Chapter XIX: Part 19

I said "No, Reverend Saunders, I do not feel that way about it. Those are material things. How do we know if these children will live to derive any benefit from this education. I think that we should stick together as a family. Her Mama, like she wanted. The girl said she has no Mama. Everything was arranged for the Mama. She is talking about money and material things. I expressed my opinion at the Six Flags, that we start with $863--no contributions were coming in. And then if we cannot make it, then let the ones that are so concerned help us. And I remarked--I am working for a very wealthy woman.

Who knows, maybe she will give us $5,000. Let us stick together as a family. Reverend Saunders says "Mrs. Oswald, your philosophy of life is beautiful, and it is a Biblical way. But you know you have to be practical."

So the very next day, sir--and this is in "Christianity Today," to prove my point--Mr. Jim Cox, who writes for "Christianity Today" and is a Star Telegram reporter called me and said "Mrs. Oswald, Reverend Saunders called me and wanted me to get a story from you, because he thought you had such a wonderful philosophy of life."

I sat down, and Mr. Jimmy Cox stayed home from Church--I gave Mr. Jimmy Cox a story that is in Christianity Today, that only goes to ministers, and it is because of Reverend Saunders. So I do have people to testify about this particular thing. And I did act in a normal way. That is a normal reaction, to not want to give up my family.

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald. I will give you Exhibits 206 through 227, both inclusive, and ask you if that is--if those are photostatic copies of your correspondence--would you look at each one of them--with the State Department that you have referred to in your testimony?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Do you want the numbers as I go along?

Mr. RANKIN. No. You just look at them.

Mrs. OSWALD. That is correct.

Representative FORD. These are copies, Mr. Rankin, of her letters to the State Department and the responses?

Mrs. OSWALD. That is correct.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes, that is correct, is it not, Mrs. Oswald?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, that is correct.

Mr. RANKIN. And these copies were made under your supervision were they not.

Mrs. OSWALD. That is correct. And I voluntarily gave you every copy I have. That is correct. That is correct. That is correct.

Some of this seems to be scratched out here.

Mr. DOYLE. On Exhibit No. 221, there seems to be some X markings around. Will you put that aside, and we can compare that with the original.

Mrs. OSWALD. This is correct. That is correct. That is correct. I don't remember writing to Mrs. James. I remember calling her on the telephone. This is my handwriting. I guess I did.

Yes, that is my handwriting. That is correct.

That is correct. That is correct. And this is correct, but should have a card with it.

Mr. DOYLE. You are referring to 227?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. And it should have with it a card, a postcard, from Lee.

Mr. DOYLE. Set 227 aside with 221.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you have a copy of 221?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you please check to see that is a correct copy.

Mr. Chairman, I think that we might gain time now if we would check these exhibits out with Mrs. Oswald, and be able to offer them at whatever time we reconvene. That is all we propose to do now.

The CHAIRMAN. All right.

Mrs. OSWALD. This is the card that should have gone with that.

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, were you able to find your copy of Exhibit 221, and compare it and see whether that which is marked on is on your copy?

Mrs. OSWALD. No sir, we have not found that yet.

"Yours 11th" is scratched out.

Mr. RANKIN. So that 221 is correct, but apparently there are some errors----

Mrs. OSWALD. There are more errors, too. Because it doesn't say "Services Department of State."

Mr. DOYLE. 221 does not appear to be a photostat of the exhibit.

Mr. RANKIN. But it does have exactly the same material on it, doesn't it?

Mrs. OSWALD. It doesn't have this--"collect." I would not say it was an exact copy.

Mr. DOYLE. It appears to have substantially the information on it. It is not a photostat of it.

Mr. RANKIN. I might advise you, Mrs. Oswald, this is from the State Department's file, from which the telegram was made up that was sent to you.

Mr. DOYLE. It is not a photostat, but it does have substantially the information that is set forth in the telegram itself.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, you have examined all of the exhibits, 206 through 227, both inclusive, and found them, except for what you and your counsel said about exhibit 221, and the card that was with 227, to be correct.

Mrs. OSWALD. That is correct.

Mr. RANKIN. We offer in evidence Exhibits 206 through 227, both inclusive.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit Nos. 206 through 227, heretofore marked for identification, were received in evidence.)

Mrs. OSWALD. This is the card that goes with this letter, as an explanation.

(The card referred to was marked Exhibit No. 240 for identification.)

Mr. RANKIN. Exhibit 240 is the card you have just referred to that goes with Exhibit 227, is that right?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. We offer in evidence Exhibit 240, and ask that a copy be substituted.

The CHAIRMAN. That may be admitted.

(The card referred to was received in evidence as Commission Exhibit No. 240.)

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, would you examine exhibits 228 through 236, both inclusive? And tell us whether or not those appear to be photostatic copies of correspondence about the Albert Schweitzer College and application?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, that is right. That is right. This is correct. That is right. That is right. That is right. That is right. That is right. That is right. That is right. That is right. That is right.

