Mr. SEELEY. Yes.
Mr. COLEMAN. What are your duties?
Mr. SEELEY. My duties are mainly supervisory and to review material
that has been prepared in the Passport Office Legal Division, and on
some occasions to clear information or material that has been prepared
in other divisions of the Passport Office.
Mr. COLEMAN. I take it you are a lawyer?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I am.
Mr. COLEMAN. Are you a member of the Bar?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I am.
Mr. COLEMAN. Of what State or States?
Mr. SEELEY. I am a member of the Bar of the District of Columbia.
Mr. COLEMAN. How long have you been with the Department of State?
Mr. SEELEY. I have been with the Department of State since 1954.
Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell me the first time you heard, read or saw
the name Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. SEELEY. Well, Mr. Coleman, I don't have an independent recollection
of that. I feel that probably the name first appears in the file on
March 28, 1961.
Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, by consulting the file, to refresh your
recollection, you think that the first time you heard or saw the name
Lee Harvey Oswald was in March 1961?
Mr. SEELEY. It is possible, it may have been that I had heard of it
before, though, because he did have some publicity, and I usually
follow those items, but I don't have any recollection of it.
Mr. COLEMAN. What happened in March 1961, that occasioned your knowing
or hearing the name Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. SEELEY. May I look at the file?
Mr. COLEMAN. Certainly.
I take it, sir, you are looking at the file which is the file of the
passport--the original passport file of the State Department.
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. That is the file that has been given State Department file
No. X, is that correct?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
The first time my name appears in the file is on a form DS-10, which is
a reference slip, and it is addressed to Mr. Cacciatore in PT-F, and to
Mr. Seeley, in PT-LS.
It requests to know insofar as I am concerned, should instruction be
classified confidential.
Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I will mark for the purposes of this deposition a
document as S-1, meaning Seeley Exhibit No. 1, which is the State
Department document which already has been marked by the State
Department as X-45.
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 1 for
identification.)
Mr. COLEMAN. Who is the reference slip dated March 28, 1961, from?
Mr. SEELEY. Mr. Kupiec.
Mr. COLEMAN. To two persons, and you are one of the two persons, Mr.
Seeley, is that correct?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. I show you the document which has been marked as S-1 and
ask you is that a copy of the document you referred to?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that you got this because someone asked whether
the instructions should be classified as confidential.
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir. I don't have an independent recollection of this,
but I assume that it is referring to this instruction which is State
Department's document X-47, which had been classified as Official Only.
Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I show you a document which has already been marked
as Commission Exhibit No. 969, and ask you whether these were the
instructions that were attached to S-1.
Mr. SEELEY. So far as I am able to determine, I don't have an
independent recollection, but looking at the formation of the file and
the fact that this was not sent, and I know that there was another one
that was sent, I believe it is the same document.
Mr. COLEMAN. And you were asked as to whether it should be classified
as confidential?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. What, if anything, did you do?
Mr. SEELEY. I don't know. I have no recollection of what action I took
on that particular aspect of it.
Mr. COLEMAN. You don't recall ever talking to Miss Waterman or anyone
else in the Department as to what form the proposed instruction should
take?
Mr. SEELEY. No. I don't know whether I even know Miss Waterman. I
know Mr. Kupiec, and I probably know Miss Waterman, but I don't have
recollection of what she looks like.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you ever discuss with Mr. Kupiec as to what form the
instruction should take?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir. This instruction was drafted by Miss Waterman,
and it was sent up for clearance to PTL, Mr. Johnson. I presume that
when it went to either Mr. Cacciatore or Mr. Kupiec, I put my name on
for the clearance procedure, in particular with regard to whether the
thing should have been classified, have a higher classification than it
did.
Mr. COLEMAN. You don't have any independent recollection of discussing
Oswald?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. Or whether the instruction should have been in a different
form?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I do not.
Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell me the next occasion where you had anything
to do with Oswald, or the file?
Mr. SEELEY. The next occasion, I think, relates to document X-43.
Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to mark as S-2 a memorandum from Robert D.
Johnson to Mr. John T. White, under date of March 31, 1961, which in
the State Department files has been marked as X-43.
