Mr. LEV. Well, now, whether Colonel Painter is the one who didn't call my attention or whether my son-in-law did not call my attention, I would say between both of them nobody called my attention as far as deviations is concerned. As far as deviations is concerned, I definitely deny the deviations as far as the boxes is concerned. I would like to represent this in here as evidence, and I believe this will explain the whole thing, and the way, Senator Bender, you are stamping me out that I am a chiseler

Senator BENDER. I never used that term. You used it yourself. If you want to apply that term to yourself, that is your privilege.

Mr. LEV. On deviations, so forth and so on, I definitely never was and never will-my background will actually show, if you will check in

Senator BENDER. You admitted yesterday that you were doing something shady.

Mr. LEV. Shady?

Senator BENDER. Yes, in putting 2 hats in the box instead of 1 when your contract provided for 1 hat to a box.

Mr. LEV. I definitely protest this in here. Not only protesting, I reject this in here, that statement.

Senator BENDER. You were doing something honorable, then, according to your code of ethics?

Mr. LEV. Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. What have you?

What is it you want to present?

(The witness conferred with his counsel.)

Senator BENDER. If you can't read, how can you distinguish between the papers what paper you want?

Mr. LEV. What paper I want?

Senator BENDER. Yes.

Mr. LEV. If any person looks long enough on paper he should certainly recognize paper. How can I distinguish between a $10 bill and a $100 bill? It is the same thing.

The CHAIRMAN. All right.

Counsel, do you have anything?

Mr. PIERCE. Let these items be shown to the chairman.

Mr. Lev. I would like, please, if it is possible to let the committee know these, and read them off.

The CHAIRMAN. Pass them here for examination.

(Documents handed to committee.)

The CHAIRMAN. You might proceed with something else for a

moment.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Lev, maybe we could finish up a couple of things. When Mr. Bellino interviewed you on this question of whether it was blackmail-and Mr. Pierce, you can see this transcript-there was a tape recording taken and he asked you:

Don't you remember what Captain Wool told you?

and you stated:

I don't remember any time with Captain Wool. Rubin told me that she wanted to get $15,000 off me.

Question. For what?

Answer. That is what I would like to know. He didn't tell me why $15,000. I said you better tell her for me that she better go to hell. That is all.

Question. You didn't call her up?

Answer. No, siree. I told him it was blackmail.

So evidently it did occur to you at that time.

Mr. Lev. Mr. Bellino has stamped this here. He mentioned it. Mr. KENNEDY. That was your answer:

No, siree, I told him it was blackmail.

Mr. LEV. Mr. Bellino is the one that mentioned that blackmail. "Did you report to somebody else in the services?" And I told him, "No, for the reason why I left at that time to Puerto Rico."

Mr. KENNEDY. What has that got to do with it?

Mr. LEV. That is what I mentioned.

Mr. KENNEDY. Then Mr. Bellino said:

You never told anybody at ASTAPA that she was trying to blackmail you? I didn't have no time. I had to work. You should seen me work down in Puerto Rico.

Mr. LEV. Right.

Mr. KENNEDY. You were the one that stated it was blackmail, Mr. Lev.

Mr. Lev. Well, if you want to call this in here, let's call it as you wish. If that is the way you feel about it, okay.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Lev, that is not the way I feel about it. You volunteered the statement it was blackmail. Yesterday you said, "I don't know anything about blackmail."

Mr. LEV. I am still saying the same thing, whether you determine this here is blackmail, or whether it is not blackmail, it is up to you to stamp the title on it.

Mr. KENNEDY. I am using your words, Mr. Lev.

Mr. Lev. I am mentioning before. Mr. Bellino is the one that used the word "blackmail," and I said it is all right.

Mr. KENNEDY. No, Mr. Lev.

Mr. LEV. My counsel was there present when I mentioned it, the $15,000, and Mr. Bellino said, "Is that blackmail?" And I said, "If you call it blackmail, all right, it is blackmail." But I didn't title it.

Mr. KENNEDY. The only trouble with that, Mr. Lev, is that you used the term first. The second thing is that we had a question yesterday, whether this occurred during 1954. Captain Wool testified before this committee that he spoke to Mrs. Hort while she was working at ASTAPA regarding this question of blackmail, this $15,000 that she wanted to get from you, and she left ASTAPA in September 1953. So it must have been prior to that time. I thought that might help you refresh your memory.

