Chapter XXI: Section 349: (a) states, "From and after the effective date of this Act, (1)

a person who is a national of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by"--then section 6 under that, subsection, states, "making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State."

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, the Secretary of State has promulgated regulations which are found in 22 Code of Federal Regulations, sections 50.1 and 50.2 and they are also reproduced in 8 Foreign Affairs Manual, section 225.6.

Basically, as I understand it, those regulations provide the form in which the citizen is to make the renunciation, and it is to be done in four copies, and then one copy is to be given to the person who makes the renunciation. Is that your understanding?

Mr. SNYDER. This is my understanding; yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Are those forms available? Are they printed up, or do you have to draft them? What is the circumstance?

Mr. SNYDER. They are not printed forms, to my knowledge, Mr. Ford--at least I have never seen a printed form. The only time that I have used them in my Foreign Service experience I have had them typed up on the spot.

The CHAIRMAN. You may continue, Mr. Coleman.

Mr. DULLES. We ought to have in the record, Mr. Chief Justice, a copy of that form--either here or later.

The CHAIRMAN. As I understood, someone from the State Department is coming here to testify on the procedures, and the witness did not bring anything with him, he says.

Mr. SNYDER. That is right, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, when you were talking to Mr. Oswald on October 31, 1959, did he say anything with respect to applying for Soviet citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; this was contained in his written statement, for one thing, and I believe that he also stated this to me orally.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did he say anything with respect to having any information since he had been in the Marine Corps that he would be willing to make available to the Soviet Union?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; he did. He stated again, in effect, that he would make available to the Soviet authorities or to the Soviet Union what he had learned concerning his speciality--he was an electronics specialist of some sort, a radar technician--at any rate, he would make available to the Soviet Union such knowledge as he had acquired while in the Marine Corps concerning his specialty.

He volunteered this statement. It was rather peculiar.

Mr. COLEMAN. You say that the interview lasted about a half an hour. I take it he then left. Did he say he was going to return?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't believe he did. He gave no particular indication of when he would return, if he would return, or this sort of thing.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall just what he said when he left your office?

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a document----

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? Did he take his passport or did he leave it?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I kept it.

Mr. DULLES. You kept the passport?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a document which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 908, and it is a Foreign Service dispatch dated November 2, 1959. This is from Embassy, Moscow, to the Department of State, Washington. It is signed by Edward L. Freers, but on the first page there is an indication it was actually drafted by you. Do you recall drafting the original of that document?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 908 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. That statement was drafted within a day or two after you had the interview with Mr. Oswald. I take it it reflects what happened at that time.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Was there any cabled report of this incident?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I cabled a report on the 31st, Mr. Dulles. Commission Exhibit No. 908 is a somewhat fuller report, 2 days later.

Mr. COLEMAN. To answer Mr. Dulles' question, I show you a document which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 910, which purports to be a copy of a cable from Moscow to the Secretary of State, and ask you whether that is the cable which was sent off on October 31, 1959.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 910 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I also had marked, and I would like to show you, Commission Exhibit No. 909, which is a copy of a telegram from American Embassy, Tokyo, to Secretary of State, dated November 27, 1963. This telegram purports to be an interview which the Ambassador in Tokyo had with you immediately after the assassination in which you attempted to recall what happened on October 31, 1959, when Mr. Oswald appeared at the Embassy.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 909 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. I ask you if you can identify that telegram?

Mr. SNYDER. Might I just inject something? I notice in my reports, on my first interview with Oswald, that I mention the Petrulli case. You might at this time or later on wish to refer to the Petrulli case.

Mr. DULLES. Mr. Chairman, this cable is very short and quite significant. I wonder if it could not be read into the record at this point, just for the continuity of the record.

Mr. SNYDER. There is a slight problem of classification on these, Mr. Dulles. I don't know how public the records are.

Mr. DULLES. Maybe you could paraphrase it, then. You mean it is a question of codes?

Mr. SNYDER. It is a question of code security; yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. If this is in the record, it will be published.

Mr. COLEMAN. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record.

Mr. COLEMAN. Would you be kind enough to read Commission Exhibit No. 910 into the record?

Mr. SNYDER. In paraphrase?

The CHAIRMAN. Paraphrase, yes; in your own way.

Representative FORD. Of course keeping the intent of what was said precisely as it was sent.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

A person appeared at the Embassy today, October 31, identified himself as Lee Harvey Oswald, and stated that he had come to renounce his American citizenship. He was the bearer of U.S. passport No. 1733242, date of issuance September 10, 1959, which showed him to be unmarried and gave his age as 20, or which showed him to be 20--it gives his date of birth. Mr. Oswald stated that he had applied for Soviet citizenship in Moscow. He stated that he had entered the Soviet Union from Helsinki, Finland, on October 15. He said that he had contemplated this action for the previous 2 years. The main reason given was that "I am a Marxist." He has a mother living at 4936 Collinwood Street, Fort Worth, Tex., which was also his last address.

