페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

It has gone to the House. It has been passed by the House, with some small modifications. The conference committee has now been appointed.

Under the circumstances, I suggest to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the membership of the committee, that you are not performing at this time the sole and only function that is the function of this committee, endeavoring to ascertain matters for the purposes of legislation.

I say this particular act, this particular law, while it has not been signed The CHAIRMAN. Will you suspend for just a moment ? Mr. COLLINS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. That is a signal for a rollcall vote. The committee will have to suspend for a few moments until Senators report to the Chamber and vote on the pending issue. We will return immediately afterwards.

I am sorry to have to interrupt you. It takes a little hustling to get over there, usually.

Mr. COLLINS. That is quite all right, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. We will be right back.
(Brief recess.)

(Members present at time of recess: Senators McClellan, Mundt, and Curtis.)

(The subcommittee reconvened at 4:30 p.m., after a brief recess.)

Members present at time of reconvening: Senators McClellan and Ervin.)

The CHAIRMAN. We will proceed.
Mr. Collins, you may resume.

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, at the adjournment, I think I had mentioned the fact that

The CHAIRMAN. What was the number of the bill that you referred to that is now in process of possibly being enacted into law? What is the number of it?

Mr. Collins. The one that I think particularly applies as far as this witness is S. 1656, which is a bill to amend chapter 50 of title 18, United States Code, with respect to the transmission of bets, wagers, and related information.

In other words, it is the bill covering the aspect of wire service, and which I suggest to you was passed by the Judiciary Committee after a very comprehensive investigation.

I suggest to this committee now that that committee having passed that bill, and it now having been passed for all practical purposes by the House except for slight modification, and being in conference, if the conferees have not already been appointed, they will be shortly-I know that as to one other bill, 1653, the conferees had been appointed

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose the bill had been passed and actually enacted into law and the President had signed it and it was now in effect. Would you deny that this committee, the Congress, had jurisdiction to investigate the subject matter under consideration here now?

Mr. COLLINS. Do you mean this bill I have talked about?
The CHAIRMAN. Yes.
Mr. COLLINS. Yes. Otherwise, I would not be rising to

some more.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, we never could investigate to determine whether a law should be repealed or not? I guess we would be forever barred; is that your contention?

Mr. COLLINS. No, I do not take that position at all, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Maybe we might want to repeal this act pretty soon or amend it. Is there any reason why, then, we should not try to have a little testimony to know what we are doing?

Mr. COLLINS. There have been several situations here, Senator, on which the occasion has brought forth laughter. Don't you think it would be rather laughable if tomorrow you decided you were going to repeal this law? The CHAIRMAN. Not necessarily. We might want to tighten it up

We passed a law a few years ago and we find now according to the testimony it is not adequate to bring in the taxes estimated. We are receiving altogether about $7 million out of an estimated $400 million that we thought it was going to produce.

As I think I mentioned the other day, it almost requires a continuous study of the Congress to keep up with the scientific and electronic devices, and so forth, that are coming into existence that are available to the criminal element, to the underworld, in the practice of their trades. It takes a continuous study.

If you want to go a little further, I wil let you go a little further. Mr. COLLINS. I only want to go a little further, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. I will indulge it a while, because I think the issue is made.

Mr. COLLINS. I would like to call your attention to the fact that you, and I say this most respectfully, Senator, because I have a great regard for you and your competence, you, in connection with this Resolution 69, offered an amendment, and I now read it to you:

Nothing contained in this resolution shall affect or impair the exercise by the Committee on the Judiciary or by the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, of any power or the discharge by such committee of any duty, conferred or imposed upon it by the Standing Rules of the Senate or by the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946.

I say that in performing the function that they did, they carried out their function. They have preempted you in this situation and have passed legislation pertaining to this particular subject that is involved in this case.

I have nothing further to say.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. The Chair will make this observation:

The amendment to which the distinguished counsel has referred is an amendment that clearly set forth the fact that this resolution was not intended to interfere with, or, rather, to impair the jurisdiction of the other two committees, the two legislative committees, to which the amendment referred. It does not impair them in any way in their functions, and that amendment clearly so states. But likewise, it does not give to those committees exclusive jurisdiction over this field.

I may say the Government Operations Committee, of which this subcommittee is an arm—in other words, that is the parent committee-has the jurisdiction and the duty to investigate government at all levels with respect to its economy and its efficiency.

This duty to investigate crime has been further imposed upon the committee, or has been reposed in the committee, by reason of the resolution to which counsel has referred.

There is overlapping jurisdiction in the Government Operations Committee of practically, if not all, the legislative committees of the Senate. For everything that this committee can do with respect to looking into the activities of any agency of the Government, a corresponding duty or an equal duty rests upon the legislative committee having jurisdiction of that agency.

Therefore, this committee has been given the jurisdiction primarily of doing the investigative work. That is what we are in process of doing now, together with being in pursuit of the additional duty assigned to us by the resolution.

If counsel made a motion for the committee to suspend on the basis of lack of jurisdiction, on the basis that another committee has jurisdiction, and for the reason that some legislation is in process of being enacted, the motion is overruled for the reasons I have stated and for other reasons that are apparent on the face of the issue.

Very well, we may proceed, Mr. Counsel.
Mr. ADLERMAN. Mr. Atlas, what is your occupation?

