TESTIMONY OF LAURANCE R. WILCOX
The testimony of Laurance R. Wilcox was taken at 2 p, m., on March 31, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.
Mr. LIEBELER. Before I start, I want to swear you in as a witness.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. WILCOX. I do.
Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Wilcox, my name is Wesley J. Liebeler. I am a member of the legal staff of the Commission appointed by President Johnson to investigate the assassination of President Kennedy.
Staff counsel have been authorized to take the testimony of witnesses the Commission pursuant to authority granted to the Commission under Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, 1963, and Joint Resolution of Congress No. 137.
The Commission rules of procedure require that copies of that Executive order and the congressional resolution, as well as copies of the Commission's rules and procedures relating to the taking of testimony be provided to each witness prior to the time his testimony is taken. I now provide you with copies of those documents. The general nature of the testimony that we wish to get from you today relates to investigations made by Western Union Telegraph Co. concerning the possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald received money orders through the offices of your company, either in Dallas or the surrounding area, and the possibility that he may have sent telegrams to other persons through the facilities of your company.
Mr. LIEBELER. Before we get into the details of your testimony, would you please state your full name for the record?
Mr. WILCOX. Laurance R. Wilcox.
Mr. LIEBELER. By whom are you employed?
Mr. WILCOX. Western Union Telegraph Co.
Mr. LIEBELER. In what capacity?
Mr. WILCOX. District manager.
Mr. LIEBELER. What are your duties as district manager?
Mr. WILCOX. Administrative; in charge of the operation for Western Union in the city of Dallas.
Mr. LIEBELER. You are general manager then of the area which includes just the city of Dallas; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. District manager.
Mr. LIEBELER. Of just the city of Dallas; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes; and immediate surrounding towns such as Garland, Mesquite, Grand Prairie, Irving, and Lancaster. That is all I can think of right now.
Mr. LIEBELER. You are generally in charge of the operations of the company within that particular area; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did there come a time, Mr. Wilcox, when you caused a search to be made of the records of the Western Union Telegraph Co. to determine whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald had ever received or sent any telegrams through the offices under your jurisdiction?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Would you tell us about that?
Mr. WILCOX. Can I refer to these papers?
Mr. LIEBELER. You may refer to any papers that you wish.
Mr. WILCOX. I want to so that I will have this exactly right as to what place. My first knowledge of the message that was supposed to have been sent by Oswald was when Mr. Hamblen, early night manager at my office, visited me telling me----
Mr. LIEBELER. Is that Mr. C. A. Hamblen?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
414
Mr. LIEBELER. Go ahead.
Mr. WILCOX. Telling me that he had been watching the television, and when he saw the picture of Oswald, he recognized that as being a man that had been in our office and had filed a message.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember when Mr. Hamblen told you this?
Mr. WILCOX. This was on a Wednesday following the assassination--following the shooting of Oswald. He told me that he was positive that he had seen Mr. Oswald in our office.
Mr. LIEBELER. He told you this on Wednesday following the Sunday on which Mr. Oswald was shot by Ruby; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 27, 1963? Thanksgiving was on November the 28th.
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, it was on a Wednesday preceding Thanksgiving. I asked Mr. Hamblen to tell me exactly what had taken place.
He stated that Oswald had filed a message going to Washington--a cash message, and it was written in a peculiar script, as Mr. Hamblen put it. It was typed in pencil. I think what he meant is printed in pencil.
I asked him to immediately set about to obtain copies of that, as I was leaving town, and to get a copy of the message, and to do that it would be necessary for him to see Mr. Pirtle, our bookkeeping manager, and to get the message, put it in an envelope, and address it to my personal attention while I was in Kansas City.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mr. Hamblen tell you anything about what the message said or to whom it was addressed, at this first conversation?
Mr. WILCOX. No, he didn't. We left for Kansas City and was there over the Thanksgiving holidays.
Mr. LIEBELER. You and your family?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes. And while there, this article appeared in the Kansas City Star, their evening paper; very much the same story as appeared in the Dallas Times Herald.
Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a copy of a clipping which purports to have appeared in the Dallas Times Herald on November 30, 1963. I ask you if this tells a story similar to the report you saw in the Kansas City Star?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, same story.
Mr. LIEBELER. We will mark this clipping as Exhibit 3002 on the deposition of Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex. March 31, 1964. I have initialed the clipping in question, Mr. Wilcox, and ask you to do the same.
