Mr. Hubert.

All right, sir; there is one statement I have noticed in the FBI report identified as Exhibit No. 1, on page 2, that I would like, if you would, to clarify, because it is not really clear to me. It is the third sentence in the last paragraph on the second page reading as follows, to wit: "He--that is you--stated on November 25 he issued instructions to his subordinates and to Chief Curry and the police department to make no comments concerning these matters. Insofar as he knows. these instructions have been followed." I would just like to get a clarification of what you had in mind. It is not clear to me.

Mr. Crull.

This may be inaccurate in my timing. This came immediately after the shooting of Oswald and the delivery of Ruby to the county jail. A problem for the district attorney's office, and for the Commission, and at that time the press had announced that President Johnson had announced that he would name such a Commission. He had actually named Chief Justice Warren to head it I am not certain.
And my instructions were that no police officer make any comment, that no evidence be released by any police officer, that it would all be turned over to the district attorney for his control, and I talked to the district attorney by telephone and told him my instructions. This was on Monday. Later, whether it was the same day or the following day, the district attorney told the chief of police that he preferred that that responsibility go to the--what is now known as the Warren Commission. I don't believe any member of the police department, but with one exception, has yet violated the instructions on statements.

Mr. Hubert.

Mr. Crull, as you know, there has been at least one statement to the effect that Chief Curry was "taking the wrap for higher-ups who insisted that Oswald be transferred in daylight hours in order to accommodate the press and other news media."

Do you know anything about that at all, sir?

Mr. Crull.

So far as I am concerned, the higher ups would have to be either the city manager or the mayor. So far as the city manager is concerned, Chief Curry was given no instructions whatsoever as to the transfer, and I feel quite confident that Mayor Cabell didn't.
For two reasons, One, he says he didn't, and the other, that under the charter, the city manager's responsibility for the chief of police and the mayor doesn't give direct orders. I think the statement is completely untrue.

Mr. Hubert.

Do you know of anything that would indicate that Mayor Cabell or any of the members of the council did exercise any kind of pressure whatsoever on Chief Curry?

Mr. Crull.

I know of nothing, and I feel certain that it didn't occur.

Mr. Hubert.

And you did not at all?

Mr. Crull.

That's correct.

Mr. Hubert.

All right, sir; is there anything else you would like to add?

Mr. Crull.

No; I guess not. Nearly all my knowledge is of course hearsay. I have no direct knowledge.

Mr. Hubert.

All right, sir; then let me close the deposition with the usual question. Am I correct in stating that nothing has been discussed between us at any time since we first met, which was today, that has not become subsequently a part of this deposition by being reported?

Mr. Crull.

That's correct.

Mr. Hubert.

I certainly thank you, sir.

Mr. Crull.

Thank you.

Mr. Hubert.

Glad you came by.

------------------
J. W. Fritz

Testimony of J.w. Fritz

The testimony of J. W. Fritz was taken at 9 a.m., on July. 14, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Leon D. Hubert, Jr., assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Sam Kelley, assistant attorney general of Texas, was present.