Page images
PDF
EPUB

gested firms." This document has been received in evidence at page 117. I just show you the list.

Mr. SCHWARZ. Yes.

Mr. MALETZ. Now, were you in the room on Friday when Mr. Strobel testified that he participated in getting up this list?

Mr. SCHWARZ. I was in the room on Friday.
Mr. MALETZ. Did you hear that testimony?

Mr. Schwarz. I don't remember specifically that he said he prepared it.

Mr. MALETZ. We shall read the testimony, page 116:

Mr. STROBEL. We made up a list. Whether it was sent to CIA, I don't know, but it was discussed with them.

The CHAIRMAN. You participated in making up that list?
Mr. STROBEL. That is right.

Now, Eggers & Higgins is one of the firms included in that list; is that right?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.
Mr. MALETZ (spelling). E-g-g-e-r-s & H-i-g-g-i-n-s?
Mr. Schwarz. That is right.

Mr. MALETZ. Is it a fact that on March 11, 1953, Strobel & Salzman secured a contract from Eggers & Higgins to do engineering work in connection with the Mercy Hospital for a fee of one-half of 1 percent of the construction cost ?

Mr. ROBB. 1953, you said, Mr. Maletz?
Mr. MALETZ. Yes.
Mr. SCHWARZ, Yes; that is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. And what was the approximate dollar fee that Strobel & Salzman secured from Eggers & Higgins for this job?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That amount has not yet been established.
Mr. MALETZ. About what will it be?
Mr. SCHWARZ. It would be about $8,000.

Mr. MALETZ. Is it a fact that on April 6, 1955, Strobel & Salzman secured a contract from Eggers & Higgins to do the engineering work in connection with the Huntington Hospital for a fee of sixty-five onehundredths of 1 percent of construction cost?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. And what would you estimate the dollar fee that Strobel & Salzman will obtain from Eggers & Higgins on this job?

Mr. SCHWARZ. About $9,000.

Mr. MALETZ. Is it also not a fact that on September 12, 1955, Strobel & Salzman secured a contract from Eggers & Higgins to do engineering work on the Staten Island Hospital, the fee to be five-eighths of 1 percent of the construction cost ? Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct. Mr. MALETZ. And what do you estimate that dollar fee would be? Mr. SCHWARZ. That would be in the neighborhood of $8,000.

Mr. MALETZ. Now, another architect on the list of outstanding architects submitted by PBS to CIA is Kelly & Gruzen; is that right? Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. Is it correct that on July 28, 1954, Strobel & Salzman secured a contract from Kelly & Gruzen on which a fee has not yet been fixed ?

Mr. SCHWARZ. I have got to find it on the list.

[ocr errors]

a

[ocr errors]

а

The CHAIRMAN. 1954.
Mr. SCHWARZ. What was that date?
The CHAIRMAN. 1954.
Mr. SCHWARZ. August 11, you say?
Mr. MALETZ. July 28, 1954.

Mr. SCHWARZ. July 28, 1954; the item referred to, we made no charge for that work because we never did it.

Mr. MALETZ. I see. Is it a fact that on July 9, 1954, Strobel & Salzman secured another contract from Kelly & Gruzen calling for a fee of $6,200 ?

Mr. SCHWARZ. At this moment, I don't see it on the list. It must be here, however.

That is July 9, 1954! Mr. MALETZ. Yes.

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct. We had a contract for an amount of $6,200.

Mr. MALETZ. Is it a fact that on August 11, 1954, Strobel & Salzman secured another contract from Kelly & Gruzen calling for a fee of $4,100?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. Is it a fact that on November 19, either 1952 or 1954
I am not sure which-Strobel & Salzman secured a contract from
Kelly & Gruzen calling for a fee of $22,500 ?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.
Mr. MALETZ. What year would that be, Mr. Schwarz?
Mr. SCHWARZ. 1952.

Mr. MALETZ. 1952. Now, another firm on the list of outstanding architects submitted to CIA by Public Buildings Service is Urbahn, Brayton & Burrows; is that right? That is the list which I have shown you which

Mr. ŠCHWARZ. I don't see them on the list.
Mr. MALETZ. Do you see them on the list ?
Mr. ScHWARZ. Yes.
Mr. MALETZ. They are on the list.
Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. Is it a fact that Strobel & Salzman secured a contract from Urbahn, Brayton & Burrows for engineering services on Public School No. 15, PS No. 15 ?

