Mr. Eisenberg.

Are you referring to the photographs which you produced at an earlier point?

Mr. Cadigan.

The photographs that I have produced here today, the various enlargements, were made from negatives. These negatives, in turn, were made at the time the original exhibits were photographed, and this would be before latent fingerprint treatment.

Mr. Eisenberg.

I asked you when I introduced those exhibits whether they had been prepared by you or under your supervision?

Mr. Cadigan.

That is true.

Mr. Eisenberg.

You meant, then, that they were prepared under your supervision, or did you mean that they were prepared by you in the sense that you made the enlargement from the negative?

Mr. Cadigan.

No; they were prepared under my supervision. In other words, I maintain all of the negatives in connection with the document aspects of this file in my room, under lock and key, at all times. I pull the negatives that I want enlarged, and I prepare a photograph requisition, take it down to our photographers, tell them what I want, and then later go back and pick up the enlargements, and check them to be sure they are just what I want.

Mr. Eisenberg.

What about the negative itself? Can you state of your own knowledge whether the negative itself is of the original?

Mr. Cadigan.

Only, insofar, that I know that on November 23, when the vast bulk of this material came in, that it was photographed. Some of these items I saw before they were photographed, and some afterward. But the exact sequence to select one item out of four or five hundred, I cannot, in all honesty, say I definitely recall seeing this before it was photographed.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Can you explain what the procedure is when a document came in involving the assassination?

Mr. Cadigan.

Initially, the first big batch of evidence was brought into the laboratory on November 23 of 1963 and this consisted of many, many items.

Mr. Eisenberg.

1963?

Mr. Cadigan.

November 23, 1963. It was a very large quantity of evidence that was brought in. There were several agent examiners available to evaluate this material. There were supervisory officials, there were representatives from our Internal Security Division, all of whom had an interest in this matter, and it was decided they wanted certain items treated for latent fingerprints. The basic rule is always that before an exhibit is treated for latent fingerprints it is photographed, and that is what was done in this case.

Mr. Eisenberg.

What happens to the negative after it is photographed? Were they all given to you?

Mr. Cadigan.

Yes; the negatives that pertain to the document aspects I took over and maintained under my control. Negatives pertaining to firearms evidence or hairs or fibers, they were turned over to Mr. Frazier.

Mr. Eisenberg.

So under the regular procedure, as soon as the document came in it would be photographed, before it was treated for latents, and the negative would be turned over to you?

Mr. Cadigan.

Yes.

Mr. Eisenberg.

So at least if the procedure had been followed, any negative you had would be a negative of a document before it had been treated for fingerprints, is that correct?

Mr. Cadigan.

That is correct.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Now, returning to Commission Exhibits Non. 820 and 819, did you prepare a photograph which would show the remnants of the signature "A. J. Hidell" on the Commission Exhibit No. 820?

Mr. Cadigan.

No.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Is the preparation of such a photograph possible?

Mr. Cadigan.

I doubt it very much, because the indentations are so faint that the enlargement would serve no useful purpose. Actually, the best examination is by low-power magnification under the proper lighting.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Did you attempt to determine whether the signature of Lee H. Oswald on this card was written by Lee H. Oswald?