Mr. McCLOY. Not Embassy; here is one from Mexico. Do we have that? We
don't have these in our files, for example.
Mr. BELMONT. This is subsequent to the assassination. You see your area
of interest at this point is information, all information we had prior
to the assassination. I did not remove from this file the items that
started to come in subsequent to the assassination, you see.
Mr. McCLOY. My feeling is that somebody on the Commission should
examine that file. I can't come to any other conclusion after reading
it all, because I don't know what is in it, what is in our record,
and what is in that file. There is a good bit of material there that
is narrative, which I think would be relevant. Certainly, I don't
believe we can be possibly criticized for deleting or not producing
a file which contains the type of information that you are speaking
of. We are just as interested in protecting the security of your
investigative processes as you are. But I don't think that when it is
on the record that we have this file, that may contain material that
was not in our files, and we are given the opportunity to examine it,
without disclosing these confidential matters that we ought not to have
somebody go through it.
Mr. DULLES. I agree with that but I think we could save time if we
checked off first what we have already and that would cut out about
half of that file probably.
Mr. McCLOY. I think in a rapid glance through it, I think just about
half of it.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, suppose you do that then, get those and let's see.
All right, proceed, Mr. Stern.
Mr. STERN. I think perhaps we ought to leave the entire matter of the
file then until we can give you the information.
The CHAIRMAN. That is right.
Mr. STERN. May we admit for the purposes of the record this list at
this time, Mr. Chief Justice, which has been marked No. 834?
The CHAIRMAN. Yes. There are no security matters in this?
Mr. BELMONT. No, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted as Exhibit No. 834.
(The document referred to, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 834
for identification, was received in evidence.)
Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, can you identify this letter dated February 6
with an attached affidavit which has been marked for identification as
Commission Exhibit No. 835?
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 835, for
identification.)
Mr. BELMONT. Yes; this is a letter dated February 6, 1964, to the
Commission from the FBI to which is attached an affidavit by Director
J. Edgar Hoover.
Mr. STERN. What is the subject?
Mr. BELMONT. Stating flatly that Lee Harvey Oswald was never an
informant of the FBI.
Mr. DULLES. Would you define informant. Obviously in the sense he knew
some information as previously indicated from the previous interviews.
I mean for the record, would you just define what you mean by an
informant in this sense?
Mr. BELMONT. An informant in this sense is an individual who has agreed
to cooperate with the FBI and to furnish information to the FBI either
for or without payment.
Mr. STERN. Thank you.
Mr. BELMONT. This would not, of course, include the cooperative citizen
to whom we go, and who frequently and frankly discloses any information
in his possession, but rather someone who joins an organization or
seeks out information at the direction and instance of the FBI relative
to subversive or criminal matters. In other words, I want to make it
clear we do not regard patriotic citizens as informants.
Mr. STERN. I take it you also would not have regarded Lee Oswald as an
informant from the contacts with him that you have told us about and
the other agents have told us about?
Mr. BELMONT. Indeed not; in no way could he be considered an informant;
in no way.
Mr. STERN. Did you supervise or assist in the preparation of the
information contained here?
Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir.
Mr. STERN. And you are familiar with it?
Mr. BELMONT. Yes; I am.
Mr. STERN. And to your knowledge, does it accurately and completely
state the Bureau's practice in recruiting a prospective informant?
Mr. BELMONT. That is correct.
Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to the information
covered in there with respect to your practices regarding informants?
Mr. BELMONT. No; only in my personal knowledge this is a correct
statement and Lee Harvey Oswald was not an informant of the FBI.
Mr. STERN. Did you ever use the term "agent" to apply to anyone other
than an employee, a special agent employee of the FBI?
Mr. BELMONT. No; we do not.
Mr. DULLES. Could I ask you, Mr. Belmont, whether Mr. Fain's separation
from the FBI had anything whatever to do with the Oswald case or in his
handling of the Oswald case?
Mr. BELMONT. No; indeed not. Mr. Fain came to the retirement age and
decided he wanted to retire, which is his privilege, and he retired and
is presently working in Texas and very happy, I understand.
Mr. DULLES. Thank you.
Mr. BELMONT. He retired in good graces, good standing, so far as the
FBI is concerned.
The CHAIRMAN. And a year before the assassination.
Mr. BELMONT. Frankly, I don't recall.
The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it was August 1962, he testified.
Mr. STERN. You have already covered this, Mr. Belmont, but just so that
the record is completely clear on this point, was Lee Oswald ever an
agent of the FBI?
Mr. BELMONT. Lee Oswald was never an agent of the FBI.
Mr. STERN. The letter of February 6, 1964, from Mr. Hoover, alludes to
testimony furnished the Commission by District Attorney Wade. Have you
subsequently been advised that Mr. Wade had not testified before the
Commission?
Mr. BELMONT. Yes; we received a letter from the Commission advising us
that the incident referred to was an informal discussion rather than
actual testimony before the Commission.
Mr. STERN. And also to complete the record, have you been advised that
Mr. Wade was not suggesting that he believed the rumor about Oswald
as an informant, but felt obliged to call it to the attention of the
Commission?
Mr. BELMONT. The Commission's letter so advised us.
Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted with No. 835?
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted under that number.
(The document referred to, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 835
for identification, was received in evidence.)
Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, I show you a letter dated February 12, 1964,
a number of affidavits by special agents, attached to it. It was
identified yesterday, parts of it were identified yesterday and it
therefore carries the number for identification 825. Can you identify
this letter for us?
Mr. BELMONT. In order to be sure--I beg your pardon. This is a letter
dated February 12, 1964, to the Commission from the FBI, to which is
attached affidavits of FBI personnel who had reason to contact Lee
Harvey Oswald and who were in a supervisory capacity over the agents
who contacted Oswald.
Mr. STERN. Did you supervise the preparation of this material?
Mr. BELMONT. These affidavits were prepared, of course, by the men
themselves. I have read the affidavits, and they were compiled as an
enclosure and sent over with this letter.
Mr. STERN. You have reviewed them in preparation for your testimony
before the Commission?
Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir.
Mr. STERN. To your knowledge, are they accurate?
Mr. BELMONT. They are accurate, to my knowledge, yes.
Mr. STERN. Are they complete?
Mr. BELMONT. Yes.
Mr. STERN. They do not omit any significant fact you know of?
Mr. BELMONT. No.
Mr. STERN. In connection with the material they cover?
Mr. BELMONT. No.
Mr. STERN. Unless there are any questions on that, Mr. Chairman, I
suggest we admit this document.
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted as No. 825.
(The document referred to, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 825
for identification, was received in evidence.)
Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, I show you a letter dated March 31, 1964, from
Director Hoover to Mr. Rankin, the General Counsel of the Commission,
with a series of attachments. Can you identify this which has been
marked for identification as No. 836. Can you identify this for the
Commission?
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 836 for
identification.)
Mr. BELMONT. This is a letter dated March 31, 1964, to the Commission
from the FBI to which is attached the instructions contained in our
manuals as to the type of information which should be disseminated to
Secret Service and our relations or liaison with Secret Service.
Mr. STERN. It was prepared in response to a request from the Commission?
Mr. BELMONT. That is correct.
Mr. STERN. Did you supervise or assist in the preparation?
Mr. BELMONT. I did.
Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed it recently?
Mr. BELMONT. Yes.
Mr. STERN. Is it complete with respect to the matters covered?
Mr. BELMONT. Yes; it is.
Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to it with respect
to the matters covered?