r. Cohn. Was that as a result of the meeting? Mr. Morgan. I got acquainted with the gentleman and over a period of time I met him from time to time. Mr. Cohn. How soon after your conference in connection with this tax case did this acquaintance come forward? Mr. Morgan. The conference was in April of 1949, I guess, the first one, and I guess I spoke at his church a year after, two years later. I don't remember exactly. Mr. Cohn. Did you see him between the April 1949 conference and the time you went to his church to talk? Mr. Morgan. I must have seen him, sure. Mr. Cohn. On how many occasions? Mr. Morgan. I don't know. Colonel Swearingen is very much interested, or was very much interested--he was with the Nuremberg trial, as I remember, and he was very much interested in a problem that I still regard as a great problem. I have a lot to say on that myself--unfortunately usually on the unpopular side, the subject of communism. On the basis of that we chatted quite a bit because he was interested in the subject, and we both knew a little about it, I think. Mr. Cohn. What do you mean he was on the unpopular side? Mr. Morgan. I said I was on the unpopular side. Mr. Cohn. You were on the unpopular side? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. When after this conference in connection with the tax case, did you next see Colonel Swearingen? Mr. Morgan. I couldn't answer your question. Mr. Cohn. Could you estimate for us, a week, two weeks, two months? Mr. Morgan. I would call him on the status of the matter periodically. Mr. Cohn. When did you first see him in connection with things other than this particular tax matter? Mr. Morgan. I would say that in so for as the personal contact with him is concerned, I recall none other than the time I met him at his church out at Connecticut Avenue and spoke to his Sunday School class. Mr. Cohn. That covers the time from when you first met him, up to the present day? Mr. Morgan. That is right, as far as I can remember. Counsel, I have had a pretty rough existence. I have been counsel to a pretty rough session on the Hill. I set up an organization of three thousand men in OPS. I have spoken all over the United States, I have met thousands of people. I can't remember specifically when I saw this individual or some other individual. To the best of my knowledge, that is the only time I have seen him. Mr. Cohn. The only time to, to the best of your knowledge, the only time you have seen him was at the church you went out to speak, that covers from the time you first met him? Mr. Morgan. That is a qualified answer. I might have bumped into him in the house or in front of the Justice Department. Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been to his home? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. He hasn't been to yours? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. Have you ever spoken any place else under arrangements made with him? Mr. Morgan. No; not to the best of my knowledge. I might have, though, I just don't remember. Mr. Cohn. You have no recollection? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. We have talked about this subpoena which as served upon you calling for the production of all records relating to any transactions between Mr. Duke and yourself, and you have told us that you have searched the files of your office and made compliance with the subpoena. Let me ask you: what is the usual routine in your law office when letters come in relating to pending matters? Mr. Morgan. I know what it is now. What it was in 1949 I certainly can't be sure of, or 1950, or any other time during the period we are talking about. I can tell you what our routine is at the present time. Mr. Cohn. Let us talk about 1949 and 1950. Mr. Morgan. I have no recollection. Mr. Cohn. Would you want to tell us whether or not you think correspondence and papers in connection with cases were retained? Mr. Morgan. I would certainly say that any correspondence relating to any official matter in the office was retained, certainly. Mr. Cohn. Would you customarily retain correspondence that you received at your office? Mr. Morgan. Normally, certainly; unless it was strictly a personal letter that had no business in the files of the office. Mr. Cohn. What would you do with those letters? Mr. Morgan. I might tear them up, take them home with me. I might do any number of things with them. I got a letter just this morning from a personal friend that has nothing to do with the office. Mr. Cohn. In complying with the subpoena, did you go through your personal correspondence? Mr. Morgan. I think I asked them to check my personal file, yes. Mr. Cohn. So, in other words, every source---- Mr. Morgan. We did the best we could. One girl worked all night long on this thing to comply with the ``forthwith'' feature of it. Mr. Cohn. Are there any letters that you received from Mr. Duke that you did not produce in response to the subpoena? Mr. Morgan. None that I know of, certainly. Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, may I have shown to the witness a letter dated September 5, 1949, addressed to Mr. Morgan, signed by Russell W. Duke. I will identify it for the record as a letter dated September 25, 1949, addressed to Welch, Mott and Morgan, 710 Erickson Building, 14th Street, Northwest, Washington, D.C., beginning: ``Dear Ed''--and with a typewritten signature ``Russell W. Duke.'' It is a three-page letter. Mr. Morgan. Do you want me to read this? Mr. Cohn. I would like you to just glance at it first and tell us whether or not you recognize that as a letter you received from Mr. Duke. Then having told us that, I would like you to read the letter from beginning to end. Mr. Morgan. Do you have a question? Mr. Cohn. Have you read that letter? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. Do you recognize that as a letter you received? Mr. Morgan. To the best of my knowledge, I never saw that before. Mr. Cohn. Can you tell us whether or not you received the original of that letter? Mr. Morgan. I certainly can say that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, I never saw that before. Mr. Cohn. You never saw that before? Mr. Morgan. Correct. To the best of my knowledge and belief, I never saw that before. I recall some of matter mentions in there, I mean this Bremen matter that he mentions, I remember that situation, but this letter right here and the facts relating in it do not click with me at all, and it is my considered opinion that I never saw it before. Mr. Cohn. It is your considered opinion that you never did see that letter before, is that right? Mr. Morgan. That is right. Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you: if you had received such a letter, would that have been in the files of your office? Mr. Morgan. Certainly. Senator Dirksen. The hearing will recess until two o'clock. [Whereupon at 11:50 a.m. a recess was taken until 2:00 p.m. the same day.] Afternoon Session [2:00 p.m.] Senator Dirksen. The hearing will resume, Mr. Cohn, you may proceed. Mr. Cohn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Morgan, is it still your testimony that you never received this letter which was shown to you just before the recess, referring to the one dated September 5, 1949. TESTIMONY OF EDWARD P. MORGAN (RESUMED) Mr. Morgan. My testimony is that to the best of my knowledge and belief I have never seen that letter before you showed it to me. Mr. Cohn. You read it. Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. I believe you said that the matters in it are familiar to you? Mr. Morgan. One of the matters is, particularly. Mr. Cohn. Are there any matters mentioned in here with which you have no familiarity? Mr. Morgan. May I see the letter again? Mr. Cohn. Of course. Mr. Morgan. Now, I certainly am familiar with this matter that he refers to as the Bremen matter. Mr. Cohn. What is the next one? Mr. Morgan. When I say I am familiar with it, I am not familiar with it in contemplation of what he says. Mr. Cohn. How about the top of the second page? Mr. Morgan. That to me is Greek. Mr. Cohn. Would you read it? Mr. Morgan [reading]: I have a lot of cases in California that I have to do a lot of bird-dogging on, and I hate like sin to go down there and bird-dog without clicking on a few. I wish that you would be able to secure some talent, as I could use some hay. I am letting things quiet down on the coast by lying dormant and putting more effort in lining up the coming campaign. I assure you that the request you made of me on the phone that Senator Morse will go along 100 per cent because the longer you get to know him, the more you will learn that he is a man of his word; but he has had so much to do, and, as I understand, he has been given assurance that you are No. 1 on the list. In all the time I have known Senator Morse, I have never known him to deviate or to say something that is not so. He either tells you in the beginning nothing doing, or he will go along. I am willing to gamble with you in any shape, form or manner that you will be in as soon as the other chap resigns. I sincerely hope that the cases that are back there clear up so that we can start on something else. Again I repeat, ``I can use the hay.'' Mr. Cohn. Regarding that paragraph, which contains a reference to a request you made to Mr. Duke over the telephone, what is that about? Mr. Morgan. I don't know. Mr. Cohn. Did you ever ask Senator Morse through Mr. Duke or anyone else to intercede in your behalf? Mr. Morgan. Through Mr. Duke? I have never asked of Senator Morse anything. If you want to know through my own personal acquaintance with Senator Morse, that is another question. If you would like me to answer that, I would be glad to. Mr. Cohn. Have you ever been together with Mr. Duke and Senator Morse? Mr. Morgan. It is possible. I recall no particular situation, but it is certainly possible, because I was up on the Hill and it could have happened, certainly. But I don't recall any specific incident. Mr. Cohn. Was Senator Morse ever in your office? Mr. Morgan. If he had been, I think I would remember it. I just don't remember it. Mr. Cohn. I assume that in view of this answer, your answer would be that you don't recall any occasion when you, Senator Morse and Mr. Duke, the three of you, were together in your office? Mr. Morgan. I have no recollection. It could have occurred, certainly, because I have a great admiration for Senator Morse. I have visited in his home. He certainly could have been in my office. I just don't remember the situation to which you refer, if it occurred. Mr. Cohn. What do you think this business of ``100 per cent behind you'' refers to? Mr. Morgan. As I say, counsel, I have no recollection of ever having seen this. If I had seen such a letter as this, I would have come to one of two conclusions. Either the man who wrote it was drunk and on goofballs, or he was demented. One or the other. I have no recollection of having seen this. It is just so much Greek to me. Mr. Cohn. Did Senator Morse ever attempt to obtain any kind of a position for you? Mr. Morgan. Senator Morse has to my deep appreciation endorsed me for positions, yes. Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss his endorsement of you with any position with Mr. Duke, or did Mr. Duke ever discuss it with you? Mr. Morgan. It is conceivable, yes. Mr. Cohn. Do you have any recollection? Mr. Morgan. I have no specific recollection. Mr. Cohn. You can't tell us whether any such discussion took place or didn't? Mr. Morgan. No. If you have any specific occasion, maybe it will refresh my recollection. I recall none. I took this man at face value. I talked freely with him. I talked with him before the atmosphere of suspicion of your neighbor occurred. I talked to him openly. I wrote to him frequently. I looked at the correspondence that is four or five years old, and I hope everybody's correspondence of four or five years ago will stand up as well. Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether or not Mr. Duke knew Senator Morse at that time? Mr. Morgan. I think perhaps he did. Mr. Cohn. You say you think perhaps he did. Do you know whether or not he did? Can't we get a categorical answer? Mr. Morgan. I am sure he knew Senator Morse. Mr. Cohn. Then your answer is yes? Mr. Morgan. Yes. But you ask me to make categorical assertions about what somebody else knew. I say I take for granted he knew him. I am sure. Mr. Cohn. That was my original question. Mr. Morgan. I don't think there was any question about that. Mr. Cohn. That is all we want to know. Do you recall any occasion when you, Senator Morse and Duke were together? Mr. Morgan. I remember no specific occasion, but we might have been. If you have in mind any situation you may ask me. Mr. Cohn. I will ask you any questions that occur to me, thank you. The word ``talent'' is used in this letter. Do you know what Mr. Duke was referring to by that word? Mr. Morgan. I certainly don't. I would say it is a screwball expression. I can say this certainly, that I recall one type of situation in which Mr. Duke was interested in my offering him some help and assistance. During this particular period I was in association with a very, very wealthy Texas oil man, and we were drilling some wells in north Louisiana, and Duke was always wanting to have some oil proposition that he might present to some of his friends out there. Now, if he had used such an expression to me, which I don't remember, that would certainly be the only thing to which I might attach such an expression. Mr. Cohn. You mean this oil deal? Mr. Morgan. No, he was wanting some oil situation that he might present to clients of his, and friends. Mr. Cohn. How do you tie the word ``talent'' up with an oil deal? Mr. Morgan. I say I can't explain it other than if such an expression ever were used in contemplation of his wanting something of me, that is the only time I ever remember that he asked me for anything, that is, in connection with the idea of some oil deal. Mr. Cohn. He asked you for your assistance or work as counsel in connection with various tax cases. Mr. Morgan. I have explained that completely. I am trying to talk to you now in terms of this expression here, which is meaningless to me. Mr. Cohn. Couldn't that refer to obtaining tax cases? Mr. Morgan. I suppose it could refer to anything. I never saw the letter to the best of my knowledge and belief. Mr. Cohn. What is there that makes you think it might refer to any oil deal? Mr. Morgan. Nothing at all. Mr. Cohn. That is just pure conjecture on your part? Mr. Morgan. Sure. Mr. Cohn. You brought up the oil deal. What was your connection? Do I understand you had an interest in oil wells? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. That was not a lawyer-client matter. Mr. Morgan. No, this was an investment matter. Mr. Cohn. Could you tell us who the partners were? Mr. Morgan. In the drilling venture? Mr. Cohn. Yes. Mr. Morgan. I would like to ask the chairman if that has any pertinence in this proceeding, that is, who my partners might have been in a business venture in the southwestern part of the United States in contemplation of this proceeding. The only reason I am reluctant to do it is that I am disinclined to throw the name out of somebody who has nothing to do with this. Senator Dirksen. Unless it were foundation for something that counsel might want to ask later that is pertinent to the objectives sought here, I doubt very much---- Mr. Morgan. I would be glad to tell you, if you would like to know, who it is, and then you can put it on the record if you wish. I am not trying to withhold anything, certainly. Senator Dirksen. It may not be relevant to the inquiry at this point. Mr. Cohn. May I ask this, Mr. Chairman. Would you tell us this: When did Mr. Duke first talk to you about participation in this oil deal or in any oil venture? Mr. Morgan. Every time he was in the office after I was in any way engaged in the business, he would bring it up. We have in our office a picture of a gusher coming in. It is well known. My friends here in the bureau know about it. Everybody knows I have been interested in oil. It is no secret. Mr. Cohn. Did he ever talk with any of your partners in any of these oil ventures or in this particular oil venture? Mr. Morgan. I would say no. Mr. Cohn. You are quite sure of that? Mr. Morgan. I know of none. Mr. Cohn. No communication, direct or indirect, with anyone associated in any of these oil ventures? Mr. Morgan. That is correct. I remember Mr. Duke had some information, so he thought, about possible oil production in the state of Oregon, and he indicated an area out there where he felt that some kind of work had been done to indicate the presence of oil. He communicated with me about it, either personally or by letter, and I wrote him a letter back concerning it. I think I have supplied you with a copy of the letter--I don't know--with respect to that matter. But insofar as communicating with any of my associates, I don't think any of them know him. I am sure they don't. Mr. Cohn. Did he know their names? Mr. Morgan. Possibly, very possibly. Mr. Cohn. You are familiar with those terms, about the psychological effect, on the last page of that letter, referring to the talent situation. Would you re-read that sentence, please? Mr. Morgan. On the last page? Mr. Cohn. The last page, I believe. Mr. Morgan. ``As you know,'' I am reading from page three of this letter: the talent is plentiful and it is a psychological effect when one comes in cold and tells a person what he knows about him. So I hope sincerely that you will be able to secure some talent for me. Mr. Cohn. Does that still sound like reference to participating in an oil deal? Mr. Morgan. Now, counsel, let us be fair about this proceeding. You asked me, as we went down this sentence here, this paragraph, what this meant. I told you that it was meaningless to me. In the context of your examination the idea was indicated as to what Mr. Duke might have at any time requested of me, and I tried to tell you honestly the only thing I can ever remember is that he requested an oil deal. Mr. Cohn. Your testimony was that it was conjecture that the word ``talent'' might refer to this oil deal. My question to you now is, having read this last paragraph, do you think the word ``talent'' had reference to an oil deal? Mr. Morgan. I don't think it does here. I don't assume it does back here. It is just meaningless to me. Mr. Cohn. Your testimony is that the last paragraph is meaningless to you? Mr. Morgan. Exactly. Mr. Cohn. Do you ever recall having used the word ``talent'' in any conversations with Mr. Duke? Mr. Morgan. It is an expression that I would not use. I just would have no recollection of it. I might have used the word ``talent'' certainly in a conversation, but in no significance as we might think of it here. Mr. Cohn. It was never given any secondary meaning by you or by Mr. Duke? Mr. Morgan. Correct, by me. I don't know what meanings Mr. Duke might put on anything. Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have any conversation with Mr. Duke in the course of which there was any arrangement concerning use of code words or secondary meanings or phrases to imply certain things that you did not say directly? Mr. Morgan. I never had any relationship involving the use of code words with Mr. Duke. Mr. Cohn. How about the rest of the question? Mr. Morgan. Repeat it. Mr. Cohn. Could we have the last question read, please? [Question read by the reporter.] Mr. Morgan. No, I would say there was no such arrangement. Mr. Cohn. Let me ask you this, Mr. Morgan. Did you ever have any interest in any way in any horses owned by Senator Morse? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. You did not? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. Did you know that Senator Morse owned any horses? Mr. Morgan. I knew that Senator Morse got kicked by a horse and broke his jaw, and I knew he was in an accident on the West Coast when he was riding in some rodeo or something. I never had any interest in any of Senator Morse's horses. Mr. Cohn. Now, Mr. Chairman, may I display to the witness a letter which I will identify for the record as a letter dated September 10, 1949, addressed to Mr. Ed Morgan, Welsh, Mott & Morgan, beginning, ``Dear Ed,'' a two page letter with the typed signature, ``R. W. Duke.'' Senator Dirksen. The letter, as identified, which was submitted for the record as Exhibit No. 1 yesterday, will be displayed to the witness. Mr. Cohn. Would you read it and tell us whether or not you can identify that as a letter you received? Mr. Morgan. I have no recollection of the letter. Mr. Cohn. You have no recollection of it? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. You can't tell us whether you received it or not? Mr. Morgan. No, I cannot tell you whether I did or did not. Mr. Cohn. If you had received that, would that have been in your files? Mr. Morgan. Normally it would appear in the files, yes. Mr. Cohn. And a search of your file has not disclosed the letter? Mr. Morgan. Unless it was among the letters that I presented to you; unless it is among the letters I presented pursuant to the subpoena. Mr. Cohn. It was in neither the prior letters nor these that you presented? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. You have read that letter and are familiar with the contents? Mr. Morgan. Yes, I have no recollection of that letter. I just don't recall it, that is all. Mr. Cohn. May I read the letter for the record? Senator Dirksen. The letter may be read. Mr. Cohn [reading]: Dear Ed: Since my conversation with you over the phone regarding what Senator Morse, yourself, and myself discussed in your office, I can only repeat as I stated in my previous letter, Senator Morse, his integrity, honesty, and sincerity is something to be highly admired and respected. At no time have I ever known him to make an idle promise. I shall see that you will be given assurance in person immediately after the 12th of this month complying with the request you made of me. Talent, Ed, is what I want. I am going to make my tour of the South (incidentally, Nevada and Idaho are good territory) and make one complete thrust to bring all the talent I possibly can to Washington. I understand there are 23 applications in Oregon for television. Can you confirm that? Well, Ed, oil lands in Oregon are going to surprise the nation. In delving through old records in the capitol recently, I ran across a survey and drilling tests that were made in a certain county by the Texas Oil Company, and their findings are so important that they will elicit from anyone who would go over them a thrilling surprise. At the time of the Teapot Dome scandal, Texas Oil Company, in conjunction with Sinclair Company, was contemplating stealing the leases for this particular area; sank seven wells, each of which were producing; wells; and each well was capped off as soon as Fall, Dohney and Daugherty were indicted, and it has been a dead duck ever since. People filed homesteads on this particular land and have since cut out the forests for lumber purposes and have abandoned these lands. They are available from the county for the price of delinquent taxes, which amount to about $200 per 160 acre sections. If you can get a company to drill on this established oil land, would you be interested in my writing you in as a full partner in owning these various sections. As I stated above, your cost would be negligible. Let me know at the earliest possible date, and I will exercise the auctions. How are the horses running? I refer to Sir Laurel Guy, the Oakland owned horse, and the Sacramento owned horse. With best personal regards, I remain, Sincerely yours, R. W. Duke. Referring to this paragraph, ``How are the horses running? I refer to Sir Laurel Guy, the Oakland owned horse, and the Sacramento owned horse,'' what does that paragraph mean to you? Mr. Morgan. As you read it to me now, I certainly do know what that meant. It would mean the Guy Schafer case and the Wilcoxon case. Wilcoxon was from Sacramento. Mr. Cohn. Was the Schafer case in Oakland? Mr. Morgan. Yes, he was from Oakland. Mr. Cohn. So, in other words, your explanation of this paragraph is that the reference is to these two cases. Mr. Morgan. Right. That is certainly what I would interpret that to mean, yes. Mr. Cohn. Was it a usual practice not to refer to these cases by their regular names, but to employ a device such as this? Mr. Morgan. Certainly in any correspondence I ever had I would utilize the name of the individual. Mr. Cohn. You have no recollection of another name or a code name or any such? Mr. Morgan. No. You asked me earlier if there were any code relationships, and I said no. Mr. Cohn. You feel if you would have received this letter you would have known what it would refer to? Mr. Morgan. I recognize it immediately, sure. Sure. Mr. Cohn. This would indicate, too, would it not, that you had received in inquiry, or that you had received this letter from Mr. Duke concerning the Schaeffer case? Mr. Morgan. Yes, certainly. I think I stated this morning that he inquired of me several times about the status of the matter. Mr. Cohn. I don't think so. I think your testimony was you had no recollection as to whether he had or not. Mr. Morgan. I had no specific recollection. This well might be one instance where he certainly did. Mr. Cohn. Do you have any recollection of any inquiry whatsoever by Mr. Duke to yourself concerning the Schafer case after the original meeting between Mr. Duke, Mr. Bobbitt and yourself? Mr. Morgan. I have no specific recollection concerning the matter. Mr. Cohn. I don't mean that you recall a specific date. I mean, do you recall any communication, oral or written, to you by Mr. Duke making any inquiry about that case following the first meeting? Mr. Morgan. I don't recall it, no, but this letter which you have in your hand, when you read that paragraph to me, had I received it, that is the construction that I would have given it. Mr. Cohn. Now, going back to the very beginning of the letter, ``Since my conversation with you over the phone regarding what Senator Morse, yourself and myself discussed in your office,'' does that refresh your recollection as to whether or not there was a meeting between Senator Morse, Mr. Duke and yourself in your office? Mr. Morgan. I don't recall it. I don't recall the meeting. It might well have occurred. Mr. Cohn. You can't say whether or not a meeting occurred? Mr. Morgan. I have no specific recollection. That does not refresh my memory. Mr. Cohn. I think you told us before if Senator Morse had been in your office, you would probably remember. Mr. Morgan. I think so, yes. Mr. Cohn. And you have no recollection? Mr. Morgan. No specific recollection. I would be willing to concede that Senator Morse had been in my office forty times, and I had talked with him and Mr. Duke in my office forty times if it were regarded as pertinent to this committee. I just have no recollection on the matter. Mr. Cohn. Now, do you know what request that you had made concerning which Senator Morse was asked to intercede is being referred to in this letter from Mr. Duke to yourself? Mr. Morgan. No. It does not strike a chord in my mind. What is the date of the letter again? Mr. Cohn. Dated September 10, 1949. Is there any position you were seeking at that time? Mr. Morgan. September 10, 1949? Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. Mr. Morgan. I recall none at the moment. I might well have been. The only thing I am trying to think of in my mind there was one position in which I was very much interested, and I can't think of it in terms of that particular date, and that is the Federal Communications Commission. I was interested in the commission. Mr. Cohn. In an appointment to the Federal Communications Commission? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss your proposed appointment with Mr. Duke? Mr. Morgan. I might very well have. Mr. Cohn. Do you have any recollection of ever having discussed it with him? Mr. Morgan. No, I have no specific recollection. Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss it with Senator Morse? Mr. Morgan. I think he wrote a letter of endorsement for me, as I remember. Mr. Cohn. Did Mr. Duke have anything to do with that? Mr. Morgan. I would say in all probability I had communicated directly with Senator Morse on the matter. Mr. Cohn. You have no recollection of having discussed it together with Senator Morse and Mr. Duke, is that correct? Mr. Morgan. It could have happened. I just have no recollection on the matter. Mr. Cohn. Now, this morning you were telling us a tax case involving Dr. Lee, is that correct? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. I believe your testimony was that Mr. Duke was sort of acting as Dr. Lee's agent, and that he brought Dr. Lee into your office in Washington, is that right? Mr. Morgan. That is correct. Mr. Cohn. Did you know that they were coming down? Mr. Morgan. Yes. He called and asked me if I would try to help Dr. Lee in connection with his problem. I wrote back and suggested that they send me additional information in order that I might determine what might be done in the situation. I don't think I was ever supplied that information. He and Dr. Lee came on to Washington. There is no question that I know of Dr. Lee's case, yes. Mr. Cohn. Then your testimony was that you took Mr. Duke and Dr. Lee over to the Bureau of Internal Revenue and first went to the technical section. Mr. Morgan. As I remember, we went to the technical staff. Mr. Cohn. And then to the comptroller's office? Mr. Morgan. No, the collector's office. Mr. Cohn.  Mr. Morgan. With the Washington office? Mr. Cohn. Yes, with reference to Dr. Lee's case. Mr. Morgan. Certainly not the last communication--official communication--concerning the case. Mr. Cohn. With the Washington office? Mr. Morgan. Oh, no. I would want to check my file to find out what correspondence I had officially relating to the case. There well might have been correspondence. I think particularly one instance in which I think the man I talked to over at the Bureau of Internal Revenue was Mr. Krag Reddish, in connection with the matter. As to correspondence with the bureau, no, I never made any statement that I had not corresponded with them on the case, certainly not, because I did correspond with the bureau. I proceeded to file a formal tax court petition in the case. I tried to get an early conference arrangement. The man had a jeopardy assessment that he wanted to get lifted if he possibly could. Mr. Cohn. That is the case in which you said you had this original conference in Washington, you were advised to file the petition, and the petition was filed out west, and the case was compromised out there is that correct? Mr. Morgan. No. The case was forwarded here to me for approval of the compromise. Mr. Cohn. But it was compromised out west, and the compromise was then forwarded to you, is that right? Mr. Morgan. I would want to check my file to be absolutely correct on it. I assume it would have been as a matter of procedure. I don't think those compromises have to be passed on back here in Washington. But I can't be sure of that and my file would show the facts. Mr. Cohn. Did you make any visit to the Bureau of Internal Revenue in connection with the Dr. Lee tax case other than your original visit with Mr. Duke and Dr. Lee? Mr. Morgan. I don't recall one, but it would have been proper to do so. Mr. Cohn. When did you see Mr. Reddish first? Mr. Morgan. The first time Dr. Lee was here. We talked to the bureau. Mr. Cohn. Didn't you say this morning you couldn't recall with whom you conferred? Mr. Morgan. You mean by name? Mr. Cohn. Yes. Mr. Morgan. I don't recall I said I could not recall with whom I conferred. If I did say it, I do recall. Mr. Cohn. I was quite sure that the record will show that I asked you specifically with whom you conferred in each division, first in technical and then the collector's office, and your answer was you could not recall. As a matter of fact, I think you were asked by one of the members of the committee who the collector was then, and you didn't recall. Mr. Morgan. On the collector, I certainly don't recall. Mr. Cohn. Let me finish the question, please. And then you commented in any event, you didn't talk to the collector, it was probably one of the deputies you talked with, and you could not recall the name. I am quite sure the record will indicate that you specifically stated you did not recall the names of the persons with whom you conferred in the technical section or the collector's office. Mr. Morgan. If that is the testimony, it is certainly subject to correction. Mr. Cohn. Do you wish to correct that testimony? Mr. Morgan. I certainly do. In the case of Mr. Reddish, if that is pertinent or material, as to who it might have been, I might check my file and recall who the other individual was. As I indicated to you, as I remember in this situation, we walked over there cold on the situation to talk to them. There were two logical places to discuss the case. One was the technical staff for an early conference, and the other was the collector's office. Mr. Cohn. Do you recall with whom you conferred at the technical staff? Do you recall that this afternoon? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. With whom? Mr. Morgan. Mr. Reddish. Mr. Cohn. He was in the technical staff? Mr. Morgan. That is right. Mr. Cohn. Had you known him before the conference on that date? Mr. Morgan. I might have. Mr. Cohn. You don't recall whether you did or did not? Mr. Morgan. I might tell you why I might have known him, because we were both members of the Missouri Society. Mr. Cohn. You have no specific recollection? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. Have you ever seen him since that date? Mr. Morgan. Personally I believe not. I don't think I have ever seen him since that time. Mr. Cohn. With whom did you confer in the collector's office? Mr. Morgan. Now I don't know. Mr. Cohn. You are quite sure you don't recall? Mr. Morgan. That is what I think your question related to this morning. If it related to both of them, then I would have to certainly amend my testimony to say Krag Reddish, because that name I do know. Mr. Cohn. Your testimony now is that except for this one personal conference to which you were accompanied by Mr. Duke and the taxpayer, you never again went to the Bureau of Internal Revenue in Washington in connection with the Dr. Lee case? Mr. Morgan. I have no recollection of it, but had I done so, it would be perfectly normal and natural to do so. But I have no recollection of ever having done so. Mr. Cohn. The petition was filed out west. Was any further action by the Bureau of Internal Revenue in Washington necessary? Mr. Morgan. In connection with the case? Mr. Cohn. Yes. Mr. Morgan. As I say, I don't know whether a settlement of that kind would have to be passed on by the bureau back in Washington. Mr. Cohn. Do you know whether it was passed on by the bureau in Washington in that particular case? Mr. Morgan. Not without referring to my file. Mr. Cohn. This is the case where the government claimed the jeopardy assessment was for $100,000, and the settlement was $6,000? Mr. Morgan. It was over $100,000. Mr. Cohn. Can you give us the figure? Mr. Morgan. I don't remember the exact amount. There were a lot of penalties, including fraud penalty of 50 percent. Mr. Cohn. Would you say $140,000 might be accurate? Mr. Morgan. It could have been. Mr. Cohn. Now, following your meeting with the Bureau of Internal Revenue in Washington before the case was finally compromised, do you know whether or not Senator Morse contacted the Bureau of Internal Revenue with reference to this case? Mr. Morgan. He may have. I have no recollection of his having done so. He may very well have done so. Mr. Cohn. You have no recollection? Mr. Morgan. No. Mr. Cohn. Did you ever discuss with Mr. Duke or he with you the fact that Senator Morse was being asked to communicate with the Bureau of Internal Revenue? Mr. Morgan. I have no recollection on the point. Perhaps so. I do remember in the Lee case that after the case had been compromised, he was extremely anxious to get the assessment lifted. As you know, the settlement would be in the technical staff, and the lifting of the assessment would be, I believe, with the collector. After it was compromised, there was still the problem of getting the jeopardy assessment lifted. I think he was interested in that. I had no part in that, as I remember. Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, may I at this point identify and place in the record a telegram that has been produced here pursuant to subpoena. It is a telegram dated September 8, 1950. It is addressed to Russell Duke, 4523 Northeast Alameda. It is signed Wayne Morse, USS. If I may, I would read the first sentence. Senator Dirksen. Has this been submitted for the record before? Mr. Cohn. This has not. Senator Dirksen. The telegram will be identified for the record, and in its entirety will be inserted in the record, and counsel is privileged to read from it. [The telegram referred to was marked as committee's Exhibit No. 4, Edward P. Morgan, January 16, 1953, and is as follows:] PRA232 Govt PD-SN Washington DC 8 425P 1950 September 8 Russell Duke, 4523 Northeast Alameda PTLD Have been in touch with Internal Revenue with reference to Dr. Lee's tax case and just today the case was sent in from the local office. I hope to have a definite report for you on Monday concerning it. S 3357 passed the House August 28 and is now on the Senate table awaiting action on House amendments. S 3358 is on the Senate calendar. Regards, Wayne Morse, USS Senator Dirksen. Has the witness seen this telegram? Mr. Cohn. No, I don't think so. Senator Dirksen. I think he should, first of all, for refreshment. Mr. Morgan. I have seen it. Mr. Cohn. I might ask you first of all, does that telegram refresh your recollection as to whether or not Senator Morse did communicate with the Bureau of Internal Revenue in connection with the Lee tax case? Mr. Morgan. That telegram would not refresh my recollection, certainly. Senator Morse may well have communicated with the Bureau of Internal Revenue concerning the lifting of the jeopardy assessment. If he did so, I certainly did not ask him to do so. Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, the sentence I wish to read into the record---- Senator Dirksen. I think it is well to read the entire exhibit, including all the code items. Mr. Cohn [reading]: PRA232 Govt Pd--SN Washington, D.C. 8 425P Russell Duke, 4523 Northeast Alameda PTLD. Have been in touch with Internal Revenue with reference to Dr. Lee's tax case and just today the case was sent in from the local office. I hope to have a definite report for you on Monday concerning it. S 3357 passed the House August 28 and is now on the Senate table awaiting action on House amendments. S 3358 is on the Senate Calendar. Regards. Wayne Morse USS. And your testimony is, Mr. Morgan, that on hearing that, it does not in any way refresh your recollection as to whether or not Senator Morse was in touch with the BIR? Mr. Morgan. That telegram does not refresh my memory, no. He may well have been. I just have no recollection on it. I do recall the general situation, that Dr. Lee was anxious to have the assessment lifted after this compromise. Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, may I identify for the record a document produced here pursuant to subpoena, dated August 29, 1950, on the stationery of R. W. Duke, Portland 13, Oregon, addressed to ``Dear Ed,'' and may I display it to the witness? Senator Dirksen. It will be identified for the record at this point. [The letter referred to was marked as committee's Exhibit No. 5, Edward P. Morgan, January 16, 1953, and is as follows]: August 29, 1950. Dear Ed: As per our telephone conversation I am sending you this letter explaining the entire arrangement made between Dr. Lee, and myself. I did give Dr. Lee, a letter agreeing that he was to pay you a certain sum and that I would then pay you the difference out of my own pocket, however after writing the agreement I pointed out to Dr. Lee, that it was unfair as I did not profit from the deal under the arrangements because my cost on his case amounted to better than the amount he was paying me. The final agreement was that Dr. Lee, would pay you the full four thousand dollars. I feel confident that Dr. Lee, does and will keep his word. The only reason that you are not paid is one, he has desperately tried to raise the money from various sources, and due to the jeopardy assessment against him it is difficult for people to conceive that he could pay them back. As you know Senator Morse's office has taken the matter up and I in turn called Mr. Earle, collector of Portland, and told him exactly what has taken place up until now and he in turn promised that he would see about the release and let me know Monday. I do know that Dr. Lee, will upon being released will immediately send you the money. Ed, I do have faith in the Dr. for various reasons which I will explain to you via phone. I still have a report that the doctor wants me to furnish him and until I render the report the case is not completed. So please bear with him and I will try to force the release thru the local collector. As soon as the boy is better I will be in Washington, D.C. as there is a lot of which I have to do as soon as I get there. I am getting inquiries regarding representation for various type of representation for firms here in the Northwest. With best personal regards, I remain, Sincerely. Mr. Morgan. Yes, I recognize this letter. Mr. Cohn. You do recognize it? Mr. Morgan. This is one of the letters, I believe, that I produced pursuant to your subpoena. Is that correct? Mr. Cohn. We will check that. Mr. Morgan. I would like the record to indicate that certainly. Mr. Cohn. I said we will check that. Mr. Morgan. Fine. Mr. Cohn. You recognize that letter as a letter you received from Mr. Duke, is that right? Mr. Morgan. I remember the letter, yes. Mr. Cohn. May I read the letter into the record? Senator Dirksen. Yes, in its entirety. Mr. Cohn. May the record indicate that this letter was produced by Mr. Morgan? Mr. Morgan. I don't wish to be over-technical, but I wish you would indicate it is a carbon copy of the letter. Senator Dirksen. To make sure that the record is correct, this letter was procured under subpoena, and is identified as carbon copy, unsigned, but on stationery allegedly of R. W. Duke, Portland 13, Oregon, and the letterhead, instead of appearing at the top of the letter, appears on the left-hand side. Mr. Cohn. May I read the letter? Senator Dirksen. The letter may be read. Mr. Cohn [reading]: August 29th, 1950. Dear Ed: As per our telephone conversation I am sending you this letter explaining the entire arrangement made between Dr. Lee, and myself: I did give Dr. Lee a letter agreeing that he was to pay you a certain sum and that I would then pay you the difference out of my own pocket, however after writing the agreement I pointed out to Dr. Lee that it was unfair as I did not profit from the deal under the arrangements because my cost on his case amounted to better than the amount he was paying me. The final agreement was that Dr. Lee would pay you the full four thousand dollars. I feel confident that Dr. Lee does and will keep his word. The only reason that you are not paid is one, he has desperately tried to raise the money from various sources, and due to the jeopardy assessment against him it is difficult for people to conceive that he could pay them back. As you know Senator Morse's office has taken the matter up and I in turn called Mr. Earle, collector of Portland, and told him exactly what has taken place up until now and he in turn promised that he would see about the release and let me know Monday. I do know that Dr. Lee will upon being released will immediately send you the money. Ed, I do have faith in the doctor for various reasons which I will explain to you via phone. I still have a report that the doctor wants me to furnish him and until I render the report the case is not completed. So please bear with him and I will try to force the release through the local collector. As soon as the boy is better I will be in Washington, D.C., as there is a lot of work which I have to do as soon as I get there. I am getting inquiries regarding representation for various types of representation for firms here in the Northwest. With best personal regards, I remain, Sincerely. This copy is unsigned. Now, does this letter refresh your recollection as to whether or not Senator Morse was in touch with the BIR? Mr. Morgan. It does not refresh my recollection. I had no knowledge--personal knowledge--that Senator Morse had been in touch with the BIR. The letter here that Duke has, a copy of which I produced for this committee, indicates that that is the case. Mr. Cohn. And that you were so advised? Mr. Morgan. Beg pardon? Mr. Cohn. And that you were so advised. Mr. Morgan. It says, ``As you know,'' meaning as I would know. Mr. Cohn. Meaning as you, Mr. Morgan, would know, that Senator Morse has been in touch, and so on. Mr. Morgan. I have no recollection of Senator Morse having done so. He may have done so. I assume it would be perfectly proper for him to do so, but I have no independent recollection on the matter. Mr. Cohn. Did you know that Mr. Duke was to be compensated in connection with the Lee tax case? Mr. Morgan. The sequence of events on that, if I may be permitted to explain it, were these. Dr. Lee and Mr. Duke came to my office. I had no real thought, necessarily, at that juncture of formally representing Mr. Lee. I was merely trying to help in connection with these two little visits over at the BIR and no suggestion was made of a possible fee at that point. When we got back to my office, and Dr. Lee realized that there was no possibility of getting a jeopardy assessment lifted, and it was explained to him what was involved insofar as legal steps were concerned, he asked me if I would undertake to represent him in connection with the case, and I told him that I would. The fee decided upon was $4,000 in a contingent fee arrangement. The contingency, as earlier indicated, was lifting the assessment so he could pay the fee. After the case was finally disposed of, I communicated with Dr. Lee, as I remember, for my fee, and at that particular point to the matter Dr. Lee pointed out that I would have to look to Mr. Duke for my money. At that point I think I probably called Duke and I think I was probably incensed at the time. I think this letter that you have read is his reply to that. Now, Dr. Lee wrote me a letter, which I have, after he appeared before the King committee in San Francisco. I appreciated it. The letter said, ``Since you were my attorney in this case, I felt I should tell you my testimony before the King committee.'' In his letter he indicates his recollection that I knew at the time of the original visit about his arrangement with Russell Duke. The doctor is honestly mistaken concerning the matter. But, gentlemen, for your purposes, if a man came to my office, being legitimate, as I thought he was, and being the agent of Dr. Lee, as I thought he was, I would be willing to concede the point. But I think the correspondence will indicate my knowledge on the matter was after the original meeting. I just feel that it would be ridiculous for me to undertake to go to the West Coast and handle a case for $4,000 on a contingent basis had I known that this fellow had received eight or nine thousand dollars in the matter. It just does not make any sense to me. I think that the whole sequence of events bear that out. But I would concede the point. So what? I thought he was a bona fide agent of the doctor. It was one of the first matters he ever came to the office with. Mr. Cohn. Now, I think you told us you had no financial transactions with Mr. Duke, except for the $500 loan you made to him, is that right? Mr. Morgan. The $500 loan was made out of our firm account, yes, with the approval of my partners. Mr. Cohn. That appears on the books of your firm? Mr. Morgan. I think I gave you the original entry at the time I produced the papers pursuant to your subpoena. Mr. Cohn. And with that exception you have had no financial transactions with Mr. Duke, is that right? Mr. Morgan. To the best of my knowledge and belief, I have not. Mr. Cohn. Did you ever split any fee with Mr. Duke? Mr. Morgan. That I can state categorically no. Mr. Cohn. Did you ever have any discussion with Mr. Duke concerning the possibility of splitting a fee with him? Mr. Morgan. No. On that score I desire to be very positive because I naturally assumed that you are building up to something of this kind in your interrogation. In the entire relationship that I might have had with Russell Duke certain things were definitely and clearly understood. Number one, that my relationship was always directly with the client or with the client's lawyer. Additionally, that as a lawyer the ethics of my profession precluded the splitting of fees, and I am now stating to you categorically that I never split any fee at any time with Russell W. Duke. Mr. Cohn. And that you never had any discussion about the possibility of splitting one? Mr. Morgan. Russell Duke at one time may or may not have indicated an interest in having something from some of these cases, but I am telling you that in any relationship that point was, certainly made very clear. I have never--I don't need to make a self-serving statement like that--in my profession split a fee. Certainly not. Mr. Cohn. You say he might have suggested it one time. Do you specifically recall it? Mr. Morgan. No, I don't. I do recall having made certain things clear to him, and I assume that the only reason I would have done that is by reason of his inferring or implying that, I don't know. Mr. Cohn. Did you have any connection with Mr. Duke concerning any claims case? Mr. Morgan. It is possible. There are in my mind one, two or three situations. This fellow was calling me all the time. Check your telephone logs, gentlemen. He would call me morning, noon and night. I was not so sophisticated in the practice or so busy that I did not listen to him. I did. He was one of those individuals who had a thousand things on the fire. If there are any particular ones you want to ask me about, I will try to remember. Mr. Cohn. You are saying you don't offhand recall any? Mr. Morgan. Offhand, I don't. Mr. Cohn. How about the claims cases involving Herman Lawson and Company and James A. Nelson? Mr. Morgan. The Herman Lawson situation, if I remember it correctly, that is something that Duke discussed with me about a bill, I think. This is subject to correction. I think the relief bill in the case had been introduced in the House and Senate before I met the fellow. That is subject to correction. I just don't remember. I do know that he had said that he represented these people. I think they were California people, as I remember, who built a post office or something down there, and by reason of some difficulties in connection with the contract, they were entitled to some type of relief in the opinion of those that were making the claim. They apparently had engaged Mr. Duke to prosecute their claim on their behalf and to represent them in that connection, and I think a bill had been introduced for such relief. I recall his discussing that with me, yes. Mr. Cohn. By whom had it been introduced? Mr. Morgan. As I remember, I think Senator Morse introduced the bill. I think that antedated or predated my acquaintance with Duke. I can't be sure. I know I had nothing to do with any conversations prior to the introduction of the bill. Mr. Cohn. Now, how about the James A. Nelson claim case? Mr. Morgan. That does not strike a bell in my mind. It may be a part and parcel of the Lawson case, I don't know. It just doesn't strike any bell at all. Mr. Morgan. With reference to the Lawson case, was there ever any discussion between Mr. Duke and yourself concerning a fee to compensate for both of them? Mr. Morgan. No, I know exactly the story on that particular case, because I had really little or nothing to do with it until late in September of 1950, as I remember, and that is subject to correction. Duke called one time from the West Coast and said he was flat broke and could not come back here to confer on it. He said he had been talking, I think, to Senator Morse's administrative assistant about the matter, and he was hoping at that time to get the matter revived, because he felt that there was merit in the case. I think he wrote a letter, possibly in connection with it. I can't be specific about that. He asked me to run a check on it. I made one check in connection with the case, and I think I wrote him a letter, and that is as far as I remember any specifics on the matter. Mr. Cohn. Did you produce that letter here for us that you wrote? Mr. Morgan. I don't know. I don't have the copies of the correspondence that I made available to you. Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, may I identify for the record a letter dated September 8, 1950, on the same stationery of R. W. Duke, Portland 13, Oregon, with the name and address printed in the margin, addressed to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, Welch, Mott & Morgan, Erickson Building, Washington, D.C., and signed with the signature that purports to be Russell W. Duke. Having identified that, may I display it to the witness? Senator Dirksen. It may be so done. May I say that this letter at this point will appear in its entirety in the record. [The letter referred to was marked as committee's Exhibit No. 6, Edward P. Morgan, January 16, 1953, and is as follows:] September 8, 1950. Mr. Edward P. Morgan, Welch, Mott & Morgan, Erickson Building, 710 Fourteenth Northwest, Washington, DC. Dear Ed: Attached is a letter which I received from Herman Lawson and Company. It is self-explanatory. Unquestionably, other claimants have sent me letters addressed to the Continental hotel giving me like authorization. As you know I have worked on this case for over 3 years and up to date I have received approximately $4,000 from Herman Lawson & Company and $500 or $1000 from James A. Nelson. The total of the claim due me would be $18,000. The majority of moneys which I have received, in fact all the moneys which I have received, has been used in travel and expense pushing this bill through. If you care to file this case under the Tucker Act, attached you will find that portion of the Tucker Act under which this case can be won. I am due to arrive in Washington some time next week at which time I sincerely hope you will be in Washington so that we can get together on this and other matters. Regarding the balance of the fee due on this particular claims case, I am sure that whatever you decide on the fee will be satisfactory to me. I have been given assurance that under this Tucker Act we can definitely win the case. Did Doctor Lee send you the total of $4,000? If not, please let me know immediately as I will see that you get every dime of it. As I had stated in my previous letter to you this case is not finished until Dr. Lee gets a report. With best respects, I remain, Sincerely, R.W. Duke. P.S., Have you heard from the Johnson Committee? If you haven't, I am sure you will. Mr. Morgan. May I make an inquiry as to whether this is one of the letters I produced pursuant to your subpoena? Mr. Cohn. Yes. Senator Dirksen. Let the record show that this letter was produced under subpoena. Mr. Cohn. I might state for the record, Mr. Chairman, if I may, that this is a photostat of the original. Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir, I have read it. Mr. Cohn. Would you read that letter for the record? Mr. Morgan. Yes. It is dated September 8, 1950, addressed to Mr. Edward P. Morgan, Welch, Mott & Morgan, Erickson Building, 710 Fourteenth N.W., Washington, D.C. [reading]: Dear Ed: Attached is a letter which I received from Herman Lawson and Company. It is self-explanatory. Unquestionably other claimants have sent me letters addressed to the Continental hotel giving me like authorization. As you know I have worked on this case for over 3 years and up to date I have received approximately $4,000 from Herman Lawson & Company and $500 or $1000 from James A. Nelson. The total of the claim due me would be $18,000. The majority of moneys which I have received, in fact all the moneys which I have received, has been used in travel and expense pushing this bill through. If you care to file this case under the Tucker Act, attached you will find that portion of the Tucker Act under which this case can be won. I am due to arrive in Washington some time next week at which time I sincerely hope you will be in Washington so that we can get together on this and other matters. Regarding the balance of the fee due on this particular claims case, I am sure that whatever you decide on the fee will be satisfactory to me. I have been given assurance that under this Tucker Act we can definitely win the case. Did Doctor Lee send you the total of $4,000? If not, please let me know immediately as I will see that you get every dime of it. As I had stated in my previous letter to you this case is not finished until Dr. Lee gets a report. With best respects, I remain, Sincerely, R.W. Duke. It has a P.S., ``Have you heard from the Johnson Committee? If you haven't, I am sure you will.'' Mr. Cohn. With reference to the sentence, ``Regarding the balance of the fee due on this particular claims case, I am sure that whatever you decide on the fee will be satisfactory to me,'' what was Mr. Duke's interest in the fee? Mr. Morgan. In this particular case? Mr. Cohn. Yes. Mr. Morgan. This is just about the substance of the case insofar as I know, and the correspondence which was attached to it, which I would assume was returned to him. Mr. Cohn. Pardon me? Mr. Morgan. I would assume any correspondence attached here was returned to him. Mr. Cohn. What interest did Mr. Duke have in a possible fee in this case? It says, ``I am sure whatever you decide on the fee will be satisfactory to me.'' Mr. Morgan. He is presenting a situation here in which he had an arrangement with the Herman Lawson Company going back three years, and he is presenting it to me at this late date for consideration. In other words, he is saying to me at that point whatever fee you care to set for your services would be satisfactory. Mr. Cohn. To Duke? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. What concern was it of Duke's? Mr. Morgan. Insofar as his representation of these people might be concerned, if he was formally the agent of these people, and formally represented them and there were a fee forthcoming--the point is I never claimed any fee in this latter. Mr. Cohn. Doesn't this envision the possibility that there will be a fee which must be satisfactory to both you and Mr. Duke, and I would assume from that a fee in which both you and Mr. Duke would participate? Mr. Morgan. I am sure if I undertook to represent the Herman Lawson Company in any extended matter apart from a simple inquiry which I make every day for friends all over the country, with no thought of remuneration, if I do so, I would want a fee arrangement. I am in the law practice and I am not in it for my health. This is Duke's letter. This is not my letter concerning the matter. You are asking me what I might construe from what Mr. Duke might say. I am telling you that upon the formal undertaking of representation of Herman Lawson Company in a matter of this kind, I would want a fee arrangement with the Herman Lawson Company certainly. Mr. Cohn. Doesn't this one sentence, ``I am sure whatever you decide on the fee will be satisfactory to me'' refresh your recollection to the point that there was at least one instance in which Mr. Duke was interested in splitting a fee? Mr. Morgan. Mr. Duke may have been interested, counsel, in splitting the fee. Mr. Cohn. That is my question. Mr. Morgan. It doesn't mean that to me necessarily. Mr. Cohn. It does not mean that? Mr. Morgan. That is right. If I were to take some of the things that Mr. Duke might have in his letters and presume to have to pass judgment on everything he might say about what he intended in contemplation of what I might consider in the matter, that would be rather ridiculous and I couldn't do it. What this letter means to me is simply this, that he has a case that he got back in 1948 before I ever knew the gentleman, and he is at this late date trying to see if something can be done about it, and he is asking my opinion about it, and he is saying in effect whatever fee in the situation would appeal to you would be satisfactory to me. But that has nothing to do with me, gentlemen. Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, may I ask one question that I am not quite clear about? Is that the case in which he had received approximately $4,000 up to date, which he claimed had been consumed in expenditures? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Senator McClellan. And that he had anticipated an arrangement for a fee of about $18,000? Mr. Morgan. Yes, that is right. Senator McClellan. Hearing it read, it carries with it the implication possibly that you were to charge him a fee out of his $18,000. Was there any consideration in that regard, that you were to get your fee from him, since he was their agent, and already had a contract with them? Mr. Morgan. I would certainly agree with you. Senator McClellan. I am just asking. I do not know. Mr. Morgan. On that point. I mean from his letter you might make such a connotation and such a construction. The significant point is this, that I never represented the Herman Lawson Company in contemplation of formal legal representation. He had called me, as I remember, prior to this letter and said that he was broke, couldn't get back here, and that he had phoned, I think, Senator Morse's administrative assistant, as I remember, because my memory was refreshed in connection with that. I looked it over, I decided in my own mind it was a dead duck and to make a long story short, I never represented the Herman Lawson Company. So insofar as any fee arrangement might be concerned insofar as I might be concerned, there was no fee arrangement. Senator McClellan. It seems here he had a contract with them as their representative. Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir. Senator McClellan. Whereby he expected to earn a total of $18,000. Mr. Morgan. Yes. Senator McClellan. If the agreement was carried out between him and those clients that he was representing. Now, there might be some other explanation of this, but on the face of it, it indicates to me if you had had no contact with the clients direct prior to that time, that he may have been paying to you out of this $18,000, whatever fee you fix would be agreeable to him. I do not know that that is true. I am asking you, since you were one of the parties to it. Mr. Morgan. I wish I could shed more light on it. But let us put it this way. Duke had a contract with the Herman Lawson Company before I ever knew him. In other words, I had not participated in the negotiation of any such contract. Let us assume that he is a legitimate agent of the Lawson Company, and I suppose we must certainly concede that. If as an agent of the Lawson Company he should pay me a fee in connection with legal work that I might do, I would say that was certainly ethically proper. Senator McClellan. I would, too. The further point is he is saying here, I have a contingent fee of $18,000. I assume that is what he means, if the claim is prosecuted successfully. Mr. Morgan. That is what he is saying. Senator McClellan. And anything you want to charge me out of that for your services would be agreeable to me. I do not know that those are the facts, but it appears that way on the surface to me. Mr. Morgan. I would say that is a fair construction from Mr. Duke's letter. Senator McClellan. Let me ask one further thing there in that connection to clarify it further. Did you ever represent this client-what is his name--Herman Lawson? After receipt of this letter, or had you prior to that been in direct touch with the Lawson Company? Mr. Morgan. To the best of my knowledge and belief I have not. Senator McClellan. Did you ever afterwards contact them or did they contact you with reference to this matter directly? Mr. Morgan. To the best of my knowledge and belief I did not. Senator McClellan. Then you never accepted employment either from Duke or from Lawson? Mr. Morgan. To the best of my knowledge and belief I did not. Senator McClellan. You did not accept employment? Mr. Morgan. Correct. I did not accept employment certainly to the best of my knowledge and belief. I made an inquiry concerning the case as a favor to Duke, that was all. Senator McClellan. Then you rejected the employment in the case after that inquiry? Mr. Morgan. I think I advised them that the case had no merit as I remember. At any rate, I did not pursue it. Senator McClellan. You did not pursue it. Mr. Morgan. That is right. Senator McClellan. You never earned anything out of it? Mr. Morgan. Not a penny. Senator McClellan. You never had any direct contact with the client? Mr. Morgan. That is correct. Senator McClellan. In any way whatsoever? Mr. Morgan. To the best of my knowledge and belief I am quite sure I did not earn anything in connection with it. Senator McClellan. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Cohn. Now, I would like to direct your attention to the case involving Jack Glass. Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Cohn. I believe you told us about that this morning. Exactly how did that case come to your attention? Mr. Morgan. That case to the best of my knowledge and belief was referred to me directly by Maurice Hendon. Mr. Cohn. He is the Los Angeles lawyer? Mr. Morgan. That was my impression. It has been my impression all along, and within the past two months, I was in Los Angeles, California, talking to Mr. Hendon, and this question came up and he said, ``By the way, did you have any connection with this fellow Duke'' or did I, in connection with this Glass case. ``Just how did you happen to get in touch with me in connection with the case?'' He related the circumstances and he told me about the King committee having been in touch with him concerning the matter, and that he had referred the case to me on the basis of some friend of mine who had suggested that he get in touch with me. My memory is as vague on it as can be, just as vague as can be. If Russell Duke himself directly referred the case to me, I would admit it. I have no reluctance about doing that. As I say, I thought this man was legitimate. I was grateful to him. I handled everything that he referred to me strictly on the merits. I think if you will look at the files you will find that I worked my cases, every one of them. So in answering your question here, as I have, saying it is vague, I don't do so to circumvent any admissions with respect to that. If Russell Duke had put Mr. Glass in touch with me, I would have represented him if I thought it was a legitimate situation. Mr. Cohn. What happened in the Glass case? Did you actually come into it? Mr. Morgan. Yes. Mr. Hendon came back and he and I conferred at the Department of Justice. I submitted a rather extensive brief, which the file will reflect, as far as the facts would permit in connection with the case. Mr. Cohn. With whom did you confer at the Department of Justice? Mr. Morgan. I think it was Col. Swearingen, as I stated this morning. Mr. Cohn. Then Mr. Glass is the gentleman who later passed on, due to a heart condition, is that correct? Mr. Morgan. Yes, he died not long after the case was finally disposed of. I might say that in this case the Department of Justice did not decline prosecution. The Department of Justice referred the case to the United States attorney and asked on the basis of the man's physical and mental condition whether the United States attorney wanted to prosecute. Mr. |