Those are all right, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. You have just finished comparing Exhibits 228 through 236 both inclusive, and found them to be correct photostatic copies of your files concerning the Albert Schweitzer matter?

Mrs. OSWALD. That is right.

Mr. RANKIN. We offer in evidence, Exhibits 228 through 236 both inclusive.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(The photostatic copies referred to were received in evidence as Commission Exhibit Nos. 228 through 236, inclusive.)

The CHAIRMAN. Have you introduced all the records you have now?

Mr. RANKIN. Just a few more, Mr. Chairman.

(The document referred to was marked 241 for identification.)

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I hand you Exhibit 241 and ask you if that is one of the letters that you referred to in your testimony?

Mrs. OSWALD. That is right.

Mr. RANKIN. And it is one that you received?

Mrs. OSWALD. It is one that I received in a letter from Russia, from Lee. And you have the letter, telling me to go to the International Rescue Committee, and to show the papers to the Red Cross in Vernon. This is the letter inclosed in that letter.

Mr. RANKIN. We offer in evidence Exhibit 241, and ask leave to substitute a copy.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(The letter referred to was received in evidence as Commission Exhibit No. 241.)

(Documents marked 242 and 243 for identification.)

Mr. RANKIN. Exhibits 242 and 243 are the telegram and the letter you received back from your transmission to the White House that you have testified about this morning, is that right?

Mrs. OSWALD. That is right.

Mr. RANKIN. And you say you would like to have the originals back?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. We offer in evidence Exhibits 242 and 243 and ask leave to substitute copies.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted on that condition.

(Commission Exhibits Nos. 242 and 243 were admitted in evidence.)

The CHAIRMAN. Are all the records identified now and admitted, Mr. Rankin?

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, we have one further matter, and that is some correspondence that involves her son's communications with the Embassy, which correspondence was examined in the presence of Mr. Mark Lane when we were taking photostatic copies. And during that examination, Mrs. Oswald was able to identify the handwriting on part of them, and not able to identify it on another part. Is that right, Mrs. Oswald?

Mrs. OSWALD. That is right; yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. And we think we should probably, to cover that matter, ask her briefly to point those out.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Let's get that done before we adjourn, and then we will adjourn for lunch.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Reporter, I will ask you to mark these exhibits, which are the ones that I understand Mrs. Oswald was able to identify the handwriting on.

(Documents were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 244 through 250 for identification.)

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, will you examine Exhibits 244 through 250, both inclusive, and tell us whether or not those are photostatic copies of communications of your son that you recognize the handwriting on of the originals?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. DOYLE. If you do not on any one of them, announce the number.

Mrs. OSWALD. This is one I would believe that I have stated--if he wrote it, he wrote it very careful. It is not scribbled like he usually does.

Mr. DOYLE. That is 246.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell whether or not that is his signature on the second page of Exhibit 246?

Mrs. OSWALD. It is just a little different. That could be forged. Just a little difference. We write left handed, and we have a trend.

Mr. RANKIN. Is that one that you said before that you thought you could recognize?

Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know, sir. I have no way of knowing. How would I know?

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recognize the handwriting now?

Mrs. OSWALD. As I have stated before, when I am looking at it, it doesn't appear to be immediately as Lee's handwriting. But it could be something that he has recopied over and over to get such a perfect lettering. It is not scribbled like we usually scribble. Now, this was one also that I would say----

Mr. RANKIN. That is Exhibit 247.

Mrs. OSWALD. That is scribbled.

Mr. RANKIN. That is more scribbled, you say?

Mrs. OSWALD. It is not quite as his ordinary writing. It is a little more thoughtfully written.

Mr. RANKIN. You think it is his, though?

Mrs. OSWALD. I would say this is his.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mrs. OSWALD. Now, this is thoughtfully written, too, yet it is his.

Mr. RANKIN. Exhibit 248.

Mrs. OSWALD. I am looking at this handwriting, because the rest of it is printed. I do not know too much about Lee's printing.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell about the handwriting?

Mrs. OSWALD. The signature looks like Lee's signature.

Mr. RANKIN. Yes.

Mrs. OSWALD. I will state again this looks like Lee's handwriting, but very thoughtfully written.

Mr. RANKIN. That is Exhibit 249. Is that right?

Mrs. OSWALD. That is right. And this is Lee's signature.

Mr. RANKIN. That is Exhibit 250 that you just referred to?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Now, I would say it is all Lee's handwriting, but very thoughtfully written.

Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. We offer in evidence Exhibits 244 through 250, both inclusive.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(The documents referred to were received in evidence as Commission Exhibits Nos. 244 through 250, inclusive.)

(A group of documents was then marked 251 through 258 for identification.)

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I will hand you Exhibits 251 through 257, both inclusive, and ask you to examine those, and state whether you recognize the handwriting.

