Season’s Greetings! If you enjoy discovering hard evidence to confirm a theory you happen to believe, then prepare yourselves, dear readers. I’m about to present you with two thoroughly enjoyable rock-hard pieces of evidence that confirms a theory I proposed in November 2023. I discovered the new evidence yesterday at Miami’s University Archives.
I’d driven to Oxford and back for the sole purpose of looking through several boxes that are stored there, one of which I’m reporting on today.
The box in question contained the file of Reuben B. Robertson, Jr., the charismatic president of Champion Paper and Fibre in Hamilton, Ohio, from 1950 to 1960. As you may recall, Robertson had taken two of those years off, from 1955 to 1957, to serve as the U.S. deputy secretary of defense under President Eisenhower. When he returned to Hamilton from that high-profile stint, he was named to serve on Miami’s Board of Trustees. Unfortunately, he didn’t serve his full four-year term. In the early-morning hours of March 13, 1960, he was instantly killed in a hit-and-run accident near his home in Glendale.
The theory that I’d put out in 2023 was that Robertson and Millett had known each other during WWII because both were working for an extremely small branch of the Army known as the Administrative Management Branch, which was housed in the Control Division of the Army Service Forces. There were only 28 officers and 3 civilians in that branch in 1943, and they were based in Washington, D.C. Considering how outgoing both men were, surely they knew each other, I said in my post. I then suggested that, since Reuben was sitting on Miami’s selection committee for a new president, he likely had talked Millett into applying for the job—a job for which Millett was grateful to accept. Although Millett had many impressive credentials in government and the military, he was at that time a full professor at Columbia University and lacked administrative experience in a university setting.
Understandably, John Millett was extremely saddened by the news of Robertson’s death, and he expressed his sadness in two letters within days of the tragedy.
The first letter I found was to Robertson’s widow, which he wrote on March 17, 1960, four days after Reuben’s death.
Here are the words he chose:
Dear Mrs. Robertson:
I wish there were some way that the many expressions of sympathy which you will be receiving at this time could somehow lessen your sense of loss. But all of us who knew Reuben well thought highly of him, and I hope this will provide you some sense of satisfaction.
I first met Reuben in 1942 when he came into the Army. We worked together on two or three projects that first year.
And I shall never forget the Thanksgiving I spent with you and Reuben in 1944 in Atlanta. It was a pleasant occasion, indeed.
When I came out to Ohio in 1953, I was very glad to have the opportunity to see Reuben more often. You may be sure that none of us who knew him well will forget him. And all of us extend our sympathy to you and to the children.
Sincerely yours,
John D. Millett
Credit: Miami University Archives; click on image for a closer view
So there it is: proof that they’d met and worked together in the Army during WWII. Millett said they began working together in 1942, but Robertson’s separation papers say he began in March 1943. I won’t quibble. Moreover, we also know that they maintained their friendship throughout the war, as evidenced by Reuben inviting John to Thanksgiving dinner in 1944 at the Robertsons’ home in Atlanta.
The second letter was to Thomas D. Morris, who at that time was assistant to the president of Champion Paper. This letter was written two days after Reuben’s death:
Dear Tom:
I should like to express to you and through you to the executive staff and the directors of Champion Paper and Fibre Company my great sympathy for the loss you have sustained in the death of Reuben Robertson. As you know, I have been a friend of Reuben’s since 1942. I met him when he first began his military service and we worked together in the same office in Washington for several months.
Later I visited him on two different occasions while he was stationed in Atlanta, and there I had an opportunity to become acquainted with Mrs. Robertson.
In the intervening years, I saw Reuben quite often in Washington and New York. He was instrumental in my coming to Miami University, and I was pleased, indeed, when Governor O’Neill appointed him a member of our Board of Trustees in 1957.
His death is a great personal and official loss to me, but I know this is little compared with what he meant to all of you in the Company.
I have never known a finer person or a more energetic executive than Reuben. His death is a great tragedy.
Sincerely yours,
John D. Millett
Credit: Miami University Archives; click on image for a closer view
Whereas Millett chose the word “instrumental” to describe Reuben’s efforts in bringing him to Miami, I believe a better word would be invaluable. In addition to suggesting that he apply, I’m sure he advocated for Millett to the other committee members, thus helping secure his nomination. In fact, I’d contend that if it weren’t for Reuben Robertson, John Millett wouldn’t have ever found his way to Miami—wouldn’t have even thought to apply for the job. The Board of Trustees elected him to be Miami’s 16th president on March 28, 1953.
You may be asking why this matters. In my November 2023 post, I discussed how an employee of Reuben Robertson’s named Dorothy Craig had written a check to Ron Tammen roughly at the time of his disappearance. To this day, I have no idea what the amount of the check was or why it was written, though I do have some hypotheses regarding the latter.
When news of Tammen’s disappearance hit the papers, Reuben Robertson probably didn’t want Champion Paper linked in any way. But how could he prevent that from happening, especially if investigators learned about the check? Maybe he could call in a favor from his good friend from the war—one who was recently named president of the university Tammen had attended.
Hi guys. As you may recall, I mentioned in a recent post that the podcast Bizarre Butler County would be airing an upcoming episode on Ron Tammen, which was scheduled for release sometime in October. As it turns out, they’ve been experiencing technical difficulties, and likely won’t be posting that episode until December. During our July interview, I provided Taylor Powers and Sarah Kennel with some breaking news about how I think St. Clair Switzer was spending his sabbatical during the 1956-57 academic year. I was planning to release this blog post shortly after the Tammen episode had dropped so I wouldn’t be stepping on their scoop. However, Taylor and Sarah have graciously given me the green light to post it now, before the Tammen episode airs. I’ll be sure to give you the heads up as soon as it does.
So…what’s the big reveal that I’ve been sitting on since July?
It has to do with the two letters
It all starts with those two letters we’ve discussed in past posts. The letters are dated December 6, 1956, and February 8, 1957, and, even by MKULTRA standards, I’m sure they’ve raised their fair share of eyebrows over the years. In the December letter, one researcher poses a dozen questions on the topic of hypnosis to another researcher. These aren’t your typical questions that might be posed by someone interested in using hypnosis in a clinical setting to help a patient improve his or her life. These are jarringly bold questions about using hypnosis to control people, and they get more and more outrageous as they go, beginning with (1) how to produce amnesia in someone on a regular basis and (2) how to induce hypnosis in someone without their knowing it, all the way to (11) possible experiments that might be considered “too dangerous, too shocking, too ‘unusual’ for routine testing” and, finally, (12) how to hypnotize someone by force. Ostensibly, nothing was out-of-bounds. Everything was on the table.
In the February letter, the writer thanks the recipient for his responses to those jarringly bold questions, which, sadly, aren’t included within the MKULTRA documents that have been released to the public. He is also hoping to schedule some additional time with the recipient. In both letters, the writer cautions the recipient to destroy the letters on his end because the topics are “most sensitive and are very highly classified” (letter 1) and “highly sensitive” (letter 2). Fortunately for us, someone decided against destroying the two letters on the writer’s end of things; otherwise we wouldn’t have the evidence that I’m about to present.
But first, I’d like to take this moment to express my gratitude to the CIA for allowing us to see in letter 1 that the recipient was a professor at Rutgers University and in letter 2 that he suffered from arthritis, thus enabling us to claim with 100 percent certainty that the recipient was Griffith Wynne Williams, an esteemed psychology professor and prolific hypnosis researcher. (The Rutgers info is an obvious giveaway, and I’d learned about Williams’ health condition from someone who knew him.) See how good it feels to embrace transparency in government, CIA? Let this be an inspiration for you to continue down this path!
If, on the other hand, those two tidbits of PII were left uncovered as a mistake, well…words can’t express the joy one feels when an agency that considers itself untouchable stumbles a little. God Bless Human Error!
I’m also convinced that the letter writer is St. Clair Switzer. I believe this because:
A) Switzer had known Griffith Williams during his days working under Clark Hull at the University of Wisconsin, when Williams was a doctoral candidate and Switzer was a master’s student.
Something Switzer was known to do while he was a professor at Miami was to ask for occasional assists from the superstar psychologists he’d met during his days with Hull. These included M.A. (Gus) Wenger (no relation), E.R. (Jack) Hilgard (also no relation), and Hull himself (if we were related, I would’ve told you that a long time ago). It makes total sense that Switzer would ask Williams for guidance about some uncomfortable, dare I say unethical, questions regarding hypnosis, now that Williams had become renowned in the field. I mean…he couldn’t exactly go to a total stranger with those sorts of questions, could he?
B) The letters contain telltale Hull-isms.
One example is his use of the opening “My Dear” in letter #1 when addressing his colleague, which is pure Clark Hull.
The opening to the December 6, 1956, letter to Griffith Williams sounds a lot like Clark Hull; click on image for a closer view
That’s how Hull began every single letter to Drs. Switzer and Patten, whether typed or handwritten, and probably to everyone else he knew, including Williams.
Here are just several of Hull’s “My dears” over the years. I have many more examples on my laptop.
Switzer had been known to use that opening as well, inspired, no doubt, by his graduate school adviser. In 1930, after earning his master’s degree under Hull, he used it in a saccharine letter to Alfred H. Upham, then-president of Miami University.
St. Clair Switzer’s awkward attempt at prose in a letter to President Upham. “Neither tongue nor checkbook…” may be one of my favorite cringe phrases ever. Click on image for a closer view.
I think Switzer must have decided against using “My Dear” in letter #2 because it would have been too over-the-top for this purpose. I mean, good Lord, we’re talking about MKULTRA here. A little gentility is fine, but a double dose would have been too weird.
Another example is the writer’s use of the term “Ph.D. thesis” instead of “dissertation” in the paragraph following the jarringly bold questions. This was also a practice favored by Hull.
This phrase found in the December 6, 1956, letter to Griffith Williams sounds a lot like Clark Hull and also St. Clair Switzer; click on image for a closer view
Although the usage is correct according to Merriam Webster, the conventional practice is to call a person’s culminating research a thesis when they’re pursuing a master’s degree and to reserve the word dissertation for the Ph.D. That’s how most people talk, at least. I’ve found that users of the word thesis when applied to the doctoral degree are generally academics who probably have a Ph.D. themselves—including Drs. Switzer and Hull. Here are highlighted examples from both men.
Clark Hull refers to a “doctor’s thesis” in a letter to Switzer; click on image for a closer view.In this letter to Switzer, Clark Hull refers to a thesis three times. Two are in reference to a doctoral thesis, while one is in reference to Switzer’s master’s thesis after it had been published. Click on image for a closer view.This is the second page of a letter from St. Clair Switzer to Jack Hilgard. He mixes it up a little, first referring to people hurrying to get their doctoral thesis in on time. He later refers to the final chapter of his dissertation.In another letter to Jack Hilgard, Switzer discusses research that he plans to reference in his doctoral thesis. Click on image for a closer view.
I can’t help but think that, four years after Hull’s death, Switzer was trying to woo Williams with a little nostalgia for their former mentor’s endearing idiosyncrasies. It’s as if he’s saying: “Don’t worry too much about my newfound interest in controlling large groups of people by surreptitiously hypnotizing them. I’m the same old lovable Doc.”
C) The timing couldn’t be better.
Switzer was on a sabbatical from the fall of 1956 through May or June of 1957, a timeframe within which the two letters originate. Because the writer was a professor (per the “Ph.D. thesis” reference), there’d be no other time that someone in academia could commit to helping a major researcher with their “very highly classified” research than while they were on sabbatical. Otherwise, he’d be too busy with his own research, not to mention courses, office hours, faculty committees, and other demands related to the “teaching straight-jacket” that Switzer referred to in a letter to Gus Wenger (still no relation) when he’d begun making plans for his sabbatical. Those plans ultimately fell through, thus freeing up Switzer to work with someone else.
Was it Jolly? Was it George?
As you probably know, I’ve struggled with the identity of the person whom I believe Switzer was assisting regarding the very highly classified research that year. In my first post on the subject of Switzer’s sabbatical, I suggested that he was working with Louis Jolyon West, who by then was at the University of Oklahoma. At the youthful age of 32, West was becoming one of the foremost heavy hitters doing Artichoke and MKULTRA research at that time. And this is an important point: he was already doing it. He already was working on very highly classified research. In March 1955, he’d begun his infamous MKULTRA research project known as Subproject 43, Psychophysiological Studies of Hypnosis and Suggestibility. According to Colin A. Ross, M.D., he was given Top Secret clearance for this work. In February 1956, he’d submitted a proposal for a continuation of that research. Although the CIA records don’t indicate it, I’m fairly sure he received the money. I feel this way based on notes that had been scribbled in response to the CIA’s receipt of West’s proposal.
Front page of notes on Jolly West’s proposal for an extension to Subproject 43; click on image for a closer view.Back page of notes on Jolly West’s proposal for an extension to Subproject 43; click on image for a closer view
Here’s one of the more telling excerpts on the back page:
To me—The budget is out of line for what we have in mind, namely, testing effects and influences of certain drugs on hypnotizability.
In fairness to [REDACTED], all this should be gone over thoroughly with him—in detail. Will do within next 2-3 wks.
At the top of page one is the following sloppy note, circled and in slightly different handwriting, signed by S.G., whom I believe to be Sidney Gottlieb.
“Feel this should be [word??] to drugs & induction of hypnosis—and scaled down accordingly—”
A close-up of Sidney Gottlieb’s comment about Jolly West’s proposal; click on image for a closer view.
Although the fifth word or words is maddeningly illegible—Is it limited to? Knocked to? Or maybe “less and keep” to?—I know what Sidney is saying. He wants Jolly West to stick to drugs and the induction of hypnosis and to scale things down, especially the budget. So it seems to me that Jolly West did receive a second year of grant money, especially since someone else was planning to go over the parameters thoroughly with him within the next 2-3 weeks.
But, OK, just for fun, let’s say that West didn’t get his extension on Subproject 43. He still had plenty of research dollars coming in for sensitive, highly classified research. On July 1, 1956, he signed a $32,800 contract between the Air Force Personnel and Training Research Center at Lackland AFB and the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation. The contract was titled “Research Involving Psychological Reaction to Stresses Encountered in Military Captivity,” and he’d obtained a Secret clearance to conduct that research.
To the best of my knowledge, no remnants of the actual research studies he’d conducted exist online. Most notably, I can’t find a Materials and Methods section anywhere that tells us what research methods were being used on his POW subjects—not even in the contract itself, which I obtained from the UCLA Archives. Do I think that hypnosis was somehow used in conducting that research? I do! After all, that’s what interrogation research was all about—hypnosis and drugs. Even more convincingly, his Subproject 43 extension proposal discusses “a number of ways in which hypnotic suggestions can bring about states of marked psychological stress,” which was the focus of his Air Force contract.
