Mr. Cadigan.

an iodine-iodide stain, which will distinguish between rag fibers, chemical wood fibers, and ground wood fibers by different coloring. The chemical wood is stained blue, rag fibers are stained red, ground wood stained yellow.
I made and studied specimens or slides of fibers from Commission Exhibit 677, the known sample, and from Commission Exhibit 142, the paper sack, to see if the fiber composition is similar. What that means is, is this chemical wood, is it coniferous or deciduous, are there any rag fibers in there or are there any ground wood fibers in there, and I found here the fiber composition was similar and essentially it is a coniferous woodlike pine. There were a few stray rag fibers, which I think were probably accidental, and a few stray ground wood fragments in there.

Mr. Dulles.

Let me get clearly what is similar, that is the paper bag, Exhibit----

Mr. Cadigan.

142; the paper comprising that sack and the paper comprising the known sample obtained November 22, Exhibit 677.

Mr. Dulles.

Right.

Mr. Cadigan.

The papers I also found were similar in fiber composition, therefore, in addition to the visual characteristics, microscopic and UV characteristics.

Mr. Eisenberg.

"UV" being ultraviolet?

Mr. Cadigan.

Yes, sir. Then I had a spectrographic examination made of the paper from the sack, 142, and the known sample secured November 22, Commission Exhibit 677.
Spectrographic tests involve, of course, burning the substance and capturing the light on a photographic plate to determine what metallic ions are present. This was done by our spectrographic section, and again the paper of Commission Exhibit 677, the paper sample, secured November 22, was found to be similar spectrographically to the paper of the sack, Commission Exhibit 142.
Now, these were additional tests, the original examinations, under visual and ultraviolet light were made by me on November 23, 1963. Fiber analysis and the spectrographic examination were conducted on March 25, 1964.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Have you now reviewed all the points in which you compared the paper sack obtained from the TSBD, Exhibit 142, and the known sample obtained on November 22, Exhibit 677?

Mr. Cadigan.

Yes.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Did you find any points of nonidentity?

Mr. Cadigan.

No; I found none.

Mr. Eisenberg.

They were identical on every point on which you measured them?

Mr. Cadigan.

Yes.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Mr. Cadigan, did you notice when you looked at the bag whether there were---that is the bag found on the sixth floor, Exhibit 142--whether it had any bulges or unusual creases?

Mr. CADIGAN. I was also requested at that time to examine the bag to determine if there were any significant markings or scratches or abrasions or anything by which it could be associated with the rifle, Commission Exhibit 139, that is, could I find any markings that I could tie to that rifle.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Yes?

Mr. Cadigan.

And I couldn't find any such markings.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Now, was there an absence of markings which would be inconsistent with the rifle having been carried in the bag?

Mr. Cadigan.

No; I don't see actually, I don't know the condition of the rifle. If it were in fact contained in this bag, it could have been wrapped in cloth or just the metal parts wrapped in a thick layer of cloth, or if the gun was in the bag, perhaps it wasn't moved too much. I did observe some scratch marks and abrasions but was unable to associate them with this gun. The scratch marks in the paper could come from any place. They could have come from many places. There were no marks on this bag that I could say were caused by that rifle or any other rifle or any other given instrument.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Was there any absence of markings or absence of bulges or