Senator RUSSELL. Has there been any increase, Mr. Secretary, in the number of agents assigned to guard the President. I thought there had been some increase in recent years?
Secretary DILLON. There has been some increase, and we have tried very hard to increase the Secret Service in the last 3 or 4 years. We have asked for more people every year, and while we never got the amount we asked for, we did get increases. I have the figures here. In 1961, the entire Secret Service amounted to 454 individuals, of whom 305 were classified as agents. In 1964, that is the fiscal year just finished, the figure was 571, of which 167 were clerks and 404 were agents. So we had achieved an increase of about 100 agents, a little over a third.

Mr. Dulles.

That included both the counterfeiting responsibilities of the Secret Service as well as the Presidential protection?
Secretary DILLON. That is right. And I think it is important to note that the counterfeiting problem was also increasing in volume very rapidly and changing very rapidly at about the same time. Actually that may have started a few years earlier because of the development of photography, which enabled one to counterfeit by photography instead of having to do it by hand engraving.

Representative Ford.

Wasn't the specific request for an increase in the White House detail--I use this in a broad sense for both the President and Vice President--primarily aimed at the increase of personnel for the Vice President?
Secretary DILLON. That was in one year.

Representative Ford.

1962?
Secretary DILLON. I think that was in--I think that was in 1963. In 1962 the law was passed, and we did have a deficiency appropriation which was given to us. The following year when we came up for our regular appropriation, we not only did not get the full amount that we thought was necessary to cover the Vice President, but they cut the protection we had been affording the Vice President in half, and whereas there had been 20 persons assigned, they reduced it to 10.

Representative Ford.

But there had been no reduction in the funds for the protection of the President?
Secretary DILLON. For the White House detail; no.

Representative Ford.

It was a reduction for the protection of the Vice President.
Secretary DILLON. That is correct. But the thing that I think we are coming to is, it is perfectly obvious that we have to do a great deal more in this advance work, field work, in interviewing people who are dangers to the President or could be classified as such. We need more people in the field on account of this. That is what I say was not probably fully realized, although Rowley specifically, when he first went up in 1962 asking for an increase, pitched it on that basis, but he did not have a very good reception from the Appropriations Committee at that time because they felt that the White House detail was the White House detail, right around the President. I don't think anyone fully understood the connection with people in the field. I am not sure that Secret Service made as good a case as they should, to be really understood on this. It has become clear now.

Representative Ford.

Mr. Rowley in that presentation asked for additional funds for and personnel for the Protective Research Service?
Secretary DILLON. I don't think it was specifically for that. It was for protection of the President, and he was the first person that made this type of request. Baughman had always said that people in the field were counterfeiting and just worked a little bit for the President, and Rowley when he came in was the first one that made this claim that they were needed to actually protect the President. He wanted more people in the field to do these things, and that was the thing that did not go over right away. I think it would be interesting here. We have----

Mr. Rankin.

May I interrupt a moment? We have a problem with some of the members of the Commission that have to go to the Congress right away for the vote. They would like to question you if they may.
Senator COOPER. I have a question which I think you can address yourself fully to later but considering these new factors which make the protection of

« Previous | Next »

Found a Typo?

Click here

Last Update: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 21:56:34 CET