurant on Nebraska and 
Henderson. 

Mr. Rice. Did he sell bolita in the restaurant ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know whether he does or not. 

Mr. Rice. It is possible ; is it not ? 

Mr. Daniel. (No response.) 

Mr. Rice. Isn't it possible ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Rice. What is the name of his restaurant ? 

Mr. Daniel. De Valencia. 

Mr. Rice. In connection with your business, do you have any part- 
ner, any people who have a percentage or interest with you ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You owned it all alone ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Were you a member of the syndicate ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know what you mean by "syndicate." 

Mr. Rice. Well, now, you have spoken about Red Italiano ; do you 
know what business he was in ? Primo Lazzara ; do you know him ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know what business he is in ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Gus Friscia ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know him ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ; what business is Friscia in ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you. 

Mr. Rice. He is in the bolita business ; isn't he ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that, because I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. He is in business with you ? 

Mr. Daniel. Certainly not. 

Mr. Rice. He is a competitor ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Rice. You mean you don't know who your competitors were? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't have any competitors. 

Mr. Rice. When you were in business ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know any competitors, because they bank just 
like I do. 

Mr. Rice. Who were some of the other bankers over there ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Suppose I tell you. 

Mr. Daniel. All right. 

Mr. Rice. How about Santo Trafficante, Jr., and Sr. ? 

Mr. Daniel. What about it ? 



160 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Eice. What? 

Mr. Daniel. What is it you are going to tell me? You said you 
would tell me. 

Mr. Rice. What business are they in ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you. 

Mr. Rice. How about Flaco ; what business is he in ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you. 

Mr. Rice. Where do you see him when you talk to him ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, maybe met him down the street or if I would go 
to West Tampa, and if I would see him there I would stop and talk 
to him. 

Mr. Rice. How about Philip Piazzo ; do you know him ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Ernie Nunes? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Longo Voyez ? They are all in bolita ; are they not ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that, Mr. Rice. I have never had 
any business dealings with any of those people. 

Mr. Rice. How about Desideres; did you ever have any business 
dealings with Desideres? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever meet with that crowd and talk matters 
over? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Now, sir, when you were in the bolita business, bolita 
peddling business, there, how did they figure out the number in the 
last month that you were in business ; was it on the dog races or throw- 
ing or what ; was it on baseball ? 

Mr. Daniel. How do you mean? 

Mr. Rice. How did you determine the number each day, the winning 
number ? 

Mr. Daniel. When — well, they go by the — take the paper, the 
bonds, and it is out of Cuba. 

Mr. Rice. What paper? 

Mr. Daniel. They pick up — they pick it up off of a paper, the 
Tribune, maybe. They take it from the bonds. 

Mr. Rice. By bonds do you mean the New York bond figures? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Are they still doing that? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Rice. When you were last in the business they were doing that? 

Mr. Daniel. No. 

Mr. Rice. What were they doing when you were last in the business ? 

Mr. Daniel. Throwing cards. 

Mr. Rice. Throwing cards? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Where did that take place ? 

Mr. Daniel. At different places. 

Mr. Rice. Well, for instance? 

Mr. Daniel. Just at different places. 

Mr. Rice. Who threw the cards? 

Mr. Daniel. An old man. 

Mr. Rice. What is his name ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 161 

Mr. Daniel. Tito. 

Mr. Rice. Did he work for you? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What is Tito's last name? 

Mr. Daniel. Just call him Tito. I don't know his last name. 

Mr. Rice. Was it Tito Rubio? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't think so. 

Mr. Rice. Tell us a little bit about it. We are interested in how you 
determine that number, where that card throwing takes place. We 
are afraid someone might be cheated or something if he wouldn't know 
how it was operated. 

Mr. Daniel. They throw the cards. You know what I mean, they 
call it the throwing of the cards. 

Mr. Rice. Where did that take place? 

Mr. Daniel. Different places. 

Mr. Rice. In Tampa? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did the spectators see the throwing? 

Mr. Daniel. Some of the people would go there and see the draw- 
ing. 

Mr. Rice. Were you one of the ones that would see that ? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Who else would be there? 

Mr. Daniel. Several people. 

Mr. Rice. Name one. 

Mr. Daniel. One ? I couldn't tell you that, Mr. Rice. 

Mr. Rice. You couldn't name anyone else who was there ? 

Mr. Daniel. No. 

Mr. Rice. Where did that take place? 

Mr. Daniel. Different places. 

Mr. Rice. Name one place. 

Mr. Daniel. Say 

Mr. Rice. Don't say "say" ; name one. 

Mr. Daniel. Well, that is just an expression, "say," you say that. 
Well, there is a place over there in West Tampa, 19 something Howard. 

Mr. Rice. I am sorry ; I didn't hear you. 

Mr. Daniel. West Tampa, 19 something Howard Avenue. 

Mr. Rice. Whose place is that? 

Mr. Daniel. A fellow by the name of Fernandez. 

Mr. Rice. 19 something West Howard? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Fernandez? What is his first name? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't remember his first name. 

Mr. Rice. Is it a private house? 

Mr. Daniel. No. It is just a little coffee shop. 

Mr. Rice. Just a little coffee shop ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Were you there when they had the throwing? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Were there any other places; did they do it in your 
house ? 

Mr. Daniel. No; sir. 

Mr. Rice. Was Chico your man ? 



162 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Daniel. Tito. He was just a man that done the drawing. 
I was just there to see it. 

Mr. Rice. Was that drawing good for the whole city of Tampa? 

Mr. Daniel. I guess so. I was doing it to protect my own bank. 

Mr. Rice. To protect your own bank ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. He was your man then, wasn't he ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Whose man was he; what was he doing it for? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. It was your bank ; who was paying him ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. It was your bank. Was that possibly Octavio Fer- 
nandez ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, maybe so ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. Who lives at 1910 Pine Street? 

Mr. Daniel. Maybe so. 

Mr. Rice. It was his place where you had the throwing? 

The Chairman. Mr. Daniel, don't say "maybe," but say it is or it is 
not. 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Let me suggest some other places and see if you remem- 
ber any other places where throwings took place ; 1514 Main Street. 

Mr. Daniel. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. At Parfinio's place? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. 1902 Howard; Toto Guarino. Do you know him? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You have never been there ? 

Mr. Daniel. Where is the place? 

Mr. Rice. 1902 Howard Avenue, in Toto Guarino's place. 

Mr. Daniel. Howard Avenue? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I don't remember it by that name, no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You said you had some peddlers working for you. Do 
you remember the names of any of those ? 

Mr. Daniel. Peddlers? 

Mr. Rice. Peddlers ; men who sold the bolita. 

Mr. Daniel. I didn't have any peddlers. 

Mr. Rice. You were a banker, were you not ? 

Mr. Daniel. /That's right. 

Mr. Rice, ^ho sold the tickets ? 

Mr. Daniel. This man brought the stuff to me. 

Mr. Rice. A man brought the stuff to you ? 

Mr. Daniel. I didn't have anything to do with that; he was the 
pick-up man. 

Mr. Rice. He was the pick-up man ? 

Mr. Daniel. He was the man who brought the business to me. I 
didn't have anything to do with the pick-up. 

Mr. Rice. What do you mean? 

Mr. Daniel. The business that he had, that he wanted me to bank. 

Mr. Rice. Who was he ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 163 

Mr. Daniel. Well, that is Robert Monue, you know, that I gave 
you while ago. 

Mr. Rice. He was doing all the business and you were doing all the 
banking ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, he had more than he could take care of. I think 
he went broke or something. All he had to do was to bring me the 
stuff and then I would bank it. 

Mr. Rice. You would bank it ? 

Mr. Daniel. That is all. Then I would bank it. 

Mr. Rice. Did he pay you anything? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did he lay-off to you ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir, I guess he had some of the money. You know 
what I mean. 

Mr. Rice. I have a list of bankers or peddlers who said that they 
worked for Angel Daniel : 

Frank Lito Arthur Robert Contrera Jonunco 

Nick Brice Arturo Rogriguez Lamino Adolfo 

Lawrence Lorenzo Bebe Sivo (Silvo) Garcia Peres 

Esteven Doniinguez Leroy Jenkins Tony Cagino 

Bill Bailey Fanio Toledo 

Albert Wingate Jose Ajaxes 

How do you account for that list being made up ? 

Mr. Daniel. How do you mean, how do I account for that list being 
made up? 

Mr. Rice. Do you want to say that you know nothing about those ? 

Mr. Daniel. They didn't work for me. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know any of them ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You know all of them, don't you ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Most of them ? 

Mr. Daniel. Most of the names? 

Mr. Rice. Most of the names you know? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Did they ever work for you ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did they turn in to you ? 

Mr. Daniel. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did they turn in to the man who worked for you ? 

Mr. Daniel. They didn't turn in to me. 

Mr. Rice. Possibly they turned in to the man who worked for you? 

Mr. Daniel. Not to me. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any pick-up man or turn-over man that 
worked for you ? 

Mr. Daniel. No. 

Mr. Rice. Do you consider that what you were doing was an illegal 
business ? 

Mr. Daniel. Probably not. 

Mr. Rice. Probably illegal? 

Mr. Daniel. Possibly banking bolita and selling it ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How do you account for the fact that law enforcement 
didn't catch up with you? You were never arrested, were you? 



164 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You have never been arrested ? 

Mr. Daniel. (No response.) 

Mr. Rice. I didn't hear your answer. 

Mr. Daniel. Well, that I don't remember, Mr. Rice, whether I have 
been arrested or not. 

Mr. Rice. Well, think about it a little bit. 

Mr. Daniel. Maybe I got a ticket or got picked up, or picked up a 
ticket here or there. 

Mr. Rice. A bolita ticket? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. All right. Tell us about when you were arrested. When 
was that ? 

Mr. Daniel. Oh, I guess maybe 4 or 5 months ago. 

Mr. Rice. Four or five months ago? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes. They gave me a ticket, and I went to the police 
station. 

Mr. Rice. Is that the only time you have ever been arrested? 

Mr. Daniel. That I can remember, yes. 

Mr. Rice. That you can what ? 

Mr. Daniel. That I can remember. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been fingerprinted ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever paid a fine ? 

Mr. Daniel. You mean a fine for 

Mr. Rice. Fined. Paid money to a judge for violation of the law? 

Mr. Daniel. Probably I have, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Probably. What was that for? ' 

Mr. Daniel. I forget ; for bolita, I believe. 

Mr. Rice. For bolita ; was that some years ago? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. You haven't been arrested for that for so long that you 
can't remember any more; is that right? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Did vou ever spend any time in jail ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How many nights? 

Mr. Daniel. I believe one night. 

Mr. Rice. That was a long time ago, wasn't it? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. You haven't been arrested since ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How do you account for that? You have been in the 
business all of that time ; you said you were in business for the last 
10 years? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I just haven't been arrested. I just haven't. 
You know what I mean. 

Mr. Rice. How do you arrange your protection, to keep from being 
arrested; whom do you pay? 

Mr. Daniel. To keep from what ? 

Mr. Rice. To keep from being arrested. 

Mr. Daniel. How do I arrange protection? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 165 

Mr. Daniel. I don't have any protection. 
Mr. Rick. You do not have any protection? 
Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do I take it that they don't have any law enforcement 
there in Tampa? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir ; they certainly do. 
Mr. Rice. How do you manage to escape that ? 
Mr. Daniel. I just manage to duck them ; that's all. 
Mr. Rice. All these other bankers manage to duck it too, don't 
they? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't say that, Mr. Rice ; no, sir. 
Mr. Rice. Do you know Sheriff Culbreath? 
Mr. Daniel. I do. 

Mr. Rice. Have you visited with him and talked with him? 
Mr. Daniel. No more than say hello or maybe in the jail there 
sometime, maybe trying to help a fellow out or something like that is 
locked up. Maybe something like that, cut his bond or something 
like that. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever met Sheriff Culbreath outside of his 
office, in the jail or courthouse? 

Mr. Daniel. Just in the courthouse there or maybe outside the 
jail. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever go to his home ? 
Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did he ever come to your home ? 
Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 
Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't know. I don't even know where the man 
lives. 

Mr. Rice. When you were down seeing the sheriff why was it 
necessary for him to see about getting a bolita peddler out? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, this boy they said they arrested him and got 
some $350 out of his pocket. He said would I go down and talk to 
the sheriff, and see if I could get him his money back, that's all. 
Mr. Rice. Did you help to get his money back ? 
Mr. Daniel. No. I would have to wait until his case was over. 
Mr. Rice. Did you go to the sheriff about that ? 
Mr. Daniel. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Why did the man come to you ? 

Mr. Daniel. 1 guess he thought I could go down and talk to the 
sheriff. 

Mr. Rice. Why did he think you had any influence with the sheriff? 
Mr. Daniel. That I couldn't say. 

Mr. Rice. As a matter of fact, he was one of the men who worked 
for you ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 
Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 
Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Who was the man that had the $350 ? 
Mr. Daniel. A man by the name of Frank Sanchez. 
Mr. Rice. Sanchez came to you for what reason ? 
Mr. Daniel. Sanchez, he didn't ; somebody else came to me and said, 
"Do you think you could go down there and talk to that sheriff and 
maybe get this boy's money back." 



166 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Kice. And you went down and talked to the sheriff ? 

Mr. Daniel. To get the money back ; that's right. 

Mr. Rice. Why do you think he came to you instead of going to a 
lawyer ? 

Mr. Daniel. I don't at all know about that, Mr. Eice, because the 
lawyer said, "You will have to wait until after the case is over" — 
probably they done that. 

Mr. Rice. You don't practice any law ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir; but I help anybody that gets into trouble, 
if I get a chance to help them. 

Mr. Rice. You go down and see the sheriff ? 

Mr. Daniel. Not the sheriff necessarily ; anybody else. 

Mr. Rice. Frank Sanchez, 2133 Walnut Street, apartment A; is 
that the man ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you. I don't know where he lives. 

Mr. Rice. I think that is where he is peddling now. He is a street 
peddler ; he lives there ; isn't that right ; he is still doing it ; isn't that 
right? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you about that, sir. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You say you never paid Sheriff Culbreath any money? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Directly or indirectly? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right, 

Mr. Rice. Have you been given any money by anyone to give to 
him? 

Mr. Daniel. I haven't ; no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You have not? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How about in his campaign ; did you support him in his 
campaign ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, how do you mean, did I support him ? 

Mr. Rice. Well, you know what support means, do you not? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Have you supported him in this campaign ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I didn't fool with politics the last time. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever made a campaign contribution? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. To anyone? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Indirectly? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. By giving it to someone else ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I take it that you didn't support Sheriff Culbreath ? 

Mr. Daniel. I didn't say I didn't. I didn't take any active part 
in it. 

Mr. Rice. Did you or didn't you ? 

Mr. Daniel. I didn't take any active part. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't take any active part in anyone else's cam- 
paign ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 167 

Mr. Daniel,. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How about Chief Beasley ? Do you know him ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever visited with him ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever gone in his house? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever given him any money ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How about Danny Alvarez; do you know him? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Of the police department? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you talked with him ? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I have been down there at the station and talked 
to him just about maybe different things, the situation there and poli- 
tics, maybe, something like that. 

Mr. Rice. You went down to the station and talked to Danny Alva- 
rez about politics? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I thought you didn't engage in politics? 

Mr. Daniel. Well, I just talked to him there but didn't engage 
in politics. We would go down there, when, say maybe an election 
was coming up for mayor, and we would talk to the policemen there. 

Mr. Rice. You would go down and talk to the policemen about 
an election coming up for mayor ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever given him any money or support for the 
mayor ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. For any reason; did you ever give him any money for 
any reason? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Wasn't Alvarez formerly in the bolita business ? 

Mr. Daniel. That I couldn't tell you, Mr. Rice. 

Mr. Rice. How about Constable Hackney ; did you visit him ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know him ? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir ; that is, I know him when I see him, something 
like that. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever talk with him ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How about K. C. Meyers, a deputy in the sheriff's office ? 

Mr. Daniel. I know who he is. 

Mr. Rice. Did you talk with him ? 

Mr. Daniel. No. sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever pay him any money ? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How about Canto ; did you pay him any money? 

Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you know Jimmy Velasco? 

Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What happened to him ? 



168 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Daniel. He got killed. 
Mr. Rice. What for ? 
Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you. 
Mr. Bice. You have no information on that ? 
Mr. Daniel. No. sir. 
Mr. Rice. He was murdered, was he not? 
Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And he was in the rackets, wasn't he ? 
Mr. Daniel. Well, I think he was. 

Mr. Rice. How about Jimmy Lumia, did you know him? 
Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever have any business transactions with him? 
Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 
Mr. Rice. What happened to him ? 
Mr. Daniel. He got killed. 

Mr. Rice. He was murdered last year, wasn't he ? 
Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 
Mr. Rice. Last summer ? 
Mr. Daniel. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever heard about the Mafia ? 
Mr. Daniel. Only what I have heard about it in the papers. 
Mr. Rice. What it is ; what did they say ? 
Mr. Daniel. Just said the Mafia. 
Mr. Rice. What was it ? 

Mr. Daniel. It just said the Mafia gang, that's all. 
Mr. Rice. The Mafia gang? 

Mr. Daniel. That's right ; just what I read in the paper. 
Mr. Rice. What did it mean ? 

Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that ; just what I read in the paper; 
that's all I know about it. 

Mr. Rice. You never discussed the Mafia with anyone? 
Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever hear it said that the Mafia was responsible 
for the murder of Velasco and Lumia ? 
Mr. Daniel. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What do you feel is the reason for their murder? 
Mr. Daniel. I couldn't tell you that, Mr. Rice. 
Mr. Rice. You can't ? 
Mr. Daniel. I really can't ; no, sir. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. I think we will excuse you for the moment. 
However, you will remain under subpena. 
Mr. Daniel. Thank you. 

TESTIMONY OF L. C. BOGGS, MAYOR, HOLLYWOOD, FLA. 

The Chairman. Mr. Boggs, do you solemnly swear before Almighty 
God that the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth? 

Mr. Boggs. I do. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Boggs, you were served with a subpena duces tecum ? 

Mr. Boggs. I was served a subpena duces tecum this morning about 
half -past 12 ; otherwise I would have been here. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 169 

Mr. Moser. Did you bring the records requested in the subpena? 

Mr. Boggs. As far as I could ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What do they consist of ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, income taxes — income-tax returns. 

Mr. Moser. Do you have them here ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Will you turn them over to a member of our staff, Mr. 
Boggs? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. Now, they are not complete, inasmuch as you 
people have asked for them, because I didn't have time to get it all up. 

Mr. Moser. All right, sir ; we will call you later after we have had 
an opportunity to examine the records. You are excused for the 
moment. 

Mr. Boggs. All right, sir. 

(Witness temporarily excused.) 

The Chairman. Will the hearing please come to order. 

Mr. Moser. Yesterday we had a dope addict up here who testified. 
We stipulated that under no circumstances was her picture to be taken. 
Television was to be off. The radio could be on. Her name was not 
to be revealed and it was understood that anybody present who knew 
the name would not reveal it. We are now going to have a series of 
drug addicts who will testify and the stipulation will apply. 

Let me make it clear that no pictures of any kind are to be taken, 
no television of the addicts, including the back, will be on, and no one 
will reveal the names of the witnesses under any circumstances. 

The Chairman. I think it only fair to say that we have received 
100-percent cooperation from the television, the newsreel, and the press 
and the radio — in fact, everyone. We think they have been most 
cooperative in this regard. 

Mr. Moser. Will you please lean over and state your name to the 
reporter ? 

The Chairman. Do you before Almighty God solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth ? 

The Witness. I do. 

(Note. — The witness gave his name to the reporter.) 

TESTIMONY OF DRUG ADDICT "B" 

Mr. Moser. How old are you ? 

The Witness. Twenty-three. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you go to school ? 

The Witness. Philadelphia. 

Mr. Moser. You come from Philadelphia? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever smoked marijuana? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. How old were you when you started using it? 

The Witness. Well, it was 4 years ago in Miami. 

Mr. Moser. So you were about 19 years old ? 

The Witness. Nineteen. 

Mr. Moser. Were other friends of yours smoking at the same time ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 



170 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Was it quite common among your circle of friends ? 

The Witness. Well, these people that I was associated with at the 
time, with them it was quite common. That is how I came in contact 
with it. 

Mr. Moser. Through your friends ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever used heroin ? 

The Witness. Well, after using marijuana, through marijuana, I 
came in contact with heroin. 

Mr. Moser. Is that because the people who used heroin were also 
hanging around with people who used marijuana? 

The Witness. Well, because marijuana is an article that is a drug 
and the type of people who hide from the law use marijuana and use 
heroin because they hide from the law also and because they are both 
hiding from the law, you come in contact with them. • 

Mr. Moser. So that anyone who starts using marijuana is pretty 
likely to wind up using heroin ? 

The Witness. They come into contact with the heroin users. I feel 
that marijuana — it isn't the marijuana but through the use of mari- 
juana, the experience that I had with it, and the different things that 
happen, I don't feel that you get any yen or bad feeling when you don't 
have it, like you do with the drug heroin. 