Part 3 of Jolly’s proposal indicates that Jolly was hypnotizing POWs to create psychological stress; click on image for a closer view.
Maybe Sidney Gottlieb and his gang weren’t all that impressed with Jolly’s “psychological stress” talk in part 3 of his proposal—someone labeled it as “meaningless” on the front page of their notes—but I, for one, am happy it’s in there. I’m also happy that the CIA redactors didn’t blacken it out.
Once again, thank you, CIA! This is what democracy looks like!
Therefore, at the time the two letters were written to Griffith Williams, Louis Jolyon West was swimming in research dollars and was conducting very highly classified research having to do with hypnosis, at least on POWs, but perhaps on a broader audience as well.
But between you and me? I think he got the MKULTRA extension too.
I’m saying all of the above because of another document, this one written two days before the second letter to Williams, on February 6, 1957. The document is a proposal on developing a hypnotic messenger, and, initially, I thought it had been written by West. I thought this because a) its timing fits snugly between the two letters; b) I knew that West had an interest in developing a hypnotic courier; and c) the proposal’s author stated that he was being assisted by a man for the year—an academic who “is thoroughly familiar with hypnotism at the theoretical level”—which made sense if his assistant was on a sabbatical and which also sounded a lot like Switzer. But the proposal’s request of $10K seems below West’s going rate, and it was written in a more layperson-friendly sort of way than a West proposal.
It was after reading George H. Estabrooks’ book “Hypnotism” that I realized that Estabrooks had written the hypnotic messenger proposal. A few of the giveaways were his preference for the word hypnotism over hypnosis as well as his use of the term “hypnotic messenger” (also a favorite) and the early appearance of his most oft-repeated statistic that one in five adults can be hypnotized into a somnambulistic (deep hypnotic) state.
And that’s where things have stagnated for a while: with me feeling 99 percent sure that Switzer wrote the two letters to Griffith Williams, which means that he was potentially helping a big-deal researcher such as Louis Jolyon West on highly classified hypnosis research. However, it could also mean that he was potentially helping George Estabrooks on his hypnotic messenger project. I couldn’t determine which one it was. Or was it both? Adding to this conundrum is the fact that West was at the University of Oklahoma while Estabrooks was at Colgate University in Hamilton, NY, which logistically seems tough to pull off for a guy living in Oxford, Ohio. Estabrooks would have been closer, but Switzer did have access to Wright Patterson AFB. He could have flown to Oklahoma now and again. Likewise, West could catch a flight to Dayton if need be.
The word that gives it all away
Then, as I was preparing to tape the podcast Bizarre Butler County with Taylor and Sarah, I decided to read through those two letters one more time.
“The problem of the use of hypnosis by a public speaker or some related technique which could be used by an individual to control or influence a crowd is of considerable importance and as you have noted there is very little information along these lines anywhere. This area is particularly interesting to [REDACTED]. He told me that he will obtain [REDACTED]’s book immediately.”
“Hold on,” thought I. “Did he just say REDACTED’s book? If the REDACTED he’s referring to is the REDACTED I’m thinking it is, then that is an enormous clue!”
In February 1957, there was probably one book and only one book on hypnosis that would have been of utmost interest to a person seeking surreptitious ways to control a crowd through hypnosis. That would be George Estabrooks’ book “Hypnotism,” which, as luck would have it, was being published that very year as a new and revised edition.
My beat-up, dog-eared 1957 copy of Hypnotism, by George H. Estabrooks; click on image for a closer view
“Hypnotism” first came out in 1943 and was written in a friendly, nontechnical, plain-language sort of way. It was a huge best seller. It was even recommended reading by the Book-of-the-Month Club.
But that doesn’t mean it didn’t get into the nitty gritty of how hypnosis could potentially be used in surreptitious ways. Whereas other hypnosis researchers would write about conventional issues pertaining to hypnosis, Estabrooks went straight to the controversial. You want to hypnotize someone without their knowledge? No problem! You want to give them a posthypnotic suggestion to do something that goes against their morals? Piece of cake!
One of the more noteworthy chapters is Hypnotism in Warfare, in which he discusses the creation of the Super Spy, not unlike the hypnotic messenger he was hoping to create in the summer of 1957. Another chapter titled Hypnotism and Human Affairs gets into how dictators employ the principles of hypnosis to get crowds of people to give them their allegiance and do their bidding.
Of course, George Estabrooks covered the less controversial topics in his book as well, but he made those chapters wildly readable too. By 1957, certainly other books had been published on the topic of hypnosis. But as I told Taylor and Sarah, two books that were sure to occupy the bookshelves of most hypnosis researchers were Clark Hull’s Hypnosis and Suggestibility, published in 1933, and George Estabrooks’ Hypnotism, first published in 1943. If you needed to consult a stodgy classic textbook about what hypnosis is, scientifically speaking, or how suggestibility can be measured in a laboratory, then you turned to Hull. If you were more in the mood for a lively book that describes all the possible ways in which hypnosis can be used out in the real world—in medicine, in criminal justice, and even in war—then Estabrooks was your guy.
Because the writer of the February 8, 1957, letter says that the major hypnosis researcher with whom he’s working will be obtaining the book “immediately,” it appears that it must already be out. So the question is: when was the publication date of the newly revised version of Hypnotism? My copy only says that it was published in the year 1957. When I spoke with Taylor and Sarah, I’d found sources that said it was published on January 1, 1957. I’ve since learned that a customary practice for when the date isn’t known is to use January 1 as a placeholder.
Here’s the copyright date on my copy of Hypnotism. Click on image for a closer view.
Later, courtesy of the New York Times, I learned that the new and revised edition of Hypnotism was published on May 1, 1957. This was confirmed in a later printing of the second edition, which stated the publication date was May 1957. So we have our answer—May it was!
The new revised version of Hypnotism, by G.H. Estabrooks, was published in May 1957. Click on image for a closer view.
Granted, the major hypnosis researcher could go out and buy the book immediately, in February. However, it would be the first edition that he’d be buying, which had been out for 14 years. The most recent printing was in 1955. If he’s going to go to the trouble of buying a copy, I think he should wait till May….and I think he likely did.
One possibility is that the letter writer had some inside information about the new book that was coming out. Maybe he’d been in touch with Estabrooks and was letting Williams know about the book in an indirect way, though he got a little ahead of himself as far as when it would be available.
But that’s not what I think happened. I think that in his response to the December 1956 letter, Griffith Williams probably gave a heads up to the letter writer that Estabrooks’ new and revised book was going to be coming out soon. Williams would have been on the inside track for information like that. I don’t know if Williams and Estabrooks talked much, but news of a forthcoming book would have made its way into newsletters of their professional societies and by word of mouth at conferences. So I can see Williams telling the letter writer (likely Switzer) that Estabrooks’ book will be out soon, and Switzer erroneously jumping to the conclusion that it would be available immediately. The sentence “He told me that he will obtain [REDACTED]’s book immediately,” sounds as if they’re promising to follow up on a recommendation that Williams had made to them.
What’s especially clear to me is that the major hypnosis researcher who is conducting very highly classified research from December 1956 through February 1957 and beyond is not George Estabrooks. Therefore, I think we can surmise two things:
1) I believe the two letters involve four men: the letter writer (likely St. Clair Switzer), the letter recipient (Griffith Williams), the major hypnosis researcher (still unknown, though possibly Louis Jolyon West), and George Estabrooks, the writer of the hypnotic messenger proposal and author of the book Hypnotism.
2) The letter writer—whom I believe was St. Clair Switzer—is working with the major hypnosis researcher. He might be helping Estabrooks too, since Estabrooks’ hypnotic messenger proposal fits within Switzer’s sabbatical and also was dated within two days of the second letter. But if we have to choose between the two researchers, I believe that St. Clair Switzer was working with the researcher with boatloads of funding and Secret or Top Secret clearance—the one who also had lots of questions about how far they could take hypnosis experimentation, no matter how dangerous, shocking, or unusual.
Well, hello! Lately, I’ve been doing some behind-the-scenes work on the Ron Tammen case, and haven’t had much time to think up, let alone write, a blog post. That’s probably a good thing since I’m not really at liberty to talk about most of what’s going on anyway. There will come a day when I’m able to go public with what it is I’ve been doing, but alas, today’s not that day.
Still, I’ve recently made a few discoveries that I am able to divulge, two of which I’ll be divulging now. They have to do with the years 1956 and 1957, when St. Clair Switzer took time off from his professorship at Miami University to go on a sabbatical. I’m intensely interested in this period because I’m trying to figure out what he was doing during that sabbatical and who he was doing it with.
The two discoveries are as follows:
1) We were right! The ARTICHOKE researcher whose personality was so off-putting to Air Force brass that he was required to work through a hand-picked liaison to the Surgeon General was Louis Jolyon West!
Back in September 2023, I posted about how it appeared that a young Louis Jolyon West had a personality that didn’t exactly mesh with buttoned-down military types, even though he himself was a major in the U.S. Air Force’s Medical Corps. In a memo dated July 24, 1953, Morse Allen, who was chief of the Technical Branch in the CIA’s Office of Security, was describing how a promising ARTICHOKE researcher whose name was redacted had elicited several red flags during a recent full-field investigation. Allen reported to his boss that, sure, the guy was “‘talkative,’ somewhat ‘unconventional’ and a ‘champion of the underdog’ but, according to all informants, he does not discuss classified information and can be trusted with Top Secret matters.” (I have a question though: what were those aforementioned informants doing chit-chatting about classified intel with this young researcher before he had clearance? Sounds to me as if they’re the ones who couldn’t be trusted with Top Secret information, ya’ know?)
Later in that post, I shared a CIA memorandum written months earlier, on September 23, 1952. In that memo, whose author’s name is redacted, two individuals were being discussed, one of whom had a “propensity to talk.” The other was described as having “nothing to contribute in the line of research,” however it appears that he had redeeming qualities too. When addressing how to ameliorate their talker problem, the author stated that “I could assure Col. REDACTED that any project involving REDACTED would be coordinated with him. In accordance with the new procedures for handling ARTICHOKE, OTS [Office of Technical Service] will be obligated to check with OS [Office of Security] and OS would automatically check with REDACTED in view of the fact that REDACTED is a consultant of, and of primary interest to the Surgeon General.”
The memo went on to say that a colonel who’d spoken with a representative of the Office of the Surgeon General had called to say that the new protocol successfully allayed their concerns. What’s more, the representative “had advised him that he thinks very highly of REDACTED and that it will be essential to keep him cut into the picture.”
In that post, I hypothesized that the talker was Jolly West and the Surgeon General’s proposed liaison who was to be “cut into the picture” was St. Clair Switzer. I pointed to the words “air research” that had been written above the liaison’s name as supporting evidence, since Switzer had worked in the Air Research and Development Command in Baltimore in the summer of 1951.
Click on image for a closer view.
In another post, I zoomed in on the scratched out name of the proposed liaison, which clearly started with the letter S and had roughly the same number of letters as Switzer. Here, I’ll show you again:
Click on image for a closer view.
The Surgeon General at that time was Harry G. Armstrong, who had close ties to Wright Patterson AFB, which is how I think he’d come to know and trust Lt. Col. Switzer. But again, this was all just a hypothesis.
Two years have gone by since I made those bold assertions, and so far, they’ve been sitting quietly on my blogsite with barely a mention from anyone. (It’s fine. I’m fine.) Today, I’m presenting supporting evidence that Jolly West indeed had to work through a liaison with the Surgeon General’s Office, even though the new evidence is a document from 1956, three and a half years after the September 1952 memo, when Harry G. Armstrong was no longer the Surgeon General.
My new evidence is Jolly West’s proposal for a second year of funding for his now infamous MKULTRA Subproject 43, Psychophysiological Studies of Hypnosis and Suggestibility. His cover letter was addressed to SG—Sidney Gottlieb—who, as head of the Chemical Division of the Office of Technical Service, had been put in charge of MKULTRA. Near the end of the letter, West mentions work he’d been doing for the Air Force and says that he may be traveling to Washington, D.C., very soon. “REDACTED will know about it before I will; if you want to see me, get in touch with him and find out whether the Surgeon General is going to be calling me up there next week.”
Thanks to MuckRock for making this document available. Click on image for a closer view.
Interesting, isn’t it? By that time, Louis Jolyon West was chair of the Department of Psychiatry, Neurology and Behavioral Sciences at the University of Oklahoma School of Medicine; he’d just completed his first year overseeing his major MKULTRA subproject (which was considered admirable back then); and he was in charge of a project requested by USAF Headquarters to develop recommendations on “training for survival and resistance to interrogation” (also impressive). Still, apparently, there were channels he was expected to go through, and he needed to wait for someone else to tell him if the Surgeon General wanted to see him or not.
And so, there we have it. In February 1956, a few months before Switzer’s sabbatical began, the system that had been worked out in 1952 was ostensibly still in place. West would communicate with Gottlieb’s Office of Technical Service. Gottlieb would consult with someone presumably from the CIA’s Office of Security, who would touch base with a contact sanctioned by the Surgeon General’s Office as to whether the Surgeon General would be summoning Jolly West for a sit-down. Granted, this is just one-half of my hypothesis. We still don’t know if St. Clair Switzer was the other half, though, if he was in 1952, I’m thinking he wasn’t in 1956. (I’ll tell you why in a second.) But any amount of corroboration is good corroboration and I think worth mentioning.
2) I have more proof that St. Clair Switzer was an employee of the CIA!
What was perplexing to me was the letter “A” next to the writer’s redacted name. In the 2022 post, I’d attempted to crack the CIA’s code of letters and numbers written on MKULTRA documents and concluded that A stood for Agency, since people who were known CIA employees consistently had an A by their name, whether their name happened to be redacted or not. The letter C, which is next to Williams’ redacted name, stood for consultant, I’d deduced.
If you’d like to see what I mean, here are a couple examples of memos in which known CIA officials Morse Allen and R.L. Bannerman have As by their names as opposed to the Cs, which are next to blackened names of people with whom they were consulting:
Sample 1
Document provided thanks to TheBlackVault.com; click on image for a closer view
Sample 2
Document provided thanks to TheBlackVault.com; click on image for a closer viewDocument provided thanks to TheBlackVault.com; click on image for a closer view
And so…because I was 99.9 percent positive (and still am) that the two letters were written by Doc Switzer and because the letter writer had an A next to his name, then logic would dictate that Switzer was an Agency insider.
