William Spiegel (II)
William Spiegel’s entire grand jury testimony on February 3, 1949.
WILLIAM SPIEGEL, called as a witness, having first been duly sworn by the Foreman, testified:
Q. Mr. Spiegel, will you give your residence address and your business address?
A. My residence is 5104 Sunset Road, Baltimore, Maryland, and business is 1050 South Paca St., Baltimore, Maryland.
Q. Mr. Spiegel, you are here in response to a subpoena, isn’t that correct?
A. That is right.
Q. You understand that this is a Federal grand jury sitting in the Southern District of New York?
A. Yes.
Q. That is, you are appearing before a Federal grand jury.
A. Yes.
Q. In connection with your appearance before this grand jury, have you consulted an attorney?
A. I have.
Q. Will you give his name and his business address?
A. His name is Harry Adelberg, and the Baltimore – in the O’Sullivan Building, Baltimore, Maryland.
Q. I wish to advise you, Mr. Spiegel, that in appearing before this grand jury you have the right to refuse to answer any questions that might be asked you in this grand jury room if you honestly and reasonably believe that, by answering those questions, you might incriminate or degrade yourself. Do you understand that?
A. I think I do, yes.
Q. What is your business?
A. I am employed in the manufacturing business.
Q. What type?
A. Stationery.
Q. How long have you been in that business?
A. My present connections since, I believe, 1940.
Q. Prior to that, what did you do?
A. Well, since approximately 1936, I have been engaged in the same business in other connections.
Q. For yourself? Were you in the business for yourself?
A. Yes.
Q. What did you manufacture, what type of product?
A. Novelty stationery such as scrapbooks, photograph albums, wastebaskets and things of that type.
Q. Did you manufacture any products wherein you used cork?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you briefly give the grand jury some information on your background? Where were you born?
A. I was born in Brooklyn, New York. We didn’t live – my parents did not live in New York very long. We lived in New Jersey a good part of our life.
Q. You have lived in the United States all your life?
A. All my life, yes.
Q. What is your educational background beyond high school?
A. I have had – I have been to New York University, taking some courses there, was entered but did not complete. I became ill in 1926 and was obliged to go to Saranac Lake and was up there for a time. Returned from there to Baltimore, my parents had moved there in the meantime, my father was in business there, and I returned to Baltimore and continued convalescing, and then after that became employed in Jersey City, remained there for a while, and returned to Baltimore to be married and continued living on in Baltimore.
Q. Can you give the approximate date of your marriage?
A. 17 years ago; it would be 1931, I believe.
Q. Do you know an individual named David Carpenter or David Zimmerman? When I use those two names, I am referring to the same individual.
A. I knew a David Zimmerman.
Q. I’d like to show you a photograph, which is a photograph of the individual I am referring to as David Carpenter or David Zimmerman, and ask you if you can identify it?
(Shows the witness grand jury Exhibit number 46.)
You will note on this photograph that two other people appear. I am not inquiring about them, so I am just asking you if you can identify the individual that appears to be holding a briefcase under his arm.
A. That looks a good deal like him.
Q. Would you briefly tell the grand jury when you first met Zimmerman, how you happened to come in contact with him and what associations you had with him, and when you last saw him? Say it in your own words.
A. Well, we met David Zimmerman, I would say in the very early years of our marriage. We were living in Baltimore, and I don’t remember specifically how I met him. We were living downtown at the time and we simply came to know him and saw him periodically thereafter in a rather friendly sort of way. He was a rather – we found him an interesting person, a pleasant person to know, and we continued seeing him at intervals throughout that period. Did you ask me the last time I saw him?
Q. Yes. Did you say when about you met him, the approximate date?
A. I guess it would be 1931.
Q. Then the last time you saw him, approximately.
A. Either 1937 or ’38.
Q. Do you know what his occupation was during that period of time?
A. I wouldn’t say I knew what his occupation was, continuously. I was under the impression that he was a paint chemist.
Q. Did you know where he worked?
A. Not precisely.
Q. Did you know where he lived?
A. I knew he lived in East Baltimore, I heard that mentioned, I believe Fairmount Street or Fairmount Avenue, I believe that was mentioned. I did not know that specifically.