Mr. Moser. I want you to limit your answers just to the questions 
I ask you. 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Will you tell me the sources from which you obtained 
the heroin? You don't have to identify anybody. Don't give any- 
body's name, but tell me the type of people that you got it from. Did 
you get it from peddlers? 

The Witness. Peddlers. 

Mr. Moser. Street peddlers ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. I would go to difFerent neighborhoods 
where they frequent and I would find the so-called connections there. 

Mr. Moser. In what cities did you buy heroin from peddlers ? 

The Witness. In Philadelphia. 

Mr. Moser. Does it come from Philadelphia or does it come from 
some other place ? 

The Witness. I imagine the heioin I used came from New York. 

Mr. Moser. Did anybody tell you where you could find it ? 

The Witness. I imagine everybody that is in the eastern part of 
the country knows that it comes from New York. 

Mr. Moser. How much does it cost in New York ? 

The Witness. It ranges around $3 a capsule. 

Mr. Moser. $3 a capsule ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You have been arrested for narcotics, a narcotics 
charge ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Where were you sent to prison ? 

The Witness. I was put on probation. 

Mr. Moser. You were put on probation ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir 

Mr. Moser. And then what? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 171 

The Witness. Then later my family felt that I was using drugs, 
and they reported me to the probation officer and I was sent to a 
house of correction. 

Mr. Moser. Where was that ? 

The Witness. Holmesburg. 

Mr. Moser. Pennsylvania? 

The Witness. Pennsylvania. 

Mr. Moser. Did you receive any treatment there ? 

The Witness. No treatment at all. It was just do your time there 
and you are away from drugs; as far as treatments, I didn't receive 
any. It was "cold turkey." 

Mr. Moser. The phrase "cold turkey" means that you were taken 
off of drugs, cold ? 

The Witness. Cold turkey; it is called cold turkey because you get 
goose pimples when 3^011 are not using the narcotics; you gat cold 
flashes. That is where the term "cold turkey" comes from. 

Mr. Moser. You were thrown in with other inmates there; were 
you? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. What was the effect of that? 

The Witness. Well, I don't feel that it did me any good, by me being 
thrown in with these different drug addicts, who, at the time, were 
older than I was. At the time I only knew maybe three or four fel- 
lows that used it at my age, and through being in prison, you meet all 
these other fellows in different connections, and they taught me all 
the other things that I shouldn't have known. Even mentioning it 
here would be tough on people that might come in contact with nar- 
cotics, and the more you know about it the worse it is, the more you 
know about it. Actually, you want to know the score when you are 
using it. 

Mr. Moser. The word "score" means knowing where to buy it? 

The Witness. Where to buy it and get it cheaper. 

Mr. Moser. How much did the drugs cost you when you were at 
the height of your habit? 

The Witness. I spent as much as — I bought like $15 worth at a time, 
and it would last me maybe a day or two. $30 to $50 a day at the 
highest. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you get the money to buy it ? 

The Witness. I was an automobile salesman at the time. 

Mr. Moser. And you made enough money to buy it ? 

The Witness. Anywhere from $200 to 300 a week, but I would spend 
all the money I had on narcotics. It took everything I had. 

Mr. Moser. Everything you could get you would spend on it ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Do you want to say anything about the life of a narcotic 
user ? 

The Witness. It is not a good life. You never have enough nar- 
cotics, and you keep building up a tolerance ; you use more and more. 
You can't make it go down. Your want for it gets stronger and 
stronger, and you know it is no good, and you have the trouble of 
buying; you have trouble using it, and you have trouble getting the 
money, and you have trouble with kicking the habit. 

85277— 51— pt. 16 12 



172 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. "Kicking the habit" means getting rid of it? 

The Witness. Getting rid of it. It is trouble all around. It is not 
a good life at all. 

Mr. Moser. Did you know when you started using heroin that you 
might get hooked? 

The Witness. No. The first time I had it, I was fooled. I didn't 
know it was heroin. The people who were using it told me that it was 
something else, and I tried it and, evidently, I liked it, and I got 
"hooked" after using it, playing with it, you know, maybe once or 
twice a month, and then as time went on I did it Monday and then 
Monday and Tuesday, and then Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, 
and then 4 days in a row, until finally I was using it every day. 
Finally I felt bad when I woke up. I knew I needed it. My system 
did not feel like it was satisfied. 

Mr. Moser. Do you feel that if other people knew about it, knew the 
life of an addict, they wouldn't use it ? 

The Witness. I feel that I don't want to live the life of an addict. 
I hate it. I hate it while I use it. I hate it while I see it, now that 
I am not an addict ; but I feel like I have a yen occasionally to take 
one, like a cheater, what you would call just one, but you can't cheat 
because it is one and then one more and before you know it you are 
using it every day. I say you have to leave it alone altogether before 
you can stop using it. 

Mr. Moser. Thank you very much. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF DHUG ADDICT "C" 

(Name and address of this witness privately given to the reporter by the wit- 
ness.) 

The Chairman. You have given your name and address to the 
official reporter, have you not ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God do you solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth ? 

The Witness. I do. 

Mr. Moser. What is your age ? 

The Witness. I will be — I am 32. 

Mr. Moser. Are you married ? 

The Witness. I am married ? 

Mr. Moser. When did you first start using drugs ? 

The Witness. I would say 1942 is when I became addicted. 

Mr. Moser. So that you have been addicted for about 9 years? 

The Witness. About, I would say, Sy 2 or 4 years ago I came down 
here, and I had a successful cure. 

Mr. Moser. A successful cure ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. I was off for almost a year. 

Mr. Moser. Then you went back on again ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. It was not permanently successful ? 

The Witness. Well 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 173 

Mr. Moser. You don't have to answer that. Did you ever use mari- 
juana? 

The Witness. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Moser. You were using marijuana before heroin? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Were many people you knew using it ? 

The Witness. I think most everybody I knew. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you live? 

The Witness. In New York. 

Mr. Moser. In New York City ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How old were you when you started using marijuana? 

The Witness. Well, probably 17. 

Mr. Moser. Were you in school ? 

The Witness. Yes ; I was in high school. 

Mr. Moser. And many of the children in high school were using it? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. A lot of people you knew were using it, though not 
necessarily in school? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. A lot of people that I frequented with. 

Mr. Moser. You have used morphine, have you? 

The Witness. Yes, sir ; I have. 

Mr. Moser. How did you happen to start using it? 

The Witness. Well, I was given morphine at first because I was ill 
in an institution, a hospital, Public Health Service hospital. 

Mr. Moser. Then later you switched to heroin ? 

The Witness. That is correct. 

Mr. Moser. How much heroin did you use when — before I ask you 
that, you have been in prison, have you not ? 

The Witness. I have. 

Mr. Moser. Would you mind stating where you first went to prison? 

The Witness. First to Leavenworth, then to Lexington. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have any contact with drugs at Leavenworth ? 

The Witness. None whatsoever. 

Mr. Moser. Did you learn then anything about the drugs at Leaven- 
worth ? 

The Witness. Yes, I did ; everything. 

Mr. Moser. Everything? 

The Witness. Well, everything; that is talked about all day." 

Mr. Moser. They talk about it a great deal in prison ? 

The Witness. That is all they talk about, outside of women, I guess. 

Mr. Moser. You have been on and off the habit for 9 years? 

The Witness. I would say that is approximately right. 

Mr. Moser. And where were you living mostly, in New York City ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Was heroin hard to buy in New York City ? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you buy it; from what kind of a source, 
street peddlers ? 

The Witness. From street peddlers ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever go to a place to buy it or is it always 
bought from a street peddler? 



174 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Witness. Either a street peddler or you make some arrange- 
ments for delivery. It is not difficult. 

Mr. Moser. When did you last buy them in New York? 

The Witness. I think I came here I would say about the beginning 
of last month. 

Mr. Moser. And it was still easy to get in New York ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How do you find the peddler when you want one? 

The Witness. Well, I should say that you graduate into him and 
then afterward you don't have any difficulty in finding him. He finds 
you. 

Mr. Moser. 1 ou became a regular customer ? 

The Witness. Well, I mean you are in it; and that's it. 

Mr. Moser. Has your wife been addicted? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did both you become addicted at the same time ? 

The Witness. No. I was off, as I say, for a year, and then she was 
addicted for about 8 or 9 months previous to that. 

jyir. Moser. How much did you and your wife together pay for 
heroin when you got to the height of your habit; what is the worst 
that you got to ? 

The Witness. From about $150 to $180 per day. 

Mr. Moser. For the two of you ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

The Chairman. Were you in debt for the purchase of it? I don't 
suppose you were able to pay cash at all times. What is the largest 
amount for which you have gotten in debt? 

The Witness. I haven't figured it out correctly, but I imagine close 
to $30,000. 

Mr. Moser. Is that indebtedness mostly to peddlers that you 
couldn't pay but who let you have it on credit? 

The Witness. Whom you could only pay so much, and they took 
what they could get. 

Mr. Moser. I think you told me that sometimes that they got up to 
$200 per day ? 

The Witness. Up to $180. It averaged, in plain words, about an 
ounce a day ; sometimes a little more. 

Mr. Moser. Did you take heroin by in-shots ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Not vein shots ? 

The Witness. That is correct. 

Mr. Moser. In-shots? 

The Witness. This past time. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever done vein shots ? 

The Witness. Yes ; I have. 

The Chairman. That is all main line? 
, The Witness. Yes ; that's correct. 

Mr. Moser. A main line direct into the vein ? 

The Witness! That's correct. 

Mr. Moser. What has been the general effect of this upon your 
body? h l ^ 

The Witness. I am dehydrated; in plain words, it has done every- 
thing but do me any good. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 175 

Mr. Moser. Have you any scars ? 

The Witness. You mean veins? Is that what you have in mind? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

The Witness. I have had no veins for 5 years ; I mean not super- 
ficial. 

Mr. Moser. Skin scars? 

The Witness. Yes ; not from the heroin particularly but from what- 
ever is mixed in with it, probably the quinine. 

Mr. Moser. You have scars from contaminated needles and drugs? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Contaminated drugs? 

The Witness. Definitely the drugs. 

Mr. Moser. That causes an infection of some kind ? 

The Witness. Correct. You get either an abscess or a burn. It 
burns out the tissue. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever taken any cures? You said you had 
been cured once, Mr. ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How many times have you taken cures ? 

The Witness. I have tried, I would say, about 15 different times. 

Mr. Moser. Fifteen different times you have taken cures? 

The Witness. Yes ; about eight of them in sanitoriums. 

Mr. Moser. In private sanitariums? 

The Witness. Yes ; and five or six myself, which is impossible. 

Mr. Moser. You have ti ied to take them voluntarily ? 

The Witness. That is correct. 

Mr. Moser. Did you try to stay off the drug? 

The Witness. Nobody wants to be on the drug after 6 months. 

Mr. Moser. You are always struggling to get off? 

The Witness. Well, I mean, it is like a fish on the hook. 

The Chairman. But then it mostly is too late? 

The Witness. I mean that's it. 

Mr. Moser. Tell us about the private hospitalization you had for a 
cure ? 

The Witness. Well, the private hospitalization, quite naturally, is 
not similar to free hospitalization ; it is expensive. I think my first 
week's bills for medication was $208 at a local sanitorium. 

Mr. Moser. For yourself alone or for yourself and your wife ? 

The Witness. The two of us. 

Mr. Moser. $208 for the two of you ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What is the total cost of hospitalization per week? 

The Witness. I would say so far in the past 6 weeks it has cost me 
about $1,500 or $1,600, and I probably owe about $700, $800, $900, 
$1,000, $1,100. 

Mr. Moser. What does the treatment consist of, just a reduction 
process ? 

The Witness. Yes; it is a reduction process. 

Mr. Moser. But you spent approximately $400 a day; is that the 
cost? 

The Witness. No. I spent from $150 to $180. 

Mr. Moser. I mean for the treatment? 

The Witness. No ; per day. 



176 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Per week I mean. 

The Witness. Well, I would say it averaged around $350. 

Mr. Moser. How long has it been since you last had a shot ? 

The Witness. I haven't had a shot, I would say, in about 7 or 8 days, 
and I haven't had an opiate in about over a month, that is, anything 
that is derived from opium. 

Mr. Moser. That is because you have been down here for treatment ; 
is that correct ? 

The Witness. That's correct, sir. 

Mr. Moser. I think that is all we have. You are excused. Thank 
you. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF DRUG PEDDLER "A" 

(Note. — Name and address of this witness privately given by the witness 
to the official court reporter. ) 

The Chairman. Do you before Almighty God solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth ? 

The Witness. I do, sir. 

Mr. Moser. I understand that you are now under arrest for the 
sale of marijuana; is that correct? 

The Witness. I copped a plea for information. 

The Chairman. Speak louder, please. 

The Witness. I copped a plea for information. 

Mr. Moser. But you were arrested for possession of marijuana? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Will you tell us something about how much marijuana 
is being used in this area ? 

The Witness. Well, from my idea, I know that there is very little 
consumption so far as the colored section is concerned. I would have 
no way of knowing how much has come in from other sources because 
we have no way to socialize with the whites, and we couldn't know 
about them. 

Mr. Moser. You merely know about the colored, and they don't 
use a great deal ? 

The Witness. That's right, not too much in the colored section, 
because they have no direct contact to get it. 

Mr. Moser. Where does it come from ? 

The Witness. Well, usually through banana boats. 

Mr. Moser. Banana boats? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Where do they come from? 

The Witness. Well, South America mostly, the Latin-American 
countries. 

Mr. Moser. Does any of it come in on airplanes? 

The Witness. Well, it has been reported that they are sources, and 
I couldn't confirm it and say it is exactly but I do hear it comes from 
airplanes. 

Mr. Moser. Does any of the marijuana come from up north? 

The Witness. Well, I couldn't say that there was. 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 177 

Mr. Moser. I believe you told one of our investigators that you 
knew sources from which it came up north. We are not going to ask 
you any of the sources, but we would like to know the places from 
which it comes. 

The Witness. Well, by being in contact with a few marijuana 
users, you hear that it comes from different sources; you know how 
a grapevine is ; it comes from different sources. 

Mr. Moser. Where do y ou hear that it comes from ? 

The Witness. The major part of it comes in by the banana boats. 

Mr. Moser. Do you think any of it comes from the north? 

The Witness. Well, I don't think so. I think they get enough, 
I assume. I imagine they get enough from sources here. 

Mr. Moser. All right. Thank you. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF DRUG PEDDLER "B" 

(Note. — This witness gave her name to the court reporter.) 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God do you solemnly swear that 
the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth and 
nothing but the truth? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. The rear camera may be on during this testimony, but 
not the others. You are on probation, are you not ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. What was the charge? 

The Witness. Marijuana and morphine. 

Mr. Moser. Sale and possession of marijuana and morphine? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Will you keep your voice up, so that all may hear. Are 
you an addict yourself? 

The Witness. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. The charge against you is only for the possession and 
sale? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know where the drugs come from? 

The Witness. Well, I do some of them. I do know where some 
comes from. 

Mr. Moser. You do know where some come from ? Miss — , do 

you know about morphine drugs ? 

The Witness. At that time I knew where it comes from. 

Mr. Moser. At that time? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You mean at the time you were arrested ? 

The Witness. At the time I had it. 

Mr. Moser. How long ago was that? 

The Witness. Well, around 6 or 7 months. 

Mr. Moser. Where did it come from at that time? Six months 
ago. 

The Witness. Habana. 

Mr. Moser. How was it brought in ? 

The Witness. By plane. 



178 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Do you know who brought it in? I don't mean to 
identify names, but what type of person brought it in; was it brought 
in by pilots, for example? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Is it brought in by American pilots? 

The Witness. No, it was Cuban. 

Mr. Moser. Did they bring it in regularly ? 

The Witness. Well, I can't say that. At that time he told me 
he had friendly planes but he usually brings it. 

The Chairman. To the best of your knowledge was it brought in 
in large quantities? 

The Witness. I believe so. 

The Chairman. Do you know anything about importation of 
marijuana? 

The Witness. Yes, I know where it comes from, too. 

The Chairman. Where ? 

The Witness. South America, and especially San Martin. 

The Chairman. Does that come by airplane? 

The Witness. Boats. 

The Chairman. What kind of boats ? 

The Witness. Banana boats. 

The Chairman. Is it brought in by the crews ? 

The Witness. Yes. I can't tell you that ; you don't know. I know 
it comes, but I don't know if they are crewmen or passengers or, you 
know 

The Chairman. But people on the boats bring it in? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. May I ask you another question? At the time when 
it is brought in here and it is obtained by somebody like yourself, how 
do you sell it ; how do you find customers for it ? 

The Witness. In my special 

Mr. Moser. In your own case. 

The Witness. In my own case the fellow that brought it in, I keep 
it for him, and if I could find somebody to sell it to he said I could 
keep the money; so I know a lot of people at that time that like it, 
and they come over and talk about it, so I gave it to them. At that 
time I didn't take it. 

Mr. Moser. A little later? 

The Witness. Yes. 

The Chairman. How did you know the people that you say were 
using it ? 

The Witness. Well, they were introduced to me. At first I didn't 
know they used it, you know, but later on I get to know they use it. 

The Chairman. How did others learn that you had some and that 
they could get it from you ? 

The Witness. Maybe they know because someone told them. 

Mr. Moser. How did you know to whom it was safe to sell it? 

The Witness. Well, I don't know if it was safe or not. In fact, it 
wasn't safe. 

Mr. Moser. You sold some to a Federal agent, did you not? 

The Witness. No, I didn't. 

Mr. Moser. Anyway, what we are trying to find out is how you 
found out who the purchasers would be, who the potential customers 
were. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 179 

The Witness. I only had one customer and he came over and asked 
me, and he said that he knew that I had some and he needed some pretty 
badly, so I gave it to him. 

Mr. Moser. You don't know what he did with it? 

The Witness. You know when a person uses drugs. You can know 
by only looking at them. 

Mr. Moser. You knew he was a user ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You didn't sell any to any of the others ? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Just that one? 

The Witness. Yes. 

The Chairman. How many persons altogether that you knew had 
been using it, and you said you learned of the fact that they were 
using it — of these people how many altogether knew that you had it ? 

The Witness. But it was only one person at that time that knew I 
had it. 

The Chairman. Didn't you say before that you had known of a 
number who liked it and had been using it? 

The Witness. Well, everyone knows, you know, around here. You 
know that lots of boys go around using it, but not that I know them 
personally. I can tell if you do or this one does or that one does. 

The Chairman. I just meant as to the number. 

The Witness. Oh, well, there is quite a few. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. That is all. You are 
excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF MARIJUANA SMOKER "A" 

Mr. Moser. For this next witness the camera may be on in the back, 
but none of the others. 

The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand and be sworn? 
Do you, before Almighty "God, solemnly swear that the testimony you 
will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? 

The Witness. I do. 
(Note. — This witness gave his name and address privately to the court reporter.) 

The Chairman. I might state at the outset that the statement by 
Mr. A. Allen Lane, a member of the bar of New York City, has been 
fiied, and Mr. Lane has cooperated with the committee's request that 
it be incorporated in the record. We will be very glad to do that. 

Mr. Lane. Thank you. 

Mr. Moser. What is your age? 

The Witness. Twenty-one. 

Mr. Moser. Do you use marijuana? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. When did you start ? 

The Witness. About a year ago. 

Mr. Moser. Where were you when you started using it ? 

The Witness. Miami. 

Mr. Moser. You never used it in New York ? 

The Witness. Yes ; New York. 

Mr. Moser. You did use it in New York before you came here? 



180 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you go to school? 

The Witness. University of Miami. 

Mr. Moser. Did you use it there ? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. You did not use it there? 

The Witness. Not at the university. 

Mr. Moser. You did not use it on the premises of the university? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Not on the campus? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. You did use it while you were attending the university, 
however ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Were other students using it? 

The Witness. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Moser. None at all. 

The Witness. Not to my knowledge, while I was going there. 

Mr. Moser. Were any of your friends using it ? 

The Witness. Yes. \ 

Mr. Moser. A group of you lived together ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How many of you were there ? 

The Witness. There were three of us living together. 

Mr. Moser. Two or three of you living together. 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And you were all about the same age? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Approximately 20 years old? 

The Witness. The others were a little older. 

Mr. Moser. And they were not students of the university? 

The Witness. They were graduates. 

Mr. Moser. They were alumni, resident graduates ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Was the use of marijuana quite prevalent where you 
were ? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Just a few of you? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you get the marijuana that you used? 

The Witness. Well, the only operator 

The Chairman. Please keep your voice up. 

The Witness. The only marijuana that I used was growing in 
my back yard. 

Mr. Moser. You were using marijuana that grew in your back 
yard ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You didn't buy any from any other sources? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Who grew it? 

The Witness. My roommate. 

Mr. Moser. Where did he get the seed ? 

The Witness. I don't know. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 181 

Mr. Moser. But he planted it? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did you help him? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. What happened when it grew up ? 

The Witness. We would take it into the house and put it in the 
oven for about 6 minutes. 

Mr. Moser. Curing it? 