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.] Immediately when I read this story in the Kansas City paper I recognized it as being the same story that Mr. Hamblen had told me just a couple of days before in my office.
We returned to Dallas Sunday, and immediately on my return to the office Monday----
Mr. LIEBELER. Monday, I suggest would have been December 2, 1963?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. And you fix that by recalling that the assassination was on the 22d. The following Friday would have been the 29th. Saturday, the 30th, Sunday the 1st; and Monday would have been December 2?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, December 2. Now, this was on my return to the office, and we indicated that was December 2. I went over the information that was contained in the newspaper article with Mr. Hamblen, reminding him that this was in effect the same story as he had told me just 2 days before, a few days before. Particularly, its comment about the strange printing on the telegram which he had seen presented by Oswald.
Mr. Hamblen admitted that he had discussed several matters with different reporters, but insisted that he hadn't given out such detailed information as appeared in the newspaper article.
However, I was constrained to feel that he had because it was exactly the same story as he had given me initially in the past week.
There was no doubt in my mind but that the newspaper article stemmed from Mr. Hamblen's visit with a newspaper reporter.
Mr. LIEBELER. In this connection, Mr. Wilcox, you have referred to a copy of
415
a letter dated December 3, 1963, which appears to be a letter from you to Mr. Semingsen; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir; would you like to have a copy?
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes. Did you prepare that letter on or about December 3?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, I did.
Mr. LIEBELER. Does it accurately reflect the events that occurred prior to that time?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. I mark that letter as Exhibit 3003, on the deposition of Mr. Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964. I have initialed the copy in question, Mr. Wilcox, and would like to have you do the same thing if you would.
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. Before we go on, I call your attention to the fact that this letter of December 3, 1963, starts out by saying "This is to supplement my report of December 2 in connection with newspaper article regarding messages and money order to Ruby or Oswald."
Do you have a copy of your report of December 2, referred to in Exhibit 3003?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. May we mark that as Exhibit No. 3004 on the deposition of Mr. Laurance R. Wilcox, Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964?
Mr. WILCOX. [Hands document to attorney.]
Mr. LIEBELER. I have initialed Exhibit No. 3004 and you have done likewise, have you not?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. You had just indicated that you had talked to Mr. Hamblen upon your return concerning the newspaper story. Would you tell us what happened next?
Mr. WILCOX. I asked Mr. Hamblen if he had obtained the message from the bookkeeping department as I had requested he do, and he stated that he had not found it and did not have it and it wasn't available.
On December 9, Mr. Semingsen, vice president of Western Union, was at my office, and at this time we interviewed several employees for the purpose of finding out if any of them could recall having seen Oswald in our office. We also discussed the Ruby money orders.
Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us the names of the employees who were interviewed on December 9, 1963, in connection with the possibility that Oswald might have sent or received telegrams through your company?
Do you have a memorandum reflecting what happened?
Mr. WILCOX. No, because what we did, we asked for statements from these people, and I have those statements and that was the result of that meeting.
Mr. LIEBELER. The meeting you referred to now is the meeting held in your office on December 9?
Mr. WILCOX. The meeting held in my office on December 9.
Mr. LIEBELER. I call your attention to a message that was sent by Mr. Semingsen to Mr. J. H. Waters in New York City, which has been attached as Attachment No. 5 to Exhibit 3001 on Mr. Semingsen's deposition. I show you that message and ask you if that accurately reflects what occurred at the meeting in your office on December 9, 1963?
Mr. WILCOX. This doesn't.
Mr. LIEBELER. You say it does not?
Mr. WILCOX. This was pertaining to Mr. Ruby. This did not have anything to do with that.
Mr. LIEBELER. Let me further point out to you, Mr. Wilcox, that we have statements of Mr. Hamblen dated December 2 and December 5, 1963, which are apparently addressed to you. I show you copies, first, of the statement dated December 2, 1963, and ask you if you can remember the circumstances under which that statement was obtained from Mr. Hamblen?
Mr. WILCOX. This statement was obtained----
Mr. LIEBELER. The statement you are referring to is the statement dated December 2, 1963; is that correct?
416
Mr. WILCOX. Yes. This statement was obtained at the time I discussed the matter with Mr. Hamblen on December 2, Monday. That was this statement.