His attitude was arrogant and aggressive. He stated that he had recently been discharged from the Marine Corps. He also volunteered the information that he had offered to the Soviet authorities any information which he had acquired as an enlisted radar operator in the Marines.

In view of the Petrulli case, the Embassy proposes to delay completing the renunciation procedure until the action of the Soviet authorities on his request for Soviet citizenship is known or the Department advises.

A dispatch follows.

The press has been informed.

The CHAIRMAN. Would the Commissioners like to see the document itself?

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, could you tell the Commission what the Petrulli case was?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes. The Petrulli case I remember quite well.

Mr. Petrulli was an American citizen who came into the Embassy some weeks before, I believe, asking to renounce his American citizenship. Mr. Petrulli hung around Moscow for quite some time, again a number of weeks, and perhaps as long as 3 weeks or a month. He had entered the Soviet Union as a tourist, I believe.

It is not clear what intent he had when he arrived.

But, at any rate, he did apply for Soviet citizenship while in Moscow, and he did come into the Embassy, and was interviewed by me to renounce his American citizenship. I did not, in accordance with the thinking which I outlined to you earlier--I did not accept his renunciation the first time he came in, but did accept it when he subsequently appeared, and insisted that is what he wanted to do.

The case had a--I might skip over the minor details, but it had a rather rapid denouncement, when the Soviet authorities, after having looked him over for a number of weeks, decided they did not want him as a citizen or resident of the Soviet Union. And when we subsequently learned, that is I learned, from my reporting to the Department, and correspondence with them, that Mr. Petrulli had been discharged from the Armed Forces some time earlier on, I believe, a 100-percent mental disability--the Soviet, I think it was the head of the consular section of the Soviet Foreign Ministry, called me into the Foreign Ministry one day and said words to the effect that an American citizen Mr. Petrulli, has overstayed his visa in the Soviet Union, he is living here illegally, and "We request that you take steps to see that he leaves the country immediately."

I told the Soviet official that to the best of my knowledge Mr. Petrulli was not then an American citizen, he having executed a renunciation of citizenship before me.

The Soviet official said in effect, "As far as we are concerned, he came here on an American passport, and we ask that you get him out of here."

Well, again to end what was a long, involved and terribly time-consuming story at the time, it was determined by the Department that Mr. Petrulli's renunciation was null and void because he was not competent, and therefore he was an American citizen, and we shipped him home.

The Petrulli case, as I say, was very much in my mind when Mr. Oswald showed up.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you sent the telegram, which is Commission Exhibit No. 910, to the State Department, I take it that the first word that you received from the State Department is a telegram which I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 916.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 916 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, by paraphrasing, could you read the second paragraph of that telegram into the record?

Mr. SNYDER. "For your information, in the event that Mr. Oswald insists on completing a renunciation of his United States citizenship, the Embassy is precluded by the provisions of section 1999 of the Revised Statutes from withholding the right to do so without regard to the status of his application for citizenship which is pending before the Soviet government and without regard to the Petrulli case."

Mr. COLEMAN. At the same time that you were notifying the State Department that Oswald had appeared, someone in the Embassy also sent a telegram to the Navy Department, didn't he, advising that Oswald, a former Marine, had appeared at the Embassy and stated that he was a radar operator in the Marine Corps, and that he had offered to furnish the Soviets the information he possessed on radar.

I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 917 this telegram and ask you whether that is the telegram that went forth to the Navy Department.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 917 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. I don't recall that I saw this telegram at the time. But I would say from the content of it, and the form, that it is clearly a telegram sent by the naval attaché of the Embassy to his home office.

Mr. COLEMAN. We also have had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 918 the telegram which the Navy sent in reply to Commission Exhibit No. 917.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 918 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Have you seen that before and can you identify that?

Mr. SNYDER. I do not recall having seen this telegram before; no, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Now, sir; the next contact that you had with Oswald was by a letter dated November 3, 1959, which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 912, is that correct?

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 912 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes--to the best of my knowledge, this was the next thing that I heard of Oswald--the next thing I heard from Oswald.

Mr. COLEMAN. How did the original of Commission Exhibit No. 912 come into your possession?

Mr. SNYDER. I believe it came through the mail.

Mr. COLEMAN. And after you received Commission Exhibit No. 912, what did you do?

Mr. SNYDER. I wrote Mr. Oswald a reply, I believe, the same day.

The CHAIRMAN. Exhibit No. 912 was a request to revoke his application to renounce citizenship, was it not?

Mr. COLEMAN. No, Mr. Chief Justice; Commission Exhibit No. 912 is a letter from Mr. Oswald complaining that the Embassy had not permitted him to renounce.

The CHAIRMAN. I misread it. Yes; that is right. Excuse me.