The Witness. Yes ; and then we would smoke it. 

Mr. Moser. When it was dry you would smoke the leaves ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How much did you grow, a lot of it ? 

The Witness. Well, there were 150 plants. 

Mr. Moser. 150 plants. 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. I believe you told our investigators that you had also 
used it when you were in New York; is that correct? 

The Witness. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Were you a student at school ? 

The Witness. Yes ; New York University. 

Mr. Moser. When was that? 

The Witness. From September until February of this year. 

Mr. Moser. Was it used very much there ? 

The Witness. No ; not at all, as far as I was concerned. 

Mr. Moser. Nobody else in school used it? 

The Witness. Nobody that I knew. 

Mr. Moser. None of your friends used it either ? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. You just used it all by yourself? 

The Witness. Well, no. None of my friends from the university — 
New York University — used it. 

Mr. Moser. Friends on the outside did ; is that correct ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How many ; were there many ? 

The Witness. No. 

Mr. Moser. Just a handful ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. That is all. 

Mr. Lane. May we be excused ? 

The Chairman. Yes, sir, and we are obliged to you for your fine 
cooperation. 

(Witness excused.) 

TESTIMONY OF MARIJUANA SMOKER "B" 

The Chairman. Will you give your name and address to the re- 
porter ? 

(Note. — Witness gave his name and address to the reporter.) 

The Chairman. Before Almighty God, do you swear that the testi- 
mony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 
the truth? 

The Witness. I do. 

Mr. Moser. What is your age ? 



182 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Witness. Twenty-five. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you go to school ? 

The Witness. University of Miami. 

Mr. Moser. How long did you go there ? 

The Witness. Three years. 

Mr. Moser. Did you graduate? 

The Witness. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Moser. While you were there did you use marijuana? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you use it very much ? 

The Witness. Well, what do you mean by "very much" ? 

Mr. Moser. How often ? 

The Witness. Oh, occasionally. I would say several days a week; 
sometimes I would use it for a period of a month or so ? 

Mr. Moser. Several times a week for perhaps a month ? 

The Witness. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. And in what form, cigarettes ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Reefers, as you call them? 

The Witness. That is what they were known as in some circles. 

Mr. Moser. Were other people that you knew using them ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. In the same house where you lived ? 

The Witness. Yes, they were. 

Mr. Moser. How many people were living in the house ? 

The Witness. Are you speaking of recently or 

Mr. Moser. Well, let us take the year 1950. 

The Witness. 1950? 

Mr. Moser. Were you at the university then % 

The Witness. Yes, I was. 

Mr. Moser. And you were living where ; living in a private home ? 

The Witness. In 1950 I was living in an apartment with two other 
boys. 

Mr. Moser. Two others. 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did they use it? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. In about the same amount you did ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Were they students at the university ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Were other students as far as you know using it? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Quite a few students — quite a few other students ? 

The Witness. Yes ; well, in my acquaintance I knew roughly 15 to 20 
who were. 

Mr. Moser. They were students at the university ; were they ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have any friends on the outside who used it? 

The Witness. A few, yes. 

Mr. Moser. How many? 
_ The Witness. On the outside of the university — outside of univer- 
sity students ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 183 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

The Witness., Maybe a dozen people. 

Mr. Moser. How did you happen to start using it? 

The Witness. Well, one of the fellows I roomed with at first was a 
musician and he offered to let me try it once, and since I am a writer 
1 was rather curious to find out its effect, so I did try it. 

Mr. Moser. So that you got a start through association with people 
that were using it ? 

The Witness. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. In 1951 where did you live? 

The Witness. I lived in Miami. 

Mr. Moser. In a house ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. With other people? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. A group of boys? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Were they students at the university? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. All of them? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How old were they ? 

The Witness. Their ages ranged from 22 to 25-. 

Mr. Moser. Did any of them use marijuana besides yourself? 

The Witness. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Moser. A lot of them ? 

The Witness. All of them. 

Mr. Moser. They all did? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did any of your friends come there and smoke mari- 
juana while they were there? 

The W t itness. Well, people would drop in from time to time and 
use it. 

Mr. Moser. Quite a few? 

The Witness. Well, there were a lot of people dropping in. 

Mr. Moser. Do you sometimes have parties there? 

The Witness. Occasionally, yes. 

Mr. Moser. At those parties did these people smoke marijuana? 

The Witness. These weren't organized parties. Sometimes a group 
of six or seven people would be over to the house, and then we would 
use it. 

Mr. Moser. You would all use it? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did anybody that came to your house ever use heroin? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did any of boys living with you use it? 

The Witness. That lived with us ; no. 

Mr. Moser. They didn't ? 

The Witness. No ; but some of the visitors did. 

Mr. Moser. Did they use it very much ? 

The Witness. I don't know. I was kind of adverse to the use of it; 
and once they know that you don't approve of the use of it, they will 
try to keep from using it. 



184 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. They don't approve ? 

The Witness. On one occasion I was offered it, urged to try it. 

Mr. Moser. They urged you to try it ? 
The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. They did ? 

The Witness. Yes. But if you are strongly opposed to it, then they 
won't bother you again. 

Mr. Moser. At the start where did you get the marijuana that you 
used at that time ? 

The Witness. From this musician friend of mine. 

Mr. Moser. Did he give them to you or sell them to you ? 

The Witness. Gave them to me. 

Mr. Moser. After that where did you get them ? 

The Witness. Mostly from him. He would come into the house 
with them and later on we would start buying it in bulk. 

Mr. Moser. From him ? 

The Witness. No; not particularly from him; he was the first one 
that I knew and eventually my range of friends who used it got 
larger and eventually you could get it from different sources. 

Mr. Moser. What kind of sources ? I am not asking you to identify 
them, but what type of sources were they? 

The Witness. I was never really acquainted with the initial sources ; 
but some of them were people living in the colored section of town. 
There was at least one that I know of on Miami Beach and one that 
I know of in Miami, one or two. 

Mr. Moser. Where on the beach ? You mean on the street? 

The Witness. No ; living in one of the hotels over there. 

The Chairman. I would like to ask you just a question or two 
about the parties which you say you had, which were attended by 
about half a dozen or so. 

The Witness. Yes. 

The Chairman. Did they use it at the same time? 

The Witness. Well, if there were a half dozen people there, they 
might light two or three cigarettes and pass them around. 

The Chairman. And they used each one in turn ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

The Chairman. With regard to the sources of their supply, would 
you have any information as to whether they had secured it from 
different sources, whether they had been previously supplied from 
different sources? 

The Witness. Well, most of our sources, of the people I knew, were 
restricted to maybe three or four sources. 

Mr. Moser. Were those sources in places like apartments where you 
would go and get it ? 

The Witness. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. You would have to know where to go and get it ? 

The Witness. That's right. I myself didn't know but I knew people 
who did, and they would get it for me. They are very reluctant to 
give you telephone numbers or addresses. The people who did it, the 
people who did know, would get it. 

Mr. Moser. They were peddlers or friends ? 

The Witness. Friends ; yes. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 185 

Mr. Moser. You never went with them? 

The Witness. On several occasions 1 went along just for the ride. 

Mr. Moser. So you knew roughly where some of them were ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You said there were some places in Greater Miami, too ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. More than one ? 

The Witness. I knew of at least two definitely. 

Mr. Moser. Were they ever bought on the street ? 

The Witness. On the street ; yes. 

Mr. Moser. You can buy reefers on the street? 

The Witness. You can arrange to meet one on the street, and he 
would pick you up in his car or you could pick him up in your car, 
and thetransaction would take place in the automobile. 

Mr. Moser. Were you involved in this business of growing mari- 
juana in the back yard ? 

The Witness. I was slightly involved ; yes. 

Mr. Moser. How did that happen? 

The Witness. Well, we had accumulated some seeds and at this time 
there was no marijuana at all available. It was very hard to get, 
and we decided to experiment with the seeds and see if they could be 
grown. 

Mr. Moser. How long ago was that? 

The Witness. This was about — let's see — it started about 5 months 
ago. 

Mr. Moser. So you did grow it in the back yard ? 

The Witness. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And you did that because it had become hard to get; 
the peddlers had disappeared ; is that right ? 

The Witness. Either they had disappeared or were not getting it 
themselves, or they refused to sell. I don't know what the reason was. 
We didn't go into that. 

Mr. Moser. Did the university know about any of this, or suspected 
it? 

The Witness. I don't believe so. I don't think the university did. 

Mr. Moser. I was wondering if the university was responsible for 
making it hot for the peddlers ? 

The Witness. I don't think so. 

Mr. Moser. You don't think they knew it ? , 

The Witness. If they did, I never heard such rumors. 

Mr. Moser. I believe you said that quite a few other students at 
the university whom you knew used it ? 

The Witness. Yes ; quite a few. 

Mr. Moser. Would you say that it is a very prevalent practice at 
the university. 

The Witness. It is difficult to say. I heard rumors that there were 
a great number of people. I don't know who is using it, and I can't 
say for sure, I just knew the people that I know. 

Mr. Moser. I believe that is all that I want to ask you. 
The Chairman. Thank you very much. You are excused. 

(Witness excused.) 



186 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

FURTHER TESTIMONY OF HARRY 0. VOILER, MIAMI BEACH, FLA. 

The Chairman. Is Mr. Voiler here ? 

A Voice From the Audience. He is available outside. I will get 
him. 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, yon have requested an opportunity to 
appear again before the committee, have you ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You may be seated. 

Mr. Voiler. May I address the Chair, please ? 

The Chairman. Will you just be seated ? Have you a further state- 
ment to make in regard to the transaction that you were questioned 
about yesterday ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think I have a statement to make to the Chair rela- 
tive to what transpired here yesterday. May I continue please ? 

The Chairman. Just a minute. The announcement was made at 
the outset of the day's session as to what we planned to do in respect 
to the matter, and we, therefore, without reopening if necessary, 
would like to hear from you as to what phase of the matter you desire 
lo speak to us about. Do you wish to submit a written statement 
first? 

Mr. Voiler. No. I think I would like to express my thoughts to 
the Chair. My thoughts are in conjunction with what transpired here, 
the evidence as it was presented to this committee. 

The Chairman. Now, is the statement that you have before you 

Mr. Voiler. Would you care to read this, yourself ? 

Hie Chairman. Yes. 

(Statement handed to chairman.) 

The Chairman. The committee is ready to hear you. 

Mr. Voiler. May I read my statement to the committee, please? 

The Chairman. Yes. You would prefer to do it that way rather 
than have the statement included in the record in toto ? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; I would prefer to speak, myself. 

The Chairman. Well, I would like to give you the opportunity; 
but you have to read the notes in order to 

Mr. Voiler. I would like to know 

The Chairman. You couldn't give it without referring to the 
notes ? 

Mr. Voiler. I wrote it for that purpose, so that we would make no 
mistake. 

The Chairman. You, of course, understand, Mr. Voiler, that your 
oath which was given yesterday still applies today ? 

Mr. Voiler. Definitely, definitely. 

Mr. Chairman, I first met Oreeta Yelverton in the latter part of 
December 1949. She had been married to Leo Martin prior to that 
time, but had been divorced but immediately afterward married Mr. 
Shortridge. That was prior to the time when she divorced Shortridge 
and later married Carroll. Carroll would be her fifth husband, ac- 
cording to what she told me. Baise and Baxa were her two first 
husbands. I never saw Rita or Carroll or Shortridge or Martin ex- 
cept on four occasions. The first time was in the Morning Mail plant 
in December of 1949. She was with Leo Martin and they talked with 
me for a while at the plant. They came in and asked me to show them 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 187 

the place, which I did. I explained everything to them and they 
left after about an hour. 

I next saw her 2 days later by herself at the plant. She came in 
to tell me that this was the most fascinating business she had ever 
seen. I took her around. She chatted with Mrs. Voiler, ami then 
she asked me if I would be interested in selling the business. I told 
her that if the right people came along I would sell 50 percent. She 
says she had a friend in New York who would be highly interested. 
I gave her the details, and presently we talked a while longer and she 
went home. 

Martin's name was never mentioned once, was never once men- 
tioned, during this conversation. The next day she called on the phone 
and asked me to have dinner with her and the friend. I said I would 
be delighted. She came in with Mr. Martin. She came with Mr. 
Martin, and they picked us up. We went to a restaurant on Coral 
Way in Miami. We stayed there until 11 : 30 p. m. There was no 
discussion about the plant. At 11 : 30 she drove us home. I thanked 
them and they drove away. 

As we were going upstairs, Mrs. Voiler remarked that we should 
reciprocate. We invited them to dinner for the following week. She 
came to see me the next day, however, and she said that she was 
confident that she would get her New York friend to purchase the 
50-percent interest, but she never did. 

I defy this lady to show a promissory note I ever gave to Accardo 
or Martin. I defy her to show when Martin or Accardo ever gave 
me as much as 5 cents. I defy her to state any place where she gave 
me money, or Martin or Accardo ever gave me money. If I ever 
gave a note and there was a consideration for the note, I can assure 
this committee I have never been sued for collection. Nor have I 
ever paid any money in payment therefor, nor have I ever given a 
note to Martin or Accardo. 

Gentlemen, why didn't one of you ask where the money was turned 
over to me — what was the denomination of the bills — who was present 
when the money was turned over to me, and when. It was very 
apparent that this committee knew in advance the testimony of 
Oreeta Yelverton Carroll. I know you gentlemen are fine investi- 
gators and good lawyers. Why didn't you ask who was present when 
the money was given? Where it was given, and in what denomina- 
tions, or were you afraid she couldn't substantiate her charges and 
that would be in my favor ? 

I have been given a thorough cross-examination by you gentlemen 
as has everyone else who has appeared here. Why did you not cross- 
examine her concerning these money payments ? Why was her word 
taken without any cross-examination ? In answer to a question asked 
by this committee to Mrs. Yelverton as to whether or not Leo Martin 
ever gave the Oliver Publishing Corp. $125,000, her answer was: 
"I know he invested close to $100,000." What did she mean by 
"close to"? 

Did she see me receive any money from him ? Was anyone present 
when he was supposed to have given me money and she knew about 
it ? She said the money was all given in cash, but gives me no dates, 
times, or places, so that I can protect myself. Nor does she state 

85277— 51— pt. 16 13 



188 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

in what denomination the cash was given. In fact, this committee 
did not see fit, as a courtesy to me, if nothing else, to ask Mrs. 
Oretta Yelverton Carroll specific questions concerning this supposed 
transfer of money, but accepted it at face value, the bare statements 
made by her, uncorroborated though they were. 

Mrs. Yelverton said that when she approached Martin Accardo for 
the money for the children's trust fund, he had given Voiler this 
$100,000. Remember, gentlemen, this was fully a half year after she 
had divorced Martin Accardo and had married Shortridge. She 
testified her divorce was either in 1948 or early in 1949. 

Gentlemen, if there was any consideration for the note why didn't 
they bring suit for the collection of it? As late as April 2, 1951, the 
assets of the Oliver Publishing Corp. were still available and were, 
in fact, sold then. 

Mrs. Yelverton can't deny that she knows what courts are for, be- 
cause she is now suing in court, I understand, for the return of the 
property held by Martin, or Accardo as you know him. 

If there was any consideration for the note, that she would have 
the same lawyer bring suit on the note, and go against the assets of 
the Oliver Publishing Corp. Why did she not ask for the capital stock 
of the Oliver Publishing Corp. for collateral as called for in the note? 
The answer is very apparent. No money was ever given to me by her 
or anybody else. 

Gentlemen, to further show you how vicious a witness you have pro- 
duced, she stated that Mr. Martin was always around the plant. We 
are willing to submit a list of all the employees of the Morning Mail, 
who can easily be interrogated, and they will testify that Leo Martin 
did not visit the Morning Mail a half dozen times from the time of 
construction of the plant, September in 1949, up to the present day. 
They can also testify that Mrs. Oretta Yelverton has not visited the 
plant more than six times herself. 

In conclusion, gentlemen, I most emphatically say again, and do so 
with the full knowledge that false swearing is a felony, that Leo Mar- 
tin never gave me 5 cents more or less toward the operation of the 
plant or the purchase of the plant. These three linotype machines 
were purchased and the down payment made long before I ever met 
Mrs. Carroll, that I never discussed policy with Leo Martin or Mrs. 
Carroll, and I defy her to show where Leo Martin ever gave or 
loaned me 1 penny. 

Gentlemen, this hearsay evidence is one of the fallacies of your com- 
mittee. You have no right under the guise of lawmakers to allow a 
man's character and word to be assassinated by hearsay evidence. No 
court of law allows it, and there must be a good reason for not allow- 
ing it. I hope you will be more sincere with me than you have been 
in the past. I further hope that you will recall Mrs. Carroll, and 
cross-examine her like any other witness as to the facts I have brought 
out. Only then can you justify this infamous action you have taken. 

The explanation I have given you concerning the note in my previ- 
ous testimony is the absolute truth. 

I want to thank this Chair for giving me this opportunity of pre- 
senting this statement in the record. 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, before Mr. Moser questions you with 
respect to several phases of this matter, may I say that Mrs. Carroll is 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 189 

present and will be afforded to speak, just as you have suggested, just 
as you have been afforded the chance. 

Mr. Voiler. Can I ask one more favor ? I forgot to bring my grip 
with me, and perhaps we might have a — go out to lunch for an hour, 
and then I can get my records. 

The Chairman. The committee will decide that. 

Mr. Voiler. I am sorry. I had my records with me yesterday. 

The Chairman. You should have brought them back with you to- 
day, but you can get them now. However, we will determine when 
we are going to have the sessions and when we will have lunch. 

You testified yesterday as to certain facts. Do you wish to change 
any testimony that you gave ? 

Mr. Voiler. Definitely not. 

The Chairman. I understood you to say when you came back the 
second time yesterday that, in your opinion, perjury had been com- 
mitted ; do you repeat that or do you wish to change it? 

Mr. Voiler. Perjury had been committed? 

The Chairman. That is what you said. 

Mr. Voiler. I think somebody has committed perjury. 

The Chairman. That is what I understood you to say yesterday. 
I would like to ask you a question or two concerning your knowledge 
of Mr. Accardo, Martin Accardo; did you know him at all as Martin 
Accardo ? 

Mr. Voiler. No ; I know him as Leo Martin. 

The Chairman. Did you have any knowledge of the fact that the 
man that you refer to as Leo Martin was and is Martin Accardo? 

Mr. Voiler. Only from this hearing. 

The Chairman. You did not know it previously ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know Mr. Carroll ? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe I met Mr. Carroll once. 

The Chairman. Under what circumstances? 

Mr. Voiler. I think Mrs. Yelverton called me up one day. She 
wanted me to come out and see her. I said I had no transportation. 
She said, "I will send for you." I think that was Mr. Carroll who 
came to pick me up. 

The Chairman. That was the extent of your contact with Mr. 
Carroll? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Did you on any occasion see Martin Accardo or 
Leo Martin in the presence of Mr. Carroll ? 

Mr. Voiler. Never. 

The Chairman. Did you ever accompany Mr. Carroll to see Martin 
Accardo or Leo Martin ? 

Mr. Voiler. Never. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have any understanding with Martin Accardo 
as to the policy of your paper ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You did not. 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have any understanding with anyone who is a 
gambler or who was engaged in any illegal activities to the effect that 



190 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

you were to conduct a campaign against law-enforcement officers and 
against the crime commission ? 

Mr. Voiler. Certainly not. 

Mr. Moser. You had not such understanding with anybody? 

Mr. Voiler. Definitely not. 

Mr. Moser. You had that policy in your editorial pages, did you 
not? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. We had no such thing. We were always for 
law and order. 

Mr. Moser. And always for Costello ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. That is a very bad statement for an officer of 
this committee to make. 

Mr. Moser. Did you publish an editorial in your paper favoring 
Costello and urging that he be welcomed to Miami ? 

Mr. Voiler. Mr. Chairman 

Mr. Moser. Just answer my question, please. 

The Chairman. Just answer the question. 

Mr. Moser. Yes or no ; did you publish such an editorial ? 

Mr. Voiler. We did not publish the editorial for the benefit of any 
individual. We believed that the Constitution of the United States 
gave any man the privilege to go wherever he saw fit. I, myself, had 
been a victim of that very thing that you are talking about in 1932 or 
1933. 

Mr. Moser. Just a minute. I asked you a simple question. Yes 
or no; did you publish an editorial favoring Costello? Yes or no; 
very simple. 

Mr. Voiler. I amplified that question by saying 

Mr. Moser. Is it difficult to tell me whether the answer is yes or no? 

Mr. Voiler. We spoke. I believe, on January 26, my editor, Mr. 
Frank Malone, wrote that editorial, showed it to me, and I approved. 

Mr. Moser. Did you talk to Frank Costello about that editorial be- 
fore it was published ? 

Mr. Voiler. I have never spoken to Frank Costello in all my life. 

Mr. Moser. Did your editor, Frank Malone, talk to Frank Costello 
before the editorial was published? 

Mr. Voiler. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Moser. He didn't*? 

Mr. Voiler. He couldn't have. 

Mr. Moser. Why not? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't believe he knows him. 