Mr. LIEBELER. That visit with Mr. Hamblen is described in Exhibit No. 3003, your letter to Mr. Semingsen on December 3, 1963, is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. And the statement of Mr. Hamblen, dated December 2, 1963, was obtained at that time? That time being the first time that you talked to Mr. Hamblen after this matter appeared in the newspapers; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have the original of Mr. Hamblen's statement of December 2, 1963?
Mr. WILCOX. I can't find it in my file. I am wondering if it was sent to Mr. Semingsen's file, but we have gone through that.
Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a thermofax copy that has been provided to us, and ask you if that is an accurate copy of the original statement?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes. That was made in our office on the thermofax machine.
Mr. LIEBELER. Let us mark the thermofax copy of the statement of Mr. C. A. Hamblen to Mr. Wilcox dated December 2, 1963, as Exhibit 3005 on the deposition of Mr. Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., on March 31, 1964. I have initialed Exhibit 3005, Mr. Wilcox. Will you do the same?
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. Does the statement of Mr. Hamblen, Exhibit No. 3005, accurately reflect the conversation which you had with him on December 2, 1963?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you prepare that statement yourself?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir; Mr. Hamblen prepared that.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did Mr. Hamblen dictate it himself, or write it out?
Mr. WILCOX. Wrote it on the typewriter himself.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now in the December 2, 1963, statement, Mr. Hamblen says: "As I recall, several weeks ago Mr. Aubrey Lewis had trouble paying this party a money order. He expected to get same without proper ID. He was informed to get some ID and come back and get paid, and as Mr. Lewis recalled he returned about 1 hour later with Navy ID card and a library card and was paid a small amount with this ID and after payment made, party left the office.
Mr. Lewis remarked to me, I would like to pinch the heads off people of his character."
Do you recall discussing this with Mr. Hamblen on December 2, 1963?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Can you remember anything else that Mr. Hamblen might have said about this incident other than that which is reflected in the statement?
Mr. WILCOX. No.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recall discussing this statement with Mr. Lewis at any time?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. When did you first discuss it with Mr. Lewis?
Mr. WILCOX. That is what I am trying to find right here. Must have been on December 4 that I talked to Mr. Lewis about it, and his statement addressed to me was written by himself.
Mr. LIEBELER. On December 4, 1963?
Mr. WILCOX. On December 4, 1963.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have a copy of that statement?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Could we mark that as Exhibit No. 3006 on the deposition of Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex, March 31, 1964?
In this case you have actually provided me the original of Mr. Lewis' statement, is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. I have initialed Exhibit No. 3006 and would like to have you do the same, if you would.
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Lewis' statement refers to that portion of Mr. Hamblen's statement, dated December 2, 1963, which we just read, does it not?
417
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. And Mr. Lewis says that he does recall the difficulty he had paying a small money order to a gentleman who struck him as being a feminine type of person, but says he cannot remember the name of that person; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember discussing that with Mr. Lewis to any other than as reflected on this statement?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Could you tell us what you said and what Mr. Lewis said about this? Before you tell us what was said, this discussion that you are referring to was held on December 4, 1963, or some other time?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir; at that time.
Mr. LIEBELER. Will you tell us what that conversation was?
Mr. WILCOX. The conversation with Mr. Lewis had to do with trying to identify the person that he was supposed to have paid this money order to, and the one with which he had some difficulty in establishing identification.
Mr. LIEBELER. I want you to tell me exactly what happened in as great detail as you can remember it.
Now, at this conversation with Mr. Lewis, the possibility that this money order was to be delivered to someone at the YMCA on Ervay Street in Dallas was discussed was it not?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Will you tell us all that you can remember about that aspect of the discussion that you had with Mr. Lewis?
Mr. WILCOX. I have discussed the matter with Mr. Lewis regarding the money order which he was having difficulty in paying. He could not pay the money order because the recipient could not produce suitable identification.
Mr. Lewis was a little hazy on the details about it, but was under the impression that it was a money order or a message in the nearby area, possibly on Ervay Street or at the YMCA.
We instituted a search for all money orders during this period, that might be the message to which Mr. Hamblen was making reference.
Mr. LIEBELER. That was the one with which Mr. Lewis had difficulty in paying; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes. Now, we found some messages. One in the amount of $65. One in the amount of $35. But neither of these were the money orders that Mr. Hamblen had reference to.
Mr. LIEBELER. How did you establish the fact that they were not the money orders?