Q. You had never been to his home at any time?
A. Never been to his home.
Q. About how many times would he visit your residence during that period of time?
A. Oh, many, many times.
Q. Now, with reference to your apartment at 112 East Madison Street, you lived there at one time, didn’t you?
A. That is right.
Q. Can you recall when you moved there?
A. We moved there in the fall of 1937.
Q. The fall of 1937. Now, how long did you live there?
A. I believe through the – possibly to the fall of the following year.
Q. Approximately a year?
A. Yes.
Q. How many rooms were in that apartment, do you recall?
A. Yes; four, including the bath.
Q. It was a living room –
A. Living room, kitchen, a small bedroom and a bath.
Q. Was it on the second floor?
A. Yes.
Q. Was there some business underneath, having to do with lumber?
A. Berch Company, weatherproofing, I believe, and things of that type.
Q. Prior to your moving there in the fall of 1937, Zimmerman had been to your previous residence. Where did you live previous to that?
A. I have some notes on that. Do you mind if I consult them?
Q. No, you can refresh your recollection from anything you have.
A. Oh, I had become ill again in either the early part of 1937 or the latter part of 1936, I do not remember when that was, and I had returned to a sanitarium and had remained there until July of 1937, and we began living at 112 East Madison in October 1937.
Q. In October 1937?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you give the various addresses you lived in Baltimore from 1931?
A. I don’t know if I have that in detail. From 1931 – from the time we were married, in other words?
Q. Yes, from the time you were married – and the reason I am fixing the date is from the time you became acquainted with David Carpenter?
A. I believe this list is fairly complete, but we lived at 14 West Franklin Street, and then lived at 2206 Brookfield Avenue.
Q. Is that Brookfield?
A. Yes, Brookfield; and 1821 Utah Place; and 921 St. Paul Street. I am not absolutely sure that these are in chronological order, 4627 Keawick Road, I think that covers it.
Q. Now, while you have that list, after you moved from this address on Madison Street, will you give your addresses up to the present time?
A. Yes. We went from Madison Street to Bloomingdale Road, 1905.
Q. Then how long have you been at Sunset?
A. I think this is our seventh year. We purchased a home there.
Q. Now, prior to your living on Madison Street, did Carpenter or Zimmerman at any time ask you to make use of your apartment?
A. Prior to when?
Q. Prior to when you moved into the Madison Street address.
A. No.
Q. That is, prior to October of 1937.
A. That’s right.
Q. Did you have any relationships with Zimmerman, other than social visits?
A. None whatsoever.
Q. Now, will you try and fix the approximate time after you moved into the Madison Street apartment, as to when Zimmerman approached you for the purpose of using your apartment?
A. We – I mean, myself and my wife – have tried to do that, and we weren’t able to definitely, but we believe it was in the fall of that year, or some time soon after we moved there, but we can’t seem to recollect any exact interval of time.
Q. I would like to interrupt the line of questioning at the present time and ask you a question, although you answered it in part, that you haven’t seen the Zimmermans since 1938, approximately 1938 – have you or your wife any knowledge that Zimmerman has endeavored to get in touch with you, within the past year or so?
A. None at all.
Q. Now, going back to the Madison Street address, will you give in your own words as completely as possible, what conversations you, or you heard your wife, had with Zimmerman concerning the use of your apartment?
A. My recollection of that is extremely hazy. As a matter of fact, I can’t recall the exact time that we actually had that conversation, nor the circumstances that surrounded it, but I do simply recall that the conclusion of the conversation was that he would be able to use our apartment, and that we arranged for a rental – or that he would contribute towards our rent, the amount of twenty dollars. Beyond that, I have no specific recollections.
Q. I would like to show you a photograph – and this is a photograph of Whittaker Chambers – Whittaker Chambers has appeared in the press during the past year – and ask you if you have come in contact with Whittaker Chambers; and when I ask you that question I don’t mean that you knew him under the name of Whittaker Chambers, but I am referring to the individual?