Mr. Moser. You don't believe he knows him ? 

Mr. Voiler. I don't believe it. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Charlie Wolf? George Wolf; do you 
know George Wolf? 

Mr. Voiler. Where is Mr. George Wolf from ? 

Mr. Moser. From New York City. 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know a George Wolf who is counsel for Costello ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You never heard of him? 

Mr. Voiler. I may have heard of him; you asked me if I ever knew 
him. I said, I don't know him. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 191 

Mr. Moser. You don't know much about Frank Costello? 

Mr. Voiler. Only what I am hearing. 

Mr. Moser. You know practically nothing about him ? 

Mr. Voiler. Very little. 

Mr. Moser. Do you think he should be welcomed to Miami ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think any man who has not committed a crime should 
be welcome in any part of the United States. 

Mr. Moser. Has he 

Mr. Voiler. I think the fathers who made the laws and contracted 
the Constitution and put in the Bill of Rights and inserted for the poor 
man the laws we know, the habeas corpus, I think that was put in 
there for protection. 

Mr. Moser. It was put in there for an entirely different purpose. 
Now, coming back to Frank Costello, you said that a man who had not 
committed any violations of the law should be allowed to come here ? 

Mr. Voiler. Any, any. 

Mr. Moser. Has Frank Costello committed any violation ? 

Mr. Voiler. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Moser. It may be that he has. 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer that. 

Mr. Moser. But if he has, you don't think he ought to be welcomed 
to Miami, do you? 

Mr. Voiler. If he has committed a crime some place, wouldn't he be 
punished by the authorities where the crime was committed ? 

Mr. Moser. He may be, if he was caught; isn't that correct? 

Mr. Voiler. If he was caught? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. Then he couldn't have committed any crime then, if he 
was caught. 

Mr. Moser. No crimes are committed then except by the ones who 
are caught; is that correct? 

Mr. Voiler. I can't answer that question. 

Mr. Moser. In other words, you know nothing about Frank Cos- 
tello; is that correct? 

Mr. Voiler. Only what I heard. 

Mr. Moser. And if he had committed crimes of an important nature, 
you wouldn't think he ought to be welcomed to Miami ; would you ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think you are getting away from the point, sir. v 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, let me bring you back to the point then. 
You said you knew nothing about Mr. Costello, and you said that your 
editorial writer knew nothing about him ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. We were speaking on the premise of what the law was 
in the United States. 

The Chairman. Yes; well, I am asking you, didn't you previously 
state that both you and the editorial writer knew nothing practically 
about Frank Costello ? 

Mr. Voiler. I can speak for myself, that I don't know Mr. Frank 
Costello. 

The Chairman. But you did speak more than that a minute or 
two ago and said that your editorial writer didn't know him ; didn't 
you say that Mai one 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, and I said that he should be subpenaed so that he 
may answer that question for himself. 



192 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. You have already volunteered it, and I want to 
question you about it. If you knew nothing about Frank Costello and 
your editorial writer knew nothing about him, why did you say in your 
editorial column that Frank Costello, as far as you knew, is a gentle- 
manly person, and also that he lives a life of rectitude? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

The Chairman. Why did you say that if you knew so little about 
him ? 

Mr. Voiler. Because the morning papers carried the story that he 
had given some sort of a benefit for the Salvation Army and that he 
had raised considerable money. 

The Chairman. And, therefore, he lived a life of rectitude; is that 
right? 

Mr. Voiler. So far as I know, he does. 

Mr. Moser. Is it possible that a gangster or criminal made con- 
tributions to charity for the purpose of living a life of rectitude? 

Mr. Voiler. It might be possible. 

The Chairman. That is the extent of your knowledge of the edi- 
torial, that you issued for the benefit of the Miami people ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, Mr. Chairman. I am trying to tell you that I, my- 
self, have been a victim of the very thing that transpired or was trying 
to transpire in 1933. Harry O. Voiler went to California to make a 
picture called The Prizefighter and the Lady for MGM, between 
Primo Camera, Max Baer, and Myrna Loy 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, did you ask 

Mr. Voiler. Would you please let me finish? Just a minute; the 
Chair has given me its attention. Why should you want to inter- 
rupt me ? 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, counsel is entirely correct. The state- 
ment that you are making is entirely foreign to what we have asked. 
We have asked about your knowledge of Frank Costello. You said to 
your knowledge you don't know him. You are going back to some- 
thing in 1932, which couldn't be remotely connected with what we have 
asked. 

Mr. Voiler. I am trying to tell you, Mr. Chairman, please, what has 
transpired and what constitutes the law. 

The Chairman. We don't need you to tell us what constitutes the 
law. 

Mr. Voiler. I differ with you, Mr. Chairman, on that. 

The Chairman. We differ on a lot of things. 

Mr. Voher. Of course, we do. The press has a right to express 
itself in its own opinion without any criticism. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, are you willing to discontinue this lecture 
and answer some questions? 

Mr. Voiler. I will be glad to answer anything you like. The only 
thing I am asking you is to give me a chance to amplify anything that 
may 

Mr. Moser. I want you to amplify it. Will you tell me when you 
were in Hollywood, Calif., in 1932, did you see Frank Costello at that 
time ? 

Mr. Voiler. I have never seen Frank Costello in California. 

Mr. Moser. Did you make any attempt to get Frank Costello to put 
money into your paper ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 193 

Mr. Voiler. Certainly not. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ask him or any intermediary of his to put 
money into the paper? 

Mr. Voiler. Certainly not. 

Mr. Moser. When you wrote this editorial had you made any 
understanding with anybody to the effect that you would favor 
Costello ? 

Mr. Voiler. Certainly not. 

Mr. Moser. There is no connection between this editorial and the 
money that was put into the paper? 

Mr. Voiler. Never. 

The Chairman. The editorial to which reference has been made 
will be introduced into the record and marked by the reporter. 

(Said document as above identified, received and marked "Ex- 
hibit No. 21." See appendix p. 236.) 

Mr. Rice. It is dated January 26, 1950. 

Mr. Voiler. May I remind the Chair, please 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Voiler, you said that you never gave a promissory 
note to Martin Accardo or to Leo Martin, as you know him ; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You made quite something in your statement to that 
effect, did you not ; didn't you state that ? 

Mr. Voiler. I stated that I had never given him any note. 

Mr. Moser. Promissory note ? 

Mr. Voiler. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. I see. 

Mr. Voiler. May I address the Chair? 

Mr. Moser. Wilkyou also state that the Oliver Publishing Co. did 
not give any promissory note to Leo Martin ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. But you do not deny, do you, that the Oliver Publishing 
Corp. gave a promissory note to Oreeta Yelverton ; you do admit that, 
do you not ? 

Mr. Voiler. We never gave her a note. There is an understanding 
there. 

Mr. Moser. You never gave here a note ? 

Mr. Voiler. That is an understanding. There is a specific under- 
standing there why that paper was given. 

Mr. Moser. But you did give her a paper, did you ? 

Mr. Voiler. ( No response. ) 

Mr. Moser. Why are you so hesitant to admit the existence of this 
document ? 

Mr. Voiler. I haven't hesitated. Didn't I ask you to read it? 
And didn't you, as an attorney — you are now going to let me see it ? 
This will be the second exhibit after four or five that you have put 
into the record. I, as a witness, I have to ask for these things. 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, don't make much over nothing. You 
had that document in your hand yesterday. You saw it. 

Mr. Voiler. I am sorry, sir; may I correct the Chair? I never 
saw this thing before while it was in your possession. 

The Chairman. Wasn't reference made to the document yesterday ? 

Mr. Voiler. But it was never shown to me. 



194 ORGANIZED CRIME EN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. Did you ask to see it ? 

Mr. Voiler. Do I have to ? Isn't it customary for a document to 
be presented in evidence whereby the witness may see it? Doesn't 
the Chair know that I am not an attorney ? 

The Chairman. Just a minute. You knew what we were referring 
to, apparently, because you answered questions about it. All right, 
go ahead. 

Mr. Voiler. Shall I read it ? 

Mr. Moser. No ; don't read it, but tell us if your name appears at 
the bottom of it. 

Mr. Voiler. Yes ; my name is on there. 

Mr. Moser. Does your wife's name appear on the bottom of it ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Immediately under the name, Oliver Publishing Corp. ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Are those your signatures ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Will you look at the back page of those documents in 
your hand, not the back page but the last page? 

Mr. Voiler. Chattel mortgage. 

Mr. Moser. Is that the last page you are looking at? Does your 
name appear at the bottom of that? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Does your wife's name appear there? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And your signatures appear there ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. In two places ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Mosler. One says as officers of the corporation? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And one says as individuals ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. May I have the document back, please ? 

Mr. Voiler. I would like to read it into the record. I think I have 
a right to read it into the record. 

The Chairman. You may read it. 

Mr. Voiler. "Promissory note." It is dated January 31, 1950. On 
the left-hand corner in numerals $125,000. [Beading :] 

One year after date Oliver Publishing Corp., a Florida corporation, Harry O. 
Voiler and Louise L. Voiler, promise to pay to the order of Oreeta Yelverton, of 
Dade County, Fla., the sum of $125,000, with interest at the rate of 3 percent 
per annum until maturity. 

This note is secured by all the assets that the Oliver Publishing Corp. owns, 
such as the building located at 1521 Alton Road and all the contents within its 
confines but prior to a first chattel mortgage on the machinery amounting to 
$25,000 and $50,000 on the building, and is subject to all of the terms and 
covenants therein contained. 

It is further understood and agreed that the Oliver Publishing Corp. and 
Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler has made no other commitments nor shall 
the Oliver Publishing Corp. and Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler make any 
other obligations or sign any promissory notes that will in any way jeopardize 
the assets of said corporation until this note has been fully redeemed to the 
complete satisfaction of Oreeta Yelverton, of Dade County, Fla. 

It is further agreed that the 50 shares of stock which is the capital stock 
of the Oliver Publishing Corp. shall be put up as collateral with Oreeta Yel- 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 195 

verton as further good faith on the part of Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler 
and the Oliver Publishing Corp, in redeeming its pledge. II is also understood 
that there are no bonds of any kind issued or outstanding by the Oliver Pub- 
lishing Corp., a Florida corporation. 

And whereas the right is given by the Oliver Publishing Corp. and Harry O. 
Voiler and Louise L. Voiler, to Oreeta Yelverton at the redemption of this note 
by the Oliver Publishing Corp. and Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler to 
grant to Oreeta Yelverton the privilege of purchasing IT) shares of the capital 
stock of the Oliver Publishing Corp. which now consists of 50 shares for the sum 
of ;r;l2r>,000, giving her an equal share in the ownership and management of the 
Oliver Publishing Corp., a Florida corporation. 

It is signed on the left-hand side, "Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. 
Voiler," and the corporation's seal on the left-hand side. On the 
right-hand side, "Oliver Publishing Corporation, by Harry O. Voiler, 
president; and Louise L, Voiler, secretary." 

Mr. Moser. Who drafted that? 

Mr. Voiler. I did. 

Mr. Mosler. Vou drafted it, yourself ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. With the help of a lawyer? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Voiler, if you prepared it yourself, why, then, 
did you think it was such a necessity for you to see it yesterday ? 

Mr. Voiler. Because I wanted to read it into the record. 

The Chairman. It was marked in the record. It has been intro- 
duced into the record in full. Look at the back page. 

Mr. Voiler. Being marked into the record and having read it now, 
having read it, I think the whole United States will understand what 
this is. 

Mr. Moser. What is attached to it, a chattel mortgage ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. A chattel mortgage. 

Mr. Moser. Did you prepare that, too? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes"; I did. 

Mr. Moser. What does that cover? 

Mr. Voiler. It covers the composing-room equipment, the press 
equipment, the stereotype equipment, the mailing equipment. 

Mr. Moser. Now, those were all subject to another chattel mort- 
gage, were they not, a prior chattel mortgage ? 

Mr. Voiler. There was a prior chattel mortgage of $25,000. 

Mr. Moser. On some of them ? 

Mr. Voiler. On all of the equipment, not counting the three Lino- 
type machines that are not in here, I don't think, but were in on the 
$25,000 loan we had made. 

Mr. Moser. What was the financial condition of your company at 
the time this so-called deal was made? 

Mr. Voiler. I think it was sound. 

Mr. Moser. How long had you been running? 

Mr. Voiler. Altogether ? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. Forty-eight days. 

Mr. Moser. How long had you been running at the time you made 
this agreement? 

Mr. Voiler. We started on January 12; being the 13th, I imagine 
that would be 21 or 22 days. 



196 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Did you have any advertising contracts ? 

Mr. Voiler. We originally had some, but we were originally due to 
go into publication on December 30. We had — the print was off one- 
hundreclth of an inch, and, therefore, the shaft was heating up. We 
had to call in other engineers to straighten that out and to find a 
solution for it. It finally choked it. From December 30, when we 
first discovered it, perhaps I should say, November 30, or maybe No- 
vember 29 or the 30th of November 

Mr. Moser. Had you received any money for advertisements at 
that time ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. Advertisements are not paid usually in advance. 

Mr. Moser. Did you have any amounts owed to you on January 31 
for advertisements ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes ; I think so. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know how much ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. Any substantial amount? 

Mr. Voiler. I wouldn't know offhand. I could bring the records 
and amplify it. 

Mr. Moser. Had you received any money from subscriptions ? 

Mr. Voiler. Some. 

Mr. Moser. Some; how much? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, I wouldn't know that. That is all on the rec- 
ords. We have that on the records. 

Mr. Moser. Did your profit-and-loss statement or condition show 
a profit or loss at that time, January 31, 1950 ? 

Mr. Voiler. We hadn't made any statement up. 

Mr. Moser. Well, you would know whether you were working at a 
profit or loss ? 

Mr. Voiler. I believe we were operating at a loss. 

Mr. Moser. A substantial loss ? 

Mr. Voiler. Well, one doesn't know of those things, of how sub- 
stantial the loss might be. 

Mr. Moser. It is rather an important question when you are start- 
ing an enterprise; isn't it? 

Mr. Voiler. I was prepared to lose, originally $1,500 a week. 

Mr. Moser. $1,500 a week? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Where were you going to get the $1,500 a week? 

Mr. Voiler. I had this money in the bank. 

Mr. Moser. You had it in the bank? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. All the money you had borrowed to buy this equipment 
and so forth ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. And you had some more money in the bank besides ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Besides the $41,000 you testified yesterday you used to 
buy equipment, how much more did you have in the bank at that 
time ? 

Mr. Voiler. I would have to look at my records. 

Mr. Moser. Approximately how much was that? 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't answer. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 197 

Mr. Moseh. Was it $1,000? 

Mr. Voiler. Oh, 'way above that. 

Mr. Moser. Was it $50,000? 

Mr. Voiler. On January 4 — January 1 ? 

Mr. Moser. At the time you started this paper — January 12. 

Mr. Voiler. On January 12? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. Oh, I don't know. I think my balance may have been 
$15,000 or $20,000. 

Mr. Moser. What form was that in; was it in the bank? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. It was ; you had none of it invested in securities ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. You were receiving no income on it ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, no. This money was in the Oliver Publishing 
Corp. We are speaking of the Oliver Publishing Corp.? 

Mr. Moser. All right. 

Mr. Voiler. It was in the bank in the account of the Oliver Pub- 
lishing Co. 

Mr. Moser. Where did you get that money ? 

Mr. Voiler. Where did I get that money? I think I amplified 
that yesterday, that I had made some mortgages. 

Mr. Moser. You had taken a mortgage for $55,000 in 1916 ; is that 
right? 

Mr. Voiler. It was returned when ? 

Mr. Moser. 1949 or 1950. 

Mr. Voiler. 1948 or so. You brought out in your questioning 
about the Western Packing Corp. 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. I think I said that the court had given back that 
money. 

Mr. Moser. You had a newspaper that was operating at a loss, you 
thought ; you had no income coming in. At least, it wasn't substan- 
tial enough so that you could remember it, and yet you contend that 
someone who just walked into the plant and watched the machinery 
was willing to spend $125,000 to buy half of the stock. Is that cor- 
rect ; is that your contention ? 

Mr. Voiler. Nobody bought any stock. 

Mr. Moser. I didn't say anybody bought the stock. You said some- 
body wanted to buy the stock for that price; is that correct? 

Mr. Voiler. Mrs. Yelverton had made that suggestion. 

Mr. Moser. She made that offer ? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Did Mrs. Yelverton ever make any investigation of the 
financial condition of the company? 

Mr. Voiler. I couldn't know that. 

Mr. Moser. Did she ask you how much money you were going to 
make ? 

Mr. Voiler. Did she ask me how much money I was going to make — 
we were going to make ? 

Mr. Moser. Yes. 

Mr. Voiler. I don't think so. 



198 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Did she ask you how much money you had made up to 
that time ? 

Mr. Voiler. We couldn't have made any money up to January 31. 

Mr. Moser. Did she ask you how much money you had made up to 
that time? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. She did not ; did she ask to examine any of your books ? 

Mr. Voiler. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did she ask you whether there were any mortgages on 
your machinery ? 

Mr. Voiler. I think I specified it in here [referring to document] . 

Mr. Moser. Did she ask you ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. I volunteered all that. 

Mr. Moser. Did she ask you whether there was any mortgage on 
the building ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. I think we specified there was a $50,000 mortgage 
on the building. 

Mr. Moser. Did she make any inquiry as to what the financial set-up 
of the organization was ? 

Mr. Voiler. No. 

Mr. Moser. It is your contention that someone who knew nothing 
whatever about the condition or prospects of the business asked to 
invest $125,000 in half of the stock; is that your contention? 

Mr. Voiler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. That is all I want to ask you. 

The Chairman. That is all, Mr. Voiler. You are excused. 

(Witness excused.) 

FURTHER TESTIMONY OF OREETA YELVERTON CARROLL, 

MIAMI, FLA. 

The Chairman. Mrs. Carroll will be the next witness. 

Mr. Moser. You understand that you are still under oath ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Do you have any objection to having pictures con- 
tinued ? 

Mrs. Carroll. We can wait until after I am through, can't we? 
I would like to concentrate on what I am saying. 

Mr. Moser. While the witness is testifying there will be no pictures 
taken. 

Mrs. Carroll. I am sorry ; my children may be watching this — - 

Mr. Moser. At your request. 

Mrs. Carroll. And no newsreel, please. 

Mr. Moser. Do you have any objection to the rear camera being on? 

Mrs. Carroll. The rear camera may stay on. No newsreel pictures. 

Mr. Moser. You have heard the testimony of the previous witness? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes ; I did. 

Mr. Moser. You heard him demand that we ask you certain ques- 
tions? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Are you prepared to answer those questions ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir ; I am. 

Mr. Moser. First, let me ask you whether you reaffirm all of the 
testimony you gave yesterday ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 199 

Mrs. Carroll. Absolutely. 

Mr. Moser. You state that it was all true and correct? 

Mrs. Carroll. Every word. 

Mr. Moser. And you state that the testimony given by Mr. Voiler 
was false? 

Mrs. Carroll. I do. 

Mr. Moser. Mrs. Carroll, have you a statement that you would like 
to make generally on the proposition ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; I think so. Mr. Voiler has evidently spent an 
awful lot of time on his speech, and was quite effective and dramatic 
from his viewpoint, so I hate to spoil it for him, but the things he 
says that I have no actual proof of that, it's nothing but my word, I am 
afraid that I have — I mean other people I have discussed this situation 
with ; other people, not just Martin Accardo. 

Now, when I first found out about his connection with the paper 

The Chairman. Whose connection ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Martin Accardo. I asked him at that time — he told 
me he had given Mr. Voiler $50,000, and I said, "Well, who is the 
man ?" I said, "I mean where does he come from ?" I had never even 
heard of him, and for Accardo to be interested in the newspaper, well, 
naturally, it would seem a little ridiculous to me, knowing the circum- 
stances, and he showed me a piece of paper he had in the desk there. 
My attorney has it now. I can produce it if you care to see that. 
It was just a small piece of paper with Harry Voiler "s and Louise 
Voilers names signed at the bottom. It was something about — it's 
been a long time since I have seen it — about issuing shares into the 
company, and it left a couple of places blank there for the name to be 
filled in. 

Mr. Moser. Can you identify the date on which this occurred ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir. I think it was about 3 days before the paper 
opened. Just what date that would be, I don't know. I don't remem- 
ber what date the paper opened, either. 

Mr. Moser. About the 10th of January 1950? 

Mrs. Carroll. The 10th of January; that's right. This was about 
2 or 3 days previous to that. I asked him at the time, I said, "This 
paper means nothing." He said, "Well, after all" — and I am sure the 
committee is familiar with the customs of some of the men in Mr. 
Accardo's business; they don't sign notes or anything; if they borrow 
money, a handshake is good enough. Evidently that is what took place 
between Mr. Accardo and Harry Voiler with that first $50,000 because 
the papers here given me were worthless ; there was nothing to it at all. 
It wasn't worth the ink and the paper it was written on. 