Mr. WILCOX. He looked at them and decided it wasn't the one, because we couldn't find anything that had reference to this particular identification that Hamblen was talking about.
Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Lewis looked at these telegrams; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Does the telegram indicate what sort of identification was produced by the person to whom the money order was paid?
Mr. WILCOX. Well, there are several others in here.
Mr. LIEBELER. You are looking through a number of telegrams covering money orders; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Going to different people at the YMCA, but none of them was the money order message. None of them was a money order message that Lewis could identify as being a money order of the type Hamblen was describing. In other words, he couldn't find anything that fitted into that pattern at all.
Mr. LIEBELER. You discussed these money orders with Mr. Lewis after you obtained them from the files; that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right. Mr. Lewis later told me that it might have been a money order draft that could have been paid to some individual in our town and that the party holding the draft had presented it at our office for payment,
418
but was having difficulty in producing suitable identification for us to cash the draft. In that event, we would not have any message or record of message in our file locally.
Mr. LIEBELER. If I understand you correctly, Mr. Wilcox, the situation which you just described would occur when a money order telegram had been delivered to some party at some other office, some office other than the Dallas central office?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. And he would have the draft in his hand that would have been delivered to him by the telegraph company in some other office, and then he would come to the Dallas central office and attempt to cash that draft; is that correct?
Mr. LIEBELER. And Mr. Lewis said it is possible that the transaction with which he had such difficulty could have been a transaction such as the one we have described; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. In that event, you would not have any record of it in the Dallas office?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Is it correct that you would not have any record of it in the Dallas office even when the draft had been successfully cashed, as it apparently subsequently was in this case?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. You would still not have any record of it?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now, you have produced 11 money orders in the form of telegrams, transmitting money to individuals living at the YMCA here in Dallas. Is it correct that these are the only 11 telegrams which you were able to find addressed to the YMCA or to anyone at the YMCA during some period beginning on or about October 1963, and running up to approximately the end of November 1963?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you, yourself, personally authorize or instruct that the search be conducted which produced these telegrams?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been a search through every single money order delivered through the Dallas office through the month of October or November, 1963, is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. These 11 telegrams are the only 11 that were addressed to the YMCA?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now, the dates covered by the search would be October 1 through the 17th of November 1963? Or what was it, as best you can recall?
Mr. WILCOX. The end of November, as I remember.
Mr. LIEBELER. Beginning when?
Mr. WILCOX. Beginning the first part of October.
Mr. LIEBELER. It is a fact, is it not, that none of these 11 telegrams are addressed to Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir; none of them are.
Mr. LIEBELER. Or to anybody using any of Mr. Oswald's known aliases?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. I think that we had better, for the record, indicate the names of the people to whom these telegrams are addressed. There is a telegram dated October 4, 1963, addressed to George McMurray, transmitting $15, is that correct?
Mr. LIEBELER. There is also a telegram dated October 10, 1963, addressed to Michael C. Robinson, transmitting $100 to Mr. Robinson at the YMCA, is that correct?
419
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. And there is a telegram dated October 11, 1963, transmitting $150 to James McGinley, is that right?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Also for the record we better indicate who sent these telegrams. The telegram to Mr. McMurray was sent by Mrs. Mildred McMurray in Plainfield, N.J.; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. The telegram to Mr. Robinson was sent by Mrs. S. R. Robinson, of Charleston, S.C.; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. The telegram to Mr. McGinley was sent by Cornelius McGinley of Chicago; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. There is a telegram dated October 15, 1963, to Mr. Jack Burge from Rosalie A. Burge, Tulsa, Okla., transmitting $10; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. There is also a telegram dated October 19, 1963, to John A. Casber from John Casber of Midland, Tex., transmitting $35?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. A telegram dated October 28, 1963, to Gary Aue from Mrs. G. C. O'Quinn, Ft. Morgan, Colo., transmitting $65.
Mr. WILCOX. Yes sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. There is a telegram dated October 31, 1963, to Stanley Qupiec from Stayea Houston of Ware, Mass., transmitting $50; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. There is also a telegram dated November 22, 1963, to Welton Hayes from Louis W. Hayes, of Rome, N.Y., transmitting $25; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. And a telegram dated November either 27 or 28.
Mr. WILCOX. It would be November 7. This is a transmission, November 7.
