Mr. SEELEY. But even if she was to report, I don't get the significance
of an individual appearing at a Soviet Embassy, either here or anywhere
else in the world, by itself meaning anything insofar as passports is
concerned.
Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, the problem is, if there is a problem, that on
June 24, 1963, when Mr. Oswald applied for his passport, the State
Department issued it routinely because under the lookout system there
was nothing on Oswald, so, therefore, it went out the next day.
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. And we think, from what we know, that as of June 24 or 25
no one looked at the file, so, therefore, there is no reason why the
passport wouldn't go out.
Mr. SEELEY. I would presume from looking at this file, that that is
absolutely correct.
Mr. COLEMAN. But our problem is that if on June 24 or June 25 someone
had looked at the file, would you have issued the passport based upon
what was in the file as of June 24 or 25, or would you have at least
talked to people to see whether some action should be taken?
Mr. SEELEY. If I had seen this application on June 24 or 25, before it
had been issued, I think I probably would have discussed it. But that
would have been the end of it. We have no basis upon which to deny him
or hold up his passport. There would have been a discussion.
Mr. COLEMAN. Are you saying, then, it is your opinion that after
reviewing the file that if the request for a passport had come in and
you had looked at the file before the passport was issued, there was no
regulation or legal basis on which you could refuse him a passport?
Mr. SEELEY. That is correct. That is absolutely correct.
Mr. COLEMAN. And, therefore, I take it then, that the only additional
information you got in the October CIA telegram was that he was in
Mexico City, and he had visited the Russian Embassy in Mexico City.
Mr. SEELEY. That is correct.
Mr. COLEMAN. And it is your position that he had the right to go back
to Russia if he wanted to go anyway; is that correct?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. And so, therefore, there is nothing that you could have
done about it?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. Did you make any memorandum or any memoranda when you
looked at the file in October 1963?
Mr. SEELEY. Aside from this notation which is in my handwriting, which
says "Noted CHS 10-22-63" that is the extent of the documentation that
I gave to them.
Mr. COLEMAN. But you do say you had some discussions with the other
gentlemen that looked at the file?
Mr. SEELEY. I don't have a recollection. I don't know whether Mr.
Ritchie does. I don't believe he does either, but the fact that we both
had it, he may have passed it to me. You have to get this in context.
We have hundreds of these cases. This is one case out of hundreds.
I am surprised that I have got any recollection, but I do have some,
as I mentioned before in my testimony here, that I did have some
recollection of it.
Mr. COLEMAN. No one called you and said, "Well, look, let him have the
passport, don't do anything about it," I take it?
Mr. SEELEY. Oh, no, sir. At the time the passport was issued, it was
issued.
Mr. COLEMAN. But I mean when you got the telegram, nobody called you
and said, "Look, just skip it. Let him have the passport."
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. "Don't do anything about it"?
Mr. SEELEY. No, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. All the action you took, you took independently?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; as my own independent action.
Mr. COLEMAN. I take it if faced with the situation again, knowing only
what you knew on October 22, 1963, you would take the same action today?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; that is correct. There is one additional item,
and that is under our new regulations we do put a card in on a defector
or a person--I think I can give you the definition here.
"Defectors, expatriates and repatriates whose activities or background
demand further inquiry prior to issuance of passport facilities."
I presume that under this criteria, in fact I know under this criteria
that Oswald would have a card placed against him today.
Mr. COLEMAN. Is it your opinion as assistant legal counsel to the
Passport Office that you still in the final analysis couldn't deny him
the passport?
Mr. SEELEY. That is definite.
Mr. COLEMAN. And you would have to give it to him?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLEMAN. Has there been any other case of a defector where you have
actually issued him another passport?
Mr. SEELEY. We have issued passports to defectors, at least one that I
know of, and I think we have furnished a report on that.
Mr. COLEMAN. You say there is a case of another defector?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; in connection with the answer to this question,
we did a research job on a list of defectors which had been furnished
to the Department of State by the Department of Defense, and our search
disclosed that only one of these individuals, a Paul David Wilson, had
applied for passport facilities since his return to the United States,
and he was issued a passport.
Mr. COLEMAN. To go where, sir?
Mr. SEELEY. To visit Mexico, Colombia, South America, and was uncertain
of others.
Mr. COLEMAN. Was that done routinely or was that done after looking at
his file?
Mr. SEELEY. My recollection of this, that this was a routine issuance
of a passport to a person on whom we had no information.
Mr. COLEMAN. In other words, this was another case where because you
didn't have a lookout card----
Mr. SEELEY. Yes.
Mr. COLEMAN. Nobody ever looked at the file?
Mr. SEELEY. Yes, sir; well, there was no file. We have no file on this
man other than his name. The Passport Office has no file on this man,
Paul David Wilson.
Mr. COLEMAN. But there has been no case where you had a file, you knew
he had defected, and then applied for another passport and before you
issued the second passport you had to make a decision as to whether you
could refuse to issue him a passport?
Mr. SEELEY. None to my knowledge.
Mr. COLEMAN. I have no further questions, unless you have something
else you would want to say.
Mr. SEELEY. I have nothing further, Mr. Coleman. I will be glad to help
all I can. That is all I can say.
Mr. COLEMAN. Thank you for coming over.