That was when he told me that that was the money he was to have 
put into a fund for the children. He asked me to meet Mr. Voiler and 
make up my own mind. He had been very impressed with him and 
he felt sure that after I had met Mr. Voiler and talked to him I would 
feel differently about it. It is not true that we went over and picked 
them up and took them to dinner. They came out to my home in 
Coral Gables in a cab. 

That night the paper was discussed — or I tried to discuss it, rather. 
But every time that I would bring it up Mrs. Voiler would start talk- 
ink real fast about the interesting parts of the newspaper business. 
But I couldn't quite seem to get any — I mean Mr. Voiler just evaded 



200 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

anything I would try to say. I mean he would just change the sub- 
ject in a very nice, polite way, of course. So I took the paper. I had 
made up my mind I didn't like the man. I didn't like his attitude. 
There was nothing straightforward and honest about it. 

Of course, I was interested in the money that was put into that 
paper, because I can't educate two children on Mr. Voiler's invest- 
ments. I took that slip of paper to an acquaintance of mine. I would 
rather not mention his name at the time. But he is in the prosecutor's 
office here in Miami. I asked his advice. I went to him because I felt 
that I could trust him and he would tell me a good attorney I could 
go to — someone I could go to. 

Mr. Moser. May I interrupt you, and ask you whether you were 
married and living with Martin Accardo at the time ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I was not married to him at that time. My name 
was legally Yelverton, my maiden name. So I did go to an attorney 
at that time, but Mr. Accardo at that time had already given Mr. 
Voiler more money. He was getting a little worried, himself, because 
Voiler was asking for money faster than the man could seem to 
produce it. 

So Mr. Accardo went with me. We went to see an attorney here 
in Miami. I think that was 11 o'clock in the morning. I explained 
the whole situation to him. I showed him this little slip of paper 
that was for the $50,000. So he got busy on the phone and he made 
an appointment with Mr. Voiler for 4 o'clock that afternoon. Well, 
that gave him quite a few hours to work on it. He came over that 
afternoon at 4 o'clock. We went up there to the apartment over the 
newspaper. We sat there from that time until about 10 o'clock that 
night. My attorney was trying to get Mr. Voiler to give me some 
protection for the investment in the paper and for my children. That 
is all I was asking for. After all, I couldn't tell him and Mr. Accardo 
what to do. 

And he told Mr. Voiler that — they couldn't come to any agreement, 
but the whole affair was discussed between the four of us in that one 
room. 

The Chairman. So the attorney was present all this time? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir; absolutely. He heard every word that was 
said. 

Mr. Moser. Who were those that were there ? 

Mrs. Carroll. There were Mr. Voiler, Mr. Accardo. my attorney, 
and me. 

Mr. Eice. Was Mrs. Voiler there ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Mrs. Voiler was sick downstairs when we first 
arrived. In fact, I think Frank alone, Voiler's editor, came up a 
couple of times while we were there, while we were upstairs talking. 

We were there until about 10 o'clock that night. My attorney saw 
we could get nowhere with him, because he is very familiar with the 
newspaper business himself, the attorney is; and he questioned Mr. 
Voiler as to his intentions and his policy and different aspects of the 
paper, or tried to. He got no cooperation whatsoever. 

Mr. Rice. Was the lawyer that you had also representing Mr. 
Accardo ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Oh, no. 

Mr. Rice. He was representing both of you ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 201 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, I suppose you would call it that. Mr. Ac- 
cardo went with me. I was the one that insisted on going. I think 
Mr. Accardo, in Mr. Voiler's interest, was keeping me satisfied at 
that time and keeping me quiet. 

Mr. Rice. What position did Mr. Accardo take in the conference 
at that time; did he take the position of w T anting to get this paper in 
writing to be evidence of the money that had been put up ? 

Mrs. Carroll. It had got to the point that Mr. Accardo was very 
willing to throw the whole thing into someone else's lap, because 
frankly he didn't know where to go from there. Evidently, they 
hadn't been able to carry out their plans, and Mr. Voiler had already 
gotten himself involved with the Daily News here. In fact, at that 
time he had a suit pending. 

Well, Mi-. Accardo — I don't know if he was afraid — but I, as I 
said, he was very willing to let me take over from that point. It may 
have been that he wanted to keep me very quiet and satisfied. I can't 
say ; I can only tell you what his attitude was. 

Mr. Rice. Someone prepared that note; is that correct? 

Mrs. Carroll. That was after the attorney left there. He said, 
"Mr. Voiler, since we can't come to any agreement, I will have my 
auditors here first thing in the morning to go through the books of the 
paper." 

We left and went on home. Mr. Voiler called. We were hardly 
home until he called. He and Mr. Accardo got together that night 
and, so help me, if he didn't give him $20,000 more that night. 

Mr. Rice. How do you know that? 

Mrs. Carroll. I heard the telephone conversation. Mr. Accardo 
told me, and even called the attorney and told him not to send the 
auditors in the following morning, that Mr. Voiler had given him 
back every bit of his money. 

Mr. Rice. Why did he tell you he put up the $20,000 ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Because Voiler at that time was expecting help from 
different sources. 

Mr. Rice. For instance? 

Mrs. Carroll. From the things that I observed, Mr. Voiler is quite 
a promoter, and he just talked a little faster than Mr. Accardo, I sup- 
pose ; but he told me that he felt that $20,000 more, that with that 
he could keep going until he could get more money, because. Mr. 
Accardo told him he just couldn't keep putting it in, he couldn't keep 
putting money into it. 

Mr. Rice. Then you had come to getting a piece of paper later on. 

Mrs. Carroll. Of course, I was very nervous; in fact, I was sick 
over it, because what could I do except drag it into court, and no doubt 
you gentlemen have seen the newspapers ; I have friends ; I have chil- 
dren. I have friends that have met Mr. Voiler in my home. Right 
after his visit to New York when he tried to see Costello 

Mr. Moser. He went to New York to try to see Costello ? 

Mrs. Carkoll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. How do you know that? 

Mrs. Carroll. He told me himself. In fact, he wanted me to go 
with him to New York. 

The Chairman. When was that? 



202 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mrs. Carroll. Well, Mrs. Voiler, I think, had gone to California. 
It was in the spring of — Avhen was Mother's Day ? 

Mr. Moser. May 13. 

Mrs. Carroll. It was sometime around May or the first part of 
June. I can check back. 

Mr. Moser. May or June of what year, 1950 ? 

Mrs. Carroll. This past year ; yes. 

Mr. Moser. This was after the paper was under way, of course? 

Mrs. Carroll. This was after it had closed. 

The Chairman. Who first brought up Frank Costello's name? 

Mrs. Carroll. While the paper was going ; in fact, in this editorial, 
when I made the remark about not liking the editorial. I didn't 
say I didn't like it, because I was going along. I felt that if I ex- 
pressed my opinions too deeply that nothing would be said in front of 
me, so I tried to stay as friendly as I could with Mr. Voiler and Mrs. 
Voiler, which I did. And they did take me into their confidence. 
Everything was discussed in front of me. At this time that editorial 
came out and they made an issue of it. Mr. Voiler told me that he 
was trying to get Costello interested in the paper, that he needed his 
backing. 

The Chairman. Did he indicate whether he knew Costello or not? 

Mrs. Carroll. I am sorry, I can't say yes to that and I can't say 
no. I don't believe that Mr. Voiler knew him, but I know that Mr. 
Wolf visited Mr. Voiler at the plant. 

The Chairman. Who is Mr. Wolf? 

Mrs. Carroll. Mr. Voiler told me that he was Mr. Costello's at- 
torney, and made an appointment for him to see Costello the follow- 
ing day. That evening one of the local papers gave Costello quite a 
write-up, and they named places he was. The following clay he 
wasn't in town. He checked out before Mr. Voiler got to see him. 
Later, after the paper folded, he wanted to go to New York. I sup- 
pose it was his last hope. He couldn't get anyone else. He tried to 
contact him ; wanted me to try to contact him there. 

The Chairman. Who wanted ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Mr. Voiler wanted to try to contact Mr. Costello 
in New York. He asked me to go with him. 

Mr. Moser. Why did he want you to go with him? 

Mrs. Carroll. I don't know why he wanted me to go with him 
exactly, unless he thought — he was always planning dinner parties 
over on the beach between the men interested in this newspaper and 
would invite me to go along. So I assume he wanted me to go to New 
York for the same purpose. As I said, I tried to stay on friendly 
terms ; otherwise, I wouldn't have known what was going on. 

Mr. Moser. You were not married to Mr. Accardo at that time? 

Mrs. Carroll. No; I wasn't. 

Mr. Rice. That was at the time when the newspaper was in finan- 
cial distress; is that right? 

Mrs. Carroll. It was always in financial distress. 

Mr. Rice. The operation needed more money badly ? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Rice. Was there any other procedure suggested for raising 
funds, any unlawful way that came to your attention between Accardo 
and Voiler, that came to your attention? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 203 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; there was. Now, this is going to embarrass 
Mr. Voiler terribly, but every word of it is the truth. When Accardo 
kept telling him, I mean, that the payroll — I can't remember what 
the payroll was, but it was a ridiculous figure for a brand-new paper 
of that size beginning. He had even taken $5,000 out of the money 
that Mr. Accardo had given him to get his wife's jewelry out of hock. 
Mr. Accardo told him he couldn't get the money that fast. It was 
beginning to frighten him, and, and evidently, the figures and the 
amounts that Mr. Voiler kept throwing at him frightened him. He 
told him he couldn't do it, couldn't keep it up. He asked him to try 
to get help from various sources, and he said he would rather not 
do that, or didn't know if he could. Mr. Voiler asked him if he would 
be willing to help him. He said that that paper would never close, 
that he had worked all his life, that that is what — that it was going on, 
that it was his one aim and ambition, and that he was going to make 
people respect the name of Harry Voiler through that newspaper ; and 
if he had to go out and steal the money to keep it going, that that 
paper would never fold. 

And he asked Mr. Accardo, since he was a partner, if he would be 
willing to help him. 

Mr. Rice. Help him ? 

Mrs. Carroll. If he had to go out and steal the money he would 
do it, and asked him if he felt as deeply as he did about keeping 
the paper going. 

Mr. Rice. Did they discuss any hold-ups or how they were going to 
steal ? 

Mrs. Carroll. No, because Mr. Accardo's answer wasn't what Mr. 
Voiler expected it to be, I am afraid. 

Mr. Moser. What was his answer? 

Mrs. Carroll. He told him he had done a lot of things in his time, 
but one thing he had never done, he had never stolen a thing, and that 
he wouldn't do it for any reason unless his children or his wife or 
his family were in such circumstances that he had to do it, then he 
would, but he couldn't do it for any newspaper or to clear anybody's 
name, Hari'y Voiler or any other name. 

Mr. Moser. Did Voiler suggest any particular methods of com- 
mitting the crimes? 

Mrs. Carroll. No. He was feeling Mr. Accardo out at this time. 
If anything was discussed after that, it wasn't in my presence. 

Mr. Moser. Did this conversation you just repeated take place in 
your presence? 

Mrs. Carroll. Oh, yes. It was in the apartment above the news- 
paper. 

Mr. Moser. Yesterday in your testimony you said that an effort had 
been made to persuade Mr. Accardo to get his brother Tony to put 
pressure on the movie houses to put advertising in the newspaper? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Would you like to cast any further light on that ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. I think the second time that I met Mr. Voiler — 
I mean where anything was discussed about the paper — I realized it 
right away that he was expecting an awful lot of help from Martin 
Accardo, from his brother. And he seemed very astonished and sur- 
prised when they started having difficulties that Mr. Accardo wouldn't 

85277 



204 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

go to his brother for money. Voiler had been counting on that very 
much. I think he knew at the beginning that Accardo didn't have 
that kind of money, but he was interested to get these other people 
tied into it, because he knew that they did have, and they did have 
the connections or things that Mr. Voiler wanted. 

Mr. Moser. In the conversation that Accardo had with Voiler in 
your presence did Mr. Voiler admit that the money had been given to 
him by Accardo? 

Mrs. Carroll. I have given him money, myself. 

Mr. Moser. You have actually handed him money ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes, sir; I have. 

Mr. Moser. That Accardo gave you ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Accardo was with me. I had it in my purse, because 
it was cash. 

Mr. Moser. In what form was the money ? 

Mrs. Carroll. In bills ; I cant remember. 

Mr. Moser. Can you tell me how much at one time ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes; I remember. In fact, I remember the after- 
noon that I took the attorney over, there was $20,000 in my purse at 
that time, and I even told the attorney, I said, "He is ready to give him 
$20,000 today, but I am not letting this money out of my purse until 
I get your opinion on this man and see what you think of him," and 
I am afraid he agreed with me. 

Mr. Moser. Did you show the money to the attorney ? 

Mrs. Carroll. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. He saw that you had it? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. That is the $20,000 that he later that 
evening gave Mr. Voiler. Now, at the time of the machines, when 
he bought these machines, he said he drew the money from the bank ; 
I gave him the money out of my purse. 

The Chairman. You gave the money to whom? 

Mrs. Carroll. To Mr. Voiler. I was carrying it in my purse be- 
cause it was too big a bundle for him to keep in his pocket, so he asked 
me to keep it in my purse. 

Mr. Moser. How much money was that? 

Mrs. Carroll. At that time I think it was around $15,000. 

Mr. Moser. In large bills ? 

Mrs. Carroll. It had to be in large bills, because the package was 
about that thick [indicating]. 

Mr. Moser. So that is 20 and 15 that you actually saw delivered? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. And actually carried. How about the 50? 

Mrs. Carroll. The 50 was discussed in my presence and in the 
presence of my attorney the day that we went over there, all of this 
discussion, every bit of it. 

Mr. Moser. Voiler admitted that he received the 50? 

Mrs. Carroll. That's right. And he admitted his agreement with 
Accardo, to begin with. The whole thing was discussed. Now, this 
paper that Mr. Voiler — may I go into that ? 

Mr. Moser. Go ahead. 

Mrs. Carroll. This note that Mr. Accardo brought me home, Mr. 
Voiler did not give me that. I became ill — well, after the last $20,000, 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 205 

who wouldn't ? I was a nervous wreck. So a few days later he brings 
me this note. 

Mr. Moser. Who? 

Mrs. Carroll. Accardo. Mr. Accardo brought that home and asked 
me if that would satisfy me and make me feel any better about it. 
I said, "Did you have an attorney draw this up?" He said, "No." 
I said, "Did Mr. Voiler have an attorney draw it up?" He said, "No." 

Then I said, "I want to read the thing. I don't have any confidence 
in the man, no faith in the man whatsoever." 

Mr. Accardo took the note, put it in the safe. I didn't find that 
note, because. I didn't know what he did with it. I didn't find that 
note until I moved from 1217 Granada this past summer. I was going 
through some papers and ran across the note. At that time I took 
the note back to the same attorney and told him what Accardo had 
done. 

Mr. Moser. Mrs. Carroll, will you now tell us the name of the 
attorney ? 

(No response.) 

The Chairman. Well, if you do not desire to do so in public, will 
you submit it to the reporter ? 

Mrs. Carroll. I will be glad to do that. 

The Chairman. Because we have referred the case to the United 
States attorney and he might be interested in it. 

Mr. Moser. Will you turn to the reporter and give him the name? 

(The witness gave the name of the attorney to the reporter.) 

Mr. Moser. All right, Mrs. Carroll, that is all we would like to 
have from you now. 

(Witness excused.) 

The Chairman. We will now recess until 2 o'clock this afternoon. 

(Thereupon, recess was taken until 2 p. m. of the same day.) 

afternoon session 

The Chairman. Will the hearing please come to order. 

Mr. Moser. Is Philip Thompson of Hollywood here? [No re- 
sponse.] 

The Chairman. We understand that the witness has been served 
with a subpena to appear. If he does not respond and if there is no 
explanation made for his inability to do so, he will be recommended 
for citation for contempt. Next witness. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. L. C. Boggs. 

FUETHEE TESTIMONY OF L. C. BOGGS, MAYOE, HOLLYWOOD, FLA. 

The Chairman. Mr. Boggs, you have been sworn ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Will you state your full name again ? 

Mr. Boggs. When I came in here this morning 

Mr. Moser. Will you state your name, please ? 

Mr. Boggs. Lester C. Boggs ; Lester Crawford Boggs. 

Mr. Moser. What is your address? 

Mr. Boggs. 2301 Lee Street, Hollywood, Fla. 

Mr. Moser. What is your business ? 



206 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Boggs. I am in the septic-tank and sewage-disposal business. 

Mr. Moser. How many employees do you have ? 

Mr. Boggs. Oh, they vary. Now, I guess we have got 18 or 20 ; I 
am not sure ; 18 or 20. 

Mr. Moser. You install septic tanks ? 

Mr. Boggs. Septic tanKs and new sewer works. 

Mr. Moser. What is the area of your business? 

Mr. Boggs. Hollywood, Hallandale, and Dania. 

Mr. Moser. About how many septic tanks do you put in per month? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, some months we are more busier than others. I 
can't tell. I would say on the average of about 15 a month, the year 
round. 

Mr. Moser. Fifteen a month? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes ; something like that. 

Mr. Moser. How much does it cost to put in a septic tank ? 

Mr. Boggs. That is according to the way you are putting it in. 

Mr. Moser. Can you give us an average as to how much a septic tank 
costs the customer ? 

Mr. Boggs. Excuse me. I thought you meant buying the stock. 

Mr. Moser. How much does it cost a customer ? 

Mr. Boggs. It averages — the average-size house costs about $81. 

Mr. Moser. $81? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. That is, tanks and drainage. That is, a com- 
plete job. 

Mr. Moser. That is, a domestic septic tank? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do they have any sewerage system in your town? 

Mr. Boggs. No. Just a couple of streets are sewered ; that's all. It's 
just drainage sewer and not a sanitary sewer. 

Mr. Moser. Do you have any other sources of income ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, I don't know whether you would call it income or 
not; I have got a little farm. 

Mr. Moser. You have a little farm ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What kind of farm ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, we raise a few pigs. We buy a few pigs in the 
wintertime and sell them in the spring. 

Mr. Moser. You make a profit on that operation ? 

Mr. Boggs. Sometimes I make a profit and sometimes you lose, ac- 
cording to what kind of hogs you get. 

Mr. Moser. In recent years how much ? 

Mr. Boggs. I would say in recent years it hasn't been profitable. It's 
just up and down; one year you make a little money and the next year 
3'Ou don't. 

Mr. Moser. That is a minor operation that doesn't produce much in- 
come; is that right? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, sometimes it will if you have a real good year. 

Mr. Moser. How much do you make in a good year in the hog busi- 
ness on your farm ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, the most I think I have ever made is around $7,000 
or around $8,000. 

The Chairman. Keep your voice up. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 207 

Mr. Boggs. $7,000 or $8,000, I would guess; I don't know right off- 
hand. 

Mr. Moser. Maybe $7,000? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes ; something or other in that amount. 

Mr. Moser. During what years have you been on the governing body 
of Hollywood? 

Mr. Boggs, Since 1935. 

Mr. Moser. Have you been on it every year ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes ; every year. One time I was off for about 3 months. 

Mr. Moser. When was that ? 

Mr. Boggs. I don't know. I believe it was 1939 or 1940. In 1939 or 
1941 the legislature passed an act and changed the laws around of the 
way you elect people in Hollywood. See, we used to elect by districts. 

Mr. Moser. It was only about 2 or 3 months that you were off? 

Mr. Boggs. About 2 or 3 months. 

Mr. Moser. During what years were you mayor? 

Mr. Boggs. I was mavor in 1945, 1946, 1949, and 1950, and am today. 

Mr. Moser. 1945, 1946? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Not in 1948 ? 

Mr. Boggs. No ; 1947 or 1948, not. 

Mr. Moser. In 1949 and 1950 you were ? 

Mr. Boggs. See, the board elects the mayor. It isn't the public that 
elects the mayor. Five, that is, elects the mayor. 

Mr. Moser. Why was it that you were not mayor for two years? 
What was the reason for that ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, it is customary to make the high man in the elec- 
tion mayor. 

Mr. Moser. And you have been the high man each year except for 
that term ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Who was responsible for enforcing the gambling laws 
in Hollywood? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, I think the city police department and the city 
manager. 

Mr. Moser. Not the mayor ? 

Mr. Boggs. The mayor has no police powers whatsoever. 

Mr. Moser. None whatever ? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Who was the boss of the police department ? 

Mr. Boggs. The city manager. 

Mr. Moser. The city manager ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Who was the boss of the city manager ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, the city commission, of course. The police depart- 
ment is under civil service. 

Mr. Moser. Under civil service? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. But from whom does it take its orders? 

Mr. Boggs. From the city manager. 

Mr. Moser. And the city manager takes his orders from the coun- 
cil ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Boggs. As a rule, yes. 



208 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Moser. Were you appointed by the council or the commis- 
sion ? 

Mr. Boggs. The commission. 

Mr. Moser. Does the commission decide what the policy of the 
police force is ? 

Mr. Boggs. In what manner ? 

Mr. Moser. Does the council decide when the police force is going 
to enforce laws and when not ? 

Mr. Boggs. No. 

Mr. Moser. Does it have anything to do at all with the policy of 
the police force in that regard ? 