Mrs. OSWALD. That doesn't look too much like Lee's handwriting. It could be a finer pen and more thoughtfully written. But I cannot identify this as Lee's handwriting.

Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell about the signature?

Mrs. OSWALD. The signature looks a little like Lee's signature.

Mr. DOYLE. You refer to 251, when you are discussing this?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, 251.

Now, this one I would say was not Lee's handwriting.

Mr. RANKIN. That is 252?

Mrs. OSWALD. 252.

I have never known Lee to sign Lee Harvey Oswald. He always signed Lee H. There again, that could be Lee's handwriting with a fine pen. But very thoughtfully written. But I will say it is not Lee's. I don't think it is. I cannot be positive. But I do not think it is Lee's handwriting.

Mr. RANKIN. That is Exhibit 252 that you have been referring to?

Mrs. OSWALD. Exhibit 252.

Here is another of the same caliber. It is too perfect. The writing is too perfect.

Mr. RANKIN. What about the signature?

Mrs. OSWALD. The signature looks like Lee's signature.

Mr. DOYLE. That is 253.

Mrs. OSWALD. 253. Yes, sir. This is a little different signature, I would say, than his normal signature.

Mr. RANKIN. 254?

Mrs. OSWALD. 254, yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. You think that Exhibit 254 is your son's handwriting or not?

Mrs. OSWALD. I would have to say with reservations again. It would have to be rewritten very thoroughly. It is not scribbled enough.

Mr. RANKIN. You think that those letters, 251 through 254, are too carefully done for your son Lee?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir. And if he did do them, he would have to have four or five copies to do it so perfect.

This is a little more scribbled. This signature looks more like Lee's than the other did.

Mr. RANKIN. That is 255?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir. 255.

This looks like Lee's handwriting--a lot of misspelling, and his signature. 256.

Now his Russian handwriting I know only from return addresses. However, I do have two brown papers with Russian writing on, from gifts that were sent to me. But I don't know if Lee addressed them or not.

And this is Lee's handwriting with a very fine pen. Isn't this handwriting backwards for a left hand? It seems when I looked at "my," it should be going this way--because I write like Lee, left handed.

Mr. RANKIN. When you refer to this--or asked whether it was backwards, you were referring to Exhibit 257, were you?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. This "m" should be going this way--which it is really. But it is kind of hard to testify to. I would say this is Lee's handwriting with a very fine pen, with reservations.

Mr. RANKIN. Exhibit 257.

We offer in evidence Exhibits 251 through 257, both inclusive.

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(The documents referred to were received in evidence as Commission Exhibits Nos. 251 through 257, inclusive.)

The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Oswald, are you now ready--we are not going to ask you to do it right now, but we are going to recess at 2 o'clock. But are we now at the point where we can hear whatever you want to tell us about your life?

Mrs. OSWALD. I am sorry, but I would like to have lunch.

The CHAIRMAN. I said that we were going to have lunch. But when we return--you have things up to that point of your story?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

You have another question you want to ask before we recess for lunch?

Mr. RANKIN. I should like to offer for the limited purpose, Mr. Chairman, of the fact that we presented this picture to Mrs. Oswald and she said it was not the picture that was presented to her--for that limited purpose I should like to offer Exhibit 237.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be so admitted.

(The picture referred to was received in evidence as Commission Exhibit No. 237.)

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chief Justice, during the noon hour may I have the custody of this transcript of a tape recording of an interview with Mrs. Oswald, the 28 pages which was tendered to us by Mr. Rankin this morning--and I will return it.

Mr. RANKIN. That is for them to have.

The CHAIRMAN. That is to become your own.

Mr. DOYLE. To become the property of Mrs. Oswald.

The CHAIRMAN. The property of Mrs. Oswald, yes. That is what we gave it to you for. She requested that.

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well, we will recess now until 2 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 12:55 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

Afternoon Session

TESTIMONY OF MRS. MARGUERITE OSWALD RESUMED

The President's Commission reconvened at 2:05 p.m.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Rankin, will you proceed with the hearing?

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, you said that you would like to turn now to telling us about your life. We would appreciate that if you would do that.

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Oswald, if you would prefer not to tell the story of your life, that is perfectly all right.

Mrs. OSWALD. I want to tell the story but there is something else that upsets me.

The CHAIRMAN. It is perfectly all right if you don't wish to. You may take your time now and go right ahead.

Mrs. OSWALD. I am sorry, you will have to excuse me about the story of my life, and Mr. Doyle knows why, but there is one part of the story of my life that will have a great connection with this, I believe.

I married Mr. Edwin Ekdahl who was an electrical engineer and a $10,000 a year man with an expense account. Mr. Ekdahl had a woman before he married me. Of course, I didn't know about it, sir. I made him wait a year before I married him, but the way I found this out, I received a telephone call, a telegram rather, he traveled--lots of times Lee and I traveled with him--stating he wouldn't return home when he was supposed to and for me not to meet him.