A. Well, to be – the thing about this is this: My whole knowledge of this thing now is tempered so much by the fact that I have seen this picture in the press, and my association in Baltimore, my experience in Baltimore last week, that it is very difficult for me to say now that I recognize his face as a result of having seen him in my apartment, or simply that I have seen him in the newspapers and also having seen him last week.
Q. You have actually seen Whittaker Chambers?
A. Yes.
Q. So that you got a good look at him?
A. That’s right.
Q. And that was last week?
A. That’s right.
Q. Now, you can understand what the purpose of pursuing this is. The grand jury would like to know as to whether this Whittaker Chambers is the individual who was brought to your apartment or introduced to you by Carpenter or Zimmerman.
A. I understand that. I would say that this bears a resemblance to that individual.
Q. Now, with reference to the individual you saw last week, you saw him physically?
A. That’s right.
Q. Does he bear a resemblance to the individual you saw?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And how would you describe that individual that Zimmerman brought to you?
A. I would describe him as a man that is short, sort of chubby, round head, large eyes, I think his teeth were not very good at the time.
Q. Well, let me put a question to you this way, Mr. Spiegel – well, this is not a question, but it is in relationship to a question. You say you are confused because of the fact that you have seen this man’s picture in the papers, and for that reason you can’t say definitely that that was the man you saw in the apartment, in your apartment?
A. That’s right.
Q. But I think that probably you can surely tell the grand jury what reason you have to believe that he looks like the man you had in the apartment – in other words, from a practical point of view, you always meet that situation where somebody asks you, “Is this a picture of the man you knew at one time?” so that that picture might influence you; but that does not prevent a person from saying, “Yes, that is the man I knew at one time” or “I saw at one time” or “I met at one time.” I think from that point of view, you should be able to tell the grand jury a little more definitely as to whether that is the man, or looks like the man, that you saw back in 1937?
A. Yes; except that I saw the man very slightly and –
Q. Let me interrupt you. With reference to that picture, if you think a personal observation of Whittaker Chambers again would assist you in furnishing information to this grand jury, I can let you observe him again. Would that assist you?
A. I don’t think it would.
THE FOREMAN: Mr. Spiegel, did Mr. Zimmerman bring other men to your apartment?
THE WITNESS: You mean at that specific time?
THE FOREMAN: Yes – around the time when he was –
THE WITNESS: No.
THE FOREMAN: He did not bring anyone else?
A. No, he did not.
THE FOREMAN: So that this particular individual is the only one involved?
THE WITNESS: That’s right.
MR. DONEGAN [U.S. Attorney]: May the record reflect that, solely for the purpose of the witness observing an individual, an individual will be brought into the grand jury room, and during the period of time that the person is in the grand jury room, no words will be spoken by the witness or anybody else that is present in the grand jury room.
Q. Now, Mr. Spiegel, I am going to bring an individual in, and you will observe him, and you are not to make any comment until I ask you a question. Do you understand that?
A. Yes. Is it possible to hear this individual talk – would you ask him some questions, so that I can hear him talk?
MR. DONEGAN: May we have a recess for a few minutes?
THE FOREMAN: Surely.
MR. DONEGAN: Would you come with me, Mr. Spiegel?
(Mr. Donegan and the witness leave the room, and return in a few minutes.)
MR. DONEGAN: I would like the record to reflect, since I said an individual is going to be brought into the room, that that individual was not brought into the room, but that the witness left the room, accompanied by Mr. Donegan, for a brief period of time.
Q. Now, Mr. Spiegel, you had an opportunity to observe an individual named Whittaker Chambers, and I held some conversation with Mr. Chambers so that you could hear him speak. Mr. Chambers asked you a question, “Do you recognize a German accent?” Mr. Chambers stood up so that you could observe him standing up, also. Now, I would like you to tell the grand jury, in your own words, what comment you have to make.
A. Whittaker Chambers resembles very closely the man that was brought to our apartment, except that my recollection is that this individual had a slight accent, which was not present in the conversation that I heard with this individual just now. In other respects, he looks a great deal like him.
Q. Were you able to recognize his conversation – I mean, recognize his manner of talking?
A. I have only one recollection of having seen this man at our apartment, and it is very difficult now to remember these very fine details as specifically as you are asking them of me. We do remember – I say “we” again; of course, I am speaking in connection with my wife – that there was an accent present, and the reason we do remember it was that we were wondering a little bit about the origin of this individual. Now, that accent was not present at this moment.