And there that blog post sat for three years with nary a peep from anyone. (Again, it’s fine. I’ve come to terms with the fact that people have interests outside of Ron Tammen. I don’t understand it, but I’ve come to terms with it.) Incidentally, this is also why I don’t think Switzer was the Surgeon General’s liaison in 1956. In Jolly West’s cover letter for his MKULTRA proposal, the person who is supposedly the Surgeon General’s liaison has a C next to his name. Note that Jolly West also has a C next to his name.
Aaannnnnyyyway…remember the hypnosis expert I recently wrote about who liked to use the word “injunction” when he described giving a hypnotic subject a basic command like “relax” or “go to sleep”? Until I came across that person’s missives, I’d only seen the word injunction used to describe an order that was handed down in a court of law by a judge or magistrate. To date, I’ve found no other hypnosis experts during that time period or any time period who have ever used the word injunction when describing that part of the hypnotic process. And trust me, I’ve looked. In fact, I’ve never come across anyone who has used that word in that way at all.
Nevertheless, I found this very rare usage of the word injunction in three Project ARTICHOKE documents. It first appears in a write-up dated March 28, 1952, three days after St. Clair Switzer’s name (I’m 100% positive) was proposed by Morse Allen as a possible consultant for ARTICHOKE. Griffith Williams was another suggested name (I’m quite sure).
Then, in October 1955 and February 1956, several months before Switzer’s sabbatical, the word popped up several times in two reports discussing the covert, or disguised, induction of hypnosis. Based on my inability to find any other hypnosis expert occupying the planet at the time who used that word in that way, I hypothesized that all three documents had been written by the same person.
But here’s what’s intriguing about that hypothesis: the author of the March 1952 write-up was clueless about Project ARTICHOKE. He’d ostensibly been given a few broadbrush details about what they were looking to do in the area of hypnosis and the collection of information from an enemy and he did a little brainstorming. He then hand-delivered a write-up of his ideas to someone whose office was within driving distance who obviously did know about the program, even though they ostensibly weren’t with the CIA. According to their cover letter dated October 1, 1952 (Happy Anniversary, by the way!) to the official now in charge of ARTICHOKE, injunction guy was still very much in the dark. For these reasons, I think we can state with 100 percent certainty that the March 1952 writer was not an Agency insider.
Do you know who was an Agency insider? The person who wrote the February 1956 report. He had an A next to his name.
I still think that the three documents were written by the same person. However, my theory has evolved and branched out. I now think that, sometime between 1952 and 1956, injunction guy was hired by the CIA—not unlike the person who wrote the two letters to Griffith Williams during the 1956-57 academic year, whom I also believe was CIA.
This could be evidence that we’re talking about one person and one person only, St. Clair Switzer.
Wouldn’t it be so great if, despite everything that the CIA has done to try to withhold the identities of its long-dead ARTICHOKE and MKULTRA actors, what with its over-the-top use of redactions and the deceptive games it likes to play with the American people, pretending to comply with FOIA and all…wouldn’t it be great if the singular feature that would help us identify one of its own would be someone’s inflated ego? I can just picture him then, seated at his typewriter, marveling at his importance, striving to impress. How could he, someone who viewed himself a writer, have known that his instinct to use a fancy word that no one ever uses in that context instead of a more typical word that would enable him to blend in would ultimately lead to his unmasking? I’d call that poetic justice.
Coming later this month, another interesting discovery about Switzer’s sabbatical
This past July, I was interviewed again by Miami Student journalists Taylor Powers and Sarah Kennel for their podcast Bizarre Butler County. In that discussion, the three of us talked more about the Tammen mystery, and I provided a little breaking news that I hadn’t shared with anyone. I still haven’t shared it with anyone.
I’ll give you a hint: It has to do with Doc Switzer’s sabbatical and a small clue regarding who he may have been working with. Because I like to honor the breaking news that I provide to fellow journalists, I won’t be breaking it here. You’ll need to wait until that podcast episode, which I’ve been told is going to air later this month. I’ll let you know the date as soon as I know. I’ll also write up a blog post with supporting documentation to accompany that episode after it drops.
Today we’re going to talk about the word injunction. Whenever I stumble upon the word, I think of a legal order, handed down by a court of law, telling someone that they need to do something or to stop doing something. In fact, it’s often used alongside the word court, as in a court injunction. Wikipedia has a very nice write-up on the word injunction, which you are welcome to read at your leisure.
But our friend Merriam Webster has provided a second meaning for the word injunction, as if we needed one. And that meaning is: an order or admonition.
P.S. Of any kind.
P.P.S. No court of law required. Just, you know…someone gives you an injunction to do something (or to not do something) and you do it (or not). The thing is: No one uses it this way.
No, seriously, I’ve been living on earth for a while now, and I’ve even been in the presence of some very smart people with very large vocabularies, and not a soul has ever used the word injunction in this way when I was with them.
Like have you ever heard a kid say: “My dad gave me an injunction last night to do my homework or else.”
Or has your boss ever said: “I need you to have the report on my desk by the end of the week. That’s an injunction.”
Or, after visiting the dentist, have you ever told someone, “The appointment went fine, except she kept giving me injunctions to open my mouth wider.”
Exactly. No one talks that way. That would be weird.
Except, there once was a person who did use the word injunction in this way…sometimes repeatedly.
This person was a hypnosis expert in the 1950s, when the federal government was on the prowl for as many hypnosis experts as it could find. Even though I’ve found no other hypnosis experts of that time period (or ever) who used the word injunction to describe a hypnotic instruction, command, or suggestion, it was this person’s go-to. For example:
“…a man might be given hypnotically (with injunction to ‘forget’ the incident) a strong compulsion to keep a secret diary.”
Or
“Injunctions to forget the hypnotic indoctrination might be tried.”
OR
“Injunction to accept subsequent non-hypnotic instructions from an ‘agent’ might be tried out.”
Those three injunctions were found on page one of a two-page write-up dated March 28, 1952, on how hypnosis might be used to gather intelligence from an enemy. While most hypnosis experts were never tempted to use the word even once in that way throughout their careers, he or she (Who am I kidding? It’s the CIA in the early ‘50s—I’m pretty sure it’s a he) found reason to use it three times in one two-pager.
Click on image for a closer view
We’ll talk more about this write-up shortly, because I find its timing to be noteworthy in addition to the route it took to reach the people in charge of Project Artichoke.
But right now, let’s jump to 1955…October 25, 1955, to be exact. On this date, an expert in hypnosis is writing a summary on the various ways in which the CIA could induce a hypnotic trance within a subject without their knowing it—what he refers to as disguised induction. In the memo, he discusses using such methods as anxiety-reducing drugs as well as medical instruments that serve as an object of fascination for the subject while providing an excuse for an operator to encourage the subject to relax without raising suspicion. Among the medical instruments he mentioned were an electrocardiograph (EKG), which measures electrical activity of the heart, and an electroencephalograph (EEG), which measures electrical activity in the brain.
In paragraph 7, he says this about the EKG and EEG: “These machines offer a situation where the subject is in a resting condition and amenable to direction of his sensory powers at the machine (fascination) which coupled with relaxation injunctions may result in achieving hypnosis.”
Click on image for a closer view
Relaxation injunctions? Could this be the same guy as the one on March 28, 1952?
Four months later, on February 28, 1956, someone is writing an interim report titled Hypnosis and Covert Operations. Disguised induction of hypnosis is still the end game. Among other techniques, the report leads with the use of the polygraph as a disguised pretest of someone’s hypnotic susceptibility, as well as a way to measure a person’s physiological changes as they are entering and exiting a hypnotic trance.
In paragraph 6, which discusses a far riskier technique involving a subject’s carotid arteries, the author says this: “It is possible to combine a stern injunction of ‘sleep!’ with carotid pressure to obtain hypnosis…,” before cautioning the reader about how dangerous the method is, how it requires a lot of practice and perfect timing, and in no way could it be considered a disguised induction of hypnosis. I mean, good grief, he’s got his hands around the subject’s neck!
Click on image for a closer view
In the very next paragraph, he’s back to describing medical instruments, and is singing the praises of a BMR machine, which measures basal metabolic rate. In addition to diverting the subject’s attention and helping them to relax, “the BMR has the added advantage of control of inspired air. Breathed through a mask (which is the measuring device), the amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide inhaled can be controlled. With the oxygen decreased, the subject is rendered more susceptible to hypnosis. This can be coupled with injunctions to ‘relax,’ ‘go to sleep if you like,’ ‘sleep,’ [sic] so that induction might be accomplished.”
Click on image for a closer view
I don’t know about you, but I generally don’t permit just anyone to control my oxygen intake, especially if someone with the CIA happens to be in the room. But hey, we’ve found one more “relax” injunction and three “sleep” injunctions, so that’s good news. Also, is it me, or is this guy beginning to sound as if he’s trying to make the word “injunction” catch on? Despite his efforts, I haven’t seen any evidence that it did.
I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking: sure, it’s weird that the word keeps popping up from time to time, and it does appear that the writer in October 1955 and February 1956 is the same person, since he’s writing about the same topic. But how can we be sure that it’s the same person as the writer of the two-pager of March 1952? And if it is the same person, how can we figure out who the person is?
Two great questions. I suggest we address them backwards. First, I’m going to tell you who I think it is, and then I’m going to tell you why.
I think it’s St. Clair Switzer. (But I think you already knew that.)
My reason has to do with three clues:
Clue #1: The number/letter combo in the top right of the October 1955 and February 1956 memos
As we’ve discussed in the past, many, but not all, of the CIA’s MKULTRA documents that were released to the public have a combination of numbers and letters in the top right corner. Here’s an example:
Click on image for a closer view
Here’s another one:
Click on image for a closer view
The series starts with an A/B, which, according to Colin Ross, M.D., stands for Artichoke/Bluebird. Then, there’s a single number, often written as a Roman numeral, which I believe represents a major grouping. The range for these numbers is I (1) through VII (7). Then there are two numbers separated by either a comma or a slash. The first of the two numbers is a smaller category within the large grouping, while the second represents a document’s number in a series within that category.
The October 1955 memo has the following number/letter combo: III, 6/15
Click on image to link to the full document
The February 1956 memo has the following number/letter combo: III, 6/19
Click on image to link to the full document
Picture it like this: Think of a file cabinet with seven drawers. The III group occupies the third file drawer, and within the III drawer are (from my count) seven file folders. Each file folder within the III drawer contains a stack of documents, which vary in number. The thickest stack is in folder #2. It contains at least 135 documents. Within the #6 folder is a much smaller stack, numbered from 1 to 19, though several documents are missing. The October 1955 memo and the February 1956 memo both occupy the III file drawer in the #6 folder.
Do you know what other record occupies the III file drawer in the #6 folder? The March 25, 1952, memo in which Morse Allen tells Cmdr. Robert J. Williams that he’s spoken with legendary hypnosis expert Clark Hull, and Hull suggested that they contact his two prized former assistants, namely St. Clair Switzer and Griffith W. Williams. (The names are redacted, but I’m positive of this.)
Click on image to link to the full document
The number at the top of the March 25, 1952, memo is III, 6/9. In other words, whoever did the numbering decided that the three memos have something in common and should be categorized accordingly. Note that I don’t think all of the memos in the #6 folder involved St. Clair Switzer, but I believe these three memos do.
Clue #2: The date of the March 28, 1952, two-pager
Three days after St. Clair Switzer and Griffith Williams were identified as individuals to be contacted for Project Artichoke, someone typed up the two-pager about possible ways to use hypnosis to obtain information from the enemy. What’s intriguing about this write-up, other than its over-the-top usage of the word injunction, is that it’s forwarded to someone at the CIA by way of a memo written by a third party. The cover memo is dated roughly six months later. We’ll get to that memo in a second.
Because Morse Allen wasn’t the type to sit around and wait, I think that he or perhaps another official reached out to both Switzer and Williams on or around March 25 (a Tuesday). By March 28 (a Friday), someone—it seems logical to infer that it would’ve been one of those two men—had typed up the document after giving the matter some serious thought. Based on what I know about Doc Switzer, my money is on him. He would have treated a phone call from Morse Allen or another official as an assignment to be handled with utmost urgency. (An injunction, if you will!) I’ve seen his response time in other situations—he could turn around a lengthy request from a person in a high place within a day. What the two-pager’s author did next offers up another important clue to his identity.
Clue #3: The date of the cover memo introducing the March 28, 1952, two-pager
Whoever wrote the two-pager had hand delivered it to someone who was in-the-know about Project Artichoke. Strangely, the cover memo is dated 1 October 1952, which seems like a long time for that entity to be sitting on something that the CIA and military were clearly interested in.
Here’s a copy of the cover memo:
Click on image to link to the full document
It’s short, so I’m going to write it up here as well.
Memorandum for: [REDACTED]
Subject: Matter Possibly Related to Project ARTICHOKE
1. Attached hereto is a memorandum delivered to this office by [REDACTED]. This was one of a number of operational suggestions that Mr. [REDACTED] brought to this office which he understood was interested in new ideas. He has no knowledge of Project ARTICHOKE and has been informed that his suggestion has been forwarded to the interested office.
2. The memorandum is being forwarded to you since it is understood that your office has assumed overall direction of Project ARTICHOKE and the matter appears to be related to some aspects of Project ARTICHOKE.
Who I think wrote the cover memo
Unfortunately, the writer and their workplace are both redacted, but I still think I know its origin. I believe the cover memo writer was someone on a military base. Think about it: the only insiders regarding Project Artichoke were a select group of people within the CIA and the military, and no one would dare pull a pop-in at the CIA.
As for which military base, I think I know that too. We discussed above that the two most likely authors were either St. Clair Switzer or Griffith W. Williams. And of those two men, the only one who had an association with a military base was St. Clair Switzer.
Therefore, I think the origin of the cover letter was someone at Wright-Patterson AFB—most likely the Wright Air Development Center’s (WADC’s) Aero Medical Laboratory, where Switzer was well known. The person who called him on or around March 25 likely gave a broad description of the kinds of questions that they were seeking answers to, but they wouldn’t have given him the full details of the program—not yet. They certainly hadn’t disclosed the name Artichoke. They were probably assessing his interest and availability regarding a classified project having to do with hypnosis, and he wanted to show them just how interested and available he was.
Why I think it was so late
So why would someone at Wright Patt wait until October 1 to forward Switzer’s memo to the officials overseeing Project Artichoke?
