TESTIMONY OF MRS. EVA GRANT
The testimony of Mrs. Eva Grant was taken at 3:30 p.m., on May 28, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Leon D. Hubert, Jr., assistant counsel of the President’s Commission. Mrs. Eva Grant was accompanied by her attorney, Phil Burleson.
Mr.Hubert. This is the deposition of Mrs. Eva Grant. Mrs. Grant is represented by Mr. Phil Burleson, her attorney.
Mrs. Grant, my name is Leon D. Hubert. I am a member of the advisory staff of the general counsel on the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy. Under the provisions of Executive Order 11130, dated November 29, 1963, issued by President Johnson, the joint resolution of Congress No. 137, and the rules of procedure adopted by the President’s Commission in conformance with the Executive order and that joint resolution, I have been authorized to take a sworn deposition from you. I state to you now that the general nature of this Commission’s inquiry is to ascertain, evaluate, and report upon the facts relevant to the assassination of President Kennedy and the subsequent violent death of Lee Harvey Oswald. In particular, as to you, Mrs. Grant, the nature of the inquiry today is to determine what facts you know about the death of Oswald, and the life and activities of your brother, Jack Ruby, and any other pertinent facts that you may know about the general inquiry.
Now, Mrs. Grant, I believe that you appear here today by a request made to you by a letter from Mr. J. Lee Rankin, general counsel of the staff for the President’s Commission. I ask you now if you have received that letter?
Mrs.Grant. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Would you state to us, please, what the date of the letter is?
Mrs.Grant. May 22.
Mr.Hubert. And it was received by you on what date?
Mrs.Grant. On the following date. I think, what is today—Thursday? I know I called here, it seems to me, Monday or Tuesday now.
Mr.Hubert. In any case, you have no objection to the taking of this deposition at the present time?
Mrs.Grant. No, sir.
Mr.Hubert. Then, will you rise and raise your right hand so that I may administer the oath?
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mrs.Grant. I do.
Mr.Hubert. Will you state your full name, please, ma’am?
Mrs.Grant. Well, I go under the name of Eva L. Grant.
Mr.Hubert. How do you spell the first name?
Mrs.Grant. Eva (spelling) E-v-a and “L.” Let me explain something to you—I married a man who used the name Grant, but the name, which you will notice, is Granovsky, but I married him under that name and I used that name for at least 25 years. I married in 1936, so you figure it out.
Mr.Hubert. And how old are you, Mrs. Grant?
Mrs.Grant. Fifty-five.
Mr.Hubert. And where do you reside?
Mrs.Grant. 3929 Rawlins, Dallas, Tex.
Mr.Hubert. Are you at present occupied?
Mrs.Grant. No.
Mr.Hubert. Now, in the course of this investigation I hope to conduct it in this way, that I will question you concerning certain segments or blocks or questions that will relate to a subject.
Under the rules of the proceedings your counsel may make any objection at anytime and under the rules also he could ask you any questions that he wants to at the end of the whole hearing, but I think, for ease of handling, it would be better if he asked you his questions after we have finished a particular area or block. I will try to indicate to your counsel when I am passing from one to the other, so that we can stop there and let him ask the questions as to that block, but I invite you, Mr. Burleson, if I should overlook and pass on to the next block, and it is obvious to you that I am, will you please interrupt and we will then have your questions relative to that block, so that the whole of the matter will be together in that way.
I think that perhaps the first thing I should like for you to do is identify the statements that were made by you to the FBI in several interviews that they had of you. Now, for the purpose of identification, first I am marking these exhibits as follows, to wit: “Dallas, Tex., May 28, 1964, Exhibit 1 to the deposition of Eva Grant.” I have signed my name to that and placed my initials on each of the subsequent pages in the lower right-hand corner. That Exhibit No. 1 purports to be the report of an interview of you by FBI Agents Jack Peden and Gaston Thompson on November 25, 1963, consisting of seven pages, and I have previously handed this Exhibit 1 to you and your attorney with the request that you read it and make any notes you wish, because what we want to do now is to state whether this Exhibit 1 represents a correct version of your understanding of the facts, and I will now ask you—have you read Exhibit 1?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; I have.
Mr.Hubert. With the aid and assistance of your counsel, would you tell us please, ma’am, whether Exhibit 1 is correct, pointing out any incorrections—things that are incorrect—anything that is omitted?
Mrs.Grant. I would have to see that again; may I?
Mr.Hubert. Yes, ma’am.
Mr.Burleson. Mr. Hubert, I might make a suggestion here since I have gone over it with her, possibly I could take her now and go into these areas?
Mr.Hubert. That will be a good way to do it because my general question is whether or not it is a completely correct document, and, therefore, to the extent it is not, I think it would be best if you would take her over to show that.
Mrs.Grant. Yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. May I suggest that you use a system of quoting the sentence to which you address yourself so it is clearly identified?
Mr.Burleson. Mrs. Grant, on page 1 of this—it is correct to the best of your present memory, is it not?
Off the record.
(A discussion between Counsel Hubert and Counsel Burleson off the record.)
Mrs.Grant(reading instrument referred to). Let me go ahead and say this now—you do want me to say it—when Jack looked at that Weissman ad, it seems to me this is what hesaid——
Mr.Burleson. Wait, are you making reference to a specific sentence in here, or are you adding to something?
Mrs.Grant. Well, I didn’t say here that he called. I think he was over there. I’m almost sure, but I may have said it—will you tell him about me? I was so sick—I mean—Iwas——
Mr.Burleson. Well, we will get into that in just a minute. Is there anything in this—on this first page that is incorrect as you now view things?