Mr. COLEMAN. You say you wrote Mr. Oswald a letter the same day?

We have had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 919 a letter from Richard E. Snyder, to Lee Harvey Oswald, dated November 6, 1959.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 919 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. I show it to you and ask you is this a copy of the letter which you wrote to Mr. Oswald?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman----

Mr. DULLES. Could we have some indication of what that letter is, for the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Referring back to Exhibit No. 912, where I was acting apparently under some misapprehension I read the first three lines and it said "Nov. 3, 1959. I, Lee Harvey Oswald, do hereby request that my present United States citizenship be revoked." Well, that is consistent with what was said.

Representative FORD. I think that is a pretty categorical statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it is.

Representative FORD. He subsequently, in Exhibit No. 912, makes a protest about the fact that he was not accorded that right previously. But I don't see how we could come to any other conclusion but the first three lines are a specific request for the right to revoke his American citizenship.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; but I had misread that first sentence, and I had asked if it wasn't a revocation of his original request. I was in error when I said that. You are correct, absolutely, on your interpretation of it.

Mr. COLEMAN. As a result of receiving Commission Exhibit No. 912, you wrote Mr. Oswald a letter which has been--a copy of which has been marked and identified as Commission Exhibit No. 919, is that correct?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Earlier in your testimony, when asked about what a citizen has to do to renounce his citizenship, you referred to section 349(a) (6).

I would like to call your attention to the fact there is also another provision--section 349(a) (2)--which provides that an American citizen shall lose his nationality by "taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof."

Did you consider whether the Oswald letter, marked as Commission Exhibit No. 912, was such an affirmation or other formal declaration?

Mr. SNYDER. There is a considerable body of law, I believe, interpreting this provision of law as to what constitutes an affirmation or other formal declaration. I believe that I was quite aware at the time that a mere statement did not constitute a formal declaration within the meaning of the law.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did----

Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question about Exhibit No. 912?

In the second paragraph of this letter, Exhibit No. 912, Oswald says, "I appered [sic] in person at the consulate office of the United States Embassy, Moscow, on Oct. 31st, for the purpose of signing the formal papers to this effect. This legal right I was refused at that time."

Do you know how he learned about his legal rights? Did you tell him his legal rights in your conversation with him? Or where did he get the information about his legal rights, if you know about that?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Dulles, I did discuss with Oswald both the significance of his act and the legal basis of it, and so forth. And I believe that in the letter which I wrote to him----

Mr. DULLES. Which was subsequent to Exhibit No. 912, was it not, in answer to 912?

Mr. SNYDER. In answer to Exhibit No. 912--in the letter which I wrote, replying to this, I purposely used the word, I think, "again", or words to that effect, and I put that word in there at the time, indicating that he had been told this before, and that I was repeating it to him.

Mr. COLEMAN. You are talking about Commission Exhibit No. 919, the third paragraph, is that correct, where you use the word "again"?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; that is correct.

In other words, at the time Oswald was there, the reason which I gave him for not taking his renunciation at the time was not that he was not legally entitled to have it, but that the office was closed at the time. In matter of fact, I don't think I had a secretary there to type out the form and so forth. But this is really quite beside the point.

But the reason which I gave him was not that I had any legal right to refuse him--that is, it wasn't based on a provision of law, as it was based on simply the fact that the Embassy was closed at the time.

Mr. COLEMAN. You will recall in Commission Exhibit No. 913, which was the first letter that Oswald gave you, that the last paragraph states, "I affirm that my allegiance is to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics," and once again I take it that you didn't think that that was the type of oath or affirmation which is set forth in section 349(a) (2)?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir; that is right.

Mr. SLAWSON. Mr. Snyder, in reference to the same document, Commission Exhibit No. 913, do you think that Mr. Oswald, when he appeared before you and gave this to you, believed in his mind that this was sufficient to renounce his citizenship?

The CHAIRMAN. How could he tell what was in his mind?

Mr. SNYDER. I really don't know.

Mr. SLAWSON. Do you believe that if you had given Mr. Oswald the opportunity to carry through with the procedures, that he would have renounced his citizenship at that first appearance?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I have every reason to believe he would have.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I also would like to show you a copy of a passport issued by the United States, which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 946, and ask you whether that is the passport that Mr. Oswald gave to you when he came into the Embassy on October 31, 1959.

Mr. DULLES. May I ask a preliminary question about Exhibit No. 913?

This is undated. Do we know the date of the receipt of this by the Embassy?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, Mr. Dulles; the testimony is that when Mr. Oswald came into the Embassy, sir, he handed this document to Mr. Snyder.

Mr. DULLES. That is the first time he came in, he handed this document to you?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

This is undoubtedly his passport; yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you received Commission Exhibit No. 919, which is the second letter from Oswald, the letter dated November 3, 1959, you then prepared and sent to the Secretary of State in Washington an airgram which the Commission has had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 920.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 920 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you the document and ask you whether you prepared the original thereof and sent it to the State Department?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. May I ask a question here?