I can think of two reasons. First, on September 30, 1952—the day before the cover memo was written—Project Artichoke was officially transferred from the Office of Scientific Intelligence to the Inspection and Security Office (I&SO), where Morse Allen was employed, with research support from the Office of Technical Services and Medical Sciences staff. (They’d been discussing this transfer for months, but this appears to be the final word.) The changeover involved a major reorganization in which duties were transferred from one person to another and copious files were handed over as well. To forward a memo on the first day of Artichoke’s new management structure doesn’t seem late at all. In fact, it seems really on the ball.
Click on image to link to the full document
Second, a memo that was probably fresh in their brains, dated September 23, 1952, may have also played a role. In the last paragraph, it was mentioned that the Surgeon General of the Air Force—a man named General Harry G. Armstrong—had requested that someone be “cut into the picture” for Project Artichoke. Of course, that person’s name was redacted, but in my September 19, 2023 post, I go deep into why I think Switzer was the person named in that memo. Namely, Armstrong had strong ties to Wright Patterson Air Force Base, so they shared that connection. What’s more, Switzer had been stationed for a portion of the previous summer at the Air Research and Development Command (ARDC) in Baltimore, which oversaw the Wright Air Development Center. I think that carried a lot of weight, since someone had handwritten “air research” above the person’s redacted name.
My theory is: the people at Wright-Patterson AFB probably hadn’t waited six months to send the two-pager to the CIA. They’d likely forwarded it in March 1952 to someone at OSI. However, when Project Artichoke was switched over to I&SO’s purview, someone at Wright Patt probably thought it wouldn’t hurt to forward the two-pager to them as well, especially now that they knew that the Office of the Surgeon General would approve.
If I’m correct that St. Clair Switzer had written the injunction memos of 1952, 1955, and 1956, you can be sure that this will open up new areas of study. It also confirms one guess I’d made a long time ago concerning two other documents that I believe Switzer wrote. But we’ll save that discussion for another day.
Any thoughts? Have you ever used the word injunction in this way before? If not, try it out on your friends, coworkers, and anyone else you know and tell us about it!
Many thanks to The Black Vault for making these documents accessible.
It’s April 19, 2024—71 years since Ronald Tammen disappeared from Miami University—and it’s wonderful to see you again. I’m truly honored that you’ve made a point to stop by this website on this day to see if there are any updates concerning the story of Ronald Tammen. It’s taken us seven years to develop the level of trust we have going on here and I will do my best not to disappoint.
And we do have updates.
Today’s topic has to do with an elephant that’s been occupying the room since this time last year, when I broke the news that, shortly before he disappeared, Ronald Tammen had cashed a check written on Oxford National Bank by a woman named Dorothy Craig, a long-time employee at Champion Paper and Fibre Company, in Hamilton, Ohio. My theory was, and still is, that someone from Champion—quite possibly its President Reuben B. Robertson, Jr.—had helped fund the work of St. Clair Switzer in Miami’s Department of Psychology and had assigned check-writing duties to Dorothy.
But, as I say, there’s a ginormous question wafting in the breeze that’s in need of some attention. It concerns how a person who’d been politely described by one colleague as “somewhat brusque”; another colleague as “difficult,” “very private,” “very military,” and “not overly friendly,”; and another colleague as “not one of everybody’s favorites” would have intersected with the warm, gracious, and perpetually personable Reuben Robertson, Jr., whose principal interest was papermaking and whose office was 11 or so miles from Oxford on North B Street in Hamilton.
No, I’m serious—how did the paths of these two total opposites cross?
Doc Switzer’s life consisted mainly of his faculty position at the university as well as periodic stints with the Air Force Reserves. Otherwise, as far as I can tell, he didn’t socialize much. He wasn’t a member of any men’s groups like the Kiwanis Club or the Rotary Club or the Y. He didn’t seem to have outside hobbies, such as woodworking or photography, nor did he engage in sports like bowling or tennis. He didn’t mentor young children or some other noble cause that would put him in touch with fellow members of his community.
When he was an undergraduate at Miami, St. Clair Switzer had joined a fraternity, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, and according to a bio written after he died, he served for a time as president. Letters he wrote to mentors and fellow grad students during his young and hungry years sound perfectly congenial. He even had a sense of humor. But people change as they grow older. Some people mellow. Others become full of themselves. Still others, resentful. I think Doc had developed into a toxic blend of the latter two by the time he reached 50, when Ron was a student at Miami.
Doc Switzer wasn’t a chit chatter. He didn’t confide. One of his students said he gave off impatient vibes when she stepped into his office seeking advice. Maybe I’m being too harsh, but I can’t exactly picture him smiling at a stranger on the street or taking a quick break from whatever he was doing to pat a dog on the head. Switzer’s social interactions consisted mainly of the everyday maneuverings of work, whether in Old Main (aka the old Harrison Hall), where the psychology department was located, or on some military base. At the university, he attended departmental meetings, he served on committees, and he taught. While doing so, he tended to make lower-level people feel smaller while kowtowing to the bigwigs.
But despite Doc’s deference to people in power, I can’t envision him picking up a phone and cold-calling Reuben Robertson, Jr., to see if he might be willing to support a government project involving Ron Tammen. He was more of a letter writer than a cold caller, and this wasn’t the sort of ask that could be put into writing. Plus, how would he have known that Reuben Robertson might be a good fit?
No, in order for Doc Switzer to come into contact with Reuben B. Robertson, Jr., or one of the top-tier managers at Champion Paper, I’m inclined to think that it would’ve happened in a manner that was more organic and less, um…weird. Put simply, I think someone probably served as a go-between.
But who? For starters, I think the middleperson would have to be someone who did get out into the community. They’d be someone who genuinely liked people and enjoyed reaching out to a fellow human and getting to know them. In addition to their general outgoing nature, I can think of three primary criteria for this person: 1) I think they’d have to be familiar with Doc Switzer or at least have a warm spot in their heart for Miami’s psychology department; 2) It would be helpful if they served in the military—WWII ideally—with bonus points if they had connections at the tip top levels of national security or intelligence or even the White House; and 3) Most of all, I think they’d have to be on a first-name basis with one or more officials at Champion Paper and Fibre.
I can think of two such individuals.
Before we continue, I’d like to state unequivocally that the two people I’m about to name, now deceased, were well known and highly respected in their fields. Also, we don’t know for sure whether one of these persons stepped in as a middleperson between St. Clair Switzer and Champion Paper and Fibre. We only know that, given their visibility and business connections, it’s possible that one of them was involved. Also, if either of them did provide a personal link between Switzer and Champion Paper, they would have believed they were doing so in service to the U.S. government, as their patriotic duty. Plus, there’s no law against it.
And so, here we go: let’s talk about the two common denominators who had the means and wherewithal to help Doc Switzer get from Point A, a prickly psychology professor in need of funding for a secret government project involving Ronald Tammen, to Point B, or, rather, North B Street, in the Office of the President at Champion Paper and Fibre.
The two people we’ll be discussing today are John F. Mee and John E. Dolibois (pronounced DOLL-uh-boy], both of whom were esteemed alumni of Miami University. Interestingly, both men also happened to be psychology majors when St. Clair Switzer was a member of the faculty.
Note that we’ll be primarily focusing on the period of time leading up to 1953, when Dorothy Craig wrote a check to Ron Tammen. To learn more about each man’s life, both of which were full and fascinating, I’ve provided links to their university bios below their background write-ups.
First, a little background on John F. Mee and John E. Dolibois:
John Frederick Mee
John F. Meewas born on July 10, 1908. He grew up on a farm in Darrtown, Ohio, a rural community about 5 miles outside of Oxford. His family was wealthy, thanks in large part to Mee’s grandfather and namesake, who raised stock (cattle and such) and was good with money. But just as money has never solved everything, it managed to instill some father-son tension between Mee and his dad. Mee’s father, R. Kirk Mee I, was a cowboy-hat-wearing character who enjoyed rubbing elbows with politicians great and small. (He looked almost exactly like Boss Hogg from the Dukes of Hazzard, which is kind of amazing since he predated that show by more than three decades.) FDR visited their house when Roosevelt was a nominee for vice president. Although Kirk Mee held respectable positions—he was the sergeant at arms for the Ohio Senate under two governors and he even ran for the Ohio Senate himself in 1942—his son John, perhaps unfairly, felt that his father lacked the drive to pursue a career in which he would generate his own wealth. He was always closer to his mother. (You can find photos of the Mee family, including R. Kirk Mee I and John F. Mee as a young man on this webpage.)
Mee was six years and one day younger than St. Clair Switzer, who was born in 1902. As an undergrad at Miami, he’d been an assistant in the psychology department’s experimental laboratory, which is how he and Switzer had gotten to know each other. They were practically contemporaries. Mee graduated from Miami in 1930, just as Switzer was completing his first year as an instructor. Thinking he wanted to be a psychology professor too, Mee went on to obtain a master’s degree in psychology at the University of Maine. He was on track to pursue a Ph.D. in psychology at Ohio State, when something fluky happened. He was visiting the campus to sign up for graduate courses, but first stopped off at the business school to say hello to someone. As it turned out, the business school professors liked him and made an offer he couldn’t refuse. He took classes while serving as placement director at Ohio State. In 1939, Mee was hired as the placement director at Indiana University’s School of Business in Bloomington as well as assistant professor of management. Strangely enough, he didn’t earn his Ph.D. from Ohio State until 20 years later, in 1959, which was…unbelievably late. (To be honest, I thought it was a typo in his bio, but I guess life had gotten in the way for him. That, plus the rules were laxer back then.) Nevertheless, it didn’t seem to tarnish his career, as you’ll soon see.
John E. Doliboiswas born on December 4, 1918, in Luxembourg, the youngest of eight children. Tragically, his mother had died of the Spanish flu shortly after his birth, so he never really knew her. Though he recalled his childhood as a happy one, the family experienced a lot of hardship. In 1931, his father decided to start a new life in the United States. John’s oldest sister had moved to the States after marrying an American soldier she’d met during WWI, and his father decided that he and young John should join them. Their ship arrived in New York Harbor on the most iconic day possible—the fourth of July. John and his father settled in the North Hill community of Akron, Ohio, a historically multicultural neighborhood that had been a welcoming destination for immigrants and refugees since WWI. It still is.
Dolibois was a quick study in his new country. He mastered English early on through the sink-or-swim method, and, by high school, he’d managed to rise to the top of his class. He was voted senior class president, and, come graduation time, he was also named valedictorian. (He graduated in 1938 at the age of 19, so he was a little older than his classmates.) Dolibois never passed up an opportunity to praise the organization that he believed helped him adapt so well to his new country: the Boy Scouts. He adored scouting. He became an Eagle Scout—the president of Goodyear Tire and Rubber pinned on his badge—and he went on to help mentor other Boy Scouts for the rest of his life. In an interview conducted in September 2006, he proudly stated that he was still involved in scouting—he was 87—and was the oldest registered “scouter” in his community.
Dolibois continued to excel after high school. His brains and exceptional people skills helped him obtain a four-year scholarship to Miami University. He joined the fraternity Beta Theta Pi, where he would become president of that organization too. Although he was a psychology major, he decided to load up on business courses during his senior year, and, after his graduation in 1942, he was hired as a management trainee with Procter and Gamble.
But the year 1942 had other plans in store for men of a certain age. John Dolibois and John Mee, not to mention St. Clair Switzer and Reuben B. Robertson, Jr., would leave their positions to serve their country in WWII. That momentous war, which we’ll discuss more shortly, would be a turning point for both men.
Criterion 1: Ties to Doc Switzer and Miami’s psychology department
John Dolibois
It’s unclear how well John Dolibois might have known Doc Switzer during his undergraduate years. The only thing we know for sure is that Dolibois was a psychology major, so he most likely knew the department chair, Everett Patten, as well as a few other professors in the department. Although it’s probable that he would have met Switzer then, it doesn’t really matter. In 1947, Dolibois was hired as the first alumni secretary for Miami University. It was in his job description to know the university’s programs inside and out as well as any of its funding needs. It was also his job to tie potential alumni donors to those needs. So even if John Dolibois didn’t know St. Clair Switzer all that well from his undergraduate days, and we don’t know that that’s the case, he would have at least been acquainted with him through his position at the university. And if Doc Switzer was experiencing a funding need, John Dolibois would have likely been brought into the loop.
John Mee
We already know that John Mee and St. Clair Switzer knew each other at least somewhat, since Mee was an assistant in the psychology laboratory when Switzer was a newly hired instructor. But I also have evidence that he and Switzer were friends, and that friendship continued until at least July 1950, when Mee wrote a letter to Doc. Among other details, Mee told Switzer that he’d be visiting Darrtown for three weeks in August, and that he planned to help Switzer paint his house during that time. He credited Switzer with influencing his career path in management, telling him with an implied wink, “Looks like you may have started me on a steady job.” In addition, Mee let Doc know that he’d provided a “glowing letter of recommendation” to the University of Tennessee for him, so apparently Doc was putting out feelers again. Finally, Mee had just edited a book, titled “Personnel Handbook,” and Doc had authored the chapter on testing. Mee wanted to bring him up to speed on that endeavor as well.
In 1961, after receiving a promotion to be the Mead Johnson Professor of Management at Indiana University, John Mee donated $1000 to Miami’s psychology department, an amount that would exceed $10,000 in today’s dollars. According to a news article, an accompanying letter he’d written to Switzer and Patten said that: “While he had ‘some very superior teachers’ in many fields at Miami as an undergraduate, ‘the giant step in my education and eventual decision to enter the academic profession’ had resulted from his association with Switzer and Patten in the psychology laboratory.” In 1962, he donated another $500 to Miami’s psychology department.
So, I think we can say with confidence that both John Dolibois and John Mee were well acquainted with St. Clair Switzer and/or Miami’s Department of Psychology at the time that Dorothy Craig wrote a check to Ronald Tammen.
Moving on to Criterion 2…
Criterion 2: Ties to WWII and national security, intelligence, or the White House
John Dolibois
John Dolibois had perhaps one of the more extraordinary experiences during WWII, as he would eventually come face to face with some of the most notoriously hard-core Nazis the world has known. Because of his language skills—he was fluent in German, as well as French and Luxembourgish—he was transferred to military intelligence (known as G-2) and sent to Camp Ritchie in the Blue Ridge Mountains of Maryland, to receive specialized training in the interrogation of prisoners of war. (He was one of the celebrated “Ritchie Boys.”) Dolibois was soon part of the Army’s elite group known as the IPW (Interrogation Prisoners of War), and he became so expert in the methods of interrogation that he was called upon to train others in the skill as well.