Q. Did you have an opportunity to observe his teeth when he was talking?
A. No. I completely overlooked that now.
Q. Now, will you tell the grand jury, Mr. Spiegel, whatever conversations you had with Carpenter or Zimmerman concerning this individual, Chambers, or whatever conversations you had with Chambers himself – and when I say “Chambers” I am referring to the individual you say looks like that man?
A. Well, taking the last first, I had no conversation at all with this individual as regards Zimmerman, and I had no conversation with Zimmerman as regards this individual, that I can remember I never saw – shall we call him Chambers?
Q. Yes, Chambers.
A. I never saw Chambers alone.
Q. Zimmerman was always present?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever see Chambers in your apartment at any time, when Zimmerman wasn’t present?
A. I don’t remember seeing him there.
Q. What did Zimmerman say was the purpose of him paying you twenty dollars a month for the use of your apartment?
A. There was no specific purpose, other than he simply wanted the use of our apartment, that he had some work he would like to do, that it was a convenient location, and he simply –
Q. Did he say what kind of work?
A. No, he did not.
Q. Did he say that this fellow Chambers had the work to do, or that he had the work to do – did he explain why he had Chambers with him?
A. No, there was never any definite indication of that.
Q. Did any question ever come up in your mind – after all, you knew Zimmerman?
A. Yes.
Q. But you didn’t know this other fellow until Zimmerman brought him to you?
A. That’s right.
Q. Did any question ever come up in your mind as to why Zimmerman brought this other fellow, for the purpose of using your apartment?
A. Well, I am not sure I ever knew that anyone else but Zimmerman was using it.
Q. Well, Zimmerman brought this fellow to your apartment?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, was there any conversation at the time this fellow was in your apartment, concerning Zimmerman’s use of your apartment?
A. It is hard for me to remember that now.
Q. Now, with reference to this individual named Chambers, did you at any time have any knowledge that he was using your apartment for the purpose of photography and for developing film?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Did you have any knowledge that he used either the bathroom or the kitchen in your apartment for photography purposes?
A. No.
Q. Now, how long a period of time did Zimmerman have this arrangement where he paid you twenty dollars a month?
A. We haven’t been able to recall that exactly, either. We believe it ran just for a few months.
Q. Well, would you say it was approximately three months?
A. Possibly.
Q. Now, during that three-month period, where you were getting twenty dollars a month from Zimmerman, how did he pay you – in cash?
A. Yes.
Q. Was he in your apartment in the evening during that period of time?
A. It is very hard for me to say when he was there. We were away a great deal.
Q. In other words, you had to sleep there?
A. Yes.
Q. And at some time during that period of three months, you must have come home in the evenings prior to midnight?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, on any of those occasions did you ever observe Zimmerman in your apartment?
A. No, I don’t think we did, but I don’t remember exactly.
Q. Did you ever observe this fellow Chambers in your apartment?
A. Not without Zimmerman.
Q. Well, during that period that you were getting twenty dollars a month from Zimmerman, on how many occasions did you observe Chambers with Zimmerman in your apartment?
A. I have only the one recollection. There is a hazy recollection that there may have been a second time.
Q. Now, were you present at any time during the day during that three-month period – approximately that three-month period – when you were getting paid for the use of your apartment?
A. Was I –
Q. Were you present during the daytime, in your apartment?
A. Very rarely. On Sundays, and possibly Saturday afternoons. I say Saturday afternoons, simply because at the present time I don’t work Saturday afternoons, and perhaps I didn’t at that time, either, but I don’t remember exactly.
Q. Well, your wife was a school teacher, I understand, during that period of time?
A. That’s right.
Q. So that I presume she was home Saturday?
A. Yes, but I was at that time just beginning this cork business that you mentioned, and it was a very young enterprise and a very new one, and a very trying one, and it took a great deal of my attention and effort and energy at that time, and I was working rather long hours and rather constantly at it.