Mr. RoBB. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire if all of these are on the list of contracts given to counsel by Mr. Schwarz? If so, if you give Mr. Schwarz the page that they appear on, it might speed things up a little bit.

Mr. MALETZ. Off the record-it does not make any difference whether it is off or on the record-Mr. Schwarz prepared a list of clients.

Mr. ROBB. Yes.
Mr. FINE. He wants you to give the page number.

Mr. MALETZ. There are no page numbers on the list which Mr. Schwarz gave to me.

Mr. ROBB. I see. But I assume these are all on that list. just trying to help you out and speed things up.

Mr. MalETz. Yes; I am sure.
Mr. SCHWARZ. That one is on the list.
Mr. MALETZ. That one is on the list?
Mr. SCHWARZ. Yes, sir.

We are

a

Mr. MALETZ. And what was the date of that contract?

Mr. SCHWARZ. The date has not been put in here. I don't know at the moment what this date is. But it must be in early 1953,

Mr. MALETZ. 1953. And the fee for that job was $9,000; is that correct?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MalETz. Is it a fact that on July 21, 1954, Strobel & Salzman secured another contract from this concern, Urbahn, Brayton & Burrows, calling for a fee of $4,000?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. Is it a fact that on March 10, 1954, Strobel & Salzman secured a contract from Urbahn, Brayton & Burrows calling for a fee of $750?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct. Mr. MALETZ. Now, would you say, Mr. Schwarz, that Eggers & Higgins, Kelly & Gruzen, and Urbahn, Brayton & Burrows are active and regular clients of Strobel & Salzman?

Mr. SCHWARZ. Yes; I would.

Mr. MALETZ. Now, another firm on the list of outstanding architects submitted by PBS to CIA as suggested firms is De Young, Moscowitz & Rosenberg; is that right?

Mr. SCHWARTZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. Now, that list, Mr. Hill testified, was prepared on August 3, 1955. Is it not correct that on August 3, 1955, Strobel & Salzman had a $30,000 contract with De Young & Moscowitz!

Mr. SCHWARZ. It depends on what is considered a contract. I personally made a verbal commitment to these people for that job. If that is a contract, then the answer is “Yes.”

Mr. MALETZ. That contract, or verbal commitment was canceled out on August 4; is that not correct?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct. Mr. MALETZ. Now, on this list of architects submitted by PBS to CIA is Shreve, Lamb & Harmon; is that right?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. Now, Shreve, Lamb & Harmon is listed on the material which you prepared as a client of Strobel & Salzman; is that right?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. Now, when did Strobel & Salzman do work for Shreve, Lamb & Harmon?

Mr. SCHWARZ. I beg your pardon, I did not hear the first part of that.

Mr. MALETZ. When did Strobel & Salzman do work for Shreve, Lamb & Harmon?

Mr. SCHWARZ. When?
Mr. MALETZ. Yes.

Mr. SCHWARZ. I would say they did work for Shreve, Lamb & Harmon in the years 1945 to 1953.

Mr. MALETZ. Are they a regular client of Strobel & Salzman?
Mr. SCHWARZ. They were å regular client of Strobel & Salzman.
Mr. MalETz. They are ?
Mr. FINE. They were, he says.

,
Mr. MALETZ. They were.
Mr. SCHWARZ. They were.
Mr. MALETZ. Are they now?

[ocr errors]

Mr. SCHWARZ. No.

Mr. MALETZ. Now, Harrison & Abramovitz is also on this list of outstanding architects submitted by PBS to CIA; is that correct?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. MALETZ. Did Strobel & Salzman do any work for Harrison & Abramovitz.

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is a very difficult question to answer either yes or no.

The CHAIRMAN. Answer it in your own way.

Mr. SCHWARZ. We have a contract for a project on which Harrison & Abramovitz are the architects, but actually our contract is with Hegeman & Harris, who I believe are the contractors for that particular project.