Credit: Department of Defense
In May 1945, after V-E Day, Dolibois was chosen for a special assignment: to interrogate some of the highest-level Nazi prisoners in preparation for the first trial at Nuremberg. Working for the Nazi War Crimes Commission, he was stationed at the Central Continental Prisoners of War Enclosure 32, which, serendipitously, was a location he knew well as a child. The POW enclosure had formerly been a resort known as the Palace Hotel of Mondorf-de-Bains, in Luxembourg. When Dolibois arrived, the once magnificent edifice had been made over into a bare-bones prison, with armed guards, barbed wire, and the sparest of accommodations. In an open swipe to the people who were interred there, it was given the nickname Camp Ashcan. Dolibois’ job was to engage with the Nazi prisoners, encouraging them to talk about their horrific deeds throughout the war so that the War Crimes Commission could determine who should be tried before the International Military Tribunal. Dolibois’ people skills came through for him again. Referring to himself as Lieutenant John Gillen—he decided it probably wouldn’t be a good idea to give the Nazis his actual name—he came to be known as a listening ear, earning the prisoners’ trust, and often getting them to dish on each other. Among the prisoners he would come to know were Hermann Goering, Karl Doenitz, Hans Frank, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Robert Ley, Julius Streicher, Alfred Jodl, and Alfred Rosenberg.
The Nazi prisoners at Camp Ashcan, many of whom interacted with John Dolibois on a regular basis. Hermann Goering, the head of Luftwaffe, the German Air Force, is seated in the front center. Credit: Public Domain
After 24 prisoners had been identified for indictment, they were moved to Nuremberg Prison in preparation for the first trial. Dolibois was transferred there as well and put in charge of prisoner morale. Because of his translation skills, his overall likability, and perhaps a little of the psychology he’d learned in college, he assisted Army psychiatrist Douglas M. Kelley as Kelley analyzed the prisoners to ensure they were mentally fit to stand trial. (Kelley’s tragic story is detailed in the book The Nazi and the Psychiatrist, by Jack El-Hai, which is currently being made into a film starring Russell Crowe and Rami Malek.) Dolibois left Nuremberg Prison in October 1945, ahead of the first trial, though he attended several of the sessions.
Interestingly, during his time at Camp Ashcan, Dolibois also got to know a man named General “Wild Bill” Donovan, director of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which oversaw U.S. intelligence activities during the war. In his post-wartime role, Donovan became involved in the interrogation procedures that Dolibois and others were doing. In his book “Pattern of Circles,” Dolibois said that Donovan “spent a lot of time with us. He stressed the techniques of getting and evaluating information. We were urged time and again to study closely the personal relations of the various internees with a view of playing them off against each other.” Donovan, who had a degree from Columbia Law School, also served as assistant to Robert H. Jackson, a Supreme Court justice who was the chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials. After the war, the OSS was disbanded, but reemerged in 1947 as the CIA, though Donovan had moved on to other legal pursuits.
After Dolibois’ time in the war had ended, he went back to Procter and Gamble. He’d been placed in their Fatty Acid Division to handle personnel matters, but his heart wasn’t in it. He was an extrovert of the highest magnitude, and he needed his innate skills as a networker extraordinaire to be put to use. He was approached by a friend with strong Miami connections about a new position that he felt Dolibois would be perfect for: alumni secretary. Dolibois threw his hat into the ring, and of course he got the job, beginning May 1, 1947. Because this was the first time the university had such a position, the people in charge of the purse strings didn’t understand why he’d need a budget to cover the costs of travel and refreshments—two essential line items for anyone who hoped to foster fruit-bearing relations between a university and its graduates. Dolibois soon began giving talks about his experiences in WWII—with provocative titles such as “Recollections of an Interrogator” and “I Knew the Top Nazis”—and donating his speaker earnings to his alumni activities. In doing so, he also managed to build a highly visible brand for himself in communities throughout the tri-state area and well beyond.
Several news articles describing Dolibois’ WWII experiences mentioned that he held a reserve commission as captain, including one article that was written on February 27, 1953. I presume he still held his reserve commission at the time that Dorothy Craig wrote a check to Ronald Tammen.
John Mee
John Mee’s experience in WWII focused less on Nazis per se and more on the staffing of a U.S. Army that, in the build-up to America’s entry into the war, had been multiplying exponentially. After stepping away from his responsibilities at Indiana University in the spring of 1941, he was doing for the Army what he did for IU’s graduating business majors: finding the right person for the job. Specifically, his role was the commissioning of officers, which he did in the Office of the Adjutant General in Washington, D.C.
Mee, who started out at the bottom of the ladder, found a way to quickly move up: by making himself into an authority. He studied up on pertinent topics that no one else knew much about…topics like whether a person could become an officer if they’d been convicted of a felony or if they weren’t a natural-born citizen. In an oral history interview he gave in 1985, he said “…then I learned something that I didn’t know. You know, I was a psychologist. People, when they got accustomed to coming to you for one thing, they started coming to you for other things.” As a result of his self-made indispensability, he was put in charge of the appointments section, which, according to Mee, was responsible for the commissioning of officers for the entire Army, “from the military cadets at West Point to the ROTCs to the training courses,” etc.
Mee eventually tired of D.C. though. He didn’t want to have to go back to Indiana University without having seen some overseas action. He requested to be transferred to the Army Air Corps and was named assistant chief of staff in charge of personnel at the European Wing of the Air Transport Command. He later went on to become chief of military personnel in the entire Air Transport Command. By the war’s end, he was a colonel who’d been stationed in Europe, India, China, and the Philippines.
When Mee returned to Indiana after the war, things had changed for him and the other faculty members who’d served. He could no longer live the simple, genteel life of a professor in a quaint college town. Once the military knew where he lived, they didn’t forget.
Said Mee: “…they traipsed up and down the corridors, knocking on the doors, see, because here’s where the knowledge was. And they drew those college professors out of those classrooms to give them knowledge in psychology, botany, _____ business, anything, see. And the college professors came back to their classrooms and offices, but the doors remained open, see. And today, see, in many areas the college professors have one foot on the campus and one foot in the government, or one foot in the firms, you see, and all this. See, the World War II spoiled the dreamy life of a college professor.”
He said that in 1985. Imagine what it was like in 1953.
In 1950, Mee was approached by someone he’d met while he was in the Air Transport Command, a man by the name of Donald Dawson. Although Dawson was born the same year as Mee, he was rather low in the Army’s hierarchy, a second lieutenant compared to Mee’s lieutenant colonel. Nevertheless, Mee was nice to Dawson.
“I took care of him,” he said, and Dawson hadn’t forgotten about that kindness.
After FDR died early in his final term of office, Harry Truman became president. Truman apparently didn’t give a rat’s patooty about military hierarchy as far as the Oval Office was concerned. Somehow, some way, Donald Dawson became one of his six principal assistants.
After his election to a second term, Truman felt he needed new ideas for presidential appointees. He wanted to put politics aside and find the names of actual experts in the various areas of specialization. He turned to Dawson to head up a group that would propose and vet the experts’ names, and in May 1950, John Mee was called upon to serve as the staff director. The group was referred to as the Little Cabinet, and it included such heavy hitters as the deputy undersecretary of state, the assistant attorney general, the assistant secretary of labor, the assistant secretary of the Air Force, and the assistant secretary of the Army.
According to Mee, the group needed to find people to fill hundreds of posts, including the head of the Atomic Energy Commission, the Civil Service Commission, and many others. Mee would scour his contacts and his contacts’ contacts for the right people with the right credentials and give the name or names to Dawson. Then this convo would happen:
“He’d say, ‘Do you know him?’”
“And I’d say, ‘Yah.’”
“’Well, call him up and see if he’ll serve,’ you see.”
“So I’d call the guy up and he’d…of course, they all say ‘yes’ and that, because everybody wants to have a presidential appointment. And then they’d come in and meet Dawson. And if Dawson approved them, they’d get about ten minutes with President Truman, and never see him again, you see, but then start off to be these other things.“
Donald S. Dawson, who oversaw Truman’s Little Cabinet; John F. Mee served as staff director under Dawson from May 1950 until the end of Truman’s second term in office; Credit: Harry S. Truman Presidential Library
Mee served in this capacity from May 1950 until the end of Truman’s second term, which was officially January 1953, likely a few months before Dorothy Craig wrote a check to Ronald Tammen. But that doesn’t mean Washington had forgotten about John Mee or that he’d stopped caring about topics of national import. In early July 1954, Mee was under consideration for the position of assistant secretary of the Air Force. I kid you not. He’d traveled to D.C. to meet on the matter with Secretary of Defense Charles Wilson and Air Secretary Harold Talbott, an aviation engineer and industrialist with strong ties to Dayton, Ohio. (Talbott had worked alongside Orville Wright!) Mee would have accepted the job too—he said so when his possible nomination was made public. To quote the news article:
“’It depends upon my clearance and the approval of the two senators from Indiana,’ Mee said. ‘If everything goes through, and it is agreeable with Indiana University, I will accept.’”
Something must have gotten in the way though because, as it turns out, he didn’t get the job. A guy named Lyle Garlock became assistant secretary instead.
One last thing: Remember John Mee’s letter to Doc Switzer? It was written on July 30, 1950. So, John Mee, who was serving as the staff director of President Truman’s Little Cabinet, had written a letter to Doc Switzer at that time, letting him know that A) he’d be spending three weeks in Darrtown in August, and B) he was still planning to help Doc paint his house. Props for that.
Moving along to Criterion 3…
Criterion 3: Ties to Champion Paper and Fibre
Perhaps the most critical question we need to ask on this blog post is: did John Dolibois and/or John Mee know someone important at Champion Paper and Fibre at the time in which Dorothy Craig wrote a check to Ronald Tammen? Because without a previous relationship, there’s no introduction to St. Clair Switzer, and with no introduction to Switzer, well, there’s no check from Dorothy.
John Dolibois
Obviously, Miami University officials knew all about Champion Paper and Fibre Company. The earliest example of a working relationship that I’m able to find is that Alexander Thomson, Sr.—chairman of the board of directors at Champion, son of Champion founder Peter G. Thomson, and husband of Mary Dabney Thomson—was a member of Miami’s Board of Trustees beginning in June 1938. His term was supposed to last until 1947, however he abruptly died from complications of pneumonia one year later, in June 1939. Then there’s Mary Dabney Thomson, who was connected to Champion by way of her marriage to Alexander Thomson, Sr., and who’d served as president of the Western College for Women, just across the road from Miami University, from 1941 to 1945. But those obvious ties precede John Dolibois’ hiring as alumni secretary in 1947, and I doubt that Dolibois knew Alexander and Mary Dabney Thomson when he was a student at Miami.
But Dolibois did know several officials at Champion Paper, and he knew them quite well, thanks to the Boy Scouts. Despite evidence of earlier attempts by others, Dolibois is credited with organizing the first Boy Scout troop in Oxford—Troop #30—soon after he arrived at Miami in the fall of 1938. In 1939, he was named its scoutmaster. (He would have been named scoutmaster sooner, but there was a rule that you had to be 21.) In the summers of 1940 and 1941, during Dolibois’ junior and senior years, he was the camp director for the Fort Hamilton Boy Scout Camp, a 50-acre rental property near Somerville. During that same period, he was hired as a “cubbing commissioner,” and he traveled around Hamilton and organized Cub Scout packs in the elementary schools. He’d been hired for both positions by the Fort Hamilton Boy Scout Council, which oversaw all scout troops in the region, and which, at that time, was led by two Champion officials: Calvin Skillman, who was president of the executive committee, and Alexander Thomson, Jr., who was vice president.
This is probably a very good time to say that Champion Paper LOVED the Scout program. The company believed so hard in scouting that it sponsored its own Boy Scout and Girl Scout troops, and it even had its own camp on Darrtown Pike, Camp Chapaco. The company’s news magazine, The Log, celebrated scouting’s 40th and 50th anniversaries with splashy spreads that drew praise from the Boy Scouts of America’s (BSA’s) PR director and the regional executive of the BSA’s National Council.
Let’s get back to 1940 and 1941 when Dolibois was by and large working for Calvin Skillman and Alexander Thomson, Jr. It’s pretty obvious who Alexander Thomson, Jr., was: he was Alexander Thomson, Sr.’s and Mary Dabney Thomson’s son, and a vice president of Champion Paper and Fibre. As it turns out, Alexander Sr. had also been a big proponent of scouting, so Alexander Jr. had ostensibly picked up the reins from his father. Sadly, Alexander Jr. passed away from a recurring illness in 1944, five days before his 36th birthday.
Dwight Thomson, son of Alexander Sr.’s brother Logan Thomson and another of Peter G. Thomson’s grandsons, would carry on the Boy Scout tradition—perhaps more enthusiastically than anyone else in the family. In 1950, he served on the development committee for the Fort Hamilton Council’s new camp lodge at Camp Myron Kahn, the council’s official camp that had opened in 1942, and he spoke at its dedication on Sunday, June 24, 1951. He was president of the executive board in 1954 and ‘55, both of which Dolibois sat on. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, both Thomson and Dolibois sat on the executive boards of the Fort Hamilton Boy Scout Council and, after 1959, the Dan Beard Council, based in Cincinnati, when the two councils had merged. In 1965, Dwight Thomson was named president of the Dan Beard Council. By that time, his credentials included serving as chair of region IV, which encompassed Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia, and sitting on the National Executive Board.
What I’m trying to say here is that John Dolibois and Dwight Thomson were both very passionate about scouting in the 1950s and 60s (and beyond), and even though I haven’t been able to locate any pics of them sitting at the same table at some 1952 chicken dinner or solemnly standing side by side at some circa 1953 awards ceremony, I have documents putting them on the same council in 1954, with Thomson serving as president. Do I think that John Dolibois, former director at the Fort Hamilton Boy Scout Camp, attended the dedication of Camp Myron Kahn’s new lodge in June of 1951? I do! Do I wish a newspaper photographer had snapped a candid shot of him chatting away with Dwight Thomson as evidence? I wish that very much! Nevertheless, I’m positive they knew each other by the time Dorothy Craig wrote a check to Ronald Tammen.
As for Calvin Skillman—Cal to his friends and colleagues—he’d managed to work his way up into the upper echelons of the company despite his not having the last name of Thomson or Robertson. In 1940, while he was presiding over the Fort Hamilton Boy Scout Council, he was the personnel manager at Champion. In 1945, he was supervisor of employee relations. In 1949, he was named assistant director of public relations, working directly under Dwight Thomson, who was vice president in charge of Industrial and Public Relations. Skillman was also serving in an editorial role for The Log during those years. In 1947, he was managing editor, in 1948, he was editor, and in April 1953, at the time when Dorothy Craig wrote a check to Ron Tammen, Cal Skillman was still assistant director of PR and one of three editorial advisors for The Log. The other two were Reuben B. Robertson, Jr., and Dwight Thomson.
