Mr. Stern.

But the first indication on page 1, when you refer to information received by communication from the District Intelligence Office, does that seem to indicate a check was made by the FBI office in New Orleans or this information was delivered by the Office of Naval Intelligence voluntarily, without request?

Mr. Fain.

I don't recall ever dictating a request. It could have happened, but you must remember it has been over a year and a half since I referred to these things. And----

Mr. Stern.

Sure.

Mr. Fain.

That just sounds like it is a communication we received from there, and that we opened the case based on that information. That would be my opinion now.

Mr. Stern.

But you don't know why they would have been sending you that information?

Mr. Fain.

That can be ascertained.

Mr. Stern.

Yes. We, perhaps, can find out from other witnesses if you don't remember, and if you don't know, just tell us that.

Mr. Fain.

I do not know; I don't recall that.

Mr. Stern.

All right. On page 10, the top paragraph, in reference to a review of the files of the passport office of the Department of State, again do you recall whether this was done at your request by someone else?

Mr. Fain.

No, sir; I do not. It could have been requested by letter out of the Dallas office or it might have been that it was made up here at scat of Government.

Mr. Stern.

But in any event did you cheek these files at the State Department?

Mr. Fain.

I did not.

Mr. Stern.

The passport office?

Mr. Fain.

No. My investigative jurisdiction was the Fort Worth area and vicinity.

Mr. Stern.

Again would you summarize your recollection of the purpose and direction of the investigation at this stage, at the time covered by this report. What do you recall to have been the purpose and direction of the investigation?

Mr. Fain.

At this particular point it seems we were looking at this individual, opened the case to find out who he was and see if he was any kind of an internal threat, a threat to the internal security of our country.

Mr. Stern.

What was your evaluation of that question as a result of your investigation?

Mr. Fain.

At that time we there was nothing appearing that he was of any potential danger to the security of--I was trying to find out whether or not, you will notice on page 9 there the last paragraph, to see whether or not he was a member of the Communist Party in Fort Worth, and my check of our confidential sources showed that there was no knowledge available, no information available, that he was a member of the Communist Party. That was supposed primarily my immediate objective, to find out whether or not he was connected with the Communist Party there in Fort Worth, in addition to the developing of the background information on him.

Mr. Stern.

And this entered into your evaluation at the time, the fact that he was not a member of the Communist Party?

Mr. Fain.

Yes, sir; there was no indication that he was a member of the Communist Party in Fort Worth.

Mr. Stern.

Was it also relevant to your evaluation that he was apparently living in Russia at the time?

Mr. Fain.

I beg your pardon?

Mr. Stern.

Was it also relevant to your conclusion about his not being a threat to the internal security of the United States that at the time he was apparently living in Russia, at the time covered by this report?

Mr. Fain.

Well, certainly we were going to keep track of him from then on, naturally, if he is over there.

The Chairman.

Gentlemen, any questions? Mr. McCloy.

Mr. Mccloy.

On the top of page 10, Mr. Chief Justice, this report refers to the review on May 9, 1961, of the files of the passport office. Who did make that review if you didn't make it?