Mr. LEV. No, I do know that he told me is approximately about a year. I would say maybe 11 months-I would say approximately between 2 months, one way or another. But I would say not more than a year. Maybe less.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Lev, you will not tell the committee why she wanted the $15,000?

Mr. LEV. I have told them about this in here, "What is it for?" And he told me, "I do not know," in a low tone.

Mr. KENNEDY. Did he say where he got the information from? Mr. LEV. Let's see now. He told me that Mrs. Hort wants to get $15,000.

Mr. KENNEDY. Yes.

Mr. LEV. I said, "What for?" And the answer was "I do not know." My answer was "Tell her I said so, to go to plumb

Mr. KENNEDY. How did he learn she wanted the $15,000?

Mr. LEV. That I don't know.

Mr. KENNEDY. You don't know why she wanted the $15,000, and you don't know how he learned that she wanted $15,000?

Mr. LEV. That is correct.

Mr. KENNEDY. Those two very important questions you never found the answer to?

Mr. LEV. No, I can't give you the answer, because I wasn't there. Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, you were there, Mr. Lev.

Mr. LEV. I wasn't there when she told him.

Mr. KENNEDY. I am talking about your conversation with Mr. Rubin. I am not talking about anything else.

Mr. Lev. His conversation, sure, he told me so. That is correct. Mr. KENNEDY. But you didn't find out why she wanted the $15,000, or where he had learned she wanted the $15,000?

Mr. LEV. I asked him.

Mr. KENNEDY. What did he say?

Mr. LEV. "What is it for" and he said he don't know. That is the

answer.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has examined the material that you submitted to the committee. Included in this material is a series of telegrams regarding buttons for the caps. Some of these telegrams are photostatic copies and others typewritten copies or original copies. If you testify, I will ask you the question, are these carbon copies of telegrams which you have submitted to the committee, and the typewritten copies of telegrams, true and correct, and were they sent and received as indicated?

Mr. Lev. I would say they are definitely correct. My son-in-law took it out from my personal file. It was in my personal file. He told me that this definitely. My son-in-law would never do anything else but

The CHAIRMAN. According to your best knowledge and information they are correct and have been taken from the files of your business? Mr. LEV. Definitely. They could also be examined in the Quartermaster. You will find the originals in down there. So that could correspond.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair feels that in deference to you and some of your testimony with respect to delays that occurred, as a matter of record and for this record, while they do not relate directly to some matters or many of the matters that are involved in this proceeding, I do feel that for the record they should be made a part of these proceedings because there will be some controversy, possibly, or at least some effort on the part of the Government to collect from you certain claims that it is asserting against you. So that those who read this record may know there was some delay regarding the buttons about which you have testified, the Chair is going to order these made exhibits to the proceedings without reading them.

Mr. LEV. Is it possible, Mr. Chairman, that they should be read off? The CHAIRMAN. If your counsel thinks any of them should be read, the Chair will accede to that. I do not think they are of that import

ance.

Mr. PIERCE. I would prefer to have the Chair just sum it up in a brief statement.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has glanced at them hurriedly, but I will identify them as telegrams relating to the shipment of buttons which the Government was to furnish.

Mr. PIERCE. And that there was a considerable delay, if the Chair please.

The CHAIRMAN. They speak for themselves that there was delay, and that Mr. Lev was wiring them, urging them to make shipments. Mr. PIERCE. And that he finally purchased the buttons at his own

expense.

The CHAIRMAN. He can testify to that. I do not know whether the telegrams reveal it or not.

Mr. PIERCE. I believe there is a letter there.

The CHAIRMAN. I will get to the letter in a moment.

Mr. PIERCE. And he waived his claim for that purchase.

The CHAIRMAN. I will get to the letter in a moment. I would like to have the telegrams inserted as exhibits in the order of their dates. They can be made one exhibit. This will be beginning with the telegram of March 22, 1951, to the New York Quartermaster Procurement Agency from B. Bloom. Next is a telegram from Mid City, April 2, 1951, to the New York Quartermaster Procurement Agency; one of April 11, 1951; one of April 13, 1951; April 18, 1951; May 15, 1951; May 17, 1951; May 23, 1951; May 31, 1951; June 14, 1951; July 16, 1951; July 20, 1951; and August 2, 1951. They will speak for themselves when placed into the record. They may all be numbered as 1, 2, 3, and 4 in order of their date, but they will be combined and made exhibit No. 75.