Something else I find interesting about Cal Skillman is that he was in the same class as Dorothy Craig at Hamilton High School—the graduating class of 1920. Granted, Dorothy dropped out after her sophomore year, but I’m sure that the two of them knew each other fairly well, especially since they’d worked for the same employer, in the same building, for years.
I’ve made a couple other discoveries worth noting about Champion Paper and Miami University—discoveries that happened long after Dorothy Craig wrote a check to Ron Tammen. One is that Champion Paper and Fibre was a leading fundraiser for Miami University’s Hamilton campus in 1966. Remember Karl Bendetsen, the man who’d overseen the deplorable internment camps that imprisoned Japanese Americans during WWII, who went on to become president of Champion Paper after Reuben B. Robertson, Jr., was killed in a traffic accident? Bendetsen organized a fundraising effort in which Champion Paper offered matching funds of up to $250,000 toward the university’s million-dollar campaign.
Another fascinating tidbit is that Karl Bendetsen’s former home, which had been nearly decimated in a fire on January 24, 1961, was rebuilt and, according to information gleaned from two news articles, had been donated to the Miami University Foundation in 1969 by the Champion Paper Foundation, a charitable arm of the company that was established in 1952. The university used Bendetsen’s former home as a conference center for several years before selling it in 1973.
We’ve already established that John Mee was the director of placement in the business schools of two large state universities—first at The Ohio State University and then at Indiana University, where he was also a professor of management. The job of a placement officer is to get to know people in corporations and industries where students can seek employment. He was from SW Ohio. He would have made it his business to know whom to call on at Champion Paper and Fibre.
Also, featured on page 777 of John Mee’s “Personnel Handbook” is a reproduced letter from Reuben Robertson, Sr., to “All Champion Employees.” The letter was used as an example of the proper way for a business to communicate with its employees about controversial issues. (In Reuben Sr.’s case, he was discussing the Taft-Hartley Act.) So again, John F. Mee was well acquainted with the powers that be at Champion Paper.
I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking, “Of course he was. But did he know anyone there really well, on a first-name basis?”
I believe he did, and evidence indicates that he knew the big cheese himself, Reuben Robertson, Jr. What’s more, I’d venture to say that, if John Mee had contacted Reuben Robertson, Jr., in early 1953 about the possibility of funding a government project led by his friend Lt. Col. St. Clair Switzer, Reuben might have felt as if he actually owed John a favor.
Here’s why:
John Mee had been named staff director for Truman’s Little Cabinet beginning in May 1950. Shortly thereafter, he was in Washington, D.C. brainstorming names for presidential appointees to run by Donald Dawson. In November 1950, the Wage Stabilization Board was completed. Do you remember who was appointed to the Wage Stabilization Board? Reuben Robertson, Jr., for one.
I believe that John Mee was the person who suggested Reuben Robertson, Jr.’s name for consideration to that board, and I also believe that John Mee was the person who called Reuben on the phone to ask if he’d be interested in serving. I also believe that this appointment made Reuben Robertson, Jr., much more of a household name to other agencies in need of smart and savvy people. After serving on the Wage Stabilization Board, Reuben was invited to be part of the Commerce Department’s Business Advisory Council (January 1953), the Mutual Security Agency’s lead representative in Germany to assess the economic situation there (February 1953), a member of a Hoover Commission task force to study the organization of the Department of Defense (January 1954), and last but not least, deputy secretary of defense (July 1955).
Martin L. Whonow?, you may be asking. Sorry, I realize I’m introducing his name late in the game, but Martin L. Friedman was Donald Dawson’s go-to assistant on the Little Cabinet. Don’t worry—this takes nothing away from John Mee, who was still the staff director and still very much overseeing the process by which the names of potential appointees were added to the pool of candidates. According to an oral interview, Friedman appeared to handle most of the security issues—running the names of prospective nominees by the FBI and figuring out what to do based on the results. The reason I’m bringing up his name now, so late in the post, is that most of Friedman’s file folders have to do with the commissions and boards that required the Little Cabinet’s input. In box 7 is the Wage Stabilization Board.
So, I think it’s safe to conclude that the Little Cabinet was responsible for the presidential appointees on the Wage Stabilization Board, which means that John Mee was the person who called Reuben Robertson on the phone and asked him if he wanted to join. You might say that Reuben Robertson, Jr., entered the national arena thanks to John Mee.
I’m going to start wrapping things up here, even though I’m skipping over one additional criterion—that of a potential association with Oxford National Bank. In part 1 of my April 19, 2023, post, I talked about how both A.K. Morris (president of the bank) and Don Shera (vice president) had extremely close ties to Miami University that, at times, ventured into conflict-of-interest territory. There were a couple other people at the university with close ties to the bank as well, one of whom was Ron Tammen’s academic adviser, J.B. Dennison, who was on the bank’s board of directors when Ron disappeared.
I’d simply like to add that John F. Mee’s grandfather had been one of the founders of the Oxford National Bank. John’s younger brother, R. Kirk Mee II, would sit on its board of directors beginning in 1956.
There’s one final discovery about Oxford National Bank that I can’t keep to myself, even though it’s a little off topic. And that discovery is: At the time that Ron Tammen disappeared, one long-time Oxford National Bank employee had two sons, both of whom had very close ties to the FBI. One son had worked as a special agent in the Cincinnati field office for two years before quitting in 1952, the year before Ron disappeared. The other son, who was older, had become a special agent for the FBI in the late 1940s and he would continue his life-long career with them in Washington, D.C.
You’d think that they’d have an interest in Ron’s story, especially since both men were Miami graduates.
OK, I’ve probably said too much.
****
As always, I welcome your comments about any of the above. Because we are discussing people who are well known and because lots of people will be reading this post, I will be a little more selective in posting comments publicly. If I don’t post your comment on the website, I will respond to you directly by email. Thank you!
After my most recent blog post about when Carl Knox stopped investigating Ron Tammen’s disappearance, a reader and I were discussing the 1976 documentary produced and narrated by Ed Hart of Dayton’s Channel 2. For those people who haven’t watched it yet, I encourage you to do so. It isn’t very long—less than 1/2 hour total. I’ve embedded the two parts on my home page, but you can also link to them here:
What’s special about this documentary is that key people tied to the investigation in 1953 have given on-camera interviews in 1976, and what they say is revealing. This got me to thinking that I should transcribe their quotes and post them online. That way we won’t forget the things they said in light of any new information that we’re able to uncover.
As it turns out, creating a transcript of their quotes wasn’t that time-consuming. I recalled that I’d found a transcript of the program in Miami University Archives early in my investigation and had filed it away. I’ll discuss that transcript in more detail a little later, since I believe it reveals something about the person or persons who created it. (Spoiler alert: it wasn’t Ed Hart.)
And so, here you go…the quotes from The Phantom of Oxford along with my thoughts below several of them:
Quotes from The Phantom of Oxford
PART 1
Joe Cella, Hamilton Journal News reporter [0:06]
[Opening]
“I believe Ron Tammen voluntarily walked off campus. I believe he’s somewhere out in the world today…alive, under an assumed name. Everything has been…erased with him…uh…and I believe he’s still out there.”
Oh, man, me too, Joe, with one slight difference: I think Ron was driven off campus. But other than that, I totally agree with you, 100 percent, that Ron Tammen was still very much alive in 1976.
Charles Findlay, Ron Tammen’s roommate [5:40]
[Describing his return to his and Ron’s room in Fisher Hall on Sunday night, April 19, 1953]
“I came back to campus, to Fisher Hall, and went to my room as normal and the light was on in the room. And in the room, the door was unlocked, and Ron’s book was open on his side of the desk. And uh…the desk chair was pulled back as though he got up and went somewhere. So I thought not too much about that and I studied I think till eleven o’clock that night. I got back to school about nine o’clock, went to bed as usual, and got up the next morning and didn’t see Ron in his bed. I still wasn’t too excited about it because I thought he might have spent the night at the fraternity house.”
For the life of this blog, I’ve been reporting that Chuck had arrived back at Fisher Hall at around 10:30 p.m. I’ve reported that time because A) that was the time reported by Joe Cella in his one-year anniversary article in the Hamilton Journal News on April 22, 1954, and B) Carl Knox had written the time 10:30 on one of his note pages along with the words “Light on – Door open but he never returned.” Carl didn’t say what happened at 10:30, but I presumed that’s when Chuck had arrived at the room, as corroborated by Cella. I’m now wondering about that time. This has nothing to do with Cella, by the way, who was an excellent reporter. But it might have something to do with what someone had told Cella when he was writing his one-year anniversary article.
In the video, Chuck says that he returned to Miami at 9 p.m. I figured that, with 23 years having transpired since he’d recounted the story, that detail may have become a little fuzzy. However, when I went back to read the earliest news articles, I found this in the April 28, 1953, Miami Student, which was overseen by journalism professor Gilson Wright, who also reported on the case: “Tammen, a counselor in Fisher Hall, disappeared sometime between 8 and 9 on a Sunday night.” How do they know it was before 9 p.m.? It may just be sloppy reporting, but could Chuck Findlay have arrived at 9, which is how they would have been able to provide that timestamp? And if that’s the case, what would the 10:30 signify in Carl Knox’s note? Of course, it may indeed be the time of Chuck’s arrival, but what if it was something else—such as the time Ron had walked back to the dorms with Paul (not his real name) and Chip Anderson or the time someone may have spotted Ron sitting in a car with a woman before driving off? Something to ponder…
Addendum: I’ve added Carl Knox’s note to the bottom of this post.
Charles Findlay [6:36]
[Describing the next day, Monday, April 20…]
“And it was sometime later that afternoon, the evening, we had a counselors meeting. And that’s when I think we discussed a little more, a little further, as to what, where Ron was and what the situation was.”
Charles Findlay [7:40]
[Describing when it first hit him that Ron probably wasn’t coming back]
“I think probably the first three or four days I wasn’t concerned. But I really realized he wasn’t coming back, he wasn’t coming back as he normally would, when the ROTC was out and they were dragging the pond, I get concerned. Cause I remember sitting at my desk and looking out the window and watching them drag the pond…and that was kind of an eerie feeling.”
Ed Hart: Someone must have thought that there was foul play involved. Did you?
“No, I didn’t. I didn’t think so because at that time, even now, you go back and you think about a college student, what 19, 20 years of age. How do you make an enemy? And who would think that a college student would have much money?”
As we’ve discussed in the past, if Ron was gay, then there was a chance that he could have been the victim of a hate crime. However, because we now have evidence that the FBI expunged Ron’s fingerprints in 2002 due to the Privacy Act, that tells us that Ron was still alive in 2002. (Per the FBI: only the subject of the record can request an expungement of that record.) Therefore, I don’t believe Ron was a victim of foul play.
Jim Larkins, fellow sophomore counselor in Fisher Hall [8:40]
[Describing why he felt it didn’t make sense for Ron to run away]
“He is just the last person that you would ever expect just to merely take off uh… for as far as I was concerned there would be no reason for his having done it. From all that we could…all that we knew about him and could learn about him he just seemed to have everything going for him.”
Carl Knox, dean of men at Miami University, who oversaw the university’s investigation into Ron’s disappearance [9:33]
[Describing students in the 1950s and a little about Ron as a person]
“Much more it was known as the apathetic period of time. It was certainly uh…far different from the Sixties but uh…it was generally a fairly happy time, sort of normal activities taking place. This young man was uh…well appreciated around campus because of his musical talent. He played bass with the Campus Owls uh…he did and was one of few people on campus who had a car permit in order to transport that bass viol around. And one of the oddities of the thing because he prized it so highly was the fact his car was found locked up with the bass inside and uh…no Ron.”
In his role as the dean of men, Carl Knox was responsible for all male students on campus. He made a point of knowing the students, especially the ones who were most active. I’ve been told that he likely knew Ron Tammen, though probably not very well. H.H. Stephenson, who was an employee of Carl’s, would have known Ron a lot better. We’ll get to H.H. in a minute.
Ronald Tammen, Sr., Ron’s father [10:52]
[Describing his perceptions of the last time he saw Ron, who’d been in Cleveland playing with the Campus Owls the weekend before he disappeared]
“He just seemed to have fun the whole time he was there. There was never anything at all that would indicate there was a (laugh) he had a problem or a thing was bothering him. Nothing at all.”
That’s how Ron’s father may have perceived his son, but there was obviously a lot more going on inside that “fun” veneer. If something was bothering Ron, especially if he was dealing with the sorts of stresses that I think he was dealing with—his grades, his finances, his sexuality—I doubt that he would have gone to his father, who was known to be decidedly not fun in certain situations.
Joe Cella [11:25]
[Describing his impression of how the investigation into Ron’s disappearance was conducted]
“I wasn’t too keen on the initial investigation that went on. It was very abruptly done. To me there was no thorough investigation. And that’s the reason I stayed with it. Over a period uh…of years that followed, we were able to accumulate a lot more, much more, than we ever had initially.”
THANK YOU, Joe, for sticking with it! It’s because of the leads you chased down that we’ve been able to get to the place we are now.
PART 2
Dr. Garret Boone, physician and Butler County coroner [0:16]
[Describing his experience when he tried to notify Miami officials at that time about Ron’s visit to his office in November 1952 to have his blood type tested]
“On one occasion…uh…led to some uh…sharp words between a…uh…between me and two Miami University personnel who did not appreciate uh…my uh…being concerned about the problem of his disappearance.”
Ed Hart: Why?
“Well, I really don’t know. Uh…they might have been bored with me and maybe they got fed…been fed up by reporters and TV men, I’m not sure…which.”
Wouldn’t you love to know who the two Miami personnel were? Doc Boone may have given us a couple clues. What I’m getting from his comment is A) he went to the university in person, since he was ostensibly talking with two people at the same time; and B) the personnel seemed to be the types of people who frequently dealt with “reporters and TV men.” Therefore, it sounds as if one of the two persons handled media relations. Was the other person Carl Knox? It’s my understanding that he was a soft-spoken man who employed a velvet-hammer type of leadership style. For this reason, it’s difficult to imagine him engaging in “sharp words” with a public official who was offering to lend his assistance in the investigation.
Ronald Tammen, Sr. [1:20]
[Describing his impressions of the investigation]
“I was happy that we got the FBI to be involved because of the broad coverage. But uh…I can’t say that I’ve ever been happy about anything that’s happened in the case, because nothing’s ever happened.”
Ronald Tammen, Sr. [1:51]
[Describing the effect Ron’s disappearance had on Mrs. Tammen]
“So much with the wife that uh…big problems occurred with her health. It was just beyond her…she just couldn’t take care uh she couldn’t take it and her health started failing and that was…that was the cause, I believe, of her death was his disappearance and no evidence or solutions at any time.”