This lesson will show you how easy it is to guess a secret question and retrieve somebody else his password.
Enter 'admin' as username and 'green' as favorite color to complete the lesson.


Preparation time
less than 30 mins
Cooking time
10 to 30 mins
Serves
Serves 4
Chorizo and squid are a winning combination and even more delicious when cooked in a buttery sage sauce and served with garlicky aïoli.
Equipment and preparation: You will need five cocktail sticks, cut in half and soaked in cold water, for securing the squids.
For the aïoli, place the yolk in a mixing bowl along with the mustard, garlic and vinegar. Begin whisking and slowly add the oils to emulsify with the yolk. As the oils incorporate into the yolk, you can speed up the process.
When all the oil has been added, season with salt and pepper and add some lemon juice and vinegar to taste. Set aside.
For the chorizo-stuffed squid, pull the tentacles away from the body of each squid and reserve them. Check the centre of the tentacles for the hard beak, which can be discarded. Feel inside the body for the quill of each squid (it resembles a shard of plastic). Pull it out of the squid and discard. Rinse inside the body in cold water. Pull the ears (wing-like flaps) from the body. Pull the purplish skin from the ears and body to leave only the white meat.
Discard the guts of the squid or, if desired, retain the ink sack to use in seafood pasta or risotto.
Knead the chorizo in a bowl together using your hands to form a rough paste. Take a piece of chorizo and form it into a shape to fill the cavity of one of the squid.
Fill each squid to about two-thirds full and press it down. Secure each squid tube with a cocktail stick and reserve until ready to cook.
Cook the potatoes in a pan of salted water until tender and then drain well. Heat a non-stick frying pan over a medium heat, add a lug of olive oil, the crushed garlic and the potatoes and season well with salt and freshly ground black pepper. Cook over a moderate heat tossing occasionally to evenly crisp and caramelise the potatoes.
Take another non-stick pan and place over a moderate heat. Season the squid pockets and tentacles with salt and pepper. Add a lug of oil to the pan and add the squid. Cook for two minutes on one side and then turn over and cook for a further two minutes.
Add the butter and sage and, when foaming, spoon it over the squid to cook further and ensure the chorizo is cooked inside. The filling will feel firm to the touch when cooked.
Add the peas, capers and zest and remove the pan from the heat. When the potatoes are ready, transfer to a plate lined with kitchen paper to drain.
To serve, divide the potatoes between serving plates along with the squid, the buttery pan juices, peas, capers and zest. Serve with a dollop of aioli.