Mr. Boggs. The only thing they have to say was the policy — like, 
before the winter season come on, of a policy on the gambling. They 
would tell the chief of police and the city manager the commission's 
wish in gambling. 

Mr. Moser. So that the police force does follow the policy of the 
commission to some extent in that regard ? 

Mr. Boggs. To some extent, yes. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Frank Costello ? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You know who he is ? 

Mr. Boggs. I have heard of him; read in the paper about him, but 
I wouldn't know the man if I would see him. 

Mr. Moser. You have never met him ? 

Mr. Boggs. No. 

Mr. Moser. Did you read the proceedings of the hearings of this 
committee with regard to Frank Costello? 

Mr. Boggs. No: I haven't. 

Mr. Moser. Did you read about him in the paper? 

Mr. Boggs. I have read different things about him in the paper, 
different things about him, being called to Washington by the com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever hear Frank Costello's views expressed on 
that? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Did you ever hear that anybody said that there are 
probably as many crooks in the Government as Frank Costello has ? 

Mr. Boggs. No. 

Mr. Moser. You heard nothing like that? 

Mr. Boggs. No. 

Mr. Moser. You didn't say anything to the effect that the Govern- 
ment has gone too far in prosecuting fellows like this ? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. I think you have reference to a piece in the 
newspaper, which later the Miami Daily News retracted, oecause the 
reporter had got that story twisted up between two different stories, 
reported me as talking to Costello in Hollywood and also telling that 
I had said the Government had gone too far in persecuting these 
fellows. I will tell you the story, if you like. 

Mr. Moser. Had you said that? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir ; absolutely not. They are two different stories. 
And later I called the Miami Daily News and they retracted that 
story. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



209 



Mr. Moser. Were efforts made to stop Costello from building a 
house in Hollywood? 

Mr. Boggs. Not that I know of. I didn't know that he had taken 
out a permit to build a house in Hollywood. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know a man by the name of William Sims? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Who is he? 

Mr. Boggs. He runs the Hollywood dog track. That is the only 
Sims that I know, William Sims. 

Mr. Moser. Does he come from Elizabeth, N. J. ? 

Mr. Boggs. I couldn't tell you where he comes from. I believe in 
New Jersey some place. 

Mr. Moser. Does he live there? 

Mr. Boggs. About 10 months out of the year, to my knowledge. 

Mr. Moser. What was his business when he came into Hollywood ; 
his dog track? 

Mr. Boggs. I didn't know of when he came to Hollywood. He came 
when they built the dog track. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know him pretty well ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes ; I knew Mr. Sims pretty well. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know that he was formerly a bootlegger? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You say that your income was perhaps a maximum of 
$7,000 in some years from the hog farm ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. I would guess that. 



offhand. 

Mr. Moser. 

Mr. Boggs. 

Mr. Moser 
pools ? 

Mr. Boggs. 

Mr. Moser. 

Mr. Boggs. 



I can't tell you just right 



And in some other years it was less or perhaps a loss? 

Yes, sir. 

And your only other income is from installing cess- 



Yes, sir. 

Is that done by you personally or by a corporation? 
Personally, up until January this year. My son has 
formed a partnership. 

Mr. Moser. So, when you stated the number of cesspools that you 
had put in, you weren't talking about any corporation; you were 
talking about your own business? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes ; up until this year. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Vincent Alo ? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You don't know him ? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Jake Lansky ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. He lives in Hollywood. 

Mr. Moser. He lives in Hollywood? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Joe Adonis ? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Jiggs Farrell? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know him well ? 

Mr. Boggs. I have known Jiggs Farrell for about 20 years. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Al Peterson ? 



210 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Boggs. Yes ; I know Al Peterson. 

Mr. Moser. What business are those people in ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, now, Jiggs Farrell, I can't tell you what business — 
in fact, I haven't seen Jiggs in a couple of years, but Al Peterson runs 
the Valhalla Restaurant. 

Mr. Moser. And it is only a restaurant ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, it is talked of other things; but I can't tell you 
whether it is or not. I don't know for sure. 

Mr. Moser. Any gambling there? 

Mr. Boggs. I couldn't tell you whether there is or not. 

Mr. Moser. You don't know ? 

Mr. Boggs. I don't gamble. 

Mr. Moser. Is it open now ? 

Mr. Boggs. I don't believe it is. I haven't been in there in a year. 
I haven't been in the restaurant in a year, but I don't believe it is. 
It usually stays open in the wintertime. 

Mr. Moser. Wasn't it closed by court injunction obtained by some 
citizens there? 

Mr. Boggs. Not the restaurant part. 

Mr. Moser. Not the restaurant part? 

Mr. Boggs. No ; not the restaurant part. 

Mr. Moser. What part was ? 

Mr. Boggs. They claimed they had booking up in the upstairs of it, 
or next door to the restaurant. 

Mr. Moser. And an injunction was obtained? 

Mr. Boggs. What I read in the newspaper ; yes. 

Mr. Moser. But you don't know why it was obtained ? 

Mr. Boggs. Only just what I read. Nobody ever consulted me about 
it at all. 

Mr. Moser. How about Jiggs Farrell's place ? 

Mr. Boggs. I read about that in the paper, too. 

Mr. Moser. Is that closed, too? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, I hear about a year or so ago. I just don't know 
whether it was that they got some injunctions against it. 

Mr. Moser. You don't know anything about that except just general 
information ? 

Mr. Boggs. Just information. 

Mr. Moser. How is it that Al Peterson didn't tell you anything 
about it ; he is a good friend of yours, isn't he ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, they are all good friends of yours. 

Mr. Moser. Not mine. 

Mr. Boggs. No, mine. But they don't tell me anything. 

Mr. Moser, Do you know M. B. Wellons ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do }' , ou know Jesse Wellons ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What place do they operate ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, right now they are operating a furniture and 
appliance store, I believe. 

Mr. Moser. The}' never operated the Rainbow Grill ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes; I believe they did several years ago. 

Mr. Moser. Why was that closed ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, they had an injunction against it. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 211 

Mr. Moser. They had an injunction against it? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. How about the Deluxe Cafe ; did they own that ? 

Mr. Boggs. I think the Deluxe was the one they had the injunction 
against, not the Rainbow. Wellons, I believe owns the Deluxeand the 
Rainbow, I believe the Rainbow was the one they got the injunction 
against. 

Mr. Moser. He owns them both? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Papa Joe ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes ; I know Papa Joe. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know him well ? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, not too well. I know him to speak to and talk 
to him. 

Mr. Moser. You know all these people that I have referred to, but 
you don't know what their business is ? 

Mr. Boggs. Just hearsay. I don't bet on anything unless I am 
reasonably assured what it is. 

Mr. Moser. What is the business that you think it is? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, I think it is just what you think it is, booking or 
stuff of that kind. 

Mr. Moser. You think it is a booking business? 

Mr. Boggs. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. If you, as a member of the city commission or as mayor 
of the city, knew there was booking going on in the town, what would 
you do about it ? 

Mr. Boggs. Anytime there has been a complaint referred to me I 
referred it to the city manager and the chief of police. And numerous 
times they have been arrested. 

Mr. Moser. And have you received many complaints ? 

Mr. Boggs. Very seldom. 

Mr. Moser. When these places are referred to you, you refer them 
to the city manager? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Do you follow up to see whether he does anything 
about it ? 

Mr. Boggs. I leave it up to them. 

Mr. Moser. If they stay open, it's up to them to close them? 

Mr. Boggs. Absolutely. 

Mr. Moser. You don't take any responsibility for that? 

Mr. Boggs. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. Have you or other members of the council or commis- 
sion, as a body, ever expressed any view to the city manager as to 
what the policy should be on this enforcement? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes; at different times I have told them to keep it 
closed. 

Mr. Moser. So it is a definite policy of Hollywood to keep those 
places closed ? 

The Chairman. Answer so the reporter can take it down; don't 
shake your head. 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever told anybody not to raid any particular 
Dlace ? 



212 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever told the city manager to go easy on 
anybody ? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. I suppose you have read about the testimony that was 
given here last night, haven't you? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. And you would like to deny all of that, I assume? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. I believe absolutely it is strictly political and 
not practiced. 

Mr. Moser. Nobody ever gave you any money for protection ? 

Mr. Boggs. Absolutely not. 

Mr. Moser. Nobody ever carried any money bags into your house? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Nobody ever heard anybody counting money in your 
dining room? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. That is all untrue? 

Mr. Boggs. Absolutely; yes. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Boggs, you say that this testimony that was given 
last night is all incorrect and was motivated by political reasons? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. How do you account for that ? 

Mr. Boggs. Just by disgruntled, defeated candidates and city em- 
ployees; acts of city employees. 

The Chairman. Mr. Boggs, is that the explanation? Do you 
think that those men would come here and would perjure themselves ; 
can you give any explanation why they would come down here and 
make that assertion if there were no foundation in fact, either con- 
cerning you or others ? 

Mr. Boggs. I absolutely do. I absolutely do. They have contested 
the election. They have hollered "fraud" in the election. They have 
done everything in the world. I absolutely do. And I believe that 
if this committee would look into the character of these people that 
testified, I don't believe their testimony would ever be written into 
any fact at all ; that is, some of them. 

Mr. Moser. It is true, however, that they obtained injunctions 
against these places that were open ? 

Mr. Boggs. Some of them. Wentworth, I think, did. 

Mr. Moser. Wentworth got the injunction, but wasn't he one of 
a group? 

Mr. Boggs. I couldn't say what he was. He was named as one 
that appeared. 

Mr. Moser. I want to ask you about some other places in Holly- 
wood. Do you know the Shore Club? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know Papa Joe's place ? 

Mr. Boggs. Papa Joe's is not in Hollywood. 

Mr. Moser. A place called the Wonder Bar? 

Mr. Boggs. The Wonder Bar ; yes ; that is in Hollywood. 

Mr. Moser. Now, those places were all open in 1949, weren't they? 

Mr. Boggs. I couldn't tell you whether or not they were. 

Mr. Moser. How big a town is Hollywood ? 

Mr. Boggs. Hollywood today is 18,000 to 20,000. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 213 

Mr. Moser. That is a pretty small place, isn't it? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You have been the mayor of this town since 1945, with 
a. few years exception ? 

Mr. Boggs. Since 1945? 

Mr. Moser. With a few years exception ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir; that's correct. 

Mr. Moser. I should think you would know all the places in town. 

Mr. Boggs. This mayorship is kind of an honorary job. You don't 
get paid ; you have to earn a living. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know what the Florida Amusement Co. is? 

Mr. Boggs. I believe it is the Wellons', the Wellons boys'. 

Mr. Moser. The Wellons'? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, I believe the Wellons'. 

Mr. Moser. That is an amusement company ? 
' Mr. Boggs. I believe that is what they call it. 

Mr. Moser. What is the nature of their business? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, now, as I tell you, all I know is that they were 
arrested for bookmaking and they had these, oh, coin machines, these 
pinball machines and music boxes, and stuff of that kind. 

Mr. Moser. No slot machines ? 

Mr. Boggs. Not that I have ever seen. 

Mr. Moser. Have you ever been in their place of business ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Do you know what they have there? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. sir. I have never seen any slot machines ♦there. 

Mr. Moser. You have never seen any slot machines there? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir, I never have. The few times I have been in 
there I have never seen any slot machines. 

Mr. Moser. Have you filed income tax returns every year since you 
have been mayor; Federal income tax returns? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. What is the gross income that you reported in 1945? 

Mr. Boggs. Your friends have got them there. I couldn't tell you 
anything about the books. 

Mr. T. D. Ellis, Jr. I just asked the witness to ask about the re- 
turns. If you asked me that question I don't believe I would be able 
to answer. 

The Chairman. Counsel, register your objection, please. I think 
that is proper, that when having produced his accounts he is entitled 
to have them before him. 

Mr. Boggs. I think I produced those for 10 years there. 

The Chairman. Counsel, it occurs to us that a summary has been 
made of them and, whether the summary may be read off, subject, 
of course, to your verification, read rather than have the witness go 
through each one, it might be quicker that way, unless you have some 
objection. 

Mr. Ellis. Permit me to explain to the chairman that I have never 
seen the returns, so I must be ignorant of the situation. I understood 
that Mr. Boggs had the returns prepared by an auditor, by whom he 
obtained them this morning, and brought them right down here. 

The Chairman. I was only commenting on the figures that were 
taken from them today. If the summary would be given it would, 



214 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

of course, be subject to your check or verification. I am only suggest- 
ing that to save time. 

Mr. Ellis. It will be all right if we are given the opportunity of 
reading them in order to determine the accuracy of them. 

The Chairman. I am going to ask Mr. Moser to read the figures 
and then, Mr. Boggs having the returns, if any differences evolve we 
will be delighted to make the corrections. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Boggs, will you tell us the name of your accountant 
who has prepared these returns ? 

Mr. Boggs. Frank B. Kliny. 

Mr. Moser. Our summary of returns indicates that in the year 1945 
you received a gross income of $31,152.20; does that sound about 
right? 

Mr. Boggs. Well, yes. 1945 did you say? Not in 1945. 

Mr. Moser. 1945 does not show a gross income of approximately 
$31,000? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. I am talking about gross income, not net. 

Mr. Boggs. I don't know nothing about one of these things; I 
turned it over to him and let him make it out. 

(Document handed to witness.) 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, that is what it says here. That is all I can tell you 
about it. 

Mr. Moser. You don't have any reason for doubting it, do you? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir ; I sure don't. 

Mr. Moser. It is based on information you supplied him, is it not? 

Mr. Boggs. That's correct. 

Mr. Moser. And the net income was $4,213.66 ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Boggs. That is what he has got down here. 

Mr. Moser. Now, let us turn to 1946; will you tell me your gross 
income for 19 

Mr. Boggs. $81,168.99. 

Mr. Moser. Is that gross ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. $81,168.99; is that correct? 

Mr. Boggs. It is. 

Mr. Moser. That represents a lot of cesspools. 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Septic tanks. 

Mr. Boggs. It ain't all that. 

Mr. Moser. Now, 1947 ; we want the gross income for that year. 

Mr. Ellis. Do you want the net for 1946 ? 

Mr. Moser. No. 

Mr. Boggs. $93,060.75. 

Mr. Moser. $93,060.75 ? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. 1948 ; the figure is $99,419.70 ? Is that correct ? 

Mr. Boggs. That's correct. 

Mr. Moser. 1949 ; it is $86,700.77 ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Boggs. That's correct. 

Mr. Moser. Gross. In 1950 the gross income was $111,079.26 ? 

Mr. Boggs. That's correct. 

Mr. Moser. That is the gross income. The total for those 6 years, 
1945 through 1950, we have added it up and it comes to $502,529.20. 



ORGANIZED CRTME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 215 

Earlier in your testimony, Mr. Boggs, you told us approximately the 
number of septic tanks you installed each year? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You installed about 15 a month at approximately $81 
apiece; so 15 times 81 would be $1,215 a month gross income for the 
installing of septic tanks? 

Mr. Boggs. That's right. 

Mr. Moser. If you multiply that by 12 you get $14,585 a year ; so 
that would be an estimated average ; and if you multiply that by the 
6 years that we have talked about here, you get a total gross income 
from this installation of septic tanks of $87,510, leaving a difference 
of approximately $424,000? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes. 

Mr. Mcser. You testified that your business also involves some in- 
stallation of other things? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes, sir ; sometimes. 

Mr. Moser. How do you account for the difference of $400,000 ? 

Mr. Boggs. I just told you, Mister, approximately, because I can't 
just sit here and guess at just what we do and everything; I couldn't 
do that. Sometimes you will get sewer jobs. Now, we get sewer 
jobs that run three or four thousand, and there isn't a septic tank 
installed ; it isn't a septic tank in it. 

Mr. Moser. When you receive your money for the installation of 
a septic tank in what form is it paid to you ? 

Mr. Boggs. By check, mostly. 

Mr. Moser. What do you do with the check, deposit it your bank 
account ? 

Mr. Boggs. Sure. 

Mr. Moser. You deposit the check in your bank account ? 

Mr. Boggs. Sure. 

Mr. Moser. Does all of your income come from checks ? 

Mr. Boggs. What did you say? 

Mr. Moser. Does all of your income come in the form of checks? 

Mr. Boggs. Mostly, yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Practically all of it? 

Mr. Boggs. Once in awhile you get somebody that owes you a two 
or three dollar bill. They pay it. I don't know. 

Mr. Moser. You furnished us with your bank statement on the 
Dania Bank for a number of months. I have before me the one for 
November 1949, showing only two deposits, one for $3,724.35, and 
one for $1,098 ; that sounds all right, does it? 

Mr. Boggs. You couldn't prove it by me. 

Mr. Moser. And in the month of December you only had two de- 
posits, one for $3,580 and one for $5,504; do those figures sound all 
right? 

Mr. Boggs. I can't tell you if they sound all right. Mister. 

Mr. Moser. A septic tank costs $81? 

Mr. Boggs. Not all of them now. 

Mr. Moser. But approximately? 

Mr. Boggs. Yes ; approximately. 

Mr. Moser. I should think I would find some deposits of $81 or 
$100, some small deposits. The only deposits I find are very large 
amounts ; how do you account for that ? 



216 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Boggs. It could be all your big jobs come in in one month. 
You know, there is a lot of these small houses you wait 90 days on 
your money; these FHA houses, until they get approved, and you 
are going to take your one contractor that builds more than one house, 
and we don't bill him with each and every septic tank ; we maybe put 
in 25, 15, 10, or maybe 5, and bill him with it. We don't bill him 
with each septic tank individually. 

Mr. Moser. Have you received any money from any source besides 
this? 

Mr. Boggs. No, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Our figures indicate that you have underestimated your 
income by one-fifth your gross income. It is shown by the income 
tax returns that it is five times the amount you estimated it to be on 
the basis of the number of septic tanks you sold. 

Mr. Boggs. I told you approximately. I didn't tell you anything 
accurate, because I don't keep my books, and I want to tell you that 
any of my records are available to you at any time. You're glad to 
look at them, you or anybody. 

Mr. Moser. All right, Mr. Boggs, that is all I want to ask you. 

(Witness excused.) 

The Chairman. I have a telegram from a citizen of Miami that 
should be read in accordance with the committee's policy. It is ad- 
dressed to the chairman and reads as follows : 

Yesterday former Sheriff Jimmy Sullivan testified that his office raided a 
place on Northwest Twenty-seventh Avenue between One Hundred and Sixth 
and One Hundred and Seventh Streets on a gambling complaint and made arrests. 
I operate a filing station, the only building on Northwest Twenty-seventh Avenue 
between One Hundred and Sixth and One Hundred and Seventh Streets. I have 
never been involved in gambling and my place lias never been raided. My lease 
may be terminated by the oil company unless this misstatement is corrected. I 
would appreciate your reading this telegram into the record. 

Mrs. James A. Cooper. 

We are very glad to do that in compliance with the request. 

Mr. Malone. Mr. Chairman, may I speak a moment ? I am Frank 
Malone, former editor of the Morning Mail. You said yesterday, 
Mr. Chairman, and I heard you on television say that if anyone's name 
was brought into this hearing who had not been subpenaed to appear 
here they would be allowed to testify. 

The Chairman. That is the policy of the committee. 

Mr. Malone. I would like to do that, if I may, since my name has 
been brought into the hearing by Mr. Voiler and Mrs. Carroll. 

The Chairman. All right, sir. Will you step forward and be 
sworn ? 

Do you before Almighty God swear that the testimony you will 
give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Malone. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF FRANCIS P. MALONE, MIAMI, FLA. 

The Chairman. Your full name, please? 

Mr. Malone. Francis P. Malone. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Malone, you have asked to come here and testify ? 

Mr. Malone. Yes, sir. I have no subpoena. 

Mr. Moser. Where do you live ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 217 

Mr. Malone. 893 Northeast Eighty-second Street, Miami, Fla. 

Mr. Moser. Are you a friend of Mr. Voiler ? 

Mr. Malone. I am. 

Mr. Moser. An intimate friend? 

Mr. Malone. Pardon me? 

Mr. Moser. An intimate friend? 

Mr. Malone. I have known Mr. Voiler for 15 or 16 years. 

Mr. Moser. All right. You want to make a statement, do you? 

Mr. Malone. I do, in connection with the insinuation this morning 
on an editorial concerning Frank Costello. It was that the editorial 
was written because I knew Costello or that some influence that Cos- 
tello might have had on me caused me to write the editorial. That is 
untrue. 

The Chairman. Did you write the editorial ? 

Mr. Malone. I wrote the editorial. 

The Chairman. Do you desire to say on what you based it ? 

Mr. Malone. The editorial was based — I told your Mr. Jackson, of 
your committee, when he interviewed me at my home a week ago, that 
the editorial was written with my tongue in my cheek. 

Mr. Moser. That the editorial was written with your tongue in your 
cheek ? 