Mr. Atlas. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

The CHAIRMAN. Pardon me. Was there anything else, Senator Ervin?

Senator Ervin. No. I concur in what the Chair had to say. The CHAIRMAN. I sometimes forget to my chief counsel here, chief of the chiefs, Senator Ervin. Senator Ervin has been a distinguished jurist before becoming a U.S. Senator, and I have great respect for his judgment and his knowledge of law, our jurisprudence and procedures. And I think the position I have stated is the position of the committee.

All right, proceed.
Mr. ADLERMAN. I think the question was answered.
Are you employed by the Delaware Sports Service?

Mr. Atlas. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so may tend to incriminate me.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that the service we have been investigating that belonged to Mr. Tollin? Mr.

ADLERMAN. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. I think Mr. Tollin admitted that he was working for him; didn't he?

Mr. ADLERMAN. That is right.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Tollin said you were working for him.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Do you get a salary of $250 a week from the Delaware Sports Service?

Mr. ATLAS. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Is it your job to arrange for the service of a corporation of spies or peekers or wigwaggers, flashers, pitchers or catchers, at the various tracks in the East ?

Mr. Atlas. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Do you find the men to do this operation and who will get this information from the racetrack to a telephone to call to the Delaware Sports Service?

Mr. Atlas. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you honestly believe that a truthful answer to these questions might tend to incriminate you?

Mr. Atlas. It might.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you honestly believe that?
Mr. ATLAS. Might.
The CHAIRMAN. You might honestly believe it or you might not?
What are you saying?

Mr. ATLAS. It might.
The CHAIRMAN. What might?
Mr. ATLAS. Incriminate me.
The CHAIRMAN. Very well, proceed.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Do you make the arrangements for the spots or the rooms or the vantage places where you can overhear the loudspeaker systems or be able to see the tote board with a pair of binoculars, and so forth?

Mr. Atlas. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

The CHAIRMAN. You have a service here called peekers or pitchers or catchers. What is this particular service that you charge he performed? What category does it come under, what name?

Mr. ADLERMAN. He is the principal arranger. He is, say, almost a master spy of a group of spies, to spy out or obtain information from the racetrack and to furnish it to the racing service. He is the man who is over them. He is the manager or the master of them. He supervises them.

The CHAIRMAN. He sets up the arrangements and supervises?

Mr. ADLERMAN. That is right. He is the only one of this group that is on a salary basis with the Delaware Sports Service. The others are independent contractors that he hires for the Delaware Sports Service.

The CHAIRMAN. This is on a continuous salary?
Mr. ADLERMAN. That is right.
The CHAIRMAN. This witness?

Mr. ADLERMAN. That is right. He is currently getting $250 a week, and Mr. Bellino put that into the record this morning.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Do you make these arrangements for the New York tracks, Belmont and Aqueduct; the Maryland tracks, Laurel, Pimlico, and Bowie; New Jersey tracks, Monmouth, Atlantic City and Garden City; West Virginia track, Charlestown?

Mr. ATLAS. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Did you at one time arrange to send Alex Estrin and Lucille Lorraine Rice to try to operate in Hialeah, Gulf Stream, and Tropical Park, in Florida?

Mr. ATLAS. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me. Mr. ADLERMAN. Do you know Mr. Herman Kane?

75477–61-pt. 2

5

Mr. ATLAS. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Do you know Mr. Jack Rose?

Mr. Atlas. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Your employer, Mr. Tollin, testified that he paid them each $900 a week to get the race results from the Florida track. Did you supervise their work?

Mr. ATLAS. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

The CHAIRMAN. There has been some testimony here to the effect that one of the purposes of getting this information out of the track and getting it disseminated to clients or customers, to bookmakers, might enable them and certain professional gamblers to place a bet on a race after the race had actually been run. But the bookmaker might not know what the outcome of the race was and thus they could place a bet on a winner. Would you regard such a transaction or such a manipulation as being a fraud upon the bookmaker if the fellow already knew the race had been run? The bookmaker didn't know it; the fellow already knew the winner. He went up and placed a bet with the bookmaker, knowing that the race had already been won by the horse he bet on. Would you say that was defrauding the bookmaker?

Mr. Atlas. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

Mr. ADLERMAN. If you helped to arrange so that it could be done, wouldn't you be a party to the fraud ?

Mr. ATLAS. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Wouldn't you regard a man who does that as being a cheat and a fraud himself?

Mr. Atlas. I respectfully decline to answer because to do so might incriminate me.

Mr. ADLERMAN. It would be a little incriminating, if true, wouldn't it?

The CHAIRMAN. All right, proceed.

Mr. ADLERMAN. Senator, this morning we put in the record this handwritten statement and the signature of Mr. Albert Tollin. I would just like to read certain paragraphs of that at this time.

I, Joseph Tollin, senior partner of Delaware Sports Service, successor to Delaware Wired Music, Inc., of 601 Tatnall Street, Wilmington, Del., make the following statement:

I have known Rudolph “Big Ralph” Atlas-
The CHAIRMAN. You are known by that name?

Mr. ATLAS. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it might tend to incriminate me.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean to be called "Big Ralph” would be incriminating

Mr. ATLAS. It might be.
The CHAIRMAN. Used in this context?
Mr. ATLAS. It might be.
The CHAIRMAN. Very well, proceed.

« 이전계속 »