Mr. WARREN. Sir, I maintained that my decision in approving the O'Brien partitions was legal and in the best interests of preserving competition and best public policy for GSA. That, in essence, is the crux of the meeting of the issues of what caused so much trouble. Mr. BROOKS. Did you have any continued pressure then, or did this settle the matter?

Mr. WARREN. The cloak and dagger sessions continued.

Mr. BROOKS. The cloak and dagger sessions

Mr. WARREN. The reason I describe them that way is because I was hurt, I was chagrined, I was humiliated that in the conduct of this contract that it would be taken, the rug jerked plumb out from under me in conducting it, without giving any reasons whatsoever for it, and leaving me completely outside, and leaving me wondering and worrying. I am a worrywart and I worried a lot about it.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. How did you hear about what went on in these cloak and dagger, so-called, meetings?

Mr. WARREN. Sir, I only can guess. I know what the results were. The results of the sessions were that Mr. Jay and Mr. Lund and, I am told, Mr. Henges, which is an unusual thing for a competitor to participate in the inspection of a job under contract to somebody else, to help inspect his competitor's job, they went to the place, and I think I said in that letter that I rested on the quality of the installation there, and I told Mr. Lund, I said in that letter, as I recall-I have forgotten, it is a long time ago, I think I said, "When you go there you will find a fine, clean, partition installation."

Mr. WALLHAUSER. These meetings could not have been on any other subject, possibly? Did they have to be on this subject?

Mr. WARREN. Oh, they could have been on there. But I was under pressure, sir, and I was being told that I was wrong. There are many things that you know are true that you can't prove before a jury. We all know that.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. You saw these meetings? They were in the office, or somewhere

Mr. WARREN. I saw them coming in and out, and then people would bring me information which I kept in confidence. Which I still keep in confidence.

Mr. BROOKS. Generally, then, they were, you think, discussing details and changes in the contract.

I

Mr. WARREN. I am personally satisfied. But I shan't disclose the confidences of people who told me what the confidences were. shan't here break that confidence.

Mr. BROOKS. You are the contracting officer for the region?

Mr. WARREN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. And

Mr. WARREN. On this particular contract.

Mr. BROOKS. Did they make some recommendations for adjustments or changes in the contract?

Mr. WARREN. Sir, Mr. Kunze, one of the better of our engineers, who has had 25 or 30 years of experience, and Mr. Bevan, who has had the same amount of experience, fine, educations and wonderful judgment through and through the years, they made the inspections on those jobs. They came back and reported to me that the contractor had completed, in their opinion, had completed the contract in accord

ance with the intent of the specifications. And after this inspection by Mr. Jay, Mr. Lund seemed like a bulldog with a bit in his teeth, got his teeth ahold of it and insisted that certain changes be made down there. Not only myself, but you could call other witnesses in the office there, and they all felt that Mr. Lund was it was a punitive thing that he was moving on. Or something to satisfy the Henges Co. That was the feeling. And without me. I don't dictate to my men. I don't cultivate "yes men" under my supervision.

Mr. BROOKS. This little note that was found in one of your files; it is written in longhand; says: "Mr. Warren: Mr. Lund would like to see you and Mr. Kunze about the Henges Co." And it is signed, "Kay." At the bottom, printed in ink, it says, "3 p.m., 8-26-59.” "Lund threatened if O'Brien Co. did not make corrections as demanded by him, they would be thrown out of business by GSA. 3:20 p.m.," and the initials, "R. W."

I wonder if you would explain briefly the nature of the correction that is being discussed. Is it something O'Brien didn't want to do, or was willing to do? What are the circumstances of the note?

Mr. WARREN. Mr. Kunze had visited the job at the insistence of Mr. Lund, to make one more visit there, even after there were four engineers, the top engineers of the office had agreed that they were completed, to make one more visit to the place. He did and he came back and it appeared in Mr. Kunze's report that Mr. Kunze was backtracking from a previous position he had taken. And so he asked Mr. Kunze and me to come in and discuss his report on the job.

Mr. Kunze, in his testimony there, told Mr. Lund that he was mistaken apparently in his interpretation, and Mr. Lund grew angry and exasperated and came out with that remark.

Mr. BROOKS. Which remark?

Mr. WARREN. The remark that I placed on the "buckslip" there. Mr. BROOKS. That he would throw him out of business?