Mr. LIEBELER. 1963 to John M. Brandes, Jr., from Helen Tuttle, San Antonio, transmitting $20; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. And one dated November 22, 1963, to Frank or Grace Fitzell, from the Akron Dime Bank in Akron, Ohio, transmitting $200; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. And one dated November 28, 1963, to George McMurray from Mildred McMurray, Plainfield, N.J., transmitting $6; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. And the address in each case were located then at the YMCA on North Ervay in Dallas; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Those were the only money order telegrams to individuals at the YMCA that you were able to find in the search of your records, and you are satisfied that those are the only money order telegrams in existence addressed to people in the YMCA during that period; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now, Mr. Lewis' statement of December 4, 1963, mentions that the individual with whom he had difficulty in paying the money order was a man of Spanish descent, is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any discussion with Mr. Lewis about that?
Mr. WILCOX. We may have had it at the time we read this statement, but I don't recall anything specific.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any discussion with Mr. Lewis as to whether he recognized this individual with whom he had difficulty order, as Lee Harvey Oswald, from pictures of Oswald which appeared in the newspaper?
Mr. WILCOX. I asked him about that and he said he couldn't describe or associate the party to the extent that he could associate it with Oswald's picture or anything like that.
420
Mr. LIEBELER. He just had no recognition?
Mr. WILCOX. Other than that he had some difficulty in paying a money order.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now, as a result of these events that followed Mr. Hamblen's statement to the newspaper reporter and the subsequent investigation that was requested or instigated by the FBI and the Secret Service and other investigatory agencies, you conducted certain searches of certain files in your office in an attempt to locate any money orders that Oswald might have received, or any telegrams that Oswald might have sent during certain periods; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes; I can give you those dates.
Mr. LIEBELER. Let me show you Exhibit 3001, which is a memorandum from Mr. Semingsen, and ask you if that memorandum accurately sets forth the dates and the checks that were made of the files in the Dallas and Irving, Tex., offices of your company to determine whether or not Oswald had received or sent any telegrams?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir; that's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Semingsen testified this morning that the paying office--that is, the office through which a money order is delivered, maintains a chronological record or file of all money orders passing through that office; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. It is my understanding that you caused the files for both Dallas and Irving to be searched for the periods indicated in Exhibit 3001?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. You were unable to find any money order payable to Lee Harvey Oswald or O. H. Lee or Alex James Hidell; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's correct.
Mr. LIEBELER. Is it possible that money orders could be sent to someone just by using initials or some shorthand name?
Mr. WILCOX. No; you never see anything because you would have no way to identify the man or associate it that you are paying it to them correctly, associate it with any identification that he might have.
Mr. LIEBELER. Since each individual must produce identification at the time the money order is paid, the money order is naturally in the full name?
Mr. WILCOX. Correct. They could be accepting it for someone--it might not be their correct name, but they could have some identification that, if it was just a small money order, but we can't change that identification. If it meets what shows on the money order, then we pay it.
Mr. LIEBELER. But you have never heard of a situation where a money order is paid to somebody just addressed to him by initials or something like that?
Mr. WILCOX. No.
Mr. LIEBELER. How many offices, approximately, does the Western Union office have in Dallas?
Mr. WILCOX. There are eight branch offices.
Mr. LIEBELER. Plus a central office?
Mr. WILCOX. Plus a central office.
Mr. LIEBELER. Is it possible to receive money orders through the branch office?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Are the files of money orders received through branch offices kept in the branch offices, or the Dallas central office?
Mr. WILCOX. Kept at our main office.
Mr. LIEBELER. So, that the search that you made of the records of the central office would include money orders that were received through any branch office located within the City of Dallas, is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. You said before that your district covered not only the City of Dallas, but surrounding communities including Irving?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER Are the records relating to money orders received through these other offices of suburban communities located or kept in the suburban offices or the Dallas central office?
Mr. WILCOX. In this case, this was an agency office and it would be--the records
421
were kept at the Irving agency office. We did search those records at the Irving agency office.
Mr. LIEBELER. That fact is indicated in Exhibit 3001, is it not?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. The records of telegrams or money orders received through other suburban offices such as Garland, for example, would also be kept in the Garland office, would they not?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. But no search was made of any suburban office other than Irving; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. Mr. Semingsen's memorandum also indicates that a search was made of the files in Fort Worth and in New Orleans, but you have no direct personal knowledge of what happened at those offices, do you?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. We also have here a statement from Mr. Hamblen dated, December 5, 1963. Do you have the original of that statement?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes; I do have.