This is probably Mr. Tammen’s most revealing statement. First, he refers to Mrs. Tammen as “the wife,” which is about as impersonal as he could be. Maybe it was how they talked in the 1950s, but in the ’70s? I’d think he could have spoken more affectionately…how about “my wife,” or “Ron’s mother,” or, best of all, “Marjorie”?
Mr. Tammen’s biggest slip was when he said “she just couldn’t take care uh she couldn’t take it.” As we’ve discussed, Marjorie was an alcoholic for years before Ron disappeared. As you can imagine, his disappearance didn’t help in that regard. When Mr. Tammen said she “couldn’t take care,” I believe he was about to give away too much information about her condition. Was he going to say that she couldn’t take care of herself? Their two younger children, Robert and Marcia? I don’t know. But he caught himself just in time.
Carl Knox [2:40]
[Describing why Ron’s disappearance had stood out for him throughout his career]
“On other campuses where I’ve been located there have been disappearances and there have been tragedies, but nothing which has sort of popped out of…
No background of explanation, no way of reasonable…uh anticipation, but just suddenly happening and there you were with uh…uh…egg on your face, deepfelt concerns and yet uh…no answers for any part of it.”
Ed Hart: And yet something tells you Ron Tammen is alive?
“Yes, I feel this. I feel it…keenly.”
I believe Carl Knox had discovered information about Tammen’s life and disappearance that he was not making public, likely after having been told by someone in a position of authority. Remember how he’d had a buzzer installed on his secretary’s desk for Tammen-related calls? Or how his secretary was given a list of words that she was instructed not to say to reporters? And we’ve since learned that he’d discovered that Dorothy Craig of Champion Paper and Fibre had written a check to Ron shortly before he disappeared. When asked 23 years later if Ron Tammen was alive, he said, “Yes, I feel this. I feel it…keenly.” This tells me that Carl had some indication that Ron was in ostensibly trustworthy hands when he left Miami’s campus. Like the U.S. government’s perhaps?
Barbara Spivey Jewell, daughter of Clara Spivey, who was at her mother’s house in Seven Mile, Ohio, when a young man who looked like Tammen showed up late at night on Sunday, April 19, 1953 [3:33]
[Describing when her mother and she notified the Oxford police about the young man’s visit]
“Well, we saw his picture in the paper about a week afterwards and my mother said, well that’s the boy that was here at our door. And so we went to Oxford to the police station and talked to them. But uh…I was at the door with my mother also and I’m um…positive it was him.”
It was actually two months later, not a week. Also, a third person in the room, Barbara’s eventual second husband, Paul Jewell, told Detective Frank Smith in 2008-ish that he was “absolutely confident” it wasn’t Ron. He thought it was a local ruffian.
Barbara Spivey Jewell [4:07]
[Describing whether she’s still convinced that it was Ron]
“I would still say that it was him. I’m positive. I can still see his dark eyes and his dark hair.”
H.H. Stephenson, Miami housing official who saw a young man who looked like Ron dining in Wellsville, NY, on August 5, 1953 [4:44]
[Describing his experience in the Wellsville, NY, restaurant]
“When my eyes would look toward him I would find he was looking at me. And I had that feeling that uh… that he was sort of looking right through me. Uh… for some reason uh… that I’ll never know I said nothing about uh… the fact that I thought maybe this young man was Ron Tammen. I didn’t speak of it to my wife during the meal. I don’t know why I didn’t.”
H.H. Stephenson (he went by Hi, short for Hiram) knew Ron Tammen, whereas Mrs. Spivey didn’t. In 1953, Hi was the director of men’s housing and student employment. He would have interviewed Ron for his counselor’s position. He also gave Ron his permit to have a car on campus. Most of us wonder why Hi didn’t walk up to the young man when he had the chance, and he obviously would agree. But Hi told his boss, Carl Knox, the next day. Why didn’t the university follow up on that potentially big lead?
Sgt. Jack Reay, Dayton Police Department, Missing Persons [6:30]
[Describing his check on Ron’s Social Security number in 1976]
“When I checked with the state, this uh…Social Security came back negative. There was no record of it, which would indicate that, in the past few years, since we’ve had the computer, uh…and things have been entered into the computer, there’s been no activity with that Social Security number.”
The fact that Ron never used his Social Security number again is incredibly important. This means that he didn’t just run away to be with some forbidden love interest, be they female or male. If he lived—and we have evidence that he did until at least 2002—then he had to have gotten a new Social Security number, which is extremely difficult to do. There is a list of circumstances for which a person can request a new Social Security number and running away to become a new person isn’t on the list.
As I mentioned earlier, there’s a transcript of The Phantom of Oxford in Miami’s University Archives. I’m missing the first page, but I have the rest of the pages, which end at 23. The transcript appears to be written by someone in the business. It’s typewritten in two columns. On the lefthand side is a description of each video clip (photos, videotaped interviews, B-roll, and reenactments) and on the righthand side is a description of the audio (narration and interviews) that accompanies that clip. I’d always thought that the transcript was provided by someone with the TV station to the university, but now I don’t think so. I think someone affiliated with the university typed it up because they only cared about the narrative and the interviews with people tied to the university. There is one person whom they didn’t care about—Sgt. Jack Reay. Even though he wasn’t involved in the Tammen investigation, he was a great resource and had a lot to say about missing person cases. The only words typed on page 21 are “MISSING PERSON THEORY,” which covers all of Sgt. Reay’s air time. I feel that his comments are elucidating too, which is why I’ve included them here.
Sgt. Jack Reay [7:16]
[Describing how rare it is for a person to disappear completely without a trace]
“It’s very difficult for a person to just drop completely out of uh…civilization and not somebody else know who he is or where he is or something about him…or him to relate back to some of his early childhood. I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m just saying that, percentage-wise, for someone to just completely drop out would be very small in comparison with the missings and runaways.”
Agree. I think it would have been impossible for Ron to have carried it off without A LOT of help.
Sgt. Jack Reay [8:00]
[Describing what kind of person would voluntarily leave family and friends forever]
“If somebody is really set on…getting lost, I think that they can, but they’re going to have to be a very strong individual. And as far as a 19-year-old…I don’t know. It takes an awful lot of willpower to sit back and say, there’s nothing back there that you ever want to be related to again.”
Also agree. But, as we’ve discussed numerous times, the 1950s were different. If Ron was gay, it would have been extremely difficult for him, especially if he was at risk of being outed. I honestly think that, in his 19-year-old brain, he decided that his family would be better off thinking that he was dead as opposed to being gay.
Sgt. Jack Reay [8:29]
[Describing the potential of identifying Ron’s remains decades later if he’d been a victim of foul play]
“If he was a normal individual and never really had any contacts with any type of…law enforcement or any type of identifying thing [mumbled], it would be a little bit difficult to identify that individual today. In fact it would be very difficult.”
Marcia Tammen’s DNA is on file in CODIS, the Combined DNA Index System. If there is ever a discovery of unidentifed human remains, law enforcement should be able to ascertain if it’s Ron. But, as discussed above, I also don’t think he was a victim of foul play.
Ronald Tammen, Sr. [8:42]
[Describing his thoughts with regard to ever seeing his son again]
“I…I have uh…have never lost hope that sometime, somehow something would come up so we’d have some evidence of either his death or his disappearance or the reason, reasons for it or…I’ve never given up. In fact a lot of times I’ve thought that uh…you know, he’s gonna show up. He’s gonna show up here pretty soon.”
😔
Joe Cella [9:20]
[Describing his thoughts with regard to ever finding Ronald Tammen]
“I don’t know whether I would recognize him today if…if I saw him, but uh… Richard gave me a photograph of Ron and uh…he gave it to me 23 years ago, believe it or not. I’ve been carrying it in my wallet…hoping some day in my travels around the country that, you know, who knows…it might be him coming down the street.”
I have it on excellent authority that Joe carried Ron’s photo in his wallet for the rest of his life.
**********
ADDENDUM
Carl Knox’s note in which he’s written the time of 10:30but doesn’t mention Chuck Findlay’s name
You guys, I’ve had a serious change of heart about something pertaining to the Ron Tammen case. It has to do with the length of time that had transpired before Carl Knox, Miami’s dean of men who was tasked with conducting the university’s investigation into Ron’s disappearance, stopped looking for him. This was despite the fact that Ron’s family and friends, not to mention Miami students, faculty, and staff; alumni; people living in the tri-state area; and anyone else who might have happened upon Ron’s story, were still devouring any piece of information the university could provide.
Recently, I had an email conversation with a reader on the topic of Dorothy Craig, and it occurred to me that, even though I’ve probably alluded to my evolved feelings on this website, I hadn’t really put them into actual words. It’s time to fix that.
What I used to think
In the past, I’ve cited two occurrences that enabled us to establish a before/after timeframe to delineate when Carl Knox had stopped looking for Ron. Mrs. Clara Spivey of Seven Mile, Ohio, provided the “before” date, the latest date on record when I believed Carl was still looking for him. Two months after Ron had disappeared, Mrs. Spivey had contacted investigators with the claim that a young man matching Ron’s description had shown up on her doorstep late at night on April 19, 1953, looking disheveled and confused and seeking directions to a nearby bus stop. At first, the time was reported as being around 11 p.m., but then the reporter, Miami journalism professor Gilson Wright, had changed it to midnight for subsequent articles. Mrs. Spivey had come forward shortly after June 20, 1953, after having read a recent article in the Hamilton Journal News in which Wright had basically retold the story and said there were no new leads. Oscar Decker of the Oxford Police had embraced Spivey’s story and the media were thereby alerted.
“It was a blustery night, with some snow flurries, and traffic was light,” Decker said. “He could have easily walked the 11 miles from Oxford to Seven Mile in two and a half or three hours.” (I beg to differ, chief, but please, do go on.)
The paper then paraphrased him saying that “If the youth in question was Tammen, it reinforces the theory that he suffered a sudden attack of amnesia.”
Because the university was publishing this new development in the Miami Student, it appeared to me as if Carl was still looking for clues as late as June 29, 1953.
The “after” date, the earliest date on record when we could conclude Carl was not still looking, was, in my view, one day after Miami housing official H.H. Stephenson had returned from his vacation in upstate New York. On August 5, 1953, Stephenson was having lunch in a hotel restaurant with his wife, in Wellsville, NY, when he was convinced that he spotted Ron, whom he’d actually known at Miami, eating at a table with several other young men. Weirdly enough, H.H. didn’t approach the young man at that moment, and by the time he returned to the dining room to find out if it was indeed Ron, he was too late. The young men had left.
According to a 1976 article by Hamilton Journal News reporter Joe Cella, Stephenson had told university officials—probably Carl himself—about his experience the next day, on August 6. However, as far as I can tell, Carl didn’t follow up on this lead. He didn’t call the hotel in Wellsville or notify the FBI or anything else he might have done to see if he could track down the young man. Likewise, unlike their reaction when Mrs. Spivey had stepped forward, university officials had kept H.H.’s potential sighting away from news reporters. Joe Cella had to chase that lead down himself 23 years later.
As a result, my earlier hypothesis was that Carl Knox had stopped looking for Ron Tammen sometime between June 29 and August 6, 1953, which I felt was surprisingly soon after Ron had disappeared.
What I think now
I think it was way sooner.
Why I’ve changed my mind
Carl was doing all the right things early in his investigation—conducting interviews, compiling notes, coordinating a campus search, talking to bank officials, and working with law enforcement. Best of all, he was following leads. If someone gave him the name of a person who might know something—someone like, oh, I don’t know…Doc Switzer, for example?—Carl would dutifully write down that person’s name on his pad of paper and contact them.
Another example was when Carl had jotted down the name of a girl Ron used to date as a freshman, Joan Ottino, along with the names of two of her family members. Joan had moved to Denver, Colorado, to attend nursing school over one year earlier, but Carl was undeterred by the distance. A week and a day after Ron disappeared—April 27, 1953—Carl had sent a telegram to Joan, asking “SHOULD YOU HEAR FROM, OR SEE, RONALD H. TAMMEN, PLEASE WIRE OR PHONE COLLECT.”
Click on image for a closer view
See what I mean? He’s not simply going through the motions to make it appear as if he’s doing something. He’s really doing something.
On May 4, 1953, an article appeared in the Hamilton Journal News informing readers that several of Ron’s fraternity brothers had recently traveled to Cincinnati in response to a landlord who thought her new tenant looked like Ron’s photo. Unfortunately, she was mistaken. Although the article doesn’t say this, I have it on excellent authority that the person driving those Delts to Cincinnati was Carl Knox. This means that, shortly before May 4, 1953, Carl Knox had been accepting phone tips and contacting his back-up witnesses and hitting the road in search for Ron. I’ve also learned that he was gathering info from his passengers on the drive to Cincy and back as well. It was on that car trip that Carl Knox learned of Paul’s (not his real name) and Chip Anderson’s late-night walk home from the Delt house to Symmes and Fisher Halls after song practice the night Ron disappeared.
But do you know what? That’s also roughly the point in time when the urgency in finding Ron Tammen seemed to wane for Carl. And it wasn’t as if he wasn’t discovering new information. Although we don’t know precisely when he discovered the information about Dorothy Craig’s check, I think it had to have been early in his investigation. Dorothy’s name is written at the top of a page of scribbled notes that establish what Ron was doing before he disappeared. It’s the sort of info an investigator would collect on day one—the condition of the room, an hour-by-hour breakdown of where he was, that sort of stuff. It could be that his note about Dorothy’s check was added at the top on a later date, though, even if that were the case, I’d still think it would have been early on.
Click on image for a closer view
I think Carl was instantly intimidated by Dorothy Craig’s check. Something about it—Was it the amount? Was it her powerful employer?—may have astonished him so much that he immediately stopped putting any further details into writing. I’ve thought for some time that as Carl was being informed by the bank official about the check, it was the pivotal point in which he’d halted his investigation. Now I’m thinking: if Carl had learned about Dorothy Craig’s check before May 4—and my hunch is that he had—maybe he did look into it, and someone else had put a stop to that part of his investigation. Maybe they said something like: “Look, Carl, if you want to drive to Cincinnati to check out the landlord’s tenant, fine, knock yourself out, but don’t go near Dorothy Craig.” No matter what happened or how, I think that Dorothy Craig’s check factored heavily into the reason the university soon lost interest in Ron’s case.
