Evening star., 1946-07-23

charges, together with ''purported'
photostatic copies Of the correspond
ence and Of the s2,500 check, were
turned over to the committee coun-
sell.
This was in accordance with COM
mittee practice. he stated. He said
he instructed the counsel to report
as soon as possible to the full COM
mittee so that determine tion
might be made as to whether a full
scale investigation of the matter
would be conducted by the commit
tee"
That preliminary investigs ton Is
now in progress he said Il am
advised by the committee counsel
that the preliminary investigation
can be completed shortly"
Text Of AfYidavit.
The text of the afiidavit by Mr.
Anderson follows:
Il desire to make the following
public statement regarding the 81
500 check paid Paul A. Olson May
II, 1871.
First, I want TO state emphati-
cally that in none OF my converse
tions or discussions with Mr.. Olson
or Mr. Coffee was it ever agreed
or mentioned that l was to make
the payment as campaign con-
tribution.
The check was paid TO Mr.
Olson for services rendered and to
be rendered in connection with my
contract for building construction
at Fort Lewis. which contract was
for a lump sum and amounted tc
approximately 1000 900.
Il included this expenditure as
an item of expense under my con-
tract the same as / did with other
contract expenses And it was not
until October 10, 1914. at the time
Of the final audit by the Internal
Revenue Department OF my ex-
penditures in connection with this
contract. that I became aware that
the $500 paid to Paul Olson could
not be charged as a proper contrac,
expense.
"On that date the Internal Rev.
enue Department questioned anc
dissllowed the item on the ground.
that any payment to secretary OF
Congressman for representation
or services in connection with 8
Government contract was agains'
public policy and irregular and moi
allowable ss an expense item.
Circumstances Described.
Briefly, the facts surrounding
the payment of this money were a,
follows:
In April, l94l. 7 was low biddel
on a contract for building construc'
ton at Fort Lewis. I had definit.
reasons to believe that the consuruc.
ing quartermaster at Fort Lewis wa!
recommending that award of tn,
contract be made to a higher bidder
So l went to Washington by plan'
TO present the matter TO the boarc
of final awards.
In this connection contacted
John Coffee's ONCE and explained
to Paul Olson my reasons for being
in Washington. Mr.. Olson arranged
for me to have hearing before the
BOARD. On the day of the hearing
he was present with me. At tn,
conclusion OF the hearing I felt GER
tain that l would be awarded the
contract.
Il also felt that it was important
that l have some competent person
or agency in Washington to repre-
sent me during the performance oi
/ the contract in expediting matters
particularly in view of the fact that
the work under the contract was
required to be completed within
ninety days and delays in obtaining
prompt decisions, payments. etc.
would be serious handicap After
leaving the hearing I asked Mr.. Oh
son If he knew of any reliable
agency in Washington that handled
that kind of work and mentioned
that I had included an allowance ir
my bid for such representation.
! Mr.. Olson asked the amount
had included and I stated S2.5O0
He said that for $4,000 he and Johr
could do more for me than any pri.
vate agency.
| Agreed to Mail Check.
| Following this conversation Mr
Coffee, Mr.. Olson and myself hat
lunch in the Capitol Building
After lunch. at Mr.. Olson's sug
gestion. We stopped beneath tn
stairs in side corridor and a
that time Mr.. Coffee said to M
that he understood from Paul tina
was willing to pay Mr.. Olsol
s2,500 for their representing m
in connection with my contract.
"I at that time stated that