So, I called his office, I was familiar with, knew his secretary, and I was going to tell her that Mr. Ekdahl would be delayed 3 or 4 days. But immediately she said, "Mrs. Ekdahl, Mr. Ekdahl is not in, he has gone out to lunch."

So, I said, the general conversation went "When will he be back" and so on, and so that evening I took the car and I went to the Texas Electric Co., works for the Texaco, the main office in New York, but he was working in Fort Worth at the time, went to the building and saw him leave the building and I followed him and to an apartment house, saw him go into this apartment house.

Then I went back home, and my oldest son, John Edward Pic, who is in the service, had a friend at the house who was about 2 years older. I told them about what happened. So it was night by this time. The kids went with me.

I called Mr. John McClain, who is an attorney, and we live next door to Mr. McClain, and told him that I had seen Mr. Ekdahl go into a home when he was supposed to be out of town and what should I do.

He said, "Mrs. Oswald, just ring the phone. Do you know the woman?"

And I said, "Yes."

"Just ring the phone and let him know that you know he is there, that you saw him."

After I thought about it I thought that is not a good idea because he could leave and say he was just there on business and I wanted to catch him there.

So the kids and I planned that we would say she had a telegram, so we went up the stairs, I believe it was the second or the third floor, and the young man knocked on the door and said, "Telegram for Mrs. Clary"--was her name.

She said, "Please push it under the door" and I told him no; he said, "No, you have to sign for it."

So with that she opened the door to sign for it and with that I, my son, and with the other young man walked into the room and Mrs. Clary had on a negligee, and my husband had his sleeves rolled up and his tie off sitting on a sofa, and he said, "Marguerite, Marguerite, you have everything wrong, you have everything wrong."

He says, "Listen to me."

I said, "I don't want to hear one thing. I have seen everything I want to see, this is it."

My two boys, in military school, the two older boys, I am paying for the two older boys because I have sold a piece of property. I wanted to take care as long as I had money of my own children and when I married Mr. Ekdahl if he would support me and Lee I would be able to take care of John Edward, and Robert in military school, we couldn't have them with us because Mr. Ekdahl traveled.

This man never let me share with his insurance policies, beneficiary, in other words, I was another woman to him. I received $100 a month and that was it. That was all the money I had from Mr. Ekdahl, and when we traveled, for instance, we were in Santa Fe, N. Mex., and he was with all the businessmen, we would have to wait until Mr. Ekdahl got through, the baby and I, in order to eat, whether it was 2 or 3 o'clock in the evening because here I was, registered under Mrs. Ekdahl and I had a checking account, but under the name of Oswald, which was the money I was using for the children so it was kind of inconvenient for me to write a check under the name of Oswald.

I am trying to point out the kind of man he was.

I had a nice living in this sense. We lived in the finest hotels and we had the finest food because all of this was charged to his expense account but he gave me nothing but this $100. That was a standard thing and he expected me to account for every cent of the hundred dollars that I spent, which I refused to do.

So, we argued naturally, because this is not a marriage. Any man who marries a woman naturally shares, she shares in his bank account and in his insurance and so on and so forth.

I wanted to divorce Mr. Ekdahl naturally but my two boys as I have stated before were in the military school, and I wanted to wait until the end of the season, the school season.

So, Lee and I went to Covington, La., and I picked the boys up at military school because this was summer time--rather I wasn't back to him.

I left him and went back to him. But this particular time I picked the boys up at military school and we spent the summer in Covington, La., and by the way, I forgot to say that Lee had a beautiful voice and sang beautifully at age 6 in Covington, La., he sang a solo in the church, Silent Night, and that can be verified. This is a very small town and the only Lutheran Church there.

So, Mr. Ekdahl came to Covington, La., and I went back again to Mr. Ekdahl. But this time I went back to him I hadn't found out about the woman. I got excited. Then I found out about the woman, he rented a place on 8th Avenue, a home.

And after I was there about a day I was in the yard hanging out some things and it was in the apartment house downstairs and a woman came along and I said, "How are you? I am Mrs. Ekdahl."

She looked astonished, and after I had made friends with her she informed me Mr. Ekdahl had a woman in this particular house while I was in Covington and she thought she was his wife but now I am the wife come.

Then I found out about the woman and we went to her apartment and caught her there. This is the end of the season by this time.

In the meantime Mr. Ekdahl filed suit for divorce from me. I thought I was sitting pretty. He didn't have anything on me. I had him for adultery with witnesses and everything and I didn't have an idea that he could sue me for a divorce, but Mr. Ekdahl did sue me for a divorce, and Mr. Ekdahl got the divorce. It was a jury case, and Mr. John McClain, was my attorney, the man I told you that I called to find out what to do.

Now, Mr. Fred Korth represented Mr. Ekdahl and when I walked into the courtroom, gentlemen, there were witnesses there that I had never seen before.