--- layout: landing title: Operational models encyclopedia subtitle: Operational Model Encyclopedia linking both generic information on how numerical weather prediction models work, and specifics on physical parameterizations, dynamics, and data assimilation in operational models. hero_height: is-medium hero_link: /know-the-project/ hero_link_text: Know the project → show_sidebar: false callout: models-summary ---
About
Vestibulum venenatis vulputate dui et rhoncus. Nullam mauris justo, semper a consequat in, rhoncus ut ex. Quisque viverra nisi vitae dignissim auctor. Mauris mattis non magna sed fringilla. Nullam pulvinar eu quam eu tincidunt. Aenean ut dapibus mi, ultrices mollis est. Aliquam dapibus dolor magna, sed vulputate ante lacinia faucibus. Morbi a efficitur diam.
Motivation
The availability of numerical guidance from NWP models has been an important component of operational forecasting for decades. For many, the output from this numerical guidance was produced by a mysterious “black box”. Rules for using and adjusting the guidance for operational forecasters were often subjective “Rules of Thumb” based on experience rather than based on quantitative analysis.
To open up this “black box”, we produced this web-based “Operational Model Encyclopedia” linking both generic information on how NWP models work, and specifics on physical parameterizations, dynamics, and data assimilation in operational models. Ensemble Prediction systems and Marine Wave models are included as well. New model descriptions are updated as operational models are updated.