Mrs.Grant(reading). Well, you see, right here, “he said he contacted”—he was in the Dallas Morning News when the President was assassinated. He was placing his ads and he was in the building from 11 until, maybe, at 1:30, and that should have been put in here and I thought I told him that.
Mr.Burleson. Well, let’s refer to that—on this last sentence on page 1, it starts out with, “She stated that Jack Ruby told her that he was at the Dallas Morning News which ran his advertisements and asked them. ‘Where in the hell do you get off taking an ad like that? Are you money hungry?’”
What do you want to say about that?
Mrs.Grant. There was a fellow there that takes his ads and his name is Newman. I think his name is John Newman, and Jack was in that area where this all takes place and the telephones were ringing, and Jack says people werecanceling their ads, you know, complete commercial ads and subscriptions and the place was a madhouse. He was in the Dallas Morning News—he went there, yousee——
Mr.Burleson. To this statement, though, that I have just quoted—your answer is what?
Mrs.Grant. Yes: but he did call me from there—he was there.
Mr.Burleson. That morning?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right—he was in the Dallas Morning News and Johnknew——
Mr.Burleson. So, when you use the word “contacted”——
Mrs.Grant. They used that word—that isn’t even my word.
Mr.Burleson. He had some contact with them is really my question—whether by being there in person or by telephone?
Mrs.Grant. He bawled John Newman out.
Mr.Burleson. All right; I think that clarifies that.
Mrs.Grant. He said, “What in the hell?” And he says, “Well, I take orders from my superiors,” that’s what Jack said.
Mr.Burleson. Is that the only change or the only thing that you want to add on the first page?
Mrs.Grant(reads). Now, you see, let me explain this—he didn’t talk to the Times Herald until later in the day, as far as I know.
Mr.Burleson. All right: let me ask you this—you are now talking about, in the second paragraph, starting with, “She advised that he told her he had called the Times Herald Newspaper in Dallas and they had advised him that they had turned down and refused to accept the same advertisement.” What about that?
Mrs.Grant. Well, it seemed to be later in the day when all the commotion had died downand——
Mr.Burleson. Later on Friday?
Mrs.Grant. The same Friday, and if I know him, he probably was using the Dallas Morning News phone because he didn’t leave there until 1:30.
Mr.Hubert. Now, is there anything else you want to revise or change on page 1?
Mrs.Grant. Well, I would say they were at—you know, they came with that ad and they turned it down and that’s about it. It’s in there.
Mr.Burleson. Is there anything else on page 1?
Mrs.Grant. Well, that part there that hecontacted——
Mr.Burleson. Well, we have already gone over that.
Mrs.Grant. He was in the Dallas Morning News when all this took place. It was the greatest commotion in history in that office, and he was crying, and he was standing against the wall, and he said there werepeople——
Mr.Burleson. All right; is there anything else though?
Mrs.Grant. No.
Mr.Burleson. Off the record.
(Discussion between Counsel Burleson and the witness, Mrs. Grant.)
Mr.Burleson. Now, on the record. On page 2, Mrs. Grant, are there some changes or revisions that you might want to make in connection with that? I direct your attention specifically to this statement, “He informed that early Thursday morning, November 21, 1963, Jack Ruby, as was his custom, placed advertisements in both Dallas papers concerning the entertainment to be offered at the Carousel and Vegas nightclubs, Dallas, Texas, which clubs he had an interest in.” Now, in reference to that, what do you want to add in reference to that? Was that actually the morning of the 22d after midnight of the 21st?
Mrs.Grant. Well, there are many weeks out of the year he would go in on—which is Friday morning after 2:30 in the morning and it seemed to me this was an unusual week. I have been away from the Vegas Club which I usually take care of, but he went to the Vegas Club to pick up money and he was on the phone half of the night, he said, calling for a band.
Mr.Burleson. But thisdate——
Mrs.Grant. So, he never got that—that’s the wrong date.
Mr.Burleson. That date really should be early Friday morning, November 22, 1963?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Burleson. Which would have been following Thursday. All right. Now, directing yourattention——
Mrs.Grant. Can I add in over here something. When he was at my apartment Friday the phone rang and Andy, who is our bartender, said, “Jack, call Don Safran.”
Mr.Burleson. Just a minute, we are coming to that, but I want to direct your attention now to the next statement after the one I just read. “She advised that after President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963, he called the newspapers to change the advertisements to show that the club would be closed Friday, Saturday and Sunday, November 22d, 23d, and 24th, 1963.” Would you care to explain that just a little bit?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; I heard him call the Dallas Morning News, because there was a paper coming out at 10 o’clock at night and it seemed to me that they said it was too late—the Dallas news—you know how it comes out?
Mr.Burleson. The first edition?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; but he said, anyway, put it in Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, and Iheard——
Mr.Burleson. And it was on the afternoon of November 22d?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right.
Mr.Burleson. That he called from your place?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right.
Mr.Burleson. He called both of the papers?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right. Then, he called the Times Herald, but in between this, it seems that Andy called, who was in charge of the Carousel Club and he said, “Call Don Saffran.”
Mr.Burleson. All right. Now, we are going to get onto that but is that all you wanted to say about what we have just talked about?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Burleson. The next immediate following statement says, “She said that Don Saffran (PH) a newspaper reporter for the Dallas Times Herald, called him and wanted to know if he was sure,” and I am continuing on page 3, “he was not going to operate those clubs on any of those three days. He pointed out that some of the other clubs apparently were not going to be closed for even one night.