Q. Mr. Spiegel, here Zimmerman was paying twenty dollars a month for the use of your apartment?
A. Yes.
Q. And so we can presume it was worth twenty dollars a month to him to have that apartment. Now, at any time during that period of time, did you observe him do anything in your apartment?
A. I did not.
Q. Didn’t that cause you to be suspicious, and wonder why he wanted to use your apartment?
A. At that time it did not.
Q. Well, can you offer any further explanation? You say, “At that time it did not.” In other words, it is rather unusual. You might think of some reasons why an individual would want to use somebody else’s apartment. There are many reasons that may be not illegal, but may be perfectly legal, but you wouldn’t want them to use your apartment for those purposes. In other words, as to whether there was a situation where he was having an affair with a woman, and wanted to use your apartment for that purpose, for twenty dollars a month; or there was some other purpose. Now didn’t it occur to you and your wife to wonder as to why he wanted to pay you twenty dollars a month? If you knew the purpose, then you could judge as to whether you wanted your apartment used or not.
A. Well, simply that our feeling toward Zimmerman was not such as to have led us at that time to question his purpose, other than we knew he did a great deal of writing, and we somehow or other didn’t think – it didn’t occur to us – that he would use our apartment for some purpose that we would ourselves object to. We had a fair amount of confidence in the man at that time.
Q. Did you regard him as a close friend?
A. We knew him – well, I don’t know what you mean by “close friend.” I would say that we valued his friendship, yes. We found it satisfactory.
Q. Well, was he in that category of a friend, wherein if he came to you and said, “I would like to use your apartment for something,” you would let him use it even without the money?
A. I think we would, yes.
Q. So that when he came up with the money, did he offer you money for the use of your apartment?
A. Well, I might qualify my previous answer, and say that if he had asked for the privilege of using our apartment occasionally, without the payment of money, I think we would have, but I am not sure that we would have been willing to extend it for an indefinite period.
Q. Was it the understanding with him that he had absolute free access to your apartment, because he paid you that twenty dollars a month?
A. I don’t recall that any specific details were arranged for.
Q. Did he bring anything to your apartment – did he have anything stored there at any time during that period?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. And what was that?
A. Some kind of a suitcase-looking affair, which was left there.
Q. Did you ever see the contents of that?
A. I did not.
Q. And where did he keep that?
A. It was left in a hall closet.
Q. Now, during this period of time, did you ever observe him use a typewriter or did you ever observe him doing any writing?
A. I didn’t see him at work.
Q. Did he ever tell you that this fellow Chambers – and when I use the word “Chambers” I am not saying that you knew him under the name of Chambers – did he ever tell you that this fellow Chambers was going to use your apartment sometimes?
A. I don’t recall that he told us that specifically, no.
Q. Well, was it your understanding that he might be using it?
A. Well, I think we could have gained that impression from the time he visited us.
Q. In other words, the purpose of him bringing this fellow Chambers to your apartment was to sort of introduce him to you, so that if he was using your apartment, you would know what the association was – is that correct?
A. Yes, I think so.
Q. Was there at any time any statement made, or any impression, that you might have gathered, as to what the real purpose of Carpenter paying you twenty dollars a month for this apartment was?
A. There was none.
Q. Or this fellow that you never had seen before, who might be using your apartment at some time?
A. No.
Q. At that time did you know that Chambers – I withdraw that – did you know at that time that Zimmerman was connected with the Communist Party?
A. I did not.
Q. I believe you have been since advised, probably by the FBI, that he is presently connected with The Daily Worker, the Communist paper?
A. I wasn’t, but my wife mentioned that she had been.
Q. Well, I will, as a matter of fact, inform you of that. Now, at any time in your previous contacts with Zimmerman, did you have any reason to believe that he had any Communist associations?
A. Not directly, no. Do you want me to elaborate on that?
Q. Yes, please.
A. Well, I think we gained the impression that his interest possibly drifted in that direction. But how far they went, that we didn’t know specifically.