Mr. LIEBELER. We will mark the original as Exhibit No. 3007 on the deposition of Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1963.
I have initialed Exhibit No. 3007, Mr. Wilcox, and I would like you do the same.
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. This statement was apparently taken on December 5, 1963. Do you recall the circumstances under which it was given?
Mr. WILCOX. This was following a meeting and discussion that we held on December 4, at which time we discussed the money orders and messages with Mr. Hamblen, Mrs. McClure, and Mr. Lewis.
Mr. LIEBELER. Who was present at this discussion other than the individuals you just mentioned and yourself?
(Mr. Wilcox phoned his office re: correct date of meeting.)
Mr. WILCOX. I did hold this meeting.
Mr. LIEBELER. Let the record indicate that Mr. Wilcox has just conferred telephonically with Mr. Semingsen and wishes now to clarify the statements concerning the time on which certain meetings were held with the employees.
Mr. WILCOX. I did hold the meetings with these people on December 4, and did obtain these statements, including the statement from Mrs. McClure, Mr. Lewis, both indicated as December 4, and the statement from Mr. Hamblen which is dated December 5.
Following this meeting I endeavored to find the message or messages that Mr. Hamblen was referring to, which he insisted Mrs. McClure had accepted from Mr. Oswald. I did extract from our files all messages matching the message numbers on the cash sheet prepared by Mrs. McClure.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI ask you to do this because Mr. Hamblen said that a message with which Mrs. McClure had difficulty was given to her by a man who Hamblen thought was Oswald, and that the message was one to Washington, D.C., specifically to the Secretary of the Navy----
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. And that it was accounted for on Mrs. McClure's sheet as a night letter that was set forth on her cash sheet; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. So you then got all of the telegrams that were listed on Mrs. McClure's cash sheets; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. From the 1st of November through the November 22. We could not find any such messages. However, we did extract all messages going to Washington, D.C., regardless of the names to whom they were sent, or signed, including some messages going to other points, because of their peculiar type of printing.
Now, would you like to see those messages?
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes, sir; I would. Let me ask you specifically if the period covered in terms of this extraction was from October?
Mr. WILCOX. From November 1.
Mr. LIEBELER. From November 1?
422
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. You picked that period because Mr. Hamblen said that he thought the event occurred about 10 days prior to the assassination; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right. Now, I think you have the only thermofax of Mrs. McClure's. Would you want the original?
Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; I do want to mark the original statement of Mrs McClure, dated December 4, 1963, which has been previously referred to by Mr. Wilcox. I will mark it as Exhibit 3008 on the deposition of Mr. Laurance R. Wilcox at Dallas, Tex., on March 31, 1964.
I have initialed that exhibit, Mr. Wilcox, and would like to have you do the same.
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. Who prepared Mrs. McClure's statement?
Mr. WILCOX. Mrs. McClure wrote that.
Mr. LIEBELER. She typed it on the typewriter herself?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Were you present at the time she prepared it?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss these incidents with her prior to the statement?
Mr. WILCOX. Only during the course of the meeting that she attended in my office.
Mr. LIEBELER. During the course of that time, Mrs. McClure indicated to you, did she not, that she had no recollection of any of the events described by Mr. Hamblen concerning the message allegedly sent to Washington D.C.?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. Let's mark these telegrams as Exhibits 3009 through 3014. I have initialed each one of them and would like to have you do the same. I have not indicated on each one of them in detail. It is on your deposition and on the dates, as I have on the others, but that fact will appear from the record.
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. You have now provided me with six telegrams, cables which have been marked for identification as Exhibits 3009 through 3014, and it is my understanding that these telegrams and cables were all shown to Mr. Hamblen and he was unable to identify any of them as answering the description of the telegram or cablegram with which Mrs. McClure had had difficulty, and which Mr. Hamblen thought had been sent by a person resembling Lee Harvey Oswald, is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. And a thorough search of the files along the lines that you have previously indicated was unable to produce any other telegrams even remotely falling into the category described by Mr. Hamblen; i.e., a telegram to Washington, D.C. or in a peculiar hand script such as described by Mr. Hamblen to any destination, whether it be Washington or otherwise; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER Now, you have provided me with a letter from yourself to Mr. Semingsen, dated December 6, 1963, which we will mark as Exhibit 3015, on deposition of Laurance R. Wilcox, at Dallas, Tex., March 31, 1964. I have initialed that exhibit and ask you to do the same, sir.