When Oswald first came in, and either placed his passport on the desk or the table, or you asked for it, did you note that he had overstayed his visa by 5 days?

Mr. SNYDER. I can't recall that I did or did not, Mr. Ford.

Representative FORD. Is that something that you would normally examine and determine under circumstances like this?

Mr. SNYDER. Oh, I might if there were some reason to look at it--if it were particularly relevant to something I was thinking at the time or asking about at the time.

In terms of Soviet practice, it is not really too relevant. That is, if the Soviet authorities find it to their interest to keep a person around, then there is no problem. And if they do not, one does not overstay one's visa in the Soviet Union.

Representative FORD. But if it is, for some Soviet reason, a good reason to keep somebody around beyond the time of their visa, wouldn't that be of some interest to us--I mean to the United States officials?

Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; but, of course, that assumption was already strongly made in the Oswald case by other circumstances in this case. There was no question in my mind that Mr. Oswald was there in Moscow for the purposes for which he stated he was in Moscow, and that this was known to the Soviet authorities, for he said he had applied for Soviet citizenship.

Representative FORD. Is it the usual thing for them to let an individual stay beyond their visa termination date?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, I would say it is not usual. Again, one can never cite a list of specific instances in these things, but I think that when you are working as a consul in Moscow for a couple of years, you have a considerable feel for these things, and that I would say it is not usual--people simply do not overstay their visas in the Soviet Union without the knowledge, by and large, of the Soviet authorities.

And this is because of the nature of the passport registration system at your hotel, and all of this sort of thing. It simply is not normally done by oversight or by lapse either on the part of the individual or on the part of the Soviet State.

Representative FORD. When he presented the passport, or when you were given the passport by him, did you examine it?

Mr. SNYDER. I undoubtedly examined it.

Representative FORD. Where in the passport would this fact be noted that he had overstayed his visa by 5 days?

(At this point, Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.)

Mr. SNYDER. It may either be on the original visa or on the police stamp placed in his passport at the time. This is to the best of my recollection.

Mr. COLEMAN. Congressman Ford, as I understand it, one of the stamps in the passport, which would be in Russian, indicates the visa that he got in Helsinki, and also indicates the length of time he was permitted to stay.

Representative FORD. So it is clearly a Soviet document in the passport?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes.

Mr. SNYDER. I could probably find these for you, if you would like.

Representative FORD. When Oswald came in, did you notice anything peculiar about his physical appearance--any bruises, any injuries of any kind?

Mr. SNYDER. No, no; as I said--you may not have been here, Mr. Ford, at the time I made my original comments on his appearance.

He was very neatly dressed, very well composed, and to all outward appearances a respectable-looking young man.

Representative FORD. I was there then, and I was interested because I think we have testimony to the effect, or we have documentation to the effect, that he had tried to commit suicide prior to his coming to the American Embassy for the purpose of renouncing his citizenship. In other words, he had cut his wrist and had been in a Soviet hospital or medical facility. And I was wondering whether you had noticed that.

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; I did not.

Representative FORD. You did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, on November 2 you sent forward Commission Exhibit No. 908, which is the Foreign Service dispatch. You had also sent forth 2 days earlier a telegram advising them about Oswald.

And on November 12 you had sent forth Commission Exhibit No. 920. Now, according to the files that we have, except for Commission Exhibit No. 916, which is the telegram asking where the dispatch was, we have no other communication during this period from the Department to the Embassy giving you advice on what to do in the Oswald case.

Was there any messages that went back to the Embassy, other than Commission Exhibit No. 916, during that period?

Mr. SNYDER. I can't really say, Mr. Coleman, that I have personal recollection. But I have no reason to believe that there was anything else came in, other than what is now in our files.

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, would you expect to get some answers to those dispatches that you were sending forward to Washington?

Mr. SNYDER. Not really--not really. The thrust of information in something like this is from the field to the Department. The Department really answered the only thing which I asked them. That is, I told the Department what I intended to do concerning his request for renunciation, and the Department responded to that. And this was really all I would have expected from them at the time.

I would have expected--if the Department had had any information concerning Oswald in its files--I would have expected them to let me know if they had indication, for instance, that Oswald was mentally unbalanced or emotionally unstable or anything else of this sort, anything which might look like a repeat of the Petrulli pattern, I would have expected them to let me know this, so I would know how to handle the case.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, 3 days before Mr. Oswald came into the Embassy, did you have occasion to write a letter to Mr. Boster in Washington, asking him how you should handle these matters of attempted renunciation of American citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. Well----

Mr. DULLES. Is this the first time he came into the Embassy?

Mr. COLEMAN. This is 3 days before he came.

Mr. DULLES. The first time?

Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SNYDER. I recall writing. I think probably the letter you have in mind--

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 914 which is a letter dated October 28, 1959, from Mr. Snyder to Mr. Boster, and ask you whether that is a letter you sent.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 914 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Is that a copy of the letter that you sent to Mr. Boster?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Doesn't that letter, at the bottom, indicate that you were attempting to get advice on how to handle an attempted renunciation of American citizenship? At the bottom of the first page.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; this is a letter which I wrote to Gene Boster. This letter, I might add, did not refer to any particular case, but was a letter in which I had put down ideas which had been circulating in my mind for some time, based on my initial handling of cases in Moscow. And it was by way of putting down, as I say, some general ideas on the subject, and asking Gene what the Department felt about this general area of notions. It wasn't directed at any particular case.

Representative FORD. Do you feel that the regulations then, as well as now, and the law as well, are archaic in this regard?

Mr. SNYDER. Oh, no; it is simply that--not the law, and certainly not the regulations--and certainly not the law, can ever take the place of the judgment of the officer on the spot.

Mr. DULLES. Was this motivated by the Petrulli case?

Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't think it was. The Petrulli case was a clear-cut case, there was no problem with the Petrulli case, legal or otherwise.

It was motivated, as best I can recall, by my experience with a few other cases. Well, let's say--let's go back a little bit further, in a more general vein. The kind of people, the kind of Americans, and I suppose not only Americans but Frenchmen, Englishmen, and otherwise, who occasionally drift into the Soviet Union and state that they want to roll up their sleeves and go to work for socialism for the rest of their lives, or something of this sort, are usually quite a peculiar kind of person.

In the first place, they are rarely Marxists in any meaningful sense of the term. That is, they don't really know what it is all about. They probably don't know two words about Marxist theories, or Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, or anything else. Even less do they know anything about the country that they have chosen to spend their lives in, theoretically.

Almost universally they have never been to the country before. They speak no Russian. And they are rebounding from something--in some cases, such as the Petrulli case, the man is simply incompetent. In other cases, as in the Webster case, he appears to have been fleeing from his wife and the general responsibilities of his prior position, and finding that he could not escape from them in the Soviet Union either.

In the case of Oswald, a man who, for one reason or another, seemed to have been uncomfortable in his own society, unable to accommodate himself to it, and hoping he will make out better some place else.

At any rate, almost universally, the pattern is of a person who is not acting out of any ideological grounds. He simply doesn't--and I think this is essentially true probably of Oswald--this was my feeling in speaking with him--that Oswald really knew nothing about Marxism and Leninism, that he professed to be modeling his life after.

Mr. DULLES. Isn't it possible, though, from this discussion--maybe this should be asked to your legal adviser--that our procedure under law about renunciation may be in conflict with general international law, because if he comes into the country with an American passport, as an American citizen, I gather under ordinary international law we have to take him back. We are responsible for him. And no renunciation he makes changes that, as the Petrulli case shows.

Now, in the Petrulli case you had a situation where he was incompetent, and you could throw the thing out on the ground he didn't know what he was doing. But in these other cases, maybe you can't.

Mr. SNYDER. Well, in the specific instance and circumstances of the Soviet Union, you obviously have a major problem, there is a major state problem.

Mr. DULLES. That might arise in other cases. Isn't that true in any case--If an American citizen arrives with an American passport, the country where he arrives doesn't have to keep him, does it? Isn't it our responsibility to take him back?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, this is a point----

Mr. DULLES. That is a question of law.

Mr. SNYDER. This is a question of law which I really cannot answer.

And where we have an extradition treaty, I think there is no great problem, perhaps, or at least the problem is somewhat different from where we do not have an extradition treaty, as in the case of the Soviet Union.

And I just don't know whether we are in the last analysis required to take back a person who is no longer one of our citizens, and under circumstances where we do not have an extradition treaty with the nation, where that person now resides.

Representative FORD. Do we have an extradition treaty with the Soviet Union?

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir.

Well, we did not at that time, and I don't think we have subsequently. But we did not at that time.

Representative FORD. Do the legal advisers to the Department know whether we have an extradition treaty now?

Mr. CHAYES. We do not have an extradition treaty with the Soviet Union.

The only bilateral treaty we have with the Soviet Union, the Senate has not yet given advice and consent--but the only bilateral agreement is the consular agreement.

But so long as I am on the record here, I don't see how the extradition treaty has any bearing at all on the requirement of taking back a former American citizen who may get into trouble in the other country. That would be a matter governed by general principles of international law, and also one's own humanitarian outlook on the particular circumstance, rather than--or there could be treaty provisions perhaps, commerce and navigation, that might bear on it. But in the usual case, I think not.

Senator COOPER. May I ask a question here? It might save time.

Is there any statutory--any statute bearing on this question of renunciation?

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cooper, we just went through that, and it has been put in evidence here, and the statute has been read and it is very simple. All he has to do is go there and renounce before a consul or State officer to satisfy the regulations and requirements of the State Department, and he is out.