A Mr. George Levine, who is a very big businessman and who Mr. Ekdahl was representing in Fort Worth for the electrical part of his plant. I knew him this way.

One time we went to the circus with his wife, my husband, myself and Lee, before going to the circus we had dinner. Now, understand we are having dinner in a public place. From the dinner we go to the circus, we are in a public place and I want you to know that it is the only time I had seen Mr. George Levine, when Mr. George Levine rushed from work in his khaki pants and got on the witness stand swore how I nagged Mr. Ekdahl and how I threw bottles at him and so on and so forth.

There were other witnesses that I had never seen, sir, who swore how I nagged Mr. Ekdahl, and Mr. Ekdahl got his divorce from me.

Now, 2 days after the assassination, after Lee's death, while I am at Six Flags it comes over the radio that Mr. Korth knew the family, this happened in 1948, sir, then Mr. Korth knew the family, and that he had represented Mr. Ekdahl in divorce proceedings and, of course, talked to the reporters where they got the information that I hit him with a bottle and so on and so forth.

Now, that is my story there. I am not even guilty of that divorce, as you see. This can be proved by my son John Edward Pic because he was a witness, sir.

I do not think I am going--I am not going to speculate but give my thoughts to anyone who would immediately make a statement that he had represented the mother of the accused assassin as an attorney years ago, and that I nagged Mr. Ekdahl and so on and so forth.

That was publicly announced about 2 days after my son was shot, sir.

Now, the name then, of course, he probably knew the name Oswald, but the name then was Ekdahl that I would say would stick in his mind more.

I will try to get to the very beginning of my life, Chief Justice.

The CHAIRMAN. Any time. Just take your time.

Mrs. OSWALD. My mother died when I was quite young and my father raised us with housekeepers. My aunt lived in the neighborhood and I had a lot of cousins and a lot of aunts. My father was French, his name was Claverie, and my mother was German, the name is Stucke. All of my father's folks spoke French and my father spoke French to his sisters. I was a child of one parent, and yet I have had a normal life, a very hard normal life that I had been able to combat all by myself, sir, without much help from anyone.

I am saying that in reference to Lee being alone; there have been so many psychiatrists saying he was by himself and he had a father image and that is why he did the shooting. There are many, many children with one parent who are perfectly normal children and I happen to be one myself.

I had a very happy childhood. I sang. I sang from the kindergarten at grammar school, and all through grammar school I was the lead singer. I was one of the most popular young ladies in the school. I also play piano by ear. I don't know a note. I used to play the marching school song for the school children.

At my grammar school graduation I had the honor of wearing a pink dress instead of a white dress and sang the song "Little Pink Roses." So I had a very happy childhood and a very full childhood. I played the piano. We had house parties in those days and a lot of gatherings and it was everything Marguerite--and I also played a ukulele, so I have a very full happy childhood.

At the age of 17, I am ahead of my story--I have had 1 year high school education. I know that on my applications I had that I had completed high school but that is almost necessary to get a job.

But I had 1 year of high school education is all that I had, sir.

I then went to work at age 17, not quite 17, for one of the biggest corporation lawyers in New Orleans, La. The name then was DuFour, Rosen, Wolff, and Kammer. Mr. DuFour died while I was there and Mr. Kammer, I believe, is still living but they were corporation attorneys for that firm plus 4 or 5 other attorneys that handled divorce cases and similar cases and I was receptionist in the outer office.

So, everybody who came into the office had to state their business to me, because the attorneys were very busy, and if it was a particular case I had to know who to refer the party to this particular man.

So, naturally, I got a very large education, let's say, by doing this, and the mayor and everybody in the town, these are the largest attorneys, corporation attorneys in New Orleans, sir, and they were attorneys representing the New Orleans Public Service and big things of that sort, and the mayor and all used to call me the boss. When the mayor came in he had an appointment but I still had to ring the phone to see if the men were ready to see him. So they called me the boss.

I was also a maid in one of the carnival balls. I am a very poor young lady but a very, let's say, popular young lady.

My early childhood. We lived on the Phillips Street in New Orleans which was a very poor neighborhood. My father was one of the very first streetcar conductors and stayed on the very same line all these years until he retired and they gave him a citation because he was on the same line all those years from retirement, and we lived in a mixed neighborhood of Negroes and white, and my childhood I played with Negroes, sir, right next door to me was a lovely family that I grew up with this Negro family.

I married Mr. Edward John Pic, Jr., while working at the law firm. I was married to Mr. Pic two and a half years when I became with child, and he did not want any children. His family and my family tried to talk to him, and, well, his family almost beat him up to say, but nobody could do anything with him.

So, at 3 months I left Mr. Pic. Mr. Pic did not divorce me, and you have the records there of me divorcing Mr. Pic, contrary to all other stories, sir.

This child, John Edward Pic then I bore alone, without a husband. I was 3 months pregnant. I had 6 more months to go, and I had this child without a husband.

So, I have had two children without a husband present, Lee and the first child.

