Mr. Eisenberg.

How does the recoil of this weapon compare with the recoil of the average military rifle?

Mr. Frazier.

Considerably less. The recoil is nominal with this weapon, because it has a very low velocity and pressure, and just an average-size bullet weight.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Would that trend to improve the shooter's marksmanship?

Mr. Frazier.

Under rapid-fire conditions, yes.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Would that make it a better choice than a more powerfully recoiling weapon for the type of crime which was committed?

Mr. Frazier.

For shooting rapidly, this would be a much better choice, be cause the recoil does not throw the muzzle nearly so far off the target, it does not jar the shooter nearly so much, as a higher-powered rifle, such as a or a .270 Winchester, or a German 8 mm. Mauser, for instance, or one of the other military-type weapons available.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Is the killing power of the bullets essentially similar to the killing power at these ranges---the killing power of the rifles you have named?

Mr. Frazier.

No, sir.

Mr. Eisenberg.

How much difference is there?

Mr. Frazier.

The higher velocity bullets of approximately the same weight would have more killing power. This has a low velocity, but has very adequate killing power with reference to humans, because it is a military--it is an established military weapon.

Representative Boggs.

This is a military weapon, is it not?

Mr. Frazier.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Mccloy.

That is designed to kill a human being.

Representative Boggs.

Exactly.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Unless there are further questions on the weapon, I am going to move into the area of the identification of the cartridge cases and the bullets.

Mr. Mccloy.

I may say I have to leave at twelve o'clock for a twelve-fifteen appointment. I will be back this afternoon.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Mr. Frazier, returning to the cartridge cases which were marked earlier into evidence as Commission Exhibits 543, 544, and 545, and which, as I stated earlier for the record, had been found next to the window of the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, can you tell us when you received those cartridge cases?

Mr. Frazier.

Yes, sir; I received the first of the exhibits, 543 and 544, on November 23, 1963. They were delivered to me by Special Agent Vincent Drain of the Dallas FBI Office.
And the other one I received on November 27(, 1963, which was delivered by Special Agents Vincent Drain and Warren De Brueys of the Dallas Office.

Mr. Eisenberg.

After receiving these cartridge cases, did you clean them up or in any way prepare them for examination?

Mr. Frazier.

Yes. The bases were cleaned of a paint which was placed on them by the manufacturer. In spots this red lacquer on the base of the case was overlapping the head of the case where some of the microscopic marks were located, and some of that color was taken off.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Why is that lacquer put on the cartridge cases?

Mr. Frazier.

It seals the primer area against moisture.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Were there any other changes made in the preparation of the cartridge cases?

Mr. Frazier.

No, sir.

Mr. Eisenberg.

You have examined the cartridge cases previously. Are they in the same condition now that they were when you received them in the laboratory except for the cleaning of the lacquer?

Mr. Frazier.

Yes, sir; they are.

Mr. Eisenberg.

After receiving the cartridge cases, did you examine them to determine whether they had been fired in Commission Exhibit 139?

Mr. Frazier.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Eisenberg.

When did you make the examinations?

Mr. Frazier.

On the dates I mentioned, that is, November 23, 1963, and November 27, 1963.