Isn't that correct, generally speaking?

Mr. CHAYES. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Is there any other statute bearing upon the effect of that renunciation with respect to any application or petition he might make later to renew his citizenship in the United States? Is there any?

Mr. COLEMAN. I would assume, sir, if he has made a valid renunciation, he is then just like any other non-American that wants to come into the United States. He has to go through one of the immigration quotas.

Mr. SNYDER. He must get an immigration visa.

Senator COOPER. I remember during the war and after the war we had problems with persons who had become naturalized citizens, and were returned to their countries, and in effect renounced their citizenship in various ways. As I remember, under certain circumstances they could renew their citizenship with the United States. But, as I understand it, there is no provision of law respecting a citizen of the United States who actually renounces his citizenship.

Mr. CHAYES. The issues in all those cases, I believe, were whether the purported expatriating act was actually an expatriating act. Whether they had voted voluntarily or served in a foreign army voluntarily, or something like that.

Senator COOPER. All this matter, the legal side of it, will be put into the record?

Mr. COLEMAN. At 2 o'clock, sir.

Now, Mr. Snyder, after you wrote that letter to Mr. Boster, which is Commission Exhibit No. 914, you received a reply to your letter which was signed by Nathaniel Davis, acting officer in charge, Soviet affairs, dated December 10, 1959, which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 915.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 915 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, also on December 1, 1959, you sent an airgram to the State Department indicating that you had been informed that Oswald had left the hotel at which he had been staying in Moscow, is that correct?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a document which has been identified as Commission Exhibit No. 921, and ask you whether that is a copy of the airgram you sent forward to the Department.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 921 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes.

Mr. COLEMAN. In Exhibit No. 921, you stated that you felt that he had not carried through with his original intent to renounce American citizenship in order to leave a crack open. Now, what information did you have which led you to put that in the airgram?

Mr. SNYDER. I am not sure whether this was my statement or----

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, would you look at that, sir?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes; this was the statement of the correspondent. The correspondent states that.

Mr. COLEMAN. Oh, you were informing the Department that the correspondent told you that she felt that Oswald may have been leaving a crack open?

Mr. SNYDER. That is right. This crack part here is part of the sentence "correspondent states."

Mr. COLEMAN. Who was the correspondent?

Mr. SNYDER. This was Priscilla Johnson.

Mr. COLEMAN. And I take it you were the one that prepared Commission Exhibit No. 921?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. You also state that no known Soviet publicity on case. I take it you meant by that there had been no mentioning in the Soviet press about Oswald.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Are you saying from the time he came into your Embassy office until the time you wrote that airgram, that there was nothing in the Soviet press about Oswald?

Mr. SNYDER. Not to my knowledge.

Mr. COLEMAN. Is that usual in these cases, where Americans attempt to renounce their citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. I think if there is a usual pattern--and, again, this is difficult to use words like "usual" because there are never two cases alike in this sort of thing--but if there is a usual pattern, it is that there is some exploitation of the defector in Soviet public media, usually after the details of his defection have been settled, particularly the detail as to whether the Soviet Union desires to have him.

Up to that point, publicity in the Soviet press probably is not to be expected.

Mr. COLEMAN. After you sent the airgram dated December 1, 1959, to the Department of State, which is Commission Exhibit No. 921, you didn't have any more contact with Oswald until some time in February 1961, is that correct?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. In the meantime, however, there was correspondence between the Embassy in Moscow and the State Department, is that correct?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Did----

Mr. SNYDER. Well, let me see.

Mr. COLEMAN. I will mark----

Mr. SNYDER. I guess there was. There was one or more welfare and whereabouts inquiries concerning him from his mother, which I think was the bulk, if not all, of the correspondence which we were engaged in between those two periods.

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, one such memorandum which went from the State Department to Moscow was a memorandum dated March 21, 1960, which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 922, which indicates that Representative Wright of Texas had made inquiry with respect to the whereabouts of Oswald.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 922 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. And attached to the operations memorandum which was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 922 is the letter sent to Congressman Wright, which has been marked as Exhibit 923.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 923 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. And also a letter sent to Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 924.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 924 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. In reply to Commission Exhibit No. 922, you prepared and sent to the Department of State an operations memorandum under date of March 28, 1960, which we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 927.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 927 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. In Commission Exhibit No. 927, you make the statement that the Embassy has no evidence that Oswald has expatriated himself other than his announced intention to do so "and the Embassy is, therefore, technically in a position to institute an inquiry concerning his whereabouts through a note to the Foreign Office."