(Exhibit No. 75 will be found in the appendix on p. 1143.) Mr. PIERCE. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. The witness has also presented to the committee the photostatic copy of a letter of January 29, 1954, addressed to Mr. B. Bloom, Mid City Uniform Cap Co. It is on New York Quartermaster purchasing agent stationery, and it is signed "George M. Mould, major, successor contracting officer." This letter may be made exhibit 76. I will read the pertinent parts of it.

Reference is made to your explanation date September 15, 1953, for relief pursuant to title II of the First War Powers Act

and so forth, and then it identifies the contract.

You are advised that your successor contracting officer has determined that no savings have been realized as a result of packing two caps to a box inasmuch as your bid price as originally submitted was based on said requirement. Since the undersigned has determined that no assessment will be made for any savings based on the packing of the contract items, there is no further need to process your application. However, in order that the matter may be closed, it is requested that you forward a letter withdrawing your application for relief under title II.

That may be made exhibit 76.

(Exhibit No. 76 may be found in the files of the subcommittee.)

The CHAIRMAN. Apparently in response to that letter, here is another letter. Here is a letter from the Quartermaster purchasing agent of New York, dated February 12, 1954, addressed to Mr. Bloom of Mid City Uniform Cap Co., which text is as follows:

Receipt is acknowledge of your letter of February 9, 1954, wherein you withdraw your application for relief pursuant to title II of the First War Powers Act of 1941 as amended, dated September 15, 1953. You are advised that said application will be considered withdrawn.

It is signed "G. M. Clarke, Jr., Chief, Legal Office."

No; that is signed-what is that? "C. F. Bennett, per G. F. Clarke, Jr., Legal Office."

That is correspondence that you had relating to the deviations on the hats, where you were relieved from repaying to the Government the savings that allegedly accrued by reason of packing 2 hats to the box?

Senator BENDER. On this one transaction?

The CHAIRMan. Yes.

Mr. LEV. Besides this here, there is a duplicate invoice there.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. These letters relate to the two contracts: which have been previously identified, and which have been under discussion.

Mr. KENNEDY. We understand these letters were written on the basis of these memoranda put into the files of October 20 and July 3, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand this is after the memorandum from Major Farnell which had gone into the file. This new officer, on the basis of that, relieved you from any liability to repay the Government the savings that may have accrued. These letters reflect that.

Here is an invoice which has been handed to me. The Chair is not familiar with it. I do not know whether it is pertinent or not. Mr. LEV. May I explain this here?

The CHAIRMAN. Well, this invoice will be made exhibit No. 78. It is addressed to the New York Quartermaster Procurement Agency, marked duplicate 1069, dated the 13th of July 1951. It is from the Mid City Uniform Cap Co. Apparently it is billing the Quartermaster Corps for buttons which your company procured and paid for yourself so that you might get credit for it or reimbursed for it from the Government. Is that correct?

Mr. LEV. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be made exhibit No. 78.

The letter of February 12, 1954, has been made exhibit No. 77 and the invoice has been made exhibit No. 78.

(Exhibits Nos. 77 and 78 may be found in the files of the subcommittee.)

Mr. LEV. What happened on the buttons is this: Colonel Shirley is telling me I can go ahead and order buttons. One of the telegrams is explaining they are not delivering new buttons until they will get buttons.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lev, apparently that is all right. The Government was to furnish the buttons and it was not able to do it as expeditiously as they desired. You needed them and you were instructed or permitted to go ahead and procure buttons if you could and bill the Government procurement agency for it.

Mr. LEV. Here is the whole thing.

Mr. PIERCE. He waived his claim.

Mr. LEV. The whole thing happened is so I waived the claim for the buttons.

The CHAIRMAN. You did what?

Mr. LEV. I waived the claim for 9,000 and some dollars over there. We kept on writing and writing and we couldn't be able to get somewhere. I came in one time and told them, "The best way to do so is to forget it. That is all."