“When Ruby heard that the other clubs were not going to be closed, he became quite upset and asked Don how anyone with any kind of conscience could dance and have a good time after the President had been killed. He ended up by telling Don that he did not care what anyone else did, that he was going to close for those three days.”
And that is the end of those several sentences. What do you want to add in your deposition about that?
Mrs.Grant. Well, as I said, Andy called him and he called Don and he says, “I’m going to close tonight—tonight.” And this is what Don says, “Are you going to be closed Saturday and Sunday?” I don’t know what Jack said, I’ll be honest, at that time, but Jack—there was about a 3-minute hesitation and he says, “I’m calling him back,” and this is what I heard him say—he said, “Don this is Jack Ruby.” He said, “Listen, I will be closed for three days—tonight, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday,” and he says, “I don’t care when the other clubs close,” and he says, “We’re broke anyway so—”. In other words, he felt he can’t get any worse off than he is—it isn’t that he makes a million dollars—I mean, that was his attitude.
Mr.Burleson. The rest of page 3, the following three paragraphs on page 3 appear to be correct; is that right?
Mrs.Grant. But I wanted to clear this—you see, this wasn’t put in.
Mr.Burleson. Well, let me ask you this: We are now referring to the first full or complete paragraph on page 3, which says, “Mrs. Grant displayed a page from the Dallas Morning News, dated Saturday, November 23d, 1963, in Section 1, Page 19, containing a one column ad approximately four inches in length, stating that the Carousel Club on Main Street, Dallas, would be closed Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.” What do you want to say about that?
Mrs.Grant. Well, I understand the early edition didn’t have it yet.
Mr.Burleson. All right. In reference to the next paragraph, it says, “Mrs. Grant recalled that on the day of the President’s assassination, November 22, 1963, Jack Ruby telephoned her at least eight times and made three personal visits to her apartment,”—what correction or change do you want to make?
Mrs.Grant. I think he came twice—one time early in the day and once later in the afternoon with the groceries.
Mr.Burleson. So, where you said “threetimes”——
Mrs.Grant. It was only two times.
Mr.Burleson. You think now that it was only two times?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Burleson. The rest of that paragraph appears to be correct?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Burleson. The next paragraph on page 3 appears to be correct?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Burleson. A continuation of the last paragraph on page 3 and on page 4, does it appear to be correct?
Mrs.Grant(read). Could I add something here?
Mr.Burleson. All right, in the last sentence of the first paragraph, at the top of the page, the statement appears, “She stated that he discussed sending flowers to the place near the spot where the President was assassinated and she feels sure that he did have flowers delivered to that spot?”
Mrs.Grant. Well, we had a regular florist, called “Your Florist,” but I was in the hospital and he sent dried up, thrown out flowers that he charged, you know, a large amount of money for. I told him to get another florist, but he didn’t. He thinks he didn’t anyway—we are almost sure he didn’t.
Mr.Burleson. Now, directing your attention to the first complete paragraph on page 4, which says, “Mrs. Grant informed that Jack Ruby was in her apartment on November 22d, 1963, from approximately 5:30 p.m. until approximately 7:15 p.m. and then he dressed and went to the synagogue for prayers.” What correction or addition do you want to make to that?
Mrs.Grant. It was much earlier than 5:30—more like 4:30 at that time. You see, he was there earlier in the day, but I don’t remember whether it was much earlier—I think he came before he even went to the newspaper office.
Mr.Burleson. “Somewhere around 4:30” should be “around 5:30”?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; and he went home to dress. You see, he didn’t live at my place.
Mr.Burleson. All right; 7:15 is about right?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right.
Mr.Burleson. Then he dressed—he went home to dress from your place before he went to the synagogue?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; but I want to tell you. He looked so bad and he was so much a broken man and more confused and I really said something to this effect to him, I said, “Do you think you are able to drive?” He says, “Yes,” but instead of him going home, he went to Dealey Plaza and he was there sometime, because he didn’t get home until much later, and he didn’t get to the synagogue until almost all of the services were over, but he didn’t have any idea about time.
Mr.Burleson. Now, as to this next paragraph on page 4, does it appear to be correct as written?
Mrs.Grant. Well, in the case that he told me that he took whatLarry——
Mr.Burleson. And there are some other things written, but what is written there, does that appear to be correct?
Mrs.Grant. Yes. [Reading.]
Mr.Burleson. Let me go off the record just a second.
(Discussion between Mr. Burleson and the witness, Mrs. Grant, off the record.)
Mr.Burleson. Is this what is right, here?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; that is correct—he said he was up every night.
Mr.Burleson. Is this correct, then?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Burleson. Now, as to the last paragraph on page 4 which starts on page 4, does that appear to be correct?
Mrs.Grant(reading). Yes; he called Stanley from my home, and that’s why I know, and they were talking about these signs and he showed me——Mr.Burleson. Just read this, though, and tell me if this is correct.
Mrs.Grant(reading). Yes.
Mr.Burleson. All right. Now, as to the first complete paragraph on page 5, would you read that and see if that appears to be correct?
Mrs.Grant(reading). You know, I don’t know if he was there twice Saturday or not.
Mr.Burleson. Where?
Mrs.Grant. At my apartment; you see, he was there from 3:30 on to 8 o’clock that evening—I know he spent about 4 hours.
Mr.Burleson. That’s on the 23d?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right. Whether he was there earlier, I don’t know. I know Friday he was there twice.
Mr.Burleson. But to the best of your recollection and remembrance at this time, this is correct?
Mrs.Grant. Well, he was there from close to about—I would say 3½ to 4 or 4 hours and 15 minutes for a Saturday.