Mr. Oswald was an insurance agent, and he used to collect insurance at my sister's house, and the day that I left Mr. Pic he helped move my furniture, the things that I was going to take.

I didn't see Mr. Ekdahl for some time and----

The CHAIRMAN. Ekdahl or Oswald.

Mrs. OSWALD. Mr. Oswald, sir, I am sorry.

John Edward and I were coming from the park one day, and Mr. Ekdahl picked--Mr. Oswald picked me up, and he was separated from his wife, however, not divorced but had been separated for a number of years, and I started dating Mr. Ekdahl and we decided to marry and he divorced his wife.

Mr. RANKIN. You said Ekdahl again.

Mrs. OSWALD. Oswald, I am sorry, and then he got the divorce proceeding. He was separated for a long time but never had been divorced from his wife but when we knew he was going to marry, and I also then got the divorce from Mr. Pic. I was not divorced there from Mr. Pic, either. We were legally separated but I was not divorced from him.

So, Mr. Oswald and I married and of that marriage Robert was born 9 months later, and as you know consequently Lee, 2 months after his father had died.

Now, Mr. Oswald was a very good man. There was the only happy part of my life. When he died hardly anybody knew that John Edward Pic was not his son. He wanted to adopt John Edward, but because his father was supporting him which I think was only $18 a month, I explained to Lee that I thought we should save this money for the boys' education and let his own father support him and naturally we would educate and do all we could do but that was no more than right. So that is why he did not adopt John Edward.

Now, that is the story of my three marriages. I have been married approximately 9 years in the three times that I have been married, sir, and I would say, I am probably guilty of a lot of things but the initial guilt has never been mine in any of these marriages, the first marriage I had explained, the second marriage was death, and the third marriage was Mr. Ekdahl.

I think then you know the rest of the story, how I lived with my children and tried to support my children.

I have often held two jobs trying to support my children. I have a whole file that the Commission has copies of jobs that I have worked, and I have also worked for these places twice, and have gone back. I have wonderful recommendations. I think I have been fired about five times in my life, and I have had much, much employment, and the reason for that is finances, in other words, I have always had a very low salary, and I am a very aggressive sales person, as these papers say, and I always produce for my people and I was in demand actually.

They would come to me and offer me 20, 25 dollars more, believe me, gentlemen. I would quit the job where I was and quit the new job because 25 dollars paid my light and heat bill and gave my children some clothes and that is mostly the reason for all of this employment, and also I used to quit my job as much as possible in the summer time when the children were little in order to be home with them.

Now, I skipped a part in the beginning about the children being placed in the Lutheran Home. I am Lutheran and I was a church member, a church worker, I should say. I helped, I sewed, natural gifted, I never did take a lesson, I never did use a pattern, my sister can verify this.

I used to come home from the attorneys with material, cut out the material, sew it, press it and go out on a date. I just had the knack of doing things that way, sir, and she can verify this because my niece, I taught her to sew and my sister said, "You are so slow, Aunt Marguerite used to sew on the material and go out on a date," and my niece would say, "Is it true, my mother said you would sew on material and go out on a date," and I said, "I wish I had a nickel for every time I did."

So those are gifted things I can't explain.

Lee had certain gifted ways about him also.

In the early part of my life that I had skipped when the war broke out and my finances were gone, I talked with the church. It was on Alva Street in New Orleans, not too far where my home was and they investigated the money I had, and I had a little money left at this time and they let me place the two older boys in the Lutheran Home which is a home only for the Lutheran Church.

This is not an institution. They have their own private school on the ground, and it is primarily based for children of one parent. However, they do take orphans. It was really not designed to be an orphan home. It was for children of one parent and you pay according to your circumstances, and they investigated my salary and after I went to work, I paid according to my circumstances for my two boys.

I took my two boys home with me every weekend, sir, and brought them back in time for Sunday so they can go to church with the children in the home. They got a wonderful education because the school on the school grounds had very few children in them.

There would be maybe two or three children to a particular grade so they had wonderful school. Lee was too young. They would not take Lee into the home until he was 3 years old.

So, I have hired maids and I have quit many a job for this. You have a background on my job, this accounts for it. Many a position and I have always had title and no money, assistant manager or manager in charge of a department, and I have had to quit that, because the maid wouldn't show up, and you couldn't get a maid for love or money.

War had broken out and the Negroes in New Orleans were going into factories and so on and so forth so there is many a job I had to leave in order to stay home and mind Lee until I could get help.

Then my sister helped with Lee. There is one particular instance, I let a couple have my home, plus $15 a month in order to care for Lee while I worked, and this couple after about 2 month's time had neglected Lee and so I had to put them out of the house and there again I had to quit a job, and take care of Lee until I could make arrangements and my sister could help me with it.

So when Lee was 3 years old I was having it very difficult with Lee, because of the different people to take care of Lee, and the different jobs that I had to give up.