Do you recall that statement in the operations memorandum?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. Was it your thought, then, that based upon all the documents you had and what transpired on October 31, 1959, and the subsequent letter that Oswald sent, that in your judgment he had not renounced his American citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. The statement which I made in that letter--to be quite accurate, as to its content--was made not for the--that is, the statement wasn't directing itself to the question has Oswald lost his citizenship or not, but rather to the question would we have the right in Soviet eyes to ask about the whereabouts of this man. The Soviet authorities took a very strict line that no foreign government had the right to inquire about any resident of the Soviet Union unless he was their citizen. So that my statement was merely--was meant there to support my conclusion that the Embassy, as far as we could see, would have the right in Soviet eyes to ask about the whereabouts of Oswald--because we had no reason to believe he was not our citizen, and, therefore, we had a perfect right to ask about where he might be.

Representative FORD. In other words, in your own mind, at that point, he had not renounced his citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. There is no question he had not renounced his citizenship; yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. You considered that he was still an American citizen as of March 28----

Mr. SNYDER. No evidence to the contrary.

Mr. DULLES. That is, he hadn't taken the procedures required under the law to renounce his citizenship?

Mr. SNYDER. He had not renounced his citizenship, and there was no evidence that he had acquired Soviet citizenship. These were the two things under which I think he could possibly have lost his citizenship at that time.

So, for lack of evidence to the contrary, he was an American citizen.

Mr. COLEMAN. On April 5, 1960--you received an operations memorandum from the Department of State, dated March 28, 1960, which we have had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 929. Do you recall receiving that?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 929 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. The second paragraph of that memorandum indicates that a lookout card or file has been opened or prepared.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. What does that mean?

Mr. SNYDER. Never having worked in this end of the Department of State, I can say only what it would mean in general terms--when one says a lookout card has been prepared, it means that an entry has been made in the file in such fashion that should someone look in the file for--under this name or this category, that there would be--that their attention would be flagged by this entry, and their attention would be called to the fact that there is something that they ought to look into. In other words, it is kind of a red flag placed--perhaps red flag is not the word to use here--but it is a flag placed in the file to attract the attention of anyone looking in the file under that.

Mr. COLEMAN. Then on May 10, 1960, and again on June 22, 1960, you received two operations memorandums from the State Department making inquiries with respect to Mr. Oswald. Can you identify those?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. You remember receiving those?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. The operations memorandum dated May 10, 1960, was given Commission Exhibit No. 928, and the operations memorandum dated June 22, 1960, has been given Commission Exhibit No. 925.

(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 925 and 928, respectively, for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. In response to those two operations memorandums, you, then, on July 6, 1960, sent forth an operations memorandum which has been given Commission Exhibit No. 926, which states that until you get other instructions, you are not going to make any further inquiry or do anything further in connection with Oswald, is that correct?

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 926 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. That is correct.

Mr. COLEMAN. Then, sir, on February 1, 1961, you received a Department of State instruction which was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 930, which requested the Embassy to ask the Ministry of Foreign Affairs--to inform the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that Mr. Oswald's mother was worried about his personal safety, and was anxious to hear from him.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 930 for identification.)

Mr. COLEMAN. Did you ever make such an inquiry of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs?

Mr. SNYDER. No, I think I did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know just when that Department instruction reached the Embassy in Moscow?

Mr. SNYDER. The date should be stamped on the document.

Mr. COLEMAN. Well, on the copy we have, sir, there is no date. I take it you have no independent recollection?

Mr. SNYDER. No; it should have been within a week, though.

Mr. COLEMAN. I take it, though, you would say that Commission Exhibit No. 930 went by diplomatic pouch.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. This didn't go by cable?

Mr. SNYDER. No, that is not a telegraphic form.

Mr. COLEMAN. On February 13, 1961, you received a letter from Mr. Oswald, did you not?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a copy of a letter which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 931, and I ask you whether that is a copy of a letter you received from Mr. Oswald.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 931 for identification.)

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, it would be helpful, I think, if we would pass these around, or if copies would be available to us at the time. Otherwise--at least I am not able to know what is transpiring between the counsel and the witness.

Are there extra copies of these we could have to examine as the exhibit is submitted to the witness?

Mr. SLAWSON. We could have them made up, Mr. Ford. I don't think there are any extra ones right now.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, suppose before you pass it to the witness you pass it to me, and I will pass it to Congressman Ford, and then over to Commissioner Dulles.

Mr. SNYDER. This letter is presumably the reason why no action was taken on the previous operations memorandum. It was overtaken, presumably, by Oswald's letter.

Mr. COLEMAN. Could you indicate for the record what Oswald said in his letter which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 931?

Mr. SNYDER. Perhaps I might just read the letter into the record.

The letter is dated February, no date.

"Dear sirs"----

Mr. DULLES. What year?

Mr. SNYDER. 1961.

"Since I have not received a reply to my letter of December 1960, I am writing again asking that you consider my request for the return of my American passport.

"I desire to return to the United States, that is if we could come to some agreement concernig [sic] the dropping of any legal proceedings against me. If so, then I would be free to ask the Russian authorities to allow me to leave. If I could show them my American passport, I am of the opinion they would give me an exit visa.