Mr.Burleson. And you say that it appears to be correct, the whole paragraph?
Mrs.Grant. Now, this is what I want to get clear.
Mr.Burleson. All right. Let me read something into the record. With the statement “She stated that from the remarks made by Ruby during the 10:20 p.m. telephone conversation, that she gained the impression that Ruby had been at his residence, 223 South Ewing (Apartment 207), Dallas, Texas, since a short time after leaving her place around 8 p.m. the same date.” Now, what do you want to say about that?
Mrs.Grant. Well, I don’t know if it was Friday or Saturday. He said he was going to the station, and I’ll be honest with you, I didn’t question—radio, television, or police station because it didn’t make a bit of difference to me. I was too gone.
Mr.Burleson. But that does not have anything to do with this, does it?
Mrs.Grant. He didn’t mention what station—he mentioned a station, but I don’t know if he went to the radio station, television, or police station, and I don’t think—it seems to me it was on a Friday instead of Saturday.
Mr.Burleson. But the statement, though, is correct as far as you know? It may not be complete, but it is correct as far as you know?
Mrs.Grant. Well, here it says on Saturday, but it is not Saturday. I think it was Friday after the synagogue. I think he called me, and he was in Phil’s, and he was ordering sandwiches, and I think it was Friday. I’ll tell you the truth, I was so confused that night I don’t know how I got anything out of him.
Mr.Burleson. All right. Let me direct your attention to the next paragraph: “At 11:30 p.m. that same night, he called and told her he had been at the station where he had talked to Henry Wade, the district attorney, Dallas County, Tex., and Russ Knight of radio station KLIF, Dallas, Tex.”
Mrs.Grant. And that should have been Friday.
Mr.Burleson. That should be Friday night?
Mrs.Grant. I think they both occurred Friday night.
Mr.Burleson. You think the reference in the preceding paragraph that we quoted should have been Friday night instead of Saturday night?
Mrs.Grant. I’m sure when he left the synagogue he went to Phil’s, he ordered sandwiches and he called me from Phil’s, and he said he was going to a station. He may have told me Saturday what station he had been at, but at that time he did not tell me.
Mr.Burleson. If this were in this paragraph I have just quoted about starting at about 11:30 p.m. that same night, that should be, then, Friday night?
Mrs.Grant. I’m sure.
Mr.Burleson. With that substitution there, is everything else in that paragraph true?
Mrs.Grant. Well, he just said he was going to a station.
Mr.Burleson. Did he tell you he talked with Henry Wade?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; he did.
Mr.Burleson. Did he tellyou——
Mrs.Grant. Wait a minute—the phone rang—wait a minute—there were a group of men. The phone rang and Jack was nearest the phone, whereverthis takes place—where they interrogate people or talk to people—I haven’t a vague idea, but yet I have been up there. Someone said answer the phone and he picked up the phone and he said, “It’s for you, Henry.” He told me this on Saturday.
A man at a station, and this time I think—this was Friday night—that I know, and he said, “Can I talk to Henry Wade?” And I think it was Russ Knight on the other end of the phone who said, “Okay,” and they were giving Russ Knight, who was—now, I know it was with KLIF because he was with KLIF, but he didn’t tell me this until Saturday when he came over but I’ll be honest, he told me when he was going to a station on Friday I did not know whether it was radio, television, or police station—I know he was in Phil’s and he ordered a lot of sandwiches.
Mr.Burleson. Would you read, then, with that explanation, and see if these two paragraphs are correct?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; yes.
Mr.Burleson. All right, let’s move on to the last paragraph on page 5, which continues on page 6. Would you read it and see if it is correct?
Mrs.Grant(reading). You see, I’ll tell you—I know when he got home Saturday afternoon, he left me—I made dinner for him and he called me.
Mr.Burleson. Was it about 12:40?
Mrs.Grant. No; he called me before that, once again, I would say it was more like 10:30 or 10 o’clock—he was still at home—Saturday he was still home—10 o’clock.
Mr.Burleson. All right; let me interrupt you—Eva—just a second, and let me read to you this paragraph starting on page 5 at the bottom, “Mrs. Grant stated that she next heard from her brother, Jack Ruby, about 12:40 a.m., Sunday, November 24. 1963, at which time he called her by telephone.” Now, you say that you heard from him sometime before 12:40?
Mrs.Grant. This fits in here—this part here.
Mr.Burleson. What I just read fits back up into the first paragraph?
Mrs.Grant. No—on Saturday he left my home around 8 o’clock. I did not hear from him for about 2 hours, it seems that long anyway. He called and he said—I know exactly what he said—he said he was making liver that George bought and getting dressed.
Mr.Burleson. That George Senator bought?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Burleson. And he was at home?
Mrs.Grant. No; George was not at home.
Mr.Burleson. I mean, Jack was at his apartment?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; this was Saturday.
Mr.Burleson. All right.
Mrs.Grant. And in those 2 hours, I assume he took a shower and from the telephone messages he must have made five long-distance calls from what I heard—that is Saturday—I don’t know where he went, but I do know he called me back again and it was after midnight, and it was near 1 o’clock, as much as I could remember.
Mr.Burleson. Would you continue on page 6, that continuation of the paragraph, and see if the rest of it is correct?
Mrs.Grant. Well, this is what Isaid——
Mr.Burleson. Now, let me read that into the record—just a second.
Mrs.Grant. At 12:40 he was at home. From the way he talked I assumed he was at home.
Mr.Burleson. Just a second, now. “She said she gained the impression that he was at his residence.”
Mrs.Grant. For Saturday is it?