Q. Well, Mr. Spiegel, you see what the question is. You are a business man with considerable experience, and you don’t take everything on their face value; you couldn’t, or you wouldn’t, be in business very long. Now, here this man comes to you, that you have known and, as you say, you have no reason to question his motives. He says, “Now, I’ll pay you $20 a month for the use of your apartment.” There is no understanding as to what he is going to use it for. Then he brings this other fellow and so you meet him, and your understanding is that he is liable to be in the apartment, too, at some time. Now, what strikes me, personally, as very unusual is, didn’t you question what this was all about? In other words, what was the purpose of this? Particularly, since at no time did you observe either Zimmerman or Chambers using your apartment; as you say, you didn’t observe them doing anything in there, either writing a book or writing a letter or even writing on a piece of paper, or even just sleeping in the place, you didn’t observe why this was worth $20 a month. Now, I think if you can give the grand jury some explanation of that, that would be helpful.
A. All right, I can try. For one thing, you said I was a business man. I would qualify that by saying I was a very young and inexperienced business man. That was my first entry into business, and I would say from some of my experiences since then I possibly wasn’t too good a business man. But I was just starting in this thing and it was a very trying thing that I was doing then, plus the fact that the going had been rather tough for us. I had been ill and my wife was on her own, and we were trying – I was trying to get this thing established. We didn’t have any money. She was – for capital, we were using whatever we could take off from her income, and we were, I would say, somewhat in the hole. And we had known Zimmerman a long time. We liked him. We thought he liked us. And when the opportunity came along to realize – to reduce our rental that way, plus the fact it was a person that we knew and had a fair amount of confidence in, I don’t think it’s too difficult to understand our willingness to do this. I don’t say that we would approach the problem the same way today. I think we are living in a different world, and I think our experience since then has been quite different, too.
Q. Well, I want to point out, it isn’t a question as to the taking of the money for the use of the apartment. That’s something that, if anybody feels they need the money, would be reasonable. But beyond that, you would be inquiring as to, well, here is this –
A. Yes, well, we did inquire; sure, there was this suitcase there. We wondered –
Q. That’s what I mean.
A. Yes, we wondered why that was there; that is right. We speculated. We couldn’t quite imagine why it was there. But –
Q. Well, now, pursuing that: Here this fellow Chambers says that he was brought to your apartment by Zimmerman and he met you there, and he used your apartment for photography purposes. You people weren’t there, you see. In other words, he says he used it in the evening sometimes while you would go out to the movies or, if you came home early, you would go someplace else. But he used it for photography purposes and for developing film. Well, it’s a well-known fact, without you having any technical knowledge, that you can’t just start to develop film and pack it away and take it away with you. You have got to leave it out to dry, you see. And with reference to developing film, you have got to make a little bit of a mess, either in the kitchen or in a bathroom, to do it. And so, consequently, didn’t you notice any indications around the apartment? Not that you observed him doing it, not that you saw him doing it; but didn’t you observe any indications around the apartment that it might have been used for some purpose?
A. Well, there were none. There was no indication whatsoever that I can recall. And I might go a step further: that I myself have had an amateur’s interest in photography for a long time and I think I would have recognized such a thing if I saw it.
Q. Did he have a closet that was locked, sort of?
A. No. The only thing was this one case which was stored on the floor of our closet, cupboard.
Q. What did that look like? Was it a suitcase?
A. I never saw – I don’t remember seeing it out of there. It was a black-colored case, black-covered, with some kind of a leather or paper or something.
Q. Now, you have a knowledge of – an amateur knowledge of photography.
A. Yes.
Q. If a person wanted to use any room in that apartment that you had for the purpose of a makeshift darkroom, was there any room suitable for that purpose? Do you recall enough about the apartment?
A. The kitchen had a large window. I don’t recall the bathroom. I’m sure the bathroom must have had a window, because I don’t think we would have occupied the apartment if it didn’t.
Q. Now, with reference to the furniture: When you would come home in the evening – in other words, sometime during the day, it’s reasonable to presume, either Zimmerman or this other fellow Chambers was in there during the day – when you would come in in the evening, would you notice, with reference to your furniture or with reference to tables or anything else, that anything was being used?
A. I don’t remember now that we did. We may have, at the time.
Q. Well, going back. Now, this has all become very significant, don’t you see?
A. Yes.
Q. And going back and searching your memory; and, of course your wife and you have had occasion to talk about this since the FBI contacted you.