Overview
Pycraft is a research project to help investigate the psychology of programming. Particularly
in age groups such as middle-schoolers, high-schoolers, and college students. Pycraft gathers the
analytics of the different age groups and determines the differences in how they go about solving
different programming problems.
Pycraft is composed of the following components:
- Blockly
- Python
- Minecraft
- Minecraft Forge
- RaspberryJam Mods
Blockly
What is it?
Blockly is a library that adds a visual code editor to web and mobile apps. The Blockly editor uses
interlocking, graphical blocks to represent code concepts like variables, logical expressions, loops,
and more. It allows users to apply programming principles without having to worry about syntax or the
intimidation of a blinking cursor on the command line.
How did Pycraft use it?
Blockly is the main UI component in Pycraft. Used for its visual programming capabilities.
Python
What is it?
Python is an interpreted, object-oriented, high-level programming language with dynamic semantics.
Its high-level built in data structures, combined with dynamic typing and dynamic binding, make it
very attractive for Rapid Application Development, as well as for use as a scripting or glue language
to connect existing components together.
How did Pycraft use it?
While using symantics of the visual Blockly blocks, these generate syntactically correct user-generated Python scripts.
These scripts are then saved and ran inside of Minecraft.
Minecraft
What is it?
An open-world game that promotes creativity, collaboration, and problem-solving in an immersive environment where the only
limit is your imagination.
How does Pycraft use it?
Minecraft is one of the main driving componets of Pycraft. While by itself Minecraft has endless
creative possibilites. Pycraft takes advantage of this and helps the users learn programming while
playng Minecraft. The generated Python scripts are ran in the text box inside of Minecraft.
Minecraft Forge
What is it?
Is a free, open-source modding API and loader designed to simplify compatibility between
community-created game mods in Minecraft: Java Edition. The end-user (player) must play the version
of Minecraft that Forge was downloaded for before it can be used. For example, Forge 1.12 will need
the 1.12 version of Minecraft in order to run correctly. Forge can then be used from the Play
drop-down in the Minecraft launcher.
How does Pycraft use it?
The Minecraft Forge API is used to bridge the gap in connecting the RaspberryJam Mods to work inside
of Minecraft.
RaspberryJam Mods
What is it?
Mods that use the Minecraft API and allow for Minecraft to be controlled by Python code.