(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 2 for
identification.)
Mr. COLEMAN. Is that the document referred to?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; it is.
Mr. COLEMAN. Now, sir, did you draft S-2?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I did.
Mr. COLEMAN. Can you tell me the circumstances surrounding your
drafting S-2?
Mr. SEELEY. This particular item I do have a recollection of because
there was a discussion between Mr. Johnson and myself concerning the
propriety of sending the passport through the mail as had been proposed.
Mr. COLEMAN. What was that discussion?
Mr. SEELEY. We were opposed to this action on several grounds.
Mr. COLEMAN. What were they?
Mr. SEELEY. One was the fact that I think we already had information
that Mrs. Oswald, the mother, had not been able to get in touch with
her son.
Mr. COLEMAN. You are talking about Oswald's mother?
Mr. SEELEY. The mother; yes. And we felt that the mails shouldn't be
trusted for a U.S. passport which we know has a value outside the
United States.
Mr. COLEMAN. Now, you also indicated in the memorandum that, "We should
not be bound by the opinion he expressed in paragraph 2 of his letter
set out in Moscow Despatch No. 985 of February 28, 1961."
Mr. SEELEY. May I get that? It is No. 585. The paragraph that we are
referring to reads: "I desire to return to the United States, that is
if we could come to some agreement concerning the dropping of any legal
proceedings against me. If so, then I would be free to ask the Russian
authorities to allow me to leave. If I could show them my American
passport, I am of the opinion they would give me an exit visa."
The item in the memorandum concerns itself mainly with his request for
agreement concerning the dropping of any legal proceedings against him.
Mr. COLEMAN. You indicated that the Department ought not to give such
agreement.
Mr. SEELEY. Yes.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have any discussions with Mr. Johnson with respect
to this March 31, 1961, memorandum?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir. I don't have a complete recollection of it, but
I do know that I did discuss this particular item, particularly the
mailing of the passport, with Mr. Johnson.
Mr. COLEMAN. And do you recall what Mr. Johnson said?
Mr. SEELEY. I think Mr. Johnson was the one that instructed me to draft
this so that we would not send this through the mail, so that the
passport would not be sent through the mail.
Mr. COLEMAN. After the memorandum of March 31, 1961, and this
discussion you had with Mr. Johnson, what did you do?
Mr. SEELEY. I am sorry?
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you draft the instructions in the form that they
actually went forward?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything to do with that?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; except I think there is a clearance, but I am not
sure about that. I think we cleared it.
Mr. COLEMAN. And the instructions that actually went forward did
indicate that they ought not to return the passport by mail?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. What was the date of that instruction?
Mr. SEELEY. The instruction that went forward?
Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.
Mr. SEELEY. That was AE-173, of April 13, 1961. It is Department X-38.
Mr. COLEMAN. Will the record show that that document has already been
marked as Commission Exhibit No. 971 before the Commission. You say
that you read Commission Exhibit No. 971 and cleared it before it went
forward?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. Exhibit No. 971 which you referred to as X-38 shows on the
left-hand side that there is a notation that a copy of the instructions
was sent to the CIA.
Mr. SEELEY. Was furnished to the CIA.
Mr. COLEMAN. Was that done at the same time the instructions went
forward?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything to do with sending it to the CIA?
Mr. SEELEY. I don't have a recollection on this. I would imagine what
happened is that there was a request by the CIA for a copy of this, and
that I authorized them to be furnished a copy on October 5, 1961.
Mr. COLEMAN. I take it you actually read the instructions which went
forward on April 13, 1961.
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir. My initials are at the bottom.
Mr. COLEMAN. The fact that your initials are at the bottom indicates
that you approved them?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. What was the next occasion on which you had anything to do
with the Oswald file or heard the name Oswald?
Mr. SEELEY. I will have to check the file. The next occasion where the
record shows that I had something to do with the Oswald file concerns
Item X-31. It is a Department of State instruction, W-7, dated July
11, 1961, drafted by Mrs. Waterman, and I cleared this particular
instruction.
Mr. COLEMAN. Can we note for the record that that instruction has
already been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 975?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. You cleared those instructions prior to the time you
received word from Mr. Snyder in the Embassy in Moscow that Oswald had
appeared at the Embassy on July 8, 10, or 11?