Mr.Burleson. From—for Saturday night when he called you at 12:40?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right.
Mr.Burleson. Would you read the next sentence in there and see if that is correct?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right.
Mr.Burleson. Now, directing your attention to the next paragraph, whichis the first complete paragraph on page 6, would you read that and see if that is correct?
Mrs.Grant(reading). That is correct.
Mr.Burleson. Now, the last paragraph on page 6, which continues on page 7—would you read that?
Mrs.Grant. Okay. [Read.] That’s all right.
Mr.Hubert. I am handing you and your attorney a document which has been identified as follows: That is to say, I have written in the margin of this document, this consisting of one page, the words, “Dallas, Tex., May 28, 1964, Exhibit No. 2 deposition of Eva Grant,” and I have signed my name and this purports to be of a telephone interview between you and the FBI agent Jack Peden on November 29 1963, and I will ask you if it is correct, if anything has been omitted, any corrections to be made or anything wrong about it in regards to the first paragraph, which says, “Mrs. Eva L. Grant, 3929 Rawlins, was telephonically contacted at the Vegas Club, 3508 Oak Lawn, Dallas, Tex., and she stated that she first came to Dallas Tex., in August of either 1942 or August 1943.”
Did you come here?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; I stayed a very short while. It was during the war and I lived out in Oak Cliff—it seems to me on Ohio Street somewhere.
Mr.Hubert. Would you say that you were really just passing through?
Mrs.Grant. No; but I was just here for a couple of weeks and then I left and you see I was always on the way from Chicago to Los Angeles.
Mr.Burleson. Are there any other changes or corrections in this that you want to make?
Mrs.Grant. Well, this building—wasn’t—go back to 1945.
Mr.Burleson. Let me read into the record the second paragraph, “She advised that a building was being erected at 1717 South Ervay, in Dallas, shortly after she arrived in Dallas, and she arranged to lease it.”
Mrs.Grant. Yes; but that was not until 1945.
Mr.Hubert. That was in 1945?
Mrs.Grant. I’m sure the last part of it was 1945.
Mr.Hubert. That was in 1945?
Mrs.Grant. I’m sure the last part of 1945.
Mr.Hubert. Is the last sentence in the second paragraph correct?
Mrs.Grant. Well, yes; that’s correct—let me explain this—you see, when they say I went to the west coast, yes; but I didn’t stay there too long. I mean, it took me from 6 months to 8 months to come back.
Mr.Burleson. Let me ask you this. In the last paragraph, Mrs. Grant stated that “she left Dallas in 1948 and went to the west coast. She informed that she returned to Dallas two or three times after 1948 and has made Dallas her home since April 1959”; is that correct?
Mrs.Grant. I was here many more years than that.
Mr.Burleson. All right, what is the true situation?
Mrs.Grant. Even if I left, I wasn’t gone maybe a half a year or 8 months even, and then I came back and I stayed here again, and then Jack had another club called Hernando’s Hideaway, and I was here a year then, maybe 2 years. Gee, I was mostly here since 1948 than any place I have been.
Mr.Burleson. But you did move to other places?
Mrs.Grant. I went to Los Angeles or Chicago—no other place than that.
Mr.Burleson. And with those additions and corrections, this is correct; is that right?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; I mean—I wouldn’t call any other place my home.
Mr.Burleson. All right, that’s all.
Mr.Hubert.Now——
Mrs.Grant. You know, of course, that I went on the road and came back.
Mr.Burleson. All right.
Mr.Hubert. I have marked for identification a document which purports to be an interview on December 2, 1963, of you by FBI Agent Jack Peden, and for purposes of identification I have marked it as follows: “Dallas, Tex., May 28, 1964, Exhibit No. 3 of the deposition of Eva Grant,” and I have signed my name and ask you the same comments with respect to that document?
Mrs.Grant(examining instrument referred to). It’s going back so far—yes; this is correct, but there are a lot of things that happened, other things.
Mr.Hubert. Yes; we understand that.
Mr.Burleson. But this is correct as far as it goes, and as far as it states?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right.
Mr.Burleson. There are other matters, but we won’t go into those at this particular time—this is true and correct?
Mrs.Grant. I mean, if you look at those States, and then look at those, you would think I was in both places at one time, but it wasn’t like that.
Mr.Burleson. All right, but this is true as far as it goes?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; of course, there are some—who remembers everything—I had a little restaurant.
Mr.Hubert. Now, we’ll get to the next document, which is a report of an interview on December 31, 1963, between FBI Agent Gaston Thompson and yourself, which I have marked for identification, “Dallas, Tex., May 28, 1964, Exhibit No. 4, deposition of Eva Grant,” and I have signed my name, and I ask you if that is correct and if there are any additions or omissions, and if so please state what you think is incorrect as to that document?
Mrs. Grant (read instrument referred to).
Mr.Burleson. I will ask you about the first paragraph—is it correct?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Burleson. Now, getting to the second paragraph, I’ll ask you if it is correct?
Mrs.Grant. Well, that’s what I told them because that’s what I thought—they told me he wasn’t dead.
Mr.Burleson. Have you heard anything since then to the contrary?
Mrs.Grant. I have not spoken to anybody—to anybody who knows where he is—whether he is dead, outside of what his name, Clements here told me they found him—he’s alive.
Mr.Burleson. Directing your attention to the sentence in the second paragraph that says, “Frank had a sister named Rose Solomon in Los Angeles,” is that correct?
Mrs.Grant. No; instead of sister, it should be aunt. He only had one sister and no other living relatives I would know.