--- layout: page title: Projects subtitle: some stuff i've made permalink: /projects sitemap: priority: 0.9 tags: - name: pudhina fresh theme - name: jekyll theme - name: jekyll ---


2.2. Download the Application¶
To download the RDT app, first navigate to the RDT Download page. As shown in figDownloadRDT
, from the application page you must click on the link Download app and User Manual
which will bring you to another page. This page contains a list of downloadable files and directories. There are at least two files available for download from this page:
The ZIP file is an archive that contains the application files for a Windows operating system.
The DMG file is an archive that contains the application files for a Mac OS X operating system.
To download the RDT app click on the link for the appropriate file for your operating system: file ending with Windows_Download.zip for users on a Windows machine and file ending with Mac_Download.dmg for users on a Mac. This will bring up a pop-up window. Click on the Download button in bottom right hand corner of this pop-up. Unpackage the ensuing downloaded file and place it in a location on your filesystem.
Note
Windows: On computers running the Windows operating system we suggest placing the directory in the C:\SimCenter folder. Once here, create a shorcut link to the application and move this shortcut link to your Desktop folder.
MacOS: We sugget copying the app to your Desktop.
Now test that the application starts. To do this navigate to the location where you placed the application and open it. You should see the user interface (UI) shown in figUI-RDT
after starting the application. Now quit the application. Additional installation steps, outlined in Section 2.1, are required before computations can be performed.
Note
On a Mac you will need to right click on the .dmg file to open it. The UI will not start correctly while in the DMG file, you need to open the .dmg file and then copy the RDT app application to your Documents or Desktop folder. You can then move the .dmg file to the trash or eject it after this has been done.
The SimCenter is not recognized as either a Windows or an Apple vendor. Our applications are not recognized by the operating system as being signed. Consequently, you may receive a warning message when you start the RDT app application for the first time. Follow the procedure you used in Section 2.1 to remedy this issue.
The RDT app application requires an up to date version of Python, that outlined in Section 2.1 to work properly. In Section 2.3, instructions are given on testing the installation.