A. Yes.
Q. And you have been trying to recollect some facts about it. Is there anything that would indicate the possibility that the apartment was used for that purpose; since all these other factors check together, and then this fellow Chambers says that he did do that when you and your wife weren’t present in that apartment.
A. I don’t recollect any.
Q. Are there some questions by the grand jury?
BY THE JURY:
Q. When Zimmerman brought this individual into your house the first time, what did he say, “This is Mr. So and so,” or how did he introduce you?
A. He introduced him by name. I can’t remember that name now.
Q. You have no recollection of it at all?
A. No, we have tried to recall it.
Q. What happened to the suitcase?
A. It finally went away.
Q. Just disappeared?
A. Yes, in the same way that we didn’t see Zimmerman again.
Q. Did he surrender the key when the suitcase disappeared at the same time, simultaneously?
A. We don’t remember that.
Q. Did the suitcase disappear within this three months’ period?
A. Whether we saw Zimmerman after the suitcase was gone again or whether it was simultaneous, I can’t tell that, either.
Q. Where did you see Chambers last week, at your office, place of business?
A. No. At the office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Q. Was your wife present?
A. No, she was not. I don’t think.
Q. Did you ever sell any photographic supplies to Zimmerman?
A. No, I didn’t deal in photographic supplies at all.
Q. You said, before, that you handled photographic equipment and supplies.
A. No, no; we manufactured photographic albums.
Q. Only albums?
A. That’s all.
BY MR. DONEGAN:
Q. Mr. Spiegel, this fellow, Chambers, with the accent, would the name “Carl” strike any note in your mind? Was he introduced to you under the name of “Carl”; “This is Carl”?
A. It seems that we remember two names.
Q. Two names?
A. Yes.
Q. “Carl” is not one of them?
A. No.
BY THE JURY:
Q. What were the names you remember?
A. No.
Q. I say, what were the names you remember?
A. I don’t.
Q. You said you remember two names.
A. Well, we remember a last name. We sort of speculated a little bit again, my wife and I – that possibly the name of Schroeder, but we are not sure of that.
Q. Did you ever go to Chambers’ house at all?
A. No.
A. He always came to your place over the years?
THE FOREMAN: You mean Zimmerman’s house.
A. Yes, I never visited Zimmerman’s house.
Q. What was the other name you remember?
A. I don’t remember any.
Q. I thought you said you remember two names.
A. Well I say that because there was a last name, so I presume there must have been a first.
THE FOREMAN: No further questions.
Q. I would like to ask just one question. I would like to pursue – you are familiar with the cases in which photographic equipment are carried, usually a fiber case, black, as you say, probably riveted or sewed. You avoided the use of the word “suitcase,” and I think advisedly. Was the case of that nature that is usually –
A. Well, I know a lot more about these things now than I did then, because the materials that I deal in in my business are like that. I would say this is a – the case was covered with an artificial leather and I think I saw metal reinforcements at the corner.
Q. What was the shape of the case, long and narrow or square?
A. I would say rectangle.
Q. Just a regular standard type of suitcase?
A. Yes. But I never saw it, actually, out of there, so I don’t know the depth of it or anything else. But you know how things are hanging in closets; you sort of see an outline.
Q. It wasn’t the usual type of case that you use to carry clothes, was it, with – riveted on the corners?
A. It might have been one of those very cheap type of cases.
Q. Mr. Spiegel, when Zimmerman would come to visit you, did he come in an automobile, to your knowledge?
A. I never knew that.
Q. From your present experience, Mr. Spiegel, would you say that case was one which might have contained photography material?
A. It could have, possibly. We all have sample cases now, that our salesmen use now, that look very much like that, too.
Q. Mr. Spiegel, you and your wife, of course, are going to continue thinking about this.
A. Yes.
Q. And in the event you recollect any information that you think might be helpful, or any information at all, would you please communicate with the FBI in Baltimore, so that eventually the information will come to the attention of the grand jury?
A. Surely.
THE FOREMAN: Mr. Spiegel, are you a member of the Communist Party?
THE WITNESS: No, I’m not.
Q. Have you ever been?
A. No, I have not.
(WITNESS EXCUSED]