Mr. Malone. Absolutely ; and I repeat that. At the time the edi- 
torial was written the other two daily newpapers in Miami were mak- 
ing a great mystery of the fact that Frank Costello was in the Greater 
Miami area. As I told Mr. Jackson, one would think from the air of 
mystery created he had come here to poison the waterworks or blow 
up the docks. Perhaps he had ; I don't know. But when I said I did 
believe that any citizen of the United States (the United States is 
not a police state) has the right to travel freely within its borders, 
whether Mr. Costello came to Miami, whether he was in Miami, I do 
not know of my own knowledge; whether he came to commit any 
crime I do not know; but, as I say, the editorial was written with my 
tongue in my cheek. 

I have been a newspaperman for 36 years. I have worked on news- 
papers in many parts of the country. My reputation as a newspaper- 
man is not that of one who associates with racketeers or hoodlums. I 
wish to make that clear. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Malone. Thank you. 

Mr. Malone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

(Witness excused.) 

The Chairman. I desire to make another statement. Since we 
convened in this afternoon's session a telegram has been received, 
addressed to the chairman, and with the name affixed to it, the Gov- 
ernor of Florida, Fuller Warren. 

The gist of it is : It undertakes to answer or respond to the itemized 
statements made in the statement read by the chairman at yesterday's 
meeting. The telegram will be filed in the record. And that brings 
me to the announcement which we desire to make concerning our 
attitude in connection with the Governor of the State. It is as fol- 
lows [reading] : 

As was indicated in our statement during Thursday's session we have thought 
it desirable to have Governor Warren tell us what he knows concerning matters 
within the scope of our investigation. An invitation to the Governor was based 



218 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

on the belief that he possessed desired information bearing on subjects under 
inquiry. 

But since the beginning of these hearings the Governor has caused to be 
published in the press a statement indicating that he does have such informa- 
tion. An Associated Press dispatch appeared on the first page of a local news- 
paper, issue of Friday, June 22. Therein he makes accusation that a large sum 
of money was improperly passed to an officer of the Greater Miami Crime 
Commission which relates to widespread gambling operation and which was to 
exert influence on litigation, according to the Governor. 

Without indicating any opinion as to the truth or falsity of the accusation, 
the fact is that the subject matter itself is one that our committee would be 
interested to hear about. So the Governor by his own statement admits the 
correctness of our assertion that he possessed information which is relevant 
here. 

We came to Florida in the hope that the Governor would see fit to give us 
here any data he has. Unfortunately our three invitations have been refused. 
In fact, the Governor has not even deigned to communicate with the committee, 
the chairman or the staff. (Except as might appear from this telegram, a tele- 
gram purportedly signed by the Governor, although we have no further informa- 
tion than that.) 

The only course left open to us is to take other means to secure from the 
Governor the information he possesses. Accordingly I will issue a subpena for 
Gov. Fuller Warren to appear in Washington, D. C. The date for the hearing 
is being set for July 9. 

(A deputy marshal stepped forward.) 

The Chairman. You are the United States marshal ? 

Deputy Marshal. Deputy marshal. 

The Chairman. But you act for and on behalf of and with the full 
authority of the United States marshal ? 

Deputy Marshal. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. I hand you herewith a subpena directed to the 
Governor of Florida requesting his appearance at the time mentioned 
in the subpena in the District of Columbia, Washington, D. C. 

(Thereupon, the said document was handed to the United States 
deputy marshal.) 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 219 



Exhibit No. 2 



85277— 51— pt. 16 15 



220 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



221 



•HORT FO»* 



Exhibit No. 3 

OHEW ■ FORM m I Si 

LWR 350 PACE 36 



Th'lS Bcfll, Hade the faTJt- day of November A. O. l'J$0 . by 

ETHEL G. SULLIVAN and JAMES SULLIVAN, her husband, 

of the County of Dade . Stale of Florida 

hereinafter called the grantor 3 . to 

THOMAS A. RICE and RUTH U. RICE, his wife, whose address 1» 
Aberdeen, Maryland 

hereinafter called the grantee 8 

liJitnCSSCth, Thai the said grantor 3 . in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and 

__—_.- — —_.— _ m — m* —KBmXX. 



SI 






other good and valuable consideration- 



the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, do give, grant, bargain, sell, ulien. remise, re- . 

lease, enfeoff, convey and confirm unto the said grantee 3 and thair heirs and assigns \ 

in fee simple, the lands situate in Harford County. State ofVEBOBh. described ' 

as follows. Maryland 

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land situate in 
the Town of Aberdeen, in the Second Election District of 
Harford County, which said lot fronts forty-seven and 
one-half (U7s) feet on the westerly side of Bel Air Avenue, 
with a depth westerly therefrom of two hundred and ten 
(210) feet to Buchanan Alley there laid out. The improve- 
ments thereon being known at present as No. 20U W. Bel Air 
Avenue; being the same and all the land as described in a 
deed dated September 16, .l°u9 from Richard A. Neu and wife 
to Ethel G. Sullivan and recorded among the Land Records of 
Harford County in Liber G. P.. G. No. 33U, folio 326» 
together with the buildings and improvements thereon and 
the rights, roads, ways, waters, privileges and appur- 
tenances thereto belonging or in any wise appertaining. 



THIS D5iB IS FOR CORRECTION OF THAT CERTAIN DEED RECORDED IN DEED 
LAND RECORD BOOK 337 G. R. G. , page 77. 



iC li&Vt atld tO Hold the same together with the hereditaments and appurtenances, unto 

the said grantee 3 , and their heirs and assigns in fee simple. •, 

fitlU the said grantors .for themselves and their heirs and legal 

representatives, covenant with said grantee a . their heirs, legal representatives and 

assigns: Thai said grantor S are indefeasibly seized of said {and in fee simple; thai 

said grantor 3 have full power and lawful right to convey said lands in fee simple, as 

aforesaid; that it shall be lawful for said grantee 3 , their heirs, legal representatives 

and assigns, at all limes peaceably and quietly to enter upon, hold, occupy and enjoy said land; 
thai said land is free from all encumbrances; that said grantor a . their heirs and legal 

representatives, will make such further assurances to perfect the fee simple title to said land in 
said grantee 3 , their heirs, legal representatives and assigns, as may reasonably be re- 

quired: and thai said grantor 9 do hereby fully warrant the title to said land and will 

defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. 



Witness 



the hand 3 and seal a of said grantor a the day and year first above written. 



Signed. Sealed and Delivered in the Presence of 
Vr. Hall 



Verta h. ijmith 





222 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

*l . ._, .. LIBER 350vPAG£ 37 

State cfjionii, j 

County of dade j 

I ¥wffyjj Cfftlilj, That this day in the next above named Stale and County before me, an 
officer dull/ authorized and acting, personally appeared 

Ethel 0. Sullivan and James Sullivan, her husband 
to me well known and known to me lo be the individual s described in and who executed the 
foregoing deed, and they acknowledged then and there before me that they 

executed said deed. 

find I further Certify, Thai the said ethei a. suiiivan ALL ta xes paid 

... ctdEFTT ROWMAN TREAS 

known to me lo be the wife of the said James Sullivan 51 Ktci i u W '<\\i,\iOi<A 

on a separate and private examination, taken and made in the above named Stale and County by 
and before me, separately and apart from her said husband, did this day acknowledge before me, 
an officer authorized to take acknowledgments of deeds, that she executed the foregoing deed 
freely and voluntarily and without any compulsion, constraint, apprehension or fear of or from 
her said husband. 

Witness my hand and official scut til Miami this * /*" day of 

November , A. D. 19 50. 

RECEIVED FOR RECfcJiV)/^ AJ/3a}mT\X^..LA-.:.. 

RffQROEOixUBERJZQB Davina A. Selby 

<.o4iB.F0Uolt.0NE OF THE N?)9ry p ubH sto f e 

My commission "e*pii 
Umi \1 O 1 ■> PU 'Ifl Bonded by Amo'icon Surety Co of N Y .■ « 

nOV I J <- It I" Jl) My commission expires '•*>"■ day $ 



Nofon, Publ.c, Stole I ,„> 

--i expires T^ov 77. TvoT^ ^ ^ O 




■•'.>•» V",VV 
A.D.ti 



I <>n fj RECORDS HARFORB 

COUNTY, M0. & EXAMINED 

PER GiRUNO R CREER. 

CLERK 

STATE OF MARYLAND, COUNTY OF HARFORD, SCT: 

I HEREBY C ERTTFY that the aforegoing is a true copy of the 
Deed as taVen from LiLer C.R.G. No. 350 Folio 36, one of the Land 
■Records of Harford County. 

In Testimony Thereof I hereunto set my hand 
and affix the Seal of the Circuit Court for 
Harford County this 13th day of June, 1951. 



Clerk of the Circuit Court fo 



lerk of the Circuit Court for Harford County 



ORGANIZED CRIME EN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 
Exhibit No. 5 



223 



Num- 
ber 


Name 


Address 


5-3530 
5-5170 
5-5287 
58-6566 




301 23d St., Miami Beacb. BIF-HC. 


Billed to Harry O. Voiler. 


309 23d St., Miami Beacb. BIF-HC. 


Billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. 


313 23d St., Miami Beach. BIF-HC. 


Billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. 
Palm Court Hotel 


309 23d St., Miami Beach. PBX-TK. 


Billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. 


309 23d St., Miami Beach. PBX-TK. 




Billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. 


309 23d St., Miami Beacb. BIF-HC. 


68 3511 


Billed to George McElroy. 
Palm Court Hotel -- 


309 23d St., Miami Beach. BIF-HC. 




Billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. 


309 23d St. (room 201) Miami Beach. 




Billed to Kuby Lazarus. 
Palm Court Hotel 


BIF-HC. 
309 23d St., Miami Beach. PBX-TK. 


5-70 9 l 


Billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. 


311 23d St., Miami Beach. BIF-HC. 


5-3°02 


Billed to Mabel M. Cumrnings. 


317 23d St., Miami Beach. BIF-HC. 


58-4911 


Billed to Alice Hodge. 
Palm Court Hotel 


309 23d St., Miami Beach. BIF-HO. 




Billed to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. 





Result of Premise Visit to Check for Legitimate Installation 

March 2, 1950. 

On this date, the undersigned disconnected and removed the services and 
equipment on the attached list which were located on the premises of the Palm 
Court Hotel, 309 Twenty-third Street, Miami Beach. 

After discovery by the plant department that service was being illegally used 
at the Palm Court Hotel address, an investigation was made to determine the 
extent of the illegal services. 

All services removed on this date were found to have been unquestionably 
moved without the company's knowledge, illegally wired, and concentrated in one 
room of the hotel. 

H. Y. Couch, 
Miami Beach Manager. 
Raeph Beers, 
Miami Beach Repair Supervisor. 

Copied verbatim from telephone company records. 

Ralph Mills. 

On July 25, 1950, the undersigned visited the premises of the Palm Court 
Hotel, 309 Twenty-third Street, Miami Beach, Fla., in connection with the, re- 
ported illegal move and attachments on services at that address. 

Our investigation revealed the following telephone services which had been 
illegally moved and on which foreign attachments were discovered : 
Telephone No. 5-7018, Sandi Barber Shop, 305 Twenty-third Street; Business 

individual line service 
Telephone No. 5-0579, Julian Arfe, 309 Twenty-third Street, room 205 ; residence 

individual line service 
Telephone No. 58-3787 (XL), Palm Court Hotel cigar stand, 309 Twenty-third 

Street; business individual line service 
Telephone No. 5-3500 (NL), DeMarlos Beauty Parlor, 309 Twenty-third Street; 

business individual line service 
Telephone No. 5-9911, Palm Court Hotel, 309 Twenty-third Street; business 

individual line service 
Telephone No. 5-3585 (NL) , Atlas Radio Co., 315-A Twenty-third Street ; business 

individual line service 
Telephone No. 5-0529, Twenty-third Street Radio Co., 315-A Twenty-third Street ; 

business individual line service 

85277— 51— pt. 16 16 



224 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Telephone No. 5-6910 (NL), Helen Penso, 323 Twenty-third Street; business 

individual line service 
Telephone No. 5-1009 (NL), Palm Court Hotel, 309 Twenty-third Street; business 

individual line service 
Telephone No. 5-1630 (NL) , Palm Court Hotel, 309 Twenty-third Street ; business 

individual line service 
Telephone No. 5-4808 (NL) , Palm Court Hotel, 309 Twenty-third Street ; business 

individual line service 

As a result of our investigation, the foregoing services were disconnected on 
July 25, 1950, and instrumentalities and equipment removed. 

H. Y. Couch, 
Miami Beach Manager. 
H. D. Cannon, 
Miami Beach Installation Supervisor. 
Copied verbatim from telephone company records. 

Ralph Mills. 

Miami, Fla., Administration 

Kemoval of telephone service, Sandi Barber Shop, Julian Arafe, Palm Court 
Hotel Cigar Stand, DeMarlos Beauty Parlor, Atlas Radio Co., Twenty-third 
Street Radio Co., Helen Penso, Palm Court Hotel (4). 

Mr. A. B. Dooley, 

Florida Manager, Jacksonville, Fla. 
Dear Mr. Dooley : The following telephone services were discontinued on 

Miami Beach on July 25, 1950, as a result of the discovery of illegal moves and 

attachments in violation of our tariff regulation. 

Telephone No. 5-7018. Business individual flat-rate line. Listed for Sandi 
Barber Shop and billed to John Sandi. Located at 305 Twenty-third Street. 
Service connected October 15, 1945. Violation found: Illegal attachments and 
illegal move of service — service disconnected and instrumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-0579. Residence individual flat-rate line. Listed and billed to 
Julian Arafe. Located at 309 Twenty-third Street, room 205. Service con- 
nected December 9, 1943. Violation found : Illegal attachments and illegal 
move of service — service disconnected and instrumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-3787. Business individual flat-rate line. A nonlist num- 
ber in the name of Palm Court Hotel cigar stand, and billed to Palm Court 
Hotel, Inc. Located at 309 Twenty-third Street. Service connected June 
12, 1947. Violation found : Illegal attachments and illegal move of service — 
service disconnected and instrumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-3500. Business individual fiat-rate line. A nonlist number in 
the name of DeMarlos Beauty Parlor and billed to Sam DeMarlos. Located 
at 309 Twenty-third Street. Service connected June 12, 1947. Violation 
found: Illegal attachments and illegal move of service — service disconnected 
and instrumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-3500. Business individual flat-rate line. A nonlist number in 
the name of DeMarlos Beauty Parlor and billed to Sam DeMarlos. Located 
at 309 Twenty-third Street. Service connected October 23, 1945. Violation 
found : Illegal attachments and illegal move of service — service disconnected 
and instrumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-9911. Business individual flat-rate line. Listed and billed bo 
Palm Court Hotel. Located at 309 Twenty-third Street. Service connected 
February 26, 1947. Violation found : Illegal attachments and illegal move of 
service — service disconnected and instrumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-3585. Business individual flat-rate line. A nonlist number in 
the name of and billed to Atlas Radio Co. Located at 315-A Twenty-third 
Street. Service connected October 23, 1945. Violation found : Illegal attach- 
ments and illegal move t>f service — service disconnected and instrumentality 
removed 

Telephone No. 5-0529. Business individual flat-rate line. Listed for Twenty- 
third Street Radio Co. and billed to Harry Sternberg. Located at 315-A 
Twenty-third Street Service connected January 29, 1944. Violation found : 
Illegal attachments and illegal move of service — service disconnected and in- 
strumentality removed 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



225 



Telephone No. 5-6910. Business individual flat-rate line. A nonlist number in 
the name of and billed to Helen Penso. Located at 32. - ! Twenty-third Street. 
Service connected February 10, 1944. Violation found : Illegal attachments 
and illegal move of service — service disconnected and instrumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-1009. Business individual flat-rate line. A nonlist number in 
the name of Palm Court Hotel and billed to San Penso. Located at 309 
Twenty-third Street. Service connected August 2, 1945. Violation found: 
Illegal attachments and illegal move of service— service disconnected and in- 
strumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-1630. Business individual flat-rate line. A nonlist number in 
the name of Palm Court Hotel and lulled to Palm Court Hotel, Inc. Located 
?.t 309 Twenty-third Street. Service connected June 19, 1947. Violation 
found : Illegal attachments and illegal move of service — service disconnected 
and instrumentality removed 

Telephone No. 5-4908. Business individual flat-rate line. A nonlist number in 

the name of and billed to Palm Court Hotel. Located at 309 Twenty-third 

Street. Service connected June 6, 1947. Violation found : Illegal attachments 

and illegal move of service — service disconnected and instrumentality removed 

Yours very truly, 

, District Manager. 



Exhibit No. 6 





226 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Exhibit No. 7 

Promissory Note — §125,000 

January 31, 1950. 

One year after date Oliver Publishing Corp., a Florida corporation, Harry O. 
Voiler and Louise L. Voiler promise to pay to the order of Oreeta Yelverton, of 
Dade County, Fla., the sum of $125,000 with interest at the rate of 3 percent per 
annum until maturity. 

This note is secured by all the assets that the Oliver Publishing Corp. owns 
such as the building located at 1521 Alton Road and all the contents within 
its confines but prior to a first chattel mortgage on the machinery amounting to 
$25,000* and $50,000 on the building, and is subject to all of the terms and coven- 
ants therein contained. 

It is further understood and agreed that the Oliver Publishing Corp. and Harry 
O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler have made no other commitments nor shall the 
Oliver Publishing Corp. and Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler make any 
other obligations or sign any promissory notes that will in any way jeopardize 
the assets of said corporation until this note has been fully redeemed to the 
complete satisfaction of Oreeta Yelverton of Dade County, Fla. 

It is further agreed that the 50 shares of stock which is the capital stock of 
the Oliver Publishing Corp. shall be put up as collateral with Oreeta Yelverton 
as further good faith on the part of Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler and 
the Oliver Publishing Corp. in redeeming its pledge. It is also understood that 
there are no bonds of any kind issued or outstanding by the Oliver Publishing 
Corp., a Florida corporation. 

And whereas the right is given by the Oliver Publishing Corp. and Harry O. 
Voiler and Louise L. Voiler to Oreeta Yelverton at the redemption of this note 
by the Oliver Publishing Corp. and Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler to grant 
to Oreeta Yelverton the privilege of purchasing 25 shares of the capital stock of 
the Oliver Publishing Corp. which now consists of 50 shares for the sum of 
$125,000, giving her an equal share in the ownership and management of the 
Oliver Publishing Corp., a Florida corporation. 

Oliver Publishing Corp., 
By Harry O. Voiler, President. 
Louise L. Voiler, Secretary. 

Chattel Mortgage 

This indenture, made this 31st day of January 1950 between the Oliver Pub- 
lishing Corp., a Florida corporation, Harry O. Voiler and Louise L. Voiler, all 
of Miami Beach, Fla., called the mortgagors, and Oreeta Yelverton of Dade 
County, Fla., called the mortgagee. 

Witnesseth, That said mortgagors for and in consideration of the sum of $125,- 
000 in hand paid by the said mortgagee, the receipt of which is hereby acknowl- 
edged, have granted, bargained, and sold to the said mortgagee, the following 
described property, situated, lying, and being located in the mortgagors' print- 
ing an publishing plant located at 1521 Alton Road, better known as the 
Morning Mail Building, in the city of Miami Beach, Dade County, Fla., to wit : 

composing room equipment 

Model 8 Linotype machine, serial No. 43676, with motor 

Model 8 Linotype machine, serial No. 50905R, with motor 

Model 31 Linotype machine, serial No. 60939, with motor (new machine) 

Ludlow typograph machine, serial No. 3648, cabinets and mats 

El Rod slug-casting machine, F-1736-E (new) 

Rouse vertical miterer, electric 1069, serial No. 2864 

Rouse hand miterer 

Hamilton electric storage cabinet, 20-page (new) 

Hammond glider saw, model G-4 (new) 

ATF saw, model S-B, serial No. 518 

Rapid Margach saw 

Vandercook composing room cylinder proof press : 

17 by 32 inch base 

Galley size 
20 turtles and 20 chases 
Blower for cleaning machines 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 227 

Approximately 200 galleys, galley-storage cabinets, and make-up tables and banks 
Tools and miscellaneous equipment for maintenance and complete use of all 
equipment 

PRESS EQUIPMENT 

Hoe 48-page web perfecting press No. 2401 

Chandler & Price 12 by IS new series job press, serial No. 50315, with counter, 

Miller feeder, and motor 
Motor — generator set Cutler-Hammer : 
75 horsepower, boxes included 
5 horsepower, boxes included 
Challenge-Diamond 30-inch power cutter, serial No. 22516, with hand clamp, 

extra knife, steel measuring tape, and motor 
Rollers, all rubber, 75-m47, new 

STEREOTYPE EQUIPMENT 

Hoe heavy-duty 2-speed matrix roller, model 23, serial No. 790, with motor and 

two tables, humidor cabinet for mats 
Hoe No. 5 single-screw flat shaver, serial No. 428, with motor 
Hoe single-page nonadjustable curved router, with motor 
Hoe curved shaver with automatic plate, ejector, with motor 
Hoe 2-ton stereotype metal furnace, gas burner, blower, single cooled equipoise 

curved casting mold 
Hoe S-column, 4-clamp lock-up flat casting mold with one set 3-part gages 
Hoe cutting-off cylinder for beveling edges of curved plates, A.S. motor 
Hoe finishing cylinder for type 7 Aq inch thick 

Hoe No. 1 size combination monorail saw table and trimmer, with motor 
Hoe gas-heated combined curved and flat scorcher 
Motor generator set (starting boxes included) 
Surface combustion remelting furnace, model M-446 
Metal truck, pneumatic tires 
20,000 pounds metal 

Mailing Equipment 

Bunn package tying machine, serial No. 102S9 (new). 