The CHAIRMAN. And the latter are the builders?
Mr. SCHWARZ. They are the builders; that is correct.
Mr. MALETZ. When did you have a contract with Hegeman &
Harris?

Mr. SCHWARZ. When?
Mr. MALETZ. Yes.

Mr. SCHWARZ. On this particular project are you talking, or ordinarily?

Mr. MALETZ. On this particular project.

Mr. SCHWARZ. On this particular project. I believe the contract was entered into some time in the middle of 1954. The exact date I have not with me.

Mr. MALETZ. Did you not in the list which you prepared for Mr. Strobel and which Mr. Strobel sent to Mansure, list Harrison & Abramovitz as a client

Mr. SCHWARZ. We did.
Mr. MALETZ. Of Strobel & Salzman?
Mr. SCHWARZ. Yes, sir.

Mr. KEATING. That is the firm that Allen Dulles wanted to have do this work on the CIA, where you got into an impasse and nothing ever happened!

Mr. STROBEL. That is correct.
Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.

Mr. KEATING. But that was also on the list that you had submitted, that you, Mr. Strobel, had submitted to the CIA?

Mr. STROBEL. That is correct.

Mr. Schwarz. I would like to make an explanation, however, of the way the name of Harrison & Abramovitz got on this list.

Mr. MALETZ. Yes.

Mr. ScHWARZ. And that is that I thought as we did this particular job for Hegeman & Harris, and Harrison & Abramovitz were the architects, I included them on the list.

Mr. FINE. But actually, Strobel & Salzman did not select the Harrison firm

Mr. Schwarz. No, sir.
Mr. FINE. As the architect?
Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct. We did not.

Mr. FINE. They were on the job, selected by Eggers, the Eggers firm; is that correct !

a

Mr. STROBEL. No. I might explain it this way. Strobel & Salzman were not selected as engineers by Harrison & Abramovitz. They were selected by the builder.

Mr. KEATING. These firms that counsel has questioned you about are all New York City architectural firms; is that right?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is right.

Mr. KEATING. And how many New York architectural firms were on that list of clients which you did not submit to the CIA!

Mr. SCHWARZ. I haven't really counted the number on the list, but there are something like 100, as a guess.

Mr. KEATING. Would there be several times
Mr. FINE. He said a hundred were on the list.
Mr. KEATING. You say there are 100 on the list?
Mr. SCHWARZ. Yes, that is what I would say.
Mr. STROBEL. They are not all architects, however.

Mr. SCHWARZ. They are not all architects; no, they are not all architects.

I would have to count the list.
Mr. STROBEL. May I answer Mr. Keating's question?
Mr. KEATING. Yes.

Mr. STROBEL. The answer would be that there are a great many more architects on the list submitted by me to Mr. Mansure than are included on this list presented to CIA.

Mr. MALETZ. Now, Mr. Schwarz, of the list of 14 architects submitted by Public Buildings Service to CIA, 6 are or have been clients of Strobel & Salzman, according to the list which you prepared; is that right?

Mr. SCHWARZ. That is correct.
Mr. MALETZ. Now, another architectural firm-
Mr. FINE. Mr. Chairman, excuse me.
I would like to clarify some phase of Mr. Keating's question.

These architects whose names appeared on the list submitted to Mr. Mansure which were not included on the list to the CIA number how many, approximately?

Mr. STROBEL. I will have to make a count.

Mr. MALTEZ. May I just say the list submitted to Mr. Mansure is the list attached to your letter of August 30, 1955, setting forth a list of all clients of Strobel & Salzman.

Mr. FINE. That is correct.

Mr. STROBEL. There are 30 additional architects beyond the names included in the list to CIA.

Mr. FINE. I want to ask another question.
Mr. Malerz. I just want to clarify that, Mr. Fine, if I may.
Mr. FINE. Go ahead.

Mr. MALETZ. You are referring to architectural firms in New York City which at one time or another have been clients of Strobel & Salzman; is that correct?

Mr. STROBEL. That is correct.
Mr. MALETZ. Thirty?
Mr. FINE. An additional 30.
Mr. MALETZ. The additional 30.

Mr. STROBEL. I don't know if they are limited to New York City. I could not vouch for that.

« PreviousContinue »