However, I was never in want of work. It was during the war and I was always able to get work, but I realized if I continued to quit jobs because I couldn't hold the jobs that some day I wouldn't have enough jobs in New Orleans for me to hold one.

So, then at age 3 Lee was placed in the home. I waited patiently for age 3 because I wanted naturally for the brothers to be together. It was hard on Lee also because Lee was at a different place and his brothers were at a different place. So at age 3 I placed Lee in a Lutheran home. Of course, you have to be under strict investigation financially and otherwise to do this because this is a church placement, sir.

Then, I became manager of Princess hosiery shop on Canal Street. I opened that shop and I was left by myself and in 6 days' time I hired four girls. There was the first shop this man has had. He now has, I think, 54 stores and he always remembers me as on the road of starting him to success, because this young man didn't have much money at the time. And this is where I met Mr. Ekdahl and there is why I didn't want to marry right away because the children were being taken care of and I was manager of the hosiery shop.

So, now, I was sitting pretty in our American slang and I did not want to marry. But he persisted. He decided he wanted to marry me and I decided to marry him. I went to the Lutheran home and talked to the, well, you don't call him a manager, the head of the home, and I was going to marry Mr. Ekdahl, and I asked if I should have, if I could have Lee, that I didn't want the children, John Edward, and Robert to miss their schooling and I told them that I would wait until the children got out of school to marry Mr. Ekdahl but Mr. Ekdahl traveled, and, yet, he had a stroke and Mr. Ekdahl had offered, if I would come to Dallas, he was being transferred to Dallas, that he would pay my room, my living quarters and everything if I would cook and take care of him and I told the home, the Lutheran home about this arrangement, so there was nothing going to be immoral about it, sir, or I wouldn't have explained to the Lutheran home and they let me have Lee under those circumstances because they knew that I was a good woman and doing the best I could.

So, I got Lee, and when we went to Dallas, I then realized I did not want to marry Mr. Ekdahl, but I had already given up my position as manager of the hosiery shop, and had taken Lee out of school so with the money, I told you I had some money, and I had sold a piece of property, I bought another piece of property for a very small down payment on Victor Street in Dallas, Tex., and Mr. Ekdahl traveled.

Now, Mr. Ekdahl used to come on weekends and stay at my home. Of course, in his bedroom with my children, just maybe not even every weekend because he traveled, and then I decided I would marry Mr. Ekdahl. I mean I decided not to, I mean, he was a persistent one.

Then I married Mr. Ekdahl and the home was sold and I traveled with Mr. Ekdahl and the children were put into military school with the money I sold the home with.

I believe I have covered everything. I am not quite sure.

Are there any questions, Mr. Rankin, that I haven't gotten?

Mr. RANKIN. I think that is very helpful.

I would like to ask you about those pictures that you offered and then decided you didn't want to give us. If you would get those out, I would like to identify them so that there cannot be any misunderstanding about just what they are about.

Could you do that?

Mrs. OSWALD. By the way, one of the reporters when I came downstairs said "What is all the commotion about those pictures, you have, Mrs. Oswald?" Where do those leaks come from? That is the example. They wanted to know about the pictures.

Mr. Chief Justice, this is Lee at 6 months.

The CHAIRMAN. He was a good looking baby.

Mrs. OSWALD. This is Lee there at 2 years. Would--if you would like a copy of the Marina pictures, sir, I would be more than happy to do that.

I think they are in an envelope. This is important, Mr. Rankin. This has something to do with Time Magazine is what I think he did. This is where he got that from. These were copied for this session. These are from my other boys to mother, and John Edward and which I wanted to show we were a family but as soon as the boys married--here is another thing, which is true to human nature.

I am a widow woman with no money and I happened not to have the type daughter-in-laws who wanted a widow woman in case they have to support me. My children make very low salaries and so I am not alone, we have thousands and thousands of women like me. It is hard to say the children don't want you. But there are many, many mothers whose sons have married because it is different with a girl.

Now a girl will take care of the mother but the boy's mother is usually nothing and I am not going to be helped or supported.

I am going to take care of myself because that is the attitude and that was the attitude when I was sick.

Lee Harvey Oswald was the only one who has helped his mother at any time but I wanted to show mothers today cared and everything until they married. That was the type family we were, sir.

And this was the picture, Mr. Rankin, of the three children which is a happy life and he wanted to be in New Orleans.

Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I am going to call your attention to Exhibit 258 which you just referred to and said maybe that is what you meant.

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, because I gave him this when he entered the home.

Mr. RANKIN. This Exhibit 258 refers to the letter you received from me as general counsel for the Commission, and then a letter to the President, and your appeal to the President, is that right?

Mrs. OSWALD. That is correct.