Mr.Burleson. Other than Rose Solomon, who is an aunt and not a sister?
Mrs.Grant. It seems it was his mother’s sister, and that was the closest family.
Mr.Burleson. Other than one change there, as far as this statement is concerned, it is true and correct?
Mrs.Grant. That is right—that’s right.
Mr.Burleson. Off the record.
(Discussion between Counsel Burleson and Hubert.)
Mr.Hubert. Now, let’s proceed along these lines. What I would like to know is something of the family background, Mrs. Grant.
Mrs.Grant. I’m ashamed to tell you.
Mr.Hubert. For instance, your mother’s name?
Mrs.Grant. Let me explain the situation, even with my family, my mother’s fathers’ name was Rutkowfsky.
Mr.Hubert. Let me handle it this way—if you will just answer my questions, then at the end of each one of these blocks of questions, your attorney will be able to clarify anything he wants to.
Mrs.Grant. But this is something—there has been a mixup in the family. A lot of times my sister would say her namewas——
Mr.Hubert(interrupting). If you will just answer my question and then we will move on this way. What was you mother’s name?
Mrs.Grant. Fanny.
Mr.Hubert. Do you remember what her last name was prior to her marriage?
Mrs.Grant. That’s what I’m trying to remember.
Mr.Hubert. You said it was Rutkowfsky, is that correct?
Mrs.Grant. I think my mother’s mother was married twice. Sometimes they used the name as Turek [spelling] T-u-r-e-k, but her father’s name was Rutkowfsky—he was a doctor of medicine in Zimbrola, Poland.
Mr.Hubert. Did your mother have any brothers or sisters?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Would you name them, please, if you remember?
Mrs.Grant. One was Sarah—they are dead—do you still want the names?
Mr.Hubert. Yes, ma’am—did she marry anyone?
Mrs.Grant. Yes, I know the name real good—wait a minute—isn’t that terrible—Moskowitz [spelling] M-o-s-k-o-w-i-t-z.
Mr.Hubert. Did any of your mother’srelatives——
Mrs.Grant. There is another one.
Mr.Hubert. All right, go ahead.
Mrs.Grant. Her brother lived until a couple of years ago. His name was Harry Rutland, and after he arrived in this country, which is 65 years ago, I would say, or close to that time, he changed his name from Rutkowfsky to Rutland, and he lived for 45 years in Denver, Colo., and he died in, let’s say, the last 3 or 4 years, I don’t remember.
Mr.Hubert. Did the sister that you mentioned come to the United States?
Mrs.Grant. Oh, yes, sir.
Mr.Hubert. All three of the children?
Mrs.Grant. At different times they arrived.
Mr.Hubert. Came to the United States and settled in the United States; is that right?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Was there any communication between your mother and her sisters and brothers after they came here?
Mrs.Grant. Oh, yes.
Mr.Hubert. They were your aunts, in fact?
Mrs.Grant. Oh, we were very close when they were alive. Let me say there was a great family, but they were killed out in Europe.
Mr.Hubert. All of these people are dead now and have been for some time?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Now, turning to your father’s side of the family, what was your father’s name?
Mrs.Grant. His name was Joseph Rubenstein.
Mr.Hubert. Did he have any brothers and sisters?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; he had a brother that came over 2 years later. His name was Abraham.
Mr.Hubert. What happened to him?
Mrs.Grant. He died 7 years ago or 6 years ago.
Mr.Hubert. Did he live in the United States?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; he did, in Chicago.
Mr.Burleson. He had settled here too, then?
Mrs.Grant. Yes, he did.
Mr.Hubert. What was your father’s employment?
Mrs.Grant. He was a carpenter.
Mr.Hubert. Did he work for anyone as a regular proposition?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; he worked for the U.S. Government during World War I. Baltimore, Md.; he built barracks, he was a union member for 55 years.
Mr.Hubert. Did he belong to any other clubs?
Mrs.Grant. Yes—he came from a town called Sokovosolover, Poland.
Mr.Hubert. Do you know how to spell that?
Mrs.Grant. Oh, we could never get it right, it’s a case of “Sokovosolover”—we could never get it right, but there is a town there by that name and he was born in that town. Let me explain this—his people, country people, came to this country. From that particular stay, they formed this club. It was called Verein, and it was a social meeting or group where all the people from this little town and families would get together and there are still some in existence, believe it or not, and probably in Chicago and I have a cousin, my father’s nephew is still alive. His name is Abraham Rubenstein.
Mr.Hubert. And this was a club formed in Chicago by the people of this village who all came to the United States?
Mrs.Grant. Yes—that’s right, they did come at different times.
Mr.Hubert. It was a social and cultural get-together?
Mrs.Grant. It was a social meeting club, where all the people from this little town and their families could get together and there are still some in existence believe it or not. And I have a cousin—my father’s nephew is still alive. His name is Abraham Rubenstein by the way.
Mr.Hubert. And this was a club formed in Chicago by the people of this village who all wanted to enter into the United States?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right—they had come at different times.
Mr.Hubert. It was a social and a cultural proposition?
Mrs.Grant. It was a get-together to know they are alive and they have bought a cemetery where you can in duetime——
Mr.Hubert. Did you attend any of the meetings?
Mrs.Grant. Oh, yes.
Mr.Hubert. Was there anything political about them?
Mrs.Grant. No—I’m going to tell you.
Mr.Hubert. Well, just tell me.
Mrs.Grant. Honest to God, there wasn’t—they drank and they danced.
Mr.Hubert. But would you answer my question as to whether or not there was any political activity discussed—the answer is what—yes or no?