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. And ask you if you prepared the original of that letter on or about December 6, 1963?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. You sent the original of it to Mr. Semingsen, did you not?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir; that's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. And the letter accurately sets forth the events preceding that date which we have been discussing here, does it not?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. You have also provided me with a copy of a letter from yourself to Mr. Semingsen, dated December 9, 1963, to which is attached the original of statement from Mrs. Betty Bedwell, dated December 6, 1963, and A. I.
423
English, dated December 6, 1963. I notice that Mr. English's statement is not signed.
Mr. WILCOX. [Signs.]
Mr. LIEBELER. And I ask you if the original of it was signed at the time you received it?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir; he just signed this on the typewriter to me.
Mr. LIEBELER. No; he did not himself sign it?
Mr. WILCOX. No.
Mr. LIEBELER. You have indicated below that it was in effect signed by Mr. English when he delivered it to you?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Also attached is a statement of Miss Bess Mildred Francis, dated December 9, 1963. Also attached is a statement of Doyle E. Lane, dated December 9, 1963; and one of Mr. E. T. Pirtle, dated December 6, 1963; and one of Ward Townsley dated December 6, 1963. Did you receive those statements from the individuals thus described?
Mr. WILCOX Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. We have marked the letter described above, together with the attachments just described as Exhibit 3016 on the deposition of Mr. Laurance R. Wilcox at Dallas, Tex., on March 31, 1964. I have initialed the first page of that exhibit and would like to have you do the same.
Mr. WILCOX. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you send the original of your letter dated December 9, 1963, to Mr. Semingsen on or about that date?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. The statements made in that letter are true and correct to the best of your knowledge, are they not?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. You have also given me the original of a statement dated December 6, 1963, of Mr. Doyle E. Lane. Was that also attached to your letter of December 9, 1963, to Mr. Semingsen?
Mr. WILCOX. No, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you receive yourself from Mr. Lane the statement just described?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. Let me mark it as Exhibit 3017 on this deposition. Would you initial the statement of Mr. Lane which we have marked 3017?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes, sir. [Initials.]
Mr. LIEBELER. Thank you.
You previously testified, Mr. Wilcox, that you had a meeting on or about December 4, 1963, with Mr. Hamblen, Mrs. McClure, and Mr. Lewis in regard to the meeting we have been discussing, and you also testified that you thought you had an additional meeting on December 9, 1963, at which Mr. Semingsen was present. Would you care to elaborate on that?
Mr. WILCOX. The meeting as you have outlined--the meetings on the dates you have outlined are correct. The meeting on December 9, at which Mr. Semingsen attended was for the purpose of confronting Mr. Hamblen with the messages that we had extracted that were going to Washington, or those which were in peculiar print, that had been accepted by Mrs. McClure during the period of 1st of November until about November 22. Mr. Hamblen, of course, could not identify any of these telegrams as having been the message he described in his statement of December 2 and December 5.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you form a conclusion at that time as to the accuracy of Mr. Hamblen's recollection concerning the events which he had related to you and to the press?
Mr. WILCOX. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. What was that conclusion?
Mr. WILCOX. That this whole thing was a figment of Mr. Hamblen's imagination. I am fearful that he was just emotionally upset over the events as they transpired, and this may have been the factor causing him to say what he had said about the acceptance of the messages and the money order, and possibly have something to do with his statements to the press.
424
Mr. LIEBELER. As I understand you, you were perfectly satisfied at that time that Oswald had never in fact been in the office either to receive money orders or to send any telegram of the type described by Mr. Hamblen, or as far as you have been able to determine, any other telegram; is that correct?
Mr. WILCOX. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. At this point I can't think of any further questions, Mr. Wilcox. If you can think of anything that you would like to say that in your opinion would be of assistance to the Commission in its work, please indicate that at this time? Can you think of anything else?
Mr. WILCOX. I can't think of anything else now, but if I do, I will be happy to pass it along to you.
Mr. LIEBELER. If you do think of anything subsequently, call it to my attention and I would appreciate it very much.
Thank you very much, Mr. Wilcox. You have been very helpful and very cooperative. The Commission appreciates the cooperation you and Western Union have shown. Thank you very much.
425