Implements type constructions and pattern matching. Using this package, you can specify a type of object and write functions that matches against the structure of objects of such types to program data structure transformations more succinctly.
| Version: | 0.1.4 |
| Depends: | R (≥ 3.2) |
| Imports: | dplyr, purrr, rlang (≥ 0.2.0), tibble, glue, foolbox, magrittr |
| Suggests: | shiny, DT, covr, styler, lintr, testthat, knitr, rmarkdown, microbenchmark, ggraph, tidygraph, tailr |
| Published: | 2018-10-19 |
| Author: | Thomas Mailund [aut, cre] |
| Maintainer: | Thomas Mailund <mailund at birc.au.dk> |
| BugReports: | https://github.com/mailund/pmatch/issues |
| License: | GPL-3 |
| URL: | https://github.com/mailund/pmatch |
| NeedsCompilation: | no |
| Language: | en-GB |
| Citation: | pmatch citation info |
| Materials: | README NEWS |
| CRAN checks: | pmatch results |
| Reference manual: | pmatch.pdf |
| Vignettes: |
Getting Started with pmatch Huffman coding "Optional" Types with pmatch |
| Package source: | pmatch_0.1.4.tar.gz |
| Windows binaries: | r-devel: pmatch_0.1.4.zip, r-release: pmatch_0.1.4.zip, r-oldrel: pmatch_0.1.4.zip |
| OS X binaries: | r-release: pmatch_0.1.4.tgz, r-oldrel: pmatch_0.1.4.tgz |
| Old sources: | pmatch archive |
| Reverse suggests: | tailr |
Please use the canonical form https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=pmatch to link to this page.


This utility uses the qhull algorithm to create phase diagrams for arbitrary regions of phase space. Depending on the dimensionality of the requested phase diagram, different plots are made.
2-D phase diagrams, we produce the convex hull
3-D phase diagrams we give create the Gibbs' triangle
4-D phase diagrams, an isometric shot of the Gibbs tetrahedron
Higher-order phase diagrams, we create a graph depiction of the phase equilibria data. In these plots, every line corresponds to 2-phase equilibrium.
Formation energies
The formation energies supplied to this tool were calculated using elemental reference states which are a combination of DFT total energies of elemental phases, fit to experimental formation energies (the gases, and ionic solids), corrected to remove the effects of DFT+U.
References
1. Barber, C., Dobkin, D. & Huhdanpaa, H. The quickhull algorithm for convex hulls. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 22, 469–483 (1996).
2. Stevanović, V., Lany, S., Zhang, X. & Zunger, A. Correcting density functional theory for accurate predictions of compound enthalpies of formation: Fitted elemental-phase reference energies. Physical Review B 85, 115104 (2012).


Utopia integrates with Yarn and provides a rake task to simplify deployment packages distributed using yarn
that implement the dist
sub-directory convention.
By default, utopia includes a .yarnrc
file which installs modules into lib/components
. This code can then be copied into public/_components
using rake yarn:update
.
If you don’t already have yarn installed, make sure you have npm installed and then run the following command:
$ sudo npm install -g yarn
Firstly, ensure your project has a package.json
file:
$ yarn init
Then install jquery using yarn
:
$ bower install jquery
Copy the distribution scripts to public/_components
:
$ rake yarn:update
Then add the appropriate <script>
tags to pages/_page.xnode
:
<script type="text/javascript" src="/_components/jquery/jquery.min.js"></script>
rake yarn:update
do?This task copies only the contents of the dist
directory. This ensures that you only get files intended for distribution. If the bower package doesn’t have a dist
directory, the entire contents is copied.
namespace :yarn do
desc 'Load the .bowerrc file and setup the environment for other tasks.'
task :environment do
@yarn_package_root = SITE_ROOT + "lib/components"
@yarn_install_root = SITE_ROOT + "public/_components"
end
desc 'Update the bower packages and link into the public directory.'
task :update => :environment do
require 'fileutils'
require 'utopia/path'
@yarn_package_root.children.select(&:directory?).collect(&:basename).each do |package_directory|
install_path = @yarn_install_root + package_directory
package_path = @yarn_package_root + package_directory
dist_path = package_path + 'dist'
FileUtils::Verbose.rm_rf install_path
FileUtils::Verbose.mkpath(install_path.dirname)
# If a package has a dist directory, we only symlink that... otherwise we have to do the entire package, and hope that bower's ignore was setup correctly:
if File.exist? dist_path
link_path = Utopia::Path.shortest_path(dist_path, install_path)
else
link_path = Utopia::Path.shortest_path(package_path, install_path)
end
FileUtils::Verbose.cp_r File.expand_path(link_path, install_path), install_path
end
end
end
You can use JavaScript by embedding it directly into your HTML, or by creating a JavaScript source file and referencing that.
In your HTML view:
<html>
<body>
<script type="text/javascript">
//<![CDATA[
console.log("Hello World")
//]]>
</script>
</body>
</html>
In script.js
:
console.log("Hello World")
In your HTML view:
<html>
<body>
<script type="text/javascript" src="script.js"></script>
</body>
</html>


Connection:
Host Name:
Query Time:
| No. | Name | Temp (℃) | Util | Memory | Process ( User: PID (Memory) ) |
|---|
| Queue Num | Status | ID | Mode | GPU Scope | Request GPU Num | Available GPUs | Register Time | Last Request Time |
|---|
| Queue Num | Status | ID | Mode | GPU Scope | Request GPU Num | Available GPUs | Register Time | Last Request Time |
|---|


Parent 0
Child 0
Child 1
Hello people!
Biography
Born in Portland, raised in Seattle. I am PNW all the way!Education and Experience
- Coding since 2008 in LPC, self-taught through anguish.org.
- Attending CodeFellows from Aug 2020 - present.
- Veterinary Tech Assistant
- Courier
- Self-Employed
- Assistant Arborist
- Pizza Delivery
Goals
I am currently working towards developing a career in coding at a professional level.Hobbies
I enjoy woodworking, playing PUBG and coding coding coding.Top 10 favorite movies:
- There Will Be Blood
- The Master
- I Think We're Alone Now
- Irreversible
- The Big Lebowski
- Being John Malkovich
- Boogie Nights
- Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
- Under the Skin
- The Abyss


Each year the open data community and the Open Knowledge Network produces an annual ranking of countries, peer reviewed by local open data experts. Here we present this year's results in the form of interactive chart for you to explore.
This visualisation is created by Tarek Amr, Open Knowledge ambassador in Egypt. Data is taken from the Global Open Data Index API. This chart is Licensed under Creative Commons License (BY-SA).
Visit the Index for more information about the datasets evaluated, the evaluation methodology and feel free to comment on the results there if you want to.


{% extends 'shared.html' %} {% block header %} {% endblock %} {% block content %}
Monsters Ink is a new-aged take on an old card game where players draw fierce monsters and pit them against their opponents.


California utility meets with governor amid bankruptcy case
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - The chief executive of a troubled California utility blamed for starting a series of catastrophic wildfires is meeting with Gov. Gavin Newsom to mediate the company’s bankruptcy case.
Pacific Gas & Electric CEO Corp. Bill Johnson and other top officials met with Newsom Tuesday in Sacramento. Representatives from shareholders, bondholders and wildfire victims also attended the meeting at the state Capitol.
The governor’s office says Newsom reiterated the state’s frustration with PG&E; and urged the parties to resolve the company’s bankruptcy before next year’s wildfire season.
The company has angered customers with its pre-emptive power shutoffs to millions of Californians during windy weather to prevent fallen powerlines from starting wildfires. Johnson says he understands the shutoffs have caused hardships, but said they were successful in preventing catastrophic wildfires.
Sign up for Daily Newsletters
Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Adapted by Neilor Tonin, URI Brazil
Make a simple problem that only read two integer values. After that, calculate the product between them and store the result in a variable named PROD. Print the result like the sample below. Do not forget to print the end line after the result otherwise you will get “Presentation Error”.
The input file will contain 2 integer numbers.
Print PROD according to the following example, with a blank space before and after the equal signal.
| Sample Inputs | Sample Outputs |
|
3 |
PROD = 27 |
|
-30 |
PROD = -300 |
|
0 |
PROD = 0 |


Senior Systems Engineer
Infosys Limited     (   Client   -   Boston Scientific  )
- Developed and maintained a test automation API using Selenium Webdriver with python binding for the automation
of Boston Scientific patient remote monitoring application.
- Helped in the integration of web automation API with other system automation APIs to form a complete end-to-end
test automation umbrella, which was used by test engineers to automate test scenarios.
- Worked as a lead of regression testing for DVT (Design and Verification) team, helping execute and maintain
regression test suite of around 2000 test scenarios, playing a significant role in providing support for
new set of devices in the application, and helping in flawless delivery.