Mrs.Grant. You may write to the man—Abraham Rubenstein, he is still alive.
Mr.Hubert. I just want to know whether your impression and your attendance at the meetings of the club indicate to you whether this group at any time had any political implication whatsoever?
Mrs.Grant. No, no; not that I would know of.
Mr.Hubert. You never observed any? Of any kind?
Mrs.Grant. Never.
Mr.Hubert. Could you tell us something of Jack’s youth and education and his childhood—you were older than he was and therefore, you are able to observe it, I would think.
Mrs.Grant. I am 2 years older and how far back do you want to go—do you want me to go?
Mr.Hubert. What kind of education did he have?
Mrs.Grant. I think he went about a year and a half to high school.
Mr.Hubert. Were your parents separated?
Mrs.Grant. My parents were separated—yes.
Mr.Hubert. When did they separate?
Mrs.Grant. In the spring of 1921.
Mr.Hubert. That was when Jack was about 10 years old?
Mrs.Grant. Let’s see, if he was born in 1911—yes.
Mr.Hubert. Who did Jack and you live with—your father or your mother?
Mrs.Grant. Well, I went to live—my mother has—these people don’t live there any more, in Maywood, Ill., my mother’s niece—the daughter of this Sarah Moskowitz, Bertha Miller, I went to live with her for a while. Then my father took an apartment, such as it was and I went to live with him for a while, and—you want to know?
Mr.Hubert. What about Jack himself?
Mrs.Grant. Now, this is something that there is a haziness about it—two of my brothers were put on a farm with some people. It seems to me—I don’t know which two—went to Woodstock, Ill., and one went to a place called West Chicago or Chicago Heights and I have forgotten whether Jack was by himself and Earl and Sammy went to a place. Then later on it seemed to me Jack went to stay with a family, maybe a year later, called the Michelles—he admired them.
Mr.Hubert. Well, is it fair to state that apparently the family broke up; is that correct?
Mrs.Grant. Yes—well, my mother had a nervous breakdown. That was the first time, because of the dissension in the home because of my father’s activities of drinking.
Mr.Hubert. Is your father an alcoholic?
Mrs.Grant. Well, he lived until 89—how can we prove it—you know, we never knew if he was drunk or sober, but he drank plenty.
Mr.Hubert. When did he die?
Mrs.Grant. I would say in 1958 or 1959. I have just forgotten now, I’ll be honest about it.
Mr.Hubert. Do you recall whether Jack himself was involved in some sort of juvenile court proceedings?
Mrs.Grant. We all were. In the State of Illinois, when parents separated, I think there is such a thing as you are under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, because I went to court several times. I don’t think—I think I was probably 12 or 13 years old—I don’t know. I remember going to a very famous court and I can’t think of the judge’s name.
Mr.Hubert. Well, what I’m trying to get at isthis——
Mrs.Grant(interrupting). Not for being bad or anything.
Mr.Hubert. That’s exactly what I want to get at. In other words, these juvenile court proceedings resulted, you say, from the mere fact that you had a broken home and not from thefact——
Mrs.Grant(interrupting). The Jewish AidSociety——
Mr.Hubert. Just a minute, let me finish the question—this did not reflect that the juveniles involved, whether it was you orJack——
Mrs.Grant. Or anyone else.
Mr.Hubert. Or anyone else had been in any trouble such as we call today—juvenile delinquency; is that correct?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right.
Mr.Hubert. And your statement to me is that although you yourself have been in theseproceedings——
Mrs.Grant(interrupting). I have been in front of the judge.
Mr.Hubert. It has not been because of juvenile delinquency; is that correct?
Mrs.Grant. Well, there was abig——
Mr.Hubert. Just answer my question, I think you can answer my question.
Mrs.Grant. I have been there several times in front of a judge and my mother was there and the kids were there, and truthfully, it’s all so vague I can’t remember.
Mr.Hubert. Do you remember that in his youth Jack was called by the nickname “Sparky”?
Mrs.Grant. Oh, yes.
Mr.Hubert. Could you tell us how he acquired that name?
Mrs.Grant. Well, there was a horse called “Sparky” that was the slowest darn horse you ever saw and it was a joke, you know, in the funny papers, and they would rib him about him. Jack was short and fat and stocky. He wobbled when he walked, from the time I remember he was 5 years old, until the time he was 8, and it seemed shortly after that he acquired that name and that burned him up, and from then on he has become very fast with his fists and he started hitting fellows—well—the fellows who probably kept calling him “Sparky”, let’s say, but these were all little boys—8, 9, 11 or 10.
Mr.Hubert. And that’s how he got the name “Sparky”?
Mrs.Grant. As much as I remember.
Mr.Hubert. From two sources—from the horse named “Spark Plug” or the comic strip that had a horse named “Spark Plug” and from the fact that he, as a child, reacted quickly to taunts of his young friends?
Mrs.Grant. Well, he changed, but the name stuck with him still.
Mr.Hubert. Yes; I understand that, but we are just talking about how he acquired the name.
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. How would you describe the neighborhood in which you were raised, generally, and the conditions under which you were generally raised?
Mrs.Grant. Well, when you discuss people who come from the old country, that was the best neighborhood they could afford to live in. Two doors down were some very wealthy people—the Katzen family. My father was a carpenter and he worked—he tried to work all the time. There wasn’t work always available, but it was considered a poor neighborhood, but I’ll tell you—went with him four blocks away to look over other neighborhoods.
Mr.Hubert. Well, as you recall it now, would you classify it as a good neighborhood, or a bad neighborhood, or what? Because, you see, we are trying to get some background information here.