Mr. SEELEY. Of 1961?
Mr. COLEMAN. 1961.
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; that is true. I wasn't sure of the time element
in there, but that is true. This went out the same day, apparently,
that the instruction was drafted and was sent in, or the despatch was
drafted and sent in.
Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, you took that action or you approved that
action prior to the time that you knew that Oswald had appeared at the
Embassy in Moscow?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. Is it a fair reading of the July 11, 1961, instructions
which you approved, that you indicated that Oswald could be given back
his passport?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I don't think so. I call your attention to
paragraph 5 of the despatch; "It is noted that the Embassy intends
to seek the Department's prior advice before granting Mr. Oswald
documentation as a United States citizen upon any application he may
submit."
Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, as of this time it was still open as far as
the Department was concerned in Washington whether Oswald had renounced
his citizenship and was entitled to a passport?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir. I don't think that the adjudicative proceeding
had been completed.
Mr. COLEMAN. When was the adjudicative process completed so far as you
were concerned, that the Passport Office in Washington determined that
in its opinion, that Mr. Oswald was still a citizen?
Mr. SEELEY. I would say that the operations memorandum of August 18,
1961, from the Department of State to the American Embassy in Moscow
which refers to the Embassy Despatch No. 29, the passport renewal
application and the questionnaire.
Mr. COLEMAN. You would say that as of that date the Passport Office
determined that Oswald was still a citizen?
Mr. SEELEY. I would say at that date that we concurred in the
conclusion of the Embassy that he had not expatriated--that we had no
information or evidence that he had expatriated himself.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have anything to do with this decision?
Mr. SEELEY. Not the citizenship decision; no, sir. I had nothing to do
with that.
Mr. COLEMAN. You weren't consulted prior to the time the decision was
made?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you approve the operations memorandum of August 18?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. 1961; before it was sent forward?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; I did. My initials are at the bottom there.
Mr. COLEMAN. If you had disapproved it, at least there would have been
further discussion?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; there would have been.
Mr. COLEMAN. So, to that extent, you did have something to do with the
decision?
Mr. SEELEY. Well, to that extent, there was no consultation. This
was sent up for clearance, and insofar as the citizenship angle was
concerned, I agreed with what they had done.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you call for and look at the file prior to the time
you initialed the operations memorandum of August 18, 1961?
Mr. SEELEY. I would presume that I had the whole file. Mr. Ehrlich has
suggested that I mention that I was not in the citizenship area at the
time that I put my concurrence on this operations memorandum, and I was
looking at it only from the aspect of my own area.
Mr. COLEMAN. What was your area?
Mr. SEELEY. I was in the Security Branch. I was Chief of the Security
Branch of the Legal Division.
Mr. COLEMAN. What did you have to do with the decision?
Mr. SEELEY. In this particular case if you had objected, I am sure that
there would have been further discussion on this particular case.
Mr. COLEMAN. Could we mark as Seeley Exhibit No. 3--instead of "S"
I think we had better call these Seeley exhibits, the operations
memorandum dated August 18, 1961, from the Department of State to the
American Embassy.
Mr. SEELEY. Fine, sir.
(The document referred to was marked Seeley Exhibit No. 3 for
identification.)
Mr. COLEMAN. That is the document that you referred to as X-27, is that
correct?
Mr. SEELEY. X-27, that is correct.
Mr. COLEMAN. If you had felt that there was evidence in the file that
Oswald had renounced his citizenship, I take it you would not have
approved this memorandum, is that correct?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I would not have.
Mr. COLEMAN. You would not have approved it?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir; I would not have approved it.
Mr. COLEMAN. There would have been further discussions?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, as far as you were concerned in reviewing
the file and what you knew and looking over it, what Miss Waterman had
said and what Mr. Snyder had said, that your decision was that you saw
no reason why you would disagree with the decision?
Mr. SEELEY. I was in complete agreement with the decision.
Mr. COLEMAN. After you concurred in the operations memorandum of
August 18, 1961, what was the next occasion on which you had anything
to do with the Oswald file?