Mr. WARREN. Yes, sir. I don't think that was a considered opinion of his. But I recorded it, sir, because I felt that it showed the general tenor of his feelings even in his sober moments.

Mr. BROOKS. You say even in his sober moments?

Mr. WARREN. Yes, sir. Not drunken sober moments. I mean when he is not exasperated and angry. I mean in that sense. I have never seen the the gentleman, I don't think is-well, he is certainly not a drinker.

Mr. BROOKS. I haven't done anything; I am just listening.

Mr. WARREN. The point is, what I meant by "sober," are those moments in which you give considered opinions. You can be on a beer stool and say to a general, "Hang him," but when you step outside you consider it and say, "No, I don't think he should be hung. He should be reprimanded."

There is a beer stool opinion and an angry moment.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Had your relations with Mr. Lund ever taken this turn before?

Mr. WARREN. Mr. Lund is a very imperious sort of person. He is domineering, or easy to domineering. I sometimes say overbearing, or he is condescending. He is noblesse oblige to people under him. I have had many talks with him when I would say, "Mr. Lund, talk straight across the table to me. Don't talk down to me. One grade higher doesn't mean I am a peasant." Those things, yes.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Did you ever lose your temper with him in a conversation, as he may have with you.

Mr. WARREN. I have only answered in kind to what has been given to me by him.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. You didn't raise your voice? You were quiet? Mr. WARREN. Oh, no; oh, no, sir. I have raised my voice here. I have raised my voice to get my point many, many times in my 66 years. Mr. BROOKS. Did Mr. Lund explain how he could throw these people out of business?

Mr. WARREN. No, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Did he give any details?

Mr. WARREN. No, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Did you feel that this was of a serious enough nature to warrant such an effort to cut him off from any business?

Mr. WARREN. It couldn't even be serious. It was silly.

Mr. BROOKS. Following this, did Mr. Jay and Mr. Lund go to St. Louis to inspect, and then later was there a meeting in Kansas City?

Mr. WARREN. Well, sir, this thing had drifted and the differences were becoming rather I considered-rather bitter. I promoted a conference in which I wanted Mr. Jay to attend so that he could hear some of the things that were going on. And I promoted a conference of all of the principals of the contract and the principals in the regional office to discuss the whole contract. I promoted that myself, and Mr. Lund agreed with me and implemented it.

Mr. BROOKS. This was on September 4?

Mr. WARREN. I believe so.

Mr. BROOKS. The meeting was on September 4, Mr. Warren?
Mr. WARREN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. On the inspection that you say Mr. Lund and Mr. Jay were interested in making on that, did Mr. Henges attend with them to inspect?

Mr. WARREN. I was told that. I couldn't prove it.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I didn't get that.

Mr. WARREN. I have complaints from the contractors that Mr. Henges

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I didn't hear your answer. You said, I have been told that, and I could not prove it?

Mr. WARREN. No, sir. I say I could not prove it. I can't prove it by my word, sitting here now. My word can't prove it. Mr. WALLHAUSER. I didnt' hear the answer.

And

Mr. WARREN. I had reports from the contractors; complaints from the contractors, that Mr. Henges and his representatives were at the job continuously, and that they were interfering with the progress of the construction work there, and asked me to have him removed and forbidden to come into the job because he had no business there. I felt that because of the delicate situation here, I felt that it would look as though I was trying to cover something up if I did that. So I told him, "You are just going to have to bear that cross, if you will. If you want to insist on it, I will appeal it to my supervisors higher up. ." They said, "No, let him stay."

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Was it ever your practice to go to the job yourself?

Mr. WARREN. Yes, sir.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. And inspect these partitions?

Mr. WARREN. Yes, sir.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. When you had these complaints, did you go to the job to see if Mr. Henges or one of his representatives was doing this?

Mr. WARREN. I go to the job when I think that the people under me are not competent, and are not capable, and are not handling it. I felt as though the people under my supervision were handling it in an excellent way, and I felt it was unnecessary for me to go there.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I have no doubt of that. But as you look back on it now, don't you think it would have been well for you to go with them to investigate these charges?

Mr. WARREN. If I had it to do over again, I think I would do it just exactly as I did.

Mr. BROOKS. At the time of this meeting that you set up for September 4, between the parties that apparently were in disagreement, was there still a question, as you understand it, in the minds of Mr. Lund and Mr. Jay about whether or not O'Brien partitions were equal to Henges'? If not, what was the purpose of this meeting? What were you trying to get accomplished?