Mrs.Grant. Okay. We lived in a block where the houses have two-story buildings. In one block between the both sides I will say there was 150 children between the ages of 4 and 15, because these families have large groups and most of the families have 6 children or 8 and some of them had 12.
Mr.Hubert. You are familiar with the modern term “a slum neighborhood,” would you characterize it like that?
Mrs.Grant. Not really a slum because those who had more money next door lived better, but there were worse neighborhoods. I don’t know how much worse. I admit to you often we talked about it. I don’t say the middle class people lived there. It was below the middle class, but yet it wasn’t the poorest class.
Mr.Hubert. When did you marry, Mrs. Grant?
Mrs.Grant. I married March 30, 1930, to Hyman Magid in Chicago.
Mr.Hubert. And I think there was a child born of this marriage?
Mrs.Grant. Oh, yes; that’s Ronnie Magid.
Mr.Hubert. Now, that child is what age?
Mrs.Grant. He will be 33 next month.
Mr.Hubert. And you were divorced from Mr. Magid?
Mrs.Grant. Yes; I was.
Mr.Hubert. What year?
Mrs.Grant. I think it was 1934 in Chicago.
Mr.Hubert. What was Mr. Magid’s, your husband’s, occupation?
Mrs.Grant. Well, you really want to know—that’s a catchy question. He went into business with his father and his father owned a meat market, but that was later on. He really took up—he was a college graduate and he did electrical work, but he never worked at it. He didn’t adapt himself to it for some reason or other.
Mr.Hubert. What did he do for a living, then?
Mrs.Grant. As far as I know he was a butcher.
Mr.Hubert. No; I mean at that time.
Mrs.Grant. He went to school when I married him and after that he worked with his father.
Mr.Hubert. In a butcher shop?
Mrs.Grant. That’s right, it was during the depression.
Mr.Hubert. Where did you live during the time of your marriage?
Mrs.Grant. I lived with my mother-in-law on Kolin Avenue.
Mr.Hubert. In Chicago?
Mrs.Grant. Yes.
Mr.Hubert. Now, after your divorce, I think you went to the west coast, is that correct?
Mrs.Grant. Jack went there first.
Mr.Hubert. What year was that?
Mrs.Grant. I think it was in 1934 in January, I mean, it seems to me it was that year.
Mr.Hubert. You had been divorced?
Mrs.Grant. That’s when he went there. I didn’t go there until later.
Mr.Hubert. Jack went first?
Mrs.Grant. Yes, he did.
Mr.Hubert. And he must have been a man about 21 or 22 at that time?
Mrs.Grant. It could be.
Mr.Hubert. This was in 1934?
Mrs.Grant. Don’t hold me to 1934 or 1935. I’m so confused. I know it was either one of the years, and he went there right after the first of the year, and I followed 6 months later.
Mr.Hubert. Do you know why he went there?
Mrs.Grant. Yes, he went to work. There was no work in Chicago and there was boys out there that said there was jobs—that there was a lot of jobs available in San Francisco.
Mr.Hubert. Did you live with him when you went out?
Mrs.Grant. Oh, yes—yes, I did; we occupied an apartment.
Mr.Hubert. It was you and Jack and your son?
Mrs.Grant. My son—I put him in a private school and Jack helped me pay for him.
Mr.Hubert. What was Jack’s occupation on the west coast?
Mrs.Grant. He got a newspaper crew—sometimes he worked for the Call Bulletin, which is a famous Hearst paper, the Examiner, and sometimes he gave us the crew and he worked for the—there was a news—it was called the San Francisco News and sometimes we worked for the Chronicle. You see, there is asystem——
Mr.Hubert. Well, when you say you worked for them, in what capacity?
Mrs.Grant. We solicited for subscriptions door to door. It was during the height of the depression.
Mr.Hubert. This was sort of a door-to-door operation that you and he had, was it?
Mrs.Grant. Well, he was a better salesman. He was always guiding me, you know, let me put it this way—there was good money in it considering the times, because they were paying 90 cents an order and we would go out and get 8 or 10 or 15 orders a day, which you couldn’t get in any other job, and our obligations were great. My son’s expenses were $65 a month and my brother helped support half of the fellows that didn’t work—who wouldn’t do this.
Mr.Hubert. When you say your “brother” you mean Jack?
Mrs.Grant. I mean Jack—Jack was the only one out there.
Mr.Hubert. When did you leave California?
Mrs.Grant. Well, I married Frank Grant in San Francisco in 1936, and I think we stayed around another year or a year and a half.
Mr.Hubert. But did you still reside with Jack then after you married?
Mrs.Grant. For a while he did—yes, he did.
Mr.Hubert. He lived with you?
Mrs.Grant. We had a four-room apartment and my son was home then with us.
Mr.Hubert. Did Jack have any other occupations during the time you were on the west coast other than that which you have described?
Mrs.Grant. I don’t remember out there anything but for the newspapers, you know, and first he came to Los Angeles and he nearly starved to death. He became a singing waiter and someone told him—well, he said he was on his way to San Francisco but I think he didn’t have enough money or gas to get there—to San Francisco.
Mr.Hubert. Were you subsequently divorced from Frank Grant?
Mrs.Grant. Now—I’m divorced many years.
Mr.Hubert. Yes, ma’am; that’s what I wanted to get. When were you divorced?
Mrs.Grant. I think I filed in 1941.
Mr.Hubert. But you left the west coast about what—1937?
Mrs.Grant. No, I didn’t. I went down to Los Angeles with Frank Grant and I lived there. I may have went home on a trip to Chicago, which I did very often.