"They have at no time insisted that I take Russian citizenship. I am living here with non-permanent type papers for a foreigner.

"I cannot leave Minsk without permission, therefore I am writing rather than calling in person.

"I hope that in recalling the responsibility I have to America that you remember your's in doing everything you can to help me since I am an American citizen.

"Sincerely Lee Harvey Oswald."

Mr. DULLES. That is addressed to the American Embassy in Moscow?

Mr. SNYDER. It is simply "Dear sirs:" As near as I can recall, it came by mail, through the Soviet mail, addressed to the Embassy.

Mr. COLEMAN. Had you received a letter from Mr. Oswald at a date of December 1960, the way he mentioned in the first paragraph of his letter?

Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; we did not.

Mr. COLEMAN. This is the first letter you received?

Mr. SNYDER. This is the first communication since he left Moscow.

Mr. COLEMAN. I would next like to mark as Commission Exhibit No. 933 the reply which you made to Mr. Oswald, which is dated February 28, 1961.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 933 for identification.)

Mr. DULLES. When you say since he left Moscow, that was in----

Mr. SNYDER. November 1959, sir.

Mr. DULLES. November 1959?

Mr. SNYDER. This is what we presume was the date.

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Dulles, we have other evidence that he didn't leave until January 7, 1960.

Mr. DULLES. The last the Embassy heard from him was in November 1959?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. You have been shown Commission Exhibit No. 933. Is that a copy of a letter which you sent to Mr. Oswald?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. COLEMAN. At the same time did you inform the State Department that you had received a letter from Mr. Oswald?

Mr. SNYDER. I presume that I did.

Mr. COLEMAN. I have had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 932 a Foreign Service Despatch under date of February 28, 1961, from the Embassy in Moscow to the State Department in Washington. I would like to ask you whether this is the despatch which you sent forth to the Department.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 932 for identification.)

Representative FORD. Do the records show the date that the letter from Oswald was written--yes; February 5--and received February 13. This communication is dated February 28. Is that a long or a short time in communicating with Washington?

Mr. SNYDER. I would say it is a long time.

Representative FORD. Is there any explanation why it is a long time?

Mr. SNYDER. The only thing I could think of is simply that Moscow is a very busy office, and Mr. Oswald's case was no longer the top of my docket.

Representative FORD. Had there been any communication with the State Department in Washington concerning the inquiries of the mother, other than this?

Mr. SNYDER. I don't know, Mr. Ford. The only knowledge I had at the time of inquiries is what I was informed of by the Department. I presume that they informed me of all inquiries--since they could hardly act upon them themselves.

Representative FORD. What is the date of the last inquiry by the mother as to Oswald's----

Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I think the record will show that on January 26, 1961, the mother came to the State Department and as a result of that visit, that inquiry of February 1, 1961, went forward, making the inquiry. It has already been put in as an exhibit.

Representative FORD. This is the trouble not keeping copies available. It is a little difficult to follow the sequence.

Mr. COLEMAN. It is Commission Exhibit No. 930.

Representative FORD. This document, Commission Exhibit No. 930, shows what, as far as you are concerned, Mr. Snyder?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, it shows an interest by Oswald's mother in his whereabouts.

Representative FORD. As of what date, and where?

Mr. SNYDER. It says that Mrs. Oswald called at the Department of State on January 26, 1961; she personally called at the Department to inquire about her son.

Representative FORD. And that was communicated to the Embassy in Moscow?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. When was it received in the Embassy in Moscow?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, this doesn't show the date of receipt, but it was sent on February 1, and was received within a week of that time.

Representative FORD. And according to the records, the letter written by Oswald on February 5, 1961, which was received--was received February 13, 1961.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes.

Representative FORD. And this document, Commission Exhibit No. 933, shows a reply was given February 28, is that correct?

Mr. SNYDER. I think that is correct, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Does that mean it took 8 days to go from Minsk to Moscow?

Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. Isn't that an unusually long time?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, not too much of that time is transit time.

Mr. DULLES. That is what I was getting at.

Representative FORD. It also shows it took 15 days to get out of the American Embassy.

Mr. SNYDER. You must remember that in my eyes, as the officer on the spot, Mr. Oswald had no claim to prior action from the Embassy among other cases. And although the consular officer attempts to be as impersonal as he can about these things, in matter of fact it is very difficult to be entirely impersonal.

Mr. Oswald had no claim to any unusual attentions of mine, I must say.

I think that the letter from Oswald from the Metropole Hotel to the Embassy took something like 3 days or 4 days.

Representative FORD. What does that mean to you? Does that mean that his correspondence was intercepted?

Mr. SNYDER. There was no question about that, Mr. Ford?

Representative FORD. Intercepted by Soviet authorities?

Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; this has been known for years.

Representative FORD. Common practice?