Mr. WARREN. What I was trying to do was to eliminate the recriminations and get understandings. But at that meeting there was no question raised. There seemed to be an accession-they at last reluctantly apparently conceded that the decision was all right. But Mr. Lund raised another question. He raised the question that, all right, the O'Brien partitions are acceptable, but the installation as made is not an O'Brien installation. And that threw it into a fog again. Mr. BROOKS. What did they do about that?

Mr. WARFEN. Mr. Kunze made the next inspection; at Mr. Lund's request, made an inspection again. I believe that was the origin of the buckslip, or memorandum, that you called my attention to.

Mr. BROOKS. Did the Henges Co. complain that the job wasn't completed on time? Did you have a completion deadline that was involved in this discussion?

Mr. WARREN. They complained on most everything. Whether that was one of their complaints or not, it was substantially completed on time. The people moved into the place and the building was ready for-the old Marine Hospital was ready for razing by the contractor. That was the main accomplishment that I remember. We got the job done.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. What happened to the one point that you made that it was not installed by O'Brien? What was the final result of that complaint, by Mr. Lund?

Mr. WARREN. Sir, I don't get the question.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. You said that at that meeting Mr. Lund raised another question, namely that it was not an O'Brien installation. Mr. WARREN. He said

Mr. WALLHAUSER. What was the result of that?

Mr. WARREN. The result of that was another inspection by Mr. Kunze, and then the following conference that we had and which was mentioned on this buckslip that the Honorable Mr. Brooks mentioned.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. But it was accepted finally?

Mr. WARREN. Yes, afterward. But there were some more pressures and misunderstandings.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Finally the job was completed and accepted? Mr. WARREN. It was completed then.

Mr. BROOKS. Would you give us an idea as to the attitude of Mr. Lund and Mr. Jay, when you all sat down and started this conference? Were they pleased and trying to work out the differences?

Mr. WARREN. Mr. Jay seemed to have the attitude that he was glad that he found out what the score was. We made I proposed that now that it is settled, the contract is all settled now, it is finished and the engineers have all testified to that, I proposed that we forget the recriminations and wipe the sheet clean and start anew. Mr. Jay

readily agreed to that.

Mr. Jay, as I recall, left the conference. Mr. Lund came back and then he opened it up and dragged it out again by wanting Mr. Kunze to make another inspection, I considered over the decision of Mr. Jay. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Lund did?

Mr. WARREN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Generally, then, apparently the conclusion of it was that they were going to reluctantly acquiesce.

Mr. WARREN. But it did not represent itself until, as far as I am concerned, that I am clear, I knew that I was not going to have any more trouble from both of them when Mr. Jay wrote the Henges Co. They wrote some time--I have forgotten the letter-some time later. They wrote a letter to the Henges Co.

Mr. BROOKS. I want to leave the Mart Building contract for a few minutes, but keeping it in mind, and hear from you about this instance you had with Mr. Burns of the Henges Co. about this same time. Would you give us the details of what happened?

Mr. WARREN. Sir, that was a small incident which was really blown up into big proportions. The Bateson Co., who are contractors on the Omaha Federal Building, had sent their representatives to Kansas City with a very complicated proposal for partition changes in that building, and they had flown them there. We had already shut the job down. We were very nervous and tense to get the job going again. The papers had to be reviewed by the central office, so we were very much rushed. Mr. Burns was out that morning. As I recall, he was trying to find out whether his proposal was going to be considered or not.

He is a very persistent salesman and a pleasant personality in many ways. But he was very insistent that morning. I was trying to get Mr. Zurick off at 9 o'clock in the morning. We decided, with the approval of Mr. Lund, that Mr. Zurick would fly, and the contractor's people volunteered that they would fly into Washington with the thing and try to kill two birds with one stone and hurry it up. I was going on with those things. I wanted to discuss the proposal of the Henges and O'Brien people as an alternate in the proposal with Zurick before he went to Washington, and I didn't dare talk too loud. Yet, Mr. Burns was standing within 10 feet of me, nearly, looking in my eye everytime I looked up.

I did not want him to know that his proposal was so much lower than O'Brien's proposal was, because I thought maybe the central office would consider the amount of the partitions. If I was a busi