Zero Robotics Australia
Qualifying Competition
The competition has begun!
Make sure you review the deadlines, especially the upcoming Gantt chart submission.
It is also worth exploring our forums where you can ask questions, and discuss the competition.
Important Dates
Australian Qualifying Competition
| Event | Location | Date | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| Late Registration Deadline | N/A | 10 May 2018 | 5pm |
| Qualifying Competition Launch Event | The University of Sydney | 10 May 2018 | 9am-3pm |
| Gantt Chart Submission | N/A | 25 May 2018 | 5pm |
| Late Late Registration Deadline | N/A | 31 May 2018 | 5pm |
| First Code Submission | N/A | 15 June 2018 | 5pm |
| Final Code Submission | N/A | 29 June 2018 | 5pm |
| Finals Event - Qualifying Competition | The University of Sydney | 2 July 2018 | 9am-3pm |
Detailed Information
The competition is run over many phases that are designed to build up participants knowledge and expertise. Firstly, the Australian Qualifying Competition is run to get students and teachers accustomed to the way that Zero Robotics works. This includes familiarisation with the website and IDE as well as making sure teams are organised in an effective way to ensure a productive and inclusive learning environment.
The competition will launch on the 10th of May in 2018 with a Kick-off event at The University of Sydney. On the same day the game manual will be released detailing the rules of this year’s game and the requirements to qualify for the International Competition. Initially spaceSPHERES will be played in 2D, teams may submit code at any time after the competition begins on the 10th of May. As listed above the first deadline requires teams to submit some documents that outline the team structure and a gantt chart that maps out the timeline teams have come up with in order to complete the competition. This can include dates for when parts of the team’s code or strategy will be finalised, targets for tutorial completion or other specific learning goals your team comes up with.
To submit your team’s documents email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>with the following:
One email per team Attach a PDF version of your team structure and Gantt chart in ONE document Call the file ‘ zr_planning_docs_SCHOOL_TEAMNAME.pdf ’ where SCHOOL and TEAMNAME are your school and team name respectively The email subject line will be the same as the name of the PDF containing your planning documentsThe next deadline is the First Code Submission. This is the deadline for teams to have submitted some piece of working code that scores points. Teams are strongly encouraged to submit code AS OFTEN AS THEY ADD ANYTHING TO THEIR TEAM’S CODE, this deadline is simply the latest date for teams to submit their first piece of code. We say this a lot but SUBMIT EARLY SUBMIT OFTEN is the best strategy for Zero Robotics.
The Final Code Submission is the deadline for all code submission for the Qualifying Competition. After this date at midnight no submissions will be excepted.
In order to be entered into the International Competition teams must have passed the three above outlined submission criteria, i.e. submitted planning documents, met the first code submission deadline and submitted another working version of their code that is different to their original version. The 30% of teams will be admitted automatically, however the Venn diagram of teams that meet the above criteria and those who perform well tends to look very circular!
If teams have a valid reason for not meeting these criteria and can show that they have been working through tutorials and improving their skills they may also be entered in the International Competition.
After the first code submission teams will have the option to continue playing the competition in 2D or change and begin to play in 3D. For new teams this can be a challenging step and we encourage you to have a go early. There is however plenty of time between the Qualifying Competition and the International Competition if your team does not feel ready to make the change. The teams that wish to change will have their points transferred to a new leader board and the 2D leader board will be organised accordingly.


Nigeria’s ex-justice minister arrested in Dubai over fraud, graft
by MOHAMMED MOMOHIn Summary
- Mr. Adoke was arrested by International Police (Interpol) for alleged involvement in oil scams, fraud and money laundering.
Abuja,
Nigeria’s former Attorney-general and Justice Minister Mohammed Adoke has been arrested in Dubai over fraud and corruption allegations, the government confirms.
Mr. Adoke, who travelled to Dubai for medical attention, was arrested by International Police (Interpol) for alleged involvement in oil scams, fraud and money laundering.
Mr. Adoke’s lawyer filed an application for the letter of attestation from Nigeria’s Ministry of Justice for Interpol to release him. However, the Nigerian government instead forwarded to Interpol charges against the former minister.
Prof. Itse Sagay, the chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee against Corruption re-ported that the arrest is the latest success in the fight against corruption under the federal government.
The charges forwarded to the international police include conspiracy and money laundering on Malabu Oil Block; conflict of interest on Malabu Oil Block; and involvement in the $9.6 bil-lion judgment award against Nigeria by Process and Industrial Developments (P&ID).
Advertisement
Mr. Adoke is also to give clarification on $2,267,400 Malabu Oil cash paid to a Bureau De Change operator. He is also facing criminal charges on abuse of office and money laundering with respect to the granting of the Oil Prospecting License (OPL) 245 to Shell and ENI.
Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had earlier obtained a warrant is-sued by a Federal Capital Territory High Court in Abuja.


The action is used for print output message into log file, the log file is at $eKuiper_install/log/stream.log by default. No properties can be specified for the action.


Without their support amet, consectetur adipiscing elit ut et ac enim nec dignissim vivamus dapibus velit et.
Become a sponsor lorem ipsum dolor sit amet lariet conseti lom Sign Up
Some sample text here for stuff


INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE
- Associate Projects
Company: Cognizant Technology SolutionsI worked on DW and BI projects of various BFSI clients including JPMorgan Chase
- Senior Executive (Business intelligence)
Company: Bajaj Allianz General insurance Co. Ltd.Worked as part of MIS team to provide information that the organization needed to manage itself effectively and efficiently. It involved interacting with clients across the country and gathering requirements. I worked on the Design and development of various ad hoc reports, advanced reports, dashboards, and scheduled reports using Business Objects. These reports had vital information that helped the company to align their business processes according to the needs of the customers. I also worked on customer retention analysis, profitability, premium, claim, audit reports.


Python Quiz
1. What would "1"*2 return if run in a python shell?
"11"
"2"
2
2. What happens if the following line of code is run in a Python shell:
a={b:2,c:3,b:4}
Creates a dictionary a containing {b:2,c:3,b:4}
Syntax Error
Creates a dictionary a containing {b:2,c:3}
3. Which line of code would remove 1 form the list L: [2,3,1,4,5]?
L[2]=[]
L.remove(1)
L.pop(1)
4. What would the following code return?
def foo(): x=5 if x=6: return x else: return 'hello'6


{% for i in products %}
Product Id: {{ i.id }}
Product Name:
{{ i.product_name }}
Product Description: {{ i.description}} - Price:${{i.price}}
{% endfor%}


Thank you for registering to the Spring Boot Tutorial Site
Please click here to verify your email address.


This is a mode of operation that the SVG Rose chart has but the canvas Rose chart doesn't. It's a stacked non-equi-angular variation. It's appropriate for when you have data that has an extra dimension that goes beyond just a straight-forward stacked or non-equi-angular chart.
This goes in the documents header:  Put this where you want the chart to show up:

This is the code that generates the chart:


| Number of Classes | Line Coverage | Mutation Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| 18 | 91% | 78% |
| Name | Line Coverage | Mutation Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| AbstractListChromosome.java | 100% |
75% |
| BinaryChromosome.java | 95% |
89% |
| BinaryMutation.java | 89% |
100% |
| Chromosome.java | 94% |
88% |
| ChromosomePair.java | 86% |
67% |
| CycleCrossover.java | 95% |
86% |
| ElitisticListPopulation.java | 100% |
79% |
| FixedElapsedTime.java | 73% |
63% |
| FixedGenerationCount.java | 82% |
75% |
| GeneticAlgorithm.java | 88% |
41% |
| ListPopulation.java | 83% |
67% |
| NPointCrossover.java | 94% |
88% |
| OnePointCrossover.java | 89% |
100% |
| OrderedCrossover.java | 100% |
71% |
| RandomKey.java | 94% |
91% |
| RandomKeyMutation.java | 89% |
100% |
| TournamentSelection.java | 72% |
70% |
| UniformCrossover.java | 96% |
93% |


Tomorrow's Beat is one of the leading national companies established in Tripoli under Libyan Laws, specialized in medical field. We are enjoying good working relations with health authorities / institutions and are officially registered as medical suppliers. The range of services offered by the company includes nearly all aspects of health care covering
- - Medical Equipment
- - Radiology
- - Laboratory and Blood Bank
- - Turnkey Projects
- - Networking and software (LIS,RIS.HIS)


Three powers
问题描述 :
Consider the set of all non-negative integer powers of 3.
S = { 1, 3, 9, 27, 81, … }
Consider the sequence of all subsets of S ordered by the value of the sum of their elements. The question is simple: find the set at the n-th position in the sequence and print it in increasing order of its elements.
Consider the sequence of all subsets of S ordered by the value of the sum of their elements. The question is simple: find the set at the n-th position in the sequence and print it in increasing order of its elements.
输入:
Each line of input contains a number n, which is a positive integer with no more than 19 digits. The last line of input contains 0 and it should not be processed.
输出:
For each line of input, output a single line displaying the n-th set as described above, in the format used in the sample output.
样例输入:
1 7 14<PHONE_NUMBER>981634049 0
样例输出:
{ } { 3, 9 } { 1, 9, 27 } { 3, 9, 27, 6561, 19683 } { 59049,<PHONE_NUMBER>,<PHONE_NUMBER>94649,<PHONE_NUMBER>91852588770249 }
解题代码:
//* @author: import java.math.BigInteger; import java.util.Scanner; public class Main { public static void main(String[]args){ BigInteger dat[]=new BigInteger[100]; dat[0]=BigInteger.ONE; BigInteger tr=new BigInteger("3"); for(int i=1;i< 100;i++){ dat[i]=dat[i-1].multiply(tr); } long N; int t; boolean first; Scanner cin=new Scanner(System.in); while(cin.hasNext()){ N=cin.nextLong(); if(N==0) break; N--; t=0; first=true; System.out.print("{"); while(N>0){ if(N%2==1){ if(first){ first=false; System.out.print(" "+dat[t]); } else System.out.print(", "+dat[t]); } t++; N/=2; } System.out.println(" }"); } } }
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Good task for the group. Hold it up for every yeara??s winner. This is a excellent oppotunity for a lot more enhancement. Indeed, obtaining far better and much better is constantly the crucial. Just like my pal suggests on the truth about ab muscles, he just keeps obtaining much better.
这个.. 真没看出来
学习了
程序只能输出一个子序列
bottes vernies blanches
I appreciate the efforts you men and women place in to share blogs on such sort of matters, it was certainly useful. Keep Posting!
程序员会算法，等于一个古惑仔带了zhi抢啊
神奇的网站
/*
* =====================================================================================
*
* Filename: 1366.cc
*
* Description:
*
* Version: 1.0
* Created: 2014年01月06日 14时52分14秒
* Revision: none
* Compiler: gcc
*
* Author: Wenxian Ni (Hello World~<EMAIL_ADDRESS>* Organization: AMS/ICT
*
* =====================================================================================
*/
#include
#include
using namespace std;
int main()
{
stack st;
int n,i,j;
int test;
int a[100001];
int b[100001];
while(cin>>n)
{
for(i=1;i>a[i];
for(i=1;i>b[i];
//st.clear();
while(!st.empty())
st.pop();
i = 1;
j = 1;
while(in)
break;
}
while(!st.empty()&&st.top()==b[j])
{
st.pop();
j++;
}
}
if(st.empty())
cout<<"YES"<<endl;
else
cout<<"NO"<<endl;
}
return 0;
}
http://www.realoj.com/problem/7如果楼主不介意，以可以在这个oj上做下，按照你的代码是错的。。。直接复制粘贴你的也是错。。不懂错在哪。
有没有C++语言的代码？
其实就是DFS搜索，数据量较小，穷举了所有情况
算法，他认识我，我不认识他，后来有人告诉我你写的这段代码就是XXX算法。。。
博主，你这个是wordpress哪个主题啊，不错哦~


| Vinayaka Gadag. | work about contact |
Full-stack developer and DevOps engineer based out of Bloomington, Indiana |
I'm an gradute student at Indiana Uinversity studying Computer Science.
I convert coffee into code overnight and I love outdoor and travelling. You will find me running, cycling or taking pictures around the beatiful college town during my free time.