Mr. RANKIN. And this is a copy you released for the press conference in Dallas. That is Exhibit 258. I offer Exhibit 258.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

Mr. RANKIN. If you will permit me, I will ask the court reporter to identify these pictures and I don't intend to offer them but then I will ask you each one by number so we can make it clear, and then return them to you, so you can tell us what they are about, is that all right with you?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, that is just fine, thank you.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, Mrs. Oswald, I will hand you Exhibits 259 through 269, both inclusive, and ask you to take them starting with Exhibit 259 and referring to the exhibit in each case, tell the Commission what the picture is about.

Mrs. OSWALD. 259 is of the three children, John Edward, Robert, and Lee and the three are smiling. In fact this picture was in a magazine because of the three good poses. It is hard to get three pictures alike.

Mr. RANKIN. About how old are the children in that picture?

Mrs. OSWALD. I know Lee was approximately going on 6 years old. There is 5 years difference in Robert so Robert would be 11, that is correct and John Edward would be 13. That is when they went to military school.

This is a picture of Lee at age 6 months.

Mr. RANKIN. You are talking about Exhibit 260?

Mrs. OSWALD. 260, yes, sir.

This is a picture of Lee at the Bronx Zoo, Exhibit 261 at age 13.

Mr. RANKIN. That is the Bronx Zoo in New York?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. RANKIN. That is the Bronx Zoo in New York that you told us about.

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

262 is a picture of Lee in Atsugi, Japan in 1958 showing his strength.

Mr. RANKIN. That shows him in Marine uniform also, does it?

Mrs. OSWALD. In his Marine uniform showing his muscles to his mother.

And this is a picture, Exhibit 263 taken in Corregidor 1957 in the wilderness.

Mr. RANKIN. He is still in the Marines there?

Mrs. OSWALD. Oh, yes, he is in fatigues, there. This is a picture taken August 19, 264 taken in California coming home on leave from Japan.

Mr. RANKIN. 264 he is still in the Marines?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, he is still in the Marines August 19. This is a picture of Lee taken in Minsk, Russia June 1st, 1961, Minsk, USSR, Exhibit 267.

There is a picture of Marguerite Oswald, the mother taken in New Orleans.

Mr. RANKIN. What is the number?

Mrs. OSWALD. 265.

Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. That is your own picture?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

This is a Mother's Day card sent to me from Santa Ana, California on May 7, 1959 from Lee.

Mr. RANKIN. That is Exhibit 266?

Mrs. OSWALD. And this is Exhibit 268 which is a Christmas card I had sent Lee on his first Christmas away from home--he joined in October--that Lee had kept all these years in his sea bag, this was found in his sea bag he left with me.

This is a book of Christmas carols Exhibit 269 that was also found in Lee's sea bag.

Mr. RANKIN. Now, Exhibits 259 to 269 both inclusive, are those all of the pictures that you were offering the Commission this morning?

Mrs. OSWALD. I have many more pictures, I would be happy to show you but these are the pictures that your Mr. Jenner said he would like to have for the Commission.

Mr. RANKIN. And that you were referring to when you offered them to the Commission?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Thank you very much and we would like to return them to you at this time.

The CHAIRMAN. We will return them to you, Mrs. Oswald.

Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Well I think that will be all then. Thank you Mrs. Oswald and if you become too tired with your testimony, we know it has been a long and arduous task for you, but we appreciate your presence.

Now, Mr. Doyle.

Mr. DOYLE. Sorry for the interruption, sir. Mrs. Oswald, do you care to make any comment to the Commission about the tape recording, the transcript of the tape recording of Mrs. Marguerite Oswald furnished to you by the Commission this morning? Do you care to make any comment about that?

Mrs. OSWALD. Should I go all the way and make the comment?

Mr. DOYLE. You make any comment you desire on that paper. I ask you whether or not you have any comment to make concerning that paper that you sent, that you were given?

Mrs. OSWALD. I am concerned about one thing, Mr. Doyle, if I may just step over there and ask you a question.

The CHAIRMAN. You may step out in the hall and talk to Mr. Doyle.

Mrs. OSWALD. Chief Justice Warren and Mr. Rankin, I have read this and it has upset me very, very much, that is what I was upset about. I have stated before in my testimony that at the end of the Six Flags I insisted upon going home and getting my important papers and I was ignored.

I wanted to testify. They put Robert on tape many a time and Marina continuously and I didn't have an interview. I have stated this previously, if you remember, and then finally a Mr. Howard put me on tape for about 5 or 10 minutes only, sir, and I had started with the defection because I was under the impression that we missed a bet when we didn't find out how Lee got to Russia and as far as I know, no reporter has been able to find out what ship he left on, and then Robert left the bedroom because he had the news that we could not get a minister, if you recall, and cried, and I said to Mr. Howard "Now all that I have left me because I see my son crying bitterly." I have stated these facts before, a very short interview.

This interview is supposed to have been by Mr. Howard, sir. The same Mr. Mike Howard that I have previously identified before on many occasions, and I swear before this Committee that now my life is more in danger which I have said before, because I did not give this testimony. This is the testimony that has been gathered by known facts because I have been a public figure.