Toledo style 799-B postal sale, serial No. 534225. 

Weld-Bilt electric lift, serial No. E-H688, 1,500-pound capacity. 

And the said mortgagors hereby fully warrant the title to said property and 
will defend the same against the lawful claims of persons, with the exception 
of Max Orovitz, of Miami Beach, Fla., who retains a first mortgage of $25,000 
on all the contents herein described but not the building itself. 

Provided always that if said mortgagors shall pay to the said mortgagee a 
certain promissory note which reads as follows : 

PROMISSORY NOTE $125,000 

Miami Beach, Fla., January SI, 1950. 
One year after date, Oliver Publishing Corp., a Florida corporation, Harry O. 
Voiler and Louise L. Voiler promise to pay to the order of Oreeta Yelverton, of 
Dade County, Fla., the sum of $125,000 with interest at the rate of 3 percent 
per annum until maturity. 

This note is payable at the Mercantile National Bank of Miami Beach, Fla., 
for value received without any relief from valuation or appraisement laws. 
Payment of all or any part of the principal and interest of this note may be 
made at any time, but if not paid at maturity the note shall bear the legal rate 
of interest and attorney's fee. 

The drawers and endorsers severally waive presentment for payment, notice 
of nonpayment, protest and notice of protest and diligence in bringing suit 
against any or all of them. 

This note is secured by chattel mortgage on all assets that the Oliver Pub- 
lishing Corp. owns such as the building located at 1521 Alton Road and all the 
contents within its confines. 

Oliver Publishing Corp., 
Harry O. Voiler, President. 
Louise L. Voiler, Secretary. 



228 



OEGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



Exhibit No. 8 
United States Department of Justice, 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, 

Washington, D. C, June 16, 1951. 
The following is the record of FBI No. 506958 : 



Contributor of 
fingerprints 



Name and number 



Arrested or 
received 



Charge 



Disposition 



USM, Chicago, I1L 

PD, Chicago, El... 

Do 



USP, Leavenworth, 
Kans. 



Martin Accardo, No. 

Martin Accardo, No. 

240. 
Martin Accardo, No. 

C-33656. 
Martin Accardo, No. 

41445. 



Apr. 28, 1931 

do 

Nov. 16. 1931 
Apr. 23,1932 



Sec. 88, title, 18, NPA. 

Suspect in a prohibi- 
tion case. 

Violated Prohibition 
Act. 

Prohibition — pos- 
session, sale, trans- 
portation. 



Pending. 



and 



4\i years 

$1,500. 
2 years; Dec. 14, 

1933, expired. 



Description : Color, white ; sex, male ; occupation, chauffeur ; birthplace, Italy 
age, 32 years in 1932 : height, 5 feet 8% inches ; weight, 167 pounds ; eyes, ch. It. 
hair, black ; complexion, medium dark ; build, medium muscular. 

Exhibit No. 9 



ORDINANCE NO. 1095: 
Sect. 1,2,3, & ^ 

FOR REFERENCE - SEE" 
FILE 



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 
DIVISION OF POLICE 

FIREARMS REGISTRATION 
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA 




NAME "OF PURCHASER (Please Print) 



XLOR-SEX* • : AGE "I HEIGHT 

i+i \r'f" 



ADDRESS 
I At 7 

— '^yW 



HAIR 



WEIGHT 



WHERE 'B0EH 



RESIDENT OF 



TIME RESIDED THEPI 




THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE NAKED PERSON HAS THIS DATE PURCHASED 
AND RECEIVED DELIVERY OF THE DESCRIBED FIREARM A ; o> THAT ALL NUMBERS 
AND DESCRIPTION OF WEAPON AND INFORMATION OF PURCHASER APE CORRECT. 



DATE OF SALE / # - ? f ' -ti- 1 ? 



NOTE: This certificate must be mailed or delivered to the Bureau 
of Records, Miami Police Department, not later than the 
first Monday following the date of sale. 



INDEXED BY: 



FOR OFFICE USE 



M ^ 4^3 Jj?a? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



229 



Exhibit No. 10 

1'mted States Department of Justice, 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, 

Washington, D. C, June 16, 1951. 

The following is the record of FBI No. 1043.">4 : 



Contributor of 
fingerprints 



PD, Detroit, Mich... 
SP, Jackson. Mich... 

St. H. of C. and Br. 

Pr., Marquette, 

Mich. 
PD, Chicago, 111 



SO, Los Angeles, 

Calif. 
PD, Burbank, Calif. 



PD. Miami, Fla. 
SO, Miami, Fla.. 



Name and number 



PD, Miami Beach, 
Fla. 
Do 



PD, Miami Beach, 
Fla. 

SO, Los Angeles, 

Calif. 
SO, Miami, Fla 



SO, Miami, Fla. 



Harry Voiler, No. 

Harry Voiler, No. 

11785. 
Harry Voiler, No. 
2772. 

Harry Voiler, No. 
C-21771. 



Harry O. Voiler, 

No. 190289. 
Harry Ozias Voiler, 

No. 216-A-3. 



Harrv O. Voiler, 

No. 6584. 
Harry O. Voiler, 

No. 021116. 
Harry O. Voiler, 

No. 449. 
Harrv O. Voiler, 

No*. 2595. 



Harrv Voiler, No. 
2595. 

Harry O. Voiler, No. 

267981. 
Harrv Ozias Voiler, 

No". 68134. 
Harry Voiler, No. 

118185. 



Arrested or 
received 



(•) 
Apr. 9, 1918 
Dec. 18,1918 

Mar. 23, 1930 



Sept. 19,1933 
Nov. 3, 1933 

Feb. 21,1934 
Feb. 22,1934 

( 2 ) 
Dec. 19, 1937 



Dec. 30. 1937 

Jan. 21,1938 
Nov. 24, 1944 
Nov. 15, 1950 



Charge 



Disposition 



Robbery, armed 

...do 

Robbery — armed 
with intent to kill 
if resist . 

G. P 



Conspiracy to com- 
mit vagrancy. 

Suspected of murder 
en route. 



Fugitive robbery for 
Los Angeles, Calif. 

Fugitive, California, 
armed robbery. 



(1) Violation Ord- 
nance 426 (per- 
mitting construc- 
tion work to be 
done on Sunday); 
(2) interfering 
with an officer. 

Fugitive from jus- 
tice from Los An- 
geles, Calif. 

Robbery 



Violated State Bev- 
erage Law. 

Renting room for 
gambling pur- 
poses. 



Apr. 6, 1918, 15 years, 

Jackson. 
15 to 30 years. 



Apr. 22, 1930, bond 
forfeited, attempted 
murder; May 29, 
1930, stricken off 
with leave to rein- 

Oct. 25, 1933, released. 

Nov. 6. 1933, delivered 
to Los Angele- 
County district at 
torney's office. 

Held under $10,000 
bond. 

Same notations. 

Same. 

$25 and costs or 25 
days and 5 days; 
suspended 5 days 
during G. B. 



Remanded to J. P. 



Jan. 24, 1938, released 

bond. 
Feb. 27, 1945, costs or 

10 days C. J. paid 



i Arrival date not given (fingerprinted Jan. 5, 1918). 
2 Criminal registration, Feb. 28, 1934. 

As Harry Voiler, Cincinnati, Ohio, October 7, 1925, suspected person.^ No. 
021116, SO, Miami, Fla., February 23, 1934, released on bond. No. 021116, SO, 
Miami, Fla., January 18, 1935, bond returned defendant on order county judge, 
case having been disposed of according to law. 

Description: Color, white; sex, male; height, 5 feet 6 inches; weight, 182 
pounds ; complexion, fair ; eyes, brown ; hair, gray ; build, medium ; birth : 
November 6, 1891, New York or Rumania ; occupation : Producer. 



Exhibit No. 11 

Tallahassee, Fla., June 20, 1951. 
Hon. Herbert R. O'Conor, 

United States Senator From Maryland, 
Biscayne Terrace Hotel, Miami, Fla.: 
Governor Warren has telephoned from the beach where he is resting to ask 
me to send you the following message : "I have no personal information regarding 
'relationships between organized criminals from other States infesting Florida,' 



230 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

as stated in your telegram. Gambling, which had openly operated in Florida for 
more than 50 years, has been suppressed by my administration. As Governor of 
Florida, I renew my invitation to meet with your committee at the executive 
offices in Tallahassee, the capital of Florida, and the seat of its government." 

Loyal Compton, Press Secretary. 



Tallahassee, Fla., June 22, 1951. 
Hon. Herbert R. O'Conor, 

Chairman, Senate Crime Investigating Committee, 
Dade County Courthouse, Miami, Fla.: 
Yesterday afternoon, according to the press, you publicly read into the official 
record of the Senate Crime Investigating Committee a statement reciting that 
your committee would like to obtain from me information on the following 
matters : 

1. Any knowledge of large contributions made to his 1948 campaign for 
Governor and whether any of these sums were to his knowledge received from 
gambling interests or gangster syndicates. 

2. Whether commitments were made to those making these substantial con- 
tributions regarding tolerance of gambling operations. 

3. Whether steps were taken after the election to carry out any such com- 
mitments. 

4. Whether arrangements were made after the election to permit and control 
activities of the bookie race wire service coming into Florida. 

5. Whether the Governor had any information regarding the relationship 
between the operation of rackets with an interstate aspect and the conduct 
of Florida law-enforcement officials subject to the Governor's constitutional 
powers. 

6. What knowledge the Governor may have as to the penetration of Chicago, 
New York, and other out-of-State gangsters into legitimate businesses in Florida. 
Since you did not see fit to accept my invitation to come to Tallahassee, the 
capital of Florida, to discuss these matters with me publicly, I am taking this 
opportunity to publicly answer each of your questions so there can be no doubt 
in your mind or in the minds of the committee and the public what the answers 
are. Since your public statement was made a part of the official record of your 
committee I hope you will make my answers to your questions also a part of 
jthe official record. My answers are : 

1. No cambler or gangster made any contribution to my campaign, so far 
as I know. 

2. No commitments were asked and no commitments were made regarding 
tolerance of gambling in Florida by any contributor to my campaign or anyone 
else. The actions of my administration in stamping out gambling, which had 
openly operated for more than 50 years in Florida, and my record in suspending 
nine law-enforcement officers on charges of neglecting to enforce the gambling 
laws should be proof enough that no commitment was made. 

3. No commitments were made, so none could be carried out. 

4. I have no knowledge that any arrangements were made at any time to permit 
and control activities of the bookie race wire service coming into Florida. On 
the contrary, the antibookie bill, designed to destroy bookie race wire service 
coming into Florida, which had failed of passage in the 1945 session and the 
1947 session of the Florida legislature, was passed with my active aid by the 
1949 session of the legislature. I signed the bill into law, and it has been very 
effective in suppressing bookie gambling. 

5. I have no knowledge of any relationship between the operation of rackets, 
whether interstate or intrastate, and the conduct of Florida law enforcement 
officials subject to the Governor's constitutional powers. 

6. I have no knowledge of the penetration of any out-of-State gangsters, or 
local gangsters, into any legitimate businesses in Florida. 

Fuller Warren, 
Governor of Florida. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



231 



NOTICE TO GUESTS 
A safe is prodded in the office for the 
SAFEKEEPING of money, jewels, orna- 
ments, bank notes, bonds, negotiable 
securities, and precious stones belonging 
to guests. 



Exhibit No. 12 

TheJJIacljstone 

CHICAGO 



# 



^3 name 




STREET. 






97159 




:h^ge 



-£* 




HUBBARD ALBERT 
MIAMI FLA 



j& 



52L 



DEPARTED 



ZO- 



st 



/i/y 



M& 



MEMO 









™ zn 



O 



iD 



!*!_ 



in 



232 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



1204-5-6 

4-2 1 OUT 4—23 

1007 BISCAY^ BLOG MIAMI FLA 

4 59 PM PM HS 



ALBERT lygBf"- /£g^- D 

Www 



44699 



stone 

. CHICAGO 




ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



233 



NOTICE TO GUESTS 
A safe is provided in the office for the 
SAFEKEEPING of money, lewels. orna- 
ments, bank notes, bonds, negotiable 
securities, and precious stones belonging 
to guest 



Exhibit No. 13 



I be J3 lactone 

CHICAGO 



97146 






'7 
!EET. 



/3t -*s£ ^^-JH 



vO 
X3 



CITY. 




CRAIG R M 
MIAMI 'FLA 










NO. PREV. 
VISITS 




ARRIVED 


DEPARTED 


ROOM 


NO. 

PERS. 


RATE 


FOLIO 


















-J 
























T 
















































•at- 
























- -4 




b 




















O 

*- 

























rr\ 


\ 
























t 


1 





























































































































MEMO 



234 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



1204-5-6 CRAIS R » 
4-21 OUT 4~23 
136 tf€ 1ST ST Nil AMI FLA 
4 59 P» W MS 




D 44698 



$%t .Btaebtone 

/ / MICHIGAN AVENUE ■ CHICAGO 



Explanation 



Amt.Charged IAmt.Credited 



APR21-49 
APR21-49 

APR21-49 



R00H 



S.SERV 

I 

-PAID 



*ft 



954 



OjOO 



K#1204- 




TRANSFER TO CITY LEDGER 



Approved by_ 



Exhibit No. 18 
Exclusive Listing 



Date: December 8, 1949. 



The Keyes Company, 

Miami, Miami Beach, and Coral Gables: 

1. In consideration of your agreement to list and to use your efforts to secure 
a purchaser for the property described as 261 S.W. 80th Road, furnished, and 
your further agreement to advertise the property and list it with other real estate 
brokers in accordance with the program outlined below, I hereby give you for a 
period of 3 months from this date (and thereafter until this agreement is re- 
voked by ten days' written notice delivered to you), the exclusive right and 
authority to sell the property at the following price and terms, or at any other 
price and terms acceptable to me : 

Price: $15,500.00. Terms: Cash above mortgage; or all cash. Interest on 
encumbrances, taxes, insurance premiums, and rents shall be adjusted pro rata at 
date of closing. Improvement liens are to be paid by me. 

2. In case you secure a purchaser for the property, the usual and customary 
practice for the examination, curing title, and for closing the transaction shall 
apply. I agree to deliver to the purchaser a good and sufficient warranty deed, 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 235 

free and clear of all lions and encumbrances except those which the purchaser 
shall assume as part of the purchase price and which are specifically detailed 
above. 

3. For finding a purchaser for the above property : 

A. I agree to pay the regular Realty Board commission of 5 percent of the 
sales price. 

B. The commission is to be paid whether the purchaser be secured by you 
or me, or by any other person, at the price and upon the terms mentioned 
or at any other price or terms acceptable to me ; or if the property is after- 
wards sold within three (3) months from the termination of this agency, to 
a purchaser to whom it was submitted by you or a cooperating broker during 
the continuance of the agency, and whose name has been disclosed to me. 

C. In any exchange of this property, permission is given you to represent 
and receive commissions from both parties. 

4. In consideration of this exclusive listing, The Keyes Co. agrees : 

A. To carefully inspect my property and secure complete information 
regarding it. 

B. To direct the concentrated efforts of its organization in bringing about 
a sale. 

C. To advertise my property as it deems advisable in the local newspapers 
or other mediums of merit. 

D. To furnish at all times additional information requested by any co- 
operating real-estate broker, and to assist cooperating brokers in closing 
a deal on my property when requested to do so. 

E. To keep me informed through the salesman in charge as to the progress 
made toward the consummation of a deal. 

5. In consideration of the above, I agree to refer to you all inquiries of brokers 
or others interested in my property. 

6. As my agent, you are authorized to accept, receipt for and hold all money 
paid or deposited as a binder thereon and if such deposit shall be forfeited by 
the prospective purchaser, you may retain one-half of such deposit, but not exceed- 
ing the total amount of your commission as your compensation. 

7. I understand that this agreement does not guarantee the sale of my prop- 
erty, but that it does guarantee that you will make an earnest and continued 
effort to sell same until this agreement is terminated. 

Owner : 

J. A. Sullivan. [seal] 

Ethel Sullivan, [seal] 
Accepted by: 

The Keyes Company, 
Arthur P. Degman. 

W. H. Lee, Salesman. 

The words "I," "MY," or "ME" shall be considered plural when applicable. 



Exhibit No. 20 

Tuesday, October 2, 1945. 
Mr. Ernest Volhabt, 

407 Title Building, Baltimore, Md. 

My mother and father, Mr. and Mrs. Tredick Ford, of Perrynon, Md., have 
just forwarded me mortgage papers for $7,000, which you made out for them. 

It seems as though there has been quite a bit of mix-up in this transaction. 

First, I wanted to help my parents as they have been carrying quite a burden 
on their shoulders for a good many years, struggling to keep up the interest on 
their §7,000 mortgage which Mrs. Mami Mitchell, of Perrynon held. 

I made a verbal agreement with my parents that I would purchase their farm 
for $12,000 and that they could stay there as long as they live and that my father 
could raise his children or put in crops as he so desires. So I paid off that 
$7,000 mortgage and we made an agreement that I would pay the $5,000 balance 
to them in payments over a couple of years, but I was to have the say of operat- 
ing the farm. 

When I received your letters stating I was not to have any rights to the farm 
and no say in the operating of it I wrote my mother and told her that was not 
in the bargain and that we would cancel our agreement that I would hold the 



236 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

mortgage for $7,500 at 6 percent interest payable annually or semiannually but, 
that it could be applied to the principal every year. 

I have put «>ver $1,000 improvements on the property which has increased the 
value almost double. 

My husband wants the proper papers made out for $7,500 for 10 years at 6 
percent. I think the set-up would be very much like the mortgage Mrs. Mitchell 
held, and we are to receive the same papers she held. 

When these papers are properly made out with the deed and insurance papers 
are forwarded to me, I will have my attorney to O. K. them and will have them 
properly sign. 

Thanking you so much for the time and patience in this transaction. 
Respectfully yours, 

Ethel Suixivan. 



Exhibit No. 21 
Who's the Bogeyman? 

The "rule or ruin" gang, in its ever desperate attempt to divert public attention 
and opinion from itself, screams in daily head lines of "hoodlum invasion" of the 
Greater Miami area. 

The screaming head line today says that the top gangsters of the country are 
meeting in Miami to set gangster policy for the Nation. 

The Miami Daily News said that Frank Costello and Tony Accardo are 
guests at Miami Beach hotels. 

We at the Morning Mail are not as well acquainted with gangsters and hood- 
lums as, apparently, is the "rule or ruin" gang. 

Who Tony Accardo is, we don't even know. 

We don't know Frank Costello, except from what we have read about him 
in a rash of national magazine articles. 

We do believe this * * * that we are not a police state. 

Are we to halt people at our State borders to say, "You can't come into Florida 
until your ci-edentials have been inspected and approved at the H?rald Building 
on South Miami Avenue, or the News Tower on Biscayne Boulevard"? 

What little we know about Frank Costello indicates that he is a gentlemanly 
person. He lives a quiet and, apparently, a life of rectitude. His donations to 
charities, not only in New York, but throughout the Nation, are a matter of 
record, despite his modest efforts to hide them. 

We just don't believe that people should be hounded. If admission to our 
community, the right to live among us and to visit us is to be based on a person's 
past life, then our population would he damned slim. 

There are many people who live among us and belong to the "better" clubs 
who, if they were .judged for moral turpitude, wouldn't be around these parts. 

We hold no brief for Frank Costello. 

We do, however, insist, and it has long been the foundation of law in this coun- 
try, that a man is innocent until he has been proven guilty. Up to now, Costello 
stands clear in the eyes of the law. 

The inane, ridiculous furore that the Miami Herald and the Miami Daily News 
are kicking up today, with their screams for a Government investigation of 
gangsterism in Greater Miami, will die, as the season dies. 

It always has ! 

It has always come down to one basic question * * * not whether the 
joints can run, but whose joints can run, and which newspaper controls the 
votes that come out of which joint. 

We have no desire to be anything but a newspaper. We have no desire to 
control anyone's votes, nor will we ever attempt it. 

As for Frank Costello, the Herald's and the News' "bogeyman," we hope that 
while he is a guest at Miami Beach he enjoys our sunshine, our flowers, our 
myriad attractions. 

The Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, we have come to the end of 
the testimony that is to be adduced. 

(Thereupon, the chairman, after having expressed thanks and 
acknowledgments on behalf of the committee and staff for aid received 
during the investigation, concluded the hearing.) 

X 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 9999 06351 639 5 



HHHHgH 



WBBBRBL- 

tlllif 



.1 '•• 



mtmmw 



-Eflffl 



iH"^ >: - 



HKHfffl 



•IliSliB 



SK8 









&3ff&$iS*ft