And let’s not forget about Dr. Garret Boone, the cranky Hamilton physician whose office Ron visited in November 1952 to have his blood type tested. In 1973, reporter Joe Cella had revealed that Boone had attempted to notify university officials about Ron’s visit but had been rebuffed. Although we don’t know exactly when Dr. Boone attempted contacting the university, I think it was also early.
An excerpt from the 1953 Hamilton, Ohio, telephone directory with Garret Boone’s entry in bold and all caps; click on image for a closer view
As Boone told Cella, “I offered the information (the medical file card contents) to local authorities at the time, but it was always discounted.”
His use of the phrase “at the time” sounds as if he didn’t wait around for two months until approaching them, as Mrs. Spivey had done. Mrs. Spivey attributed her tardiness to the fact that she hadn’t seen the story in April and had only been reminded of her front-porch visitor after reading Gilson Wright’s June 20 article stating Tammen was still missing and there were no new leads. Dr. Boone’s situation was different though. In addition to being a practicing family physician, Boone was the county coroner, which means that he was an elected official. It was his job to keep up on the news of Butler County, especially anything having to do with a potentially life-and-death matter regarding one of its citizens. He would have seen the April news articles and he knew the importance of stepping forward as early as possible in such cases.
But when he did, university officials—I’m guessing Carl was one of them—had zero interest in what he had to say. That doesn’t sound like the old Carl—the one from before May 4. This tells me Doc Boone likely contacted them shortly after that date, after he’d had time to rifle through his files for Tammen’s medical card.
By then, Carl Knox was assuming a more passive role in the investigation and letting Oxford police chief Oscar Decker take over. When Mrs. Spivey’s potential Tammen sighting was announced on June 29, 1953, it was Decker who was the spokesperson ballyhooing the news.
And so, at the moment, I think Carl Knox and Miami University were no longer investigating Ron’s case by May 4, 1953—two weeks and a day after Ron went missing. Of course, if we ever find evidence that Doc Boone had reached out to university officials earlier than that day, we’re going to have to push our date up even further.
Hi, how goes it? It’s been a while since we last chatted. I’m still researching a bunch of questions in Tammen world and beyond, but I thought…what the hey? Why not provide you with an update regarding a relatively small question to help kick off the weekend? Why not rule out one possible theory in a vexingly long list of them?
This post has to do with Dorothy Craig, the long-time Champion Paper and Fibre employee who’d written a check to Ron Tammen shortly before he disappeared. We don’t know the date of the check. We don’t know the amount of the check. Most significantly, we don’t know why the check was written. However, what we can be sure of is that a representative of Oxford National Bank had told Carl Knox about said check and with that new bit of intel, Carl had scribbled the following question at the top of the ridiculously small notepad that he was using to conduct his investigation: “Where was it cashed?”
Those four words told us that Dorothy had written the check to Ron and not the other way around. So as mad as I am at Carl for not providing any more of the details that he’d no doubt been hearing on the other end of the phone line, he at least managed to put that into writing. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: thanks, Carl!
When I presented this information for the first time in April 2023, a few of us threw out some possible reasons for the check, and one of the more popular ideas was that perhaps Dorothy had hired Ron and a few of his musician friends for a gig—maybe she’d rented out a hall for a bash she was throwing or perhaps she hired them for a church thing. Because that was something else we’d learned about Dorothy—in addition to her family and her friends and her job at Champion Paper, she was all about her church.
Dorothy and her husband Henry were members of the St. Paul Evangelical and Reformed Church, located on Campbell Avenue, between North 7th and 8th Streets, in Hamilton. (The building’s still there, but it’s now being used by another congregation.) But Dorothy was no “strictly Sundays” kind of congregant. Church was front and center in her life, and she was called upon frequently to serve.
Credit: Google Maps; The former St. Paul Evangelical and Reformed Church
In 1950, Dorothy was president of their adult Bible study group, which also hosted fundraisers to help pay for the church’s Sunday school equipment and building repairs. For one of the fundraisers, she oversaw the publication of a church cookbook, which couldn’t have been easy, what with her needing to corral content providers, dole out tasks, and make sure deadlines were being met—not to mention, after it was in print, having to get out there and sell sell sell. She planned the group’s annual picnic too. In February of 1953, not long before she wrote the check to Ron, she was elected to the church’s Board of Trustees.
The two take-homes from that previous paragraph are: 1) Dorothy Craig helped write a church cookbook in 1950, and if you happen to see it on eBay or anywhere else, could you pulleeeze let me know so that I can buy it and post it on this website?; and 2) People who attended St. Paul would have known Dorothy Craig quite well—so well, in fact, that many probably called her by her nickname…Dot.
If you’re thinking that that might be how Ron would have known Dorothy, alas, no. I’m not sure how much church Ron attended, but when he did attend, he went to the Presbyterian church in Oxford.
But there was someone else who attended St. Paul—someone whom Dorothy would have been far more inclined to contact if she ever needed to book a band. That person was Franz E. Klaber, a German immigrant who’d made a very big name for himself in Hamilton and throughout the region with his eight-piece Franz Klaber Orchestra. Their forte was polkas and other German folk music, but Franz wasn’t afraid to try other genres too.
The Klaber family had been members of St. Paul beginning at least in the late 1930s, and the family remained members after Franz Sr. passed away in 1963. Of course they’d play for church events. In fact, Franz and his family played at the St. Paul Church lawn social in August 1953. Therefore, hiring a band would have been a no-brainer for Dorothy Craig. I’m quite sure that Franz would be the first person she would’ve asked. To be honest, I think he would have been hurt if she hadn’t.
Franz Klaber’s sons, daughter, grandchildren, and now great-grandchildren are active in the band—now known as the Klaberheads. You can listen to them here. https://youtu.be/PTCO3isgPv8
And where does that leave us regarding Ron Tammen? We still don’t know how a middle-aged woman whose life revolved around family, church, and work at a paper mill 12 miles from Oxford would have intersected with a sophomore business major who was about to become one of the biggest Ohio mysteries of the century.
Nevertheless, this helps us narrow our options with regards to how they might have met. Our only problem is that the one explanation that seemed most feasible of all—the explanation that seemed most reasonable and logical—is no longer on the table.
Hi. I don’t have a lot of time to write this, so I really need to hurry. This is going to be a mini post that’s light on words and heavy on links and jpegs.
But first, I’d like to wish our veterans a happy Veteran’s Day, and to thank you for your service to our country. I’d also like to take this opportunity to discuss my favorite wartime movie. Actually, it’s not just my favorite war movie, it’s the only war movie I ever watch. And that movie is:
It’s so good, it’s on Steven Spielberg’s top five list. If you’ve never seen it before, TCM is airing it on Saturday at 5 p.m. Eastern Time. If you’re busy, DVR it. Then you can watch it whenever you want, and trust me, you’ll want to watch it more than once. I watch it at least once a year. If you’ve seen it before, be sure to mention your favorite parts in the comments. (Mine is when they go out clubbing the night they return home. I mean, does Boone City have an amazing night life, or what??)
OK, back to the real reason I’m writing this mini post—I’d like to focus on two veterans from WWII: Reuben B. Robertson, Jr., and John D. Millett. As you may recall, Reuben Robertson, Jr. was the much-loved, heavily dimpled president of Champion Paper and Fibre, in Hamilton, Ohio, from 1950 to 1960. In 1955, Reuben temporarily stepped down from that post to serve as deputy secretary of defense under Secretary Charles Wilson. In 1957, he went back to being president at Champion but, tragically, three years later, he was assisting a driver whose car was stopped in the middle of a highway and was killed by a drunk driver.
John D. Millett was Miami University’s 16th president. He’d been elected president in March 1953 after a committee that Reuben Jr. was a member of selected him as their preferred nominee. As far as Miami’s presidents go, I’d guess that Millett is considered one of their best. Steven Spielberg puts him in the top five. (Just kidding.) Millett didn’t officially start his duties at Miami until the fall of 1953, but, as president-elect, this was going to be a huge jump for him in his career. Before he came to Miami, he was a full professor at Columbia University. He’d done some impressive things, but from what I can tell, he didn’t have any administrative experience at a university. He likely wanted to hit the ground running. He attended the June meeting of the Board of Trustees. I’m sure he was doing other things to prepare as well.
As my most dedicated readers know, a woman named Dorothy Craig, whom I’ve narrowed down to being one of Reuben Jr.’s employees, wrote a check to Ronald Tammen shortly before he disappeared. Oddly enough, Dorothy Craig’s name was never, ever mentioned in any newspaper articles, even though Carl Knox had written it down in his notes. How did they manage to keep her name out of the papers? I think it may have to do with a friendship that goes back to WWII.
That’s right, just as the headline says, Reuben Robertson, Jr. and John Millett knew each other during the war. How do I know that they knew each other? Because I now have it on excellent authority that both men were working in the same extremely small branch of the same division of the Army Service Forces at the exact same time.
So let’s cut to the chase:
Both Reuben Robertson, Jr. and John D. Millett worked for the Control Division of the Army Service Forces.
The Army Service Forces was the part of the U.S. Army that was responsible for making sure that Army personnel had the necessary supplies and services to do their jobs. The Control Division was the part of the Army Service Forces that focused on improving efficiency. Control Division officers would travel to Army bases and monitor how things were being done. They helped reduce paperwork and whatnot. I’m sure they did more, but I have guests coming at 2 p.m. and I haven’t even started cleaning the downstairs yet.
OK, so where were we? Both men worked in the Control Division. But that’s not all.
Both men were officers in the same branch of the Control Division.
Which branch?
The Administrative Management Branch.
How small of a branch was it?
Really small. We’ll get to that in a minute.
OK, so this is the part where I stop writing words and start showing you pictures.
Here’s the preface to a book titled Organization of the Army Service Forces, a 700-plus page tome written by John D. Millett. In the preface, he describes his role in the Administrative Management Branch of the Control Division.
Here’s a document from Reuben Robertson Jr.’s separation papers that describes his time with the Army. In the first paragraph of the summary section, it describes his time in the Administrative Management Branch of the Control Division, a position he held for 18 months, beginning in March 1943. Although he did go to Georgia later, he was in Washington, D.C., for a portion of that time.
And lastly, here’s a citation from a book on the history of operations research in the Army that tells us how many people worked in the Control Division’s Administrative Management Branch.
We’re talking 28 officers and 3 civilians, all housed in Washington, D.C., in the fall of 1943. Reuben Robertson, Jr. and John D. Millett were two of those officers.
Reuben Jr. was such an extrovert, he could get to know 30 other people really well by lunchtime. John Millett strikes me as a major people person too. You guys, they knew each other.
For this reason, I think Reuben Robertson Jr. probably encouraged John Millett to apply for the presidency at Miami when Reuben was asked to sit on the selection committee. John had Reuben to thank for that very large boost to his career, from professor to president. It would only make sense that Reuben would have John’s ear if he ever needed to keep a bothersome detail out of the paper.
I think it’s time we elaborated a little on our theory about St. Clair (Doc) Switzer and famed MKULTRA researcher Louis Jolyon (Jolly) West. For a while now, I’ve been frantically waving a document in everyone’s faces from January 1953, and using it as evidence that the two men must have known each other and even worked together in some capacity.
So…THEN what, right?
Right. This blog post is all about what happened to Doc and Jolly AFTER the January 14th memo. Admittedly, it mostly has to do with Jolly, but, based on events that came to pass in his career, we can deduce how Doc was affected as well.
But first, let’s have a little recap.
Our running theory
In September 1952, the CIA was rounding up experts to conduct research for Project Artichoke. One of the locations at the top of their list was an Air Force Base—Lackland AFB, to be exact, in San Antonio. The reason they were drawn to Lackland was likely two-fold. First, it was where all incoming basic trainees were psychiatrically screened and where “questionable” Air Force officer candidates and pre-flight cadets were more fully evaluated psychiatrically. That’s a lot of baseline data concerning what was going on inside pretty much every airman’s head.
Second, the new chief of the Psychiatric Service had arrived at Lackland AFB in July 1952—Jolly West. He had just completed his residency at the Payne Whitney Clinic in New York City, which was part of Cornell University Medical College. As it so happens, people in the Payne Whitney Clinic were friends with people in the CIA. Harold G. Wolff, an expert on headache and psychosomatic illness, was one of those people. He would go on to head the Human Ecology Fund, which funded MKULTRA-focused research, and to coauthor a 1956 comprehensive report on communist interrogation and indoctrination methods—aka brainwashing. Jolly, having developed strong skills in hypnosis while at Payne Whitney, was now in charge of the entire psychiatric division at Lackland’s 3700th USAF Hospital. If that’s not a perfect fit for Project Artichoke, I don’t know what is.
At roughly the same time in which the CIA was scrutinizing Jolly West, someone else’s name had made a little ping on their radar. That person was Miami University psychology professor Doc Switzer, who was brought to their attention by way of a memo written on March 25, 1952. Chief among Doc’s selling points were his having worked under noted psychologist and hypnosis expert Clark Hull and for his being a pharmacist before becoming a psychology professor. By September, however, the CIA was having their doubts about someone—Doc, I believe—and, despite his Artichoke-friendly credentials, they didn’t think he had much to contribute toward the research they desired.
As it turns out, Doc could be useful in a different way. Doc was well-connected in the Air Force, whose surgeon general would have to approve whether Lackland could be a site for CIA-funded Artichoke research. Not only had Doc made a name for himself during WWII, but he was on the rolls of the Air Force Reserves, and, most recently, during the summer of 1951, he’d served in a prestigious post at the Air Research and Development Command (ARDC) in Baltimore.
On September 23, 1952, a CIA rep had spoken with a colonel in the Air Force’s Office of the Surgeon General, and the colonel had said that the person whom the CIA was uncertain about—the person I believe to be Doc Switzer—would be “essential” to be “cut into the picture” because they thought very highly of him. Four months later, on January 14, 1953, Jolly (I’m 100% sure) and Doc (I strongly believe) are named in a memo with regards to the creation of a “well-balanced interrogation research center.”
Jolly West; Credit: Oklahoma Department of Public Welfare; Fair use.
The hot shot and his rival
The winter of 1953 turned into the spring of 1953, with all of its happy trappings:
the flowers were blooming…
the birds were singing…
the bees were buzzing…
…and, on April 13…
…the director of the CIA was signing a memo establishing MKULTRA, an amped-up version of Project Artichoke.
(Due to a lack of time, we’ll forgo discussing how, six days later, a certain student from Miami University who had Doc Switzer for his psychology professor seemingly vanished from the face of the earth. We can discuss that little coinkidink another day.)
Our story picks up two months later, in the summer of 1953, when Jolly West and Sidney Gottlieb, who oversaw the CIA’s MKULTRA program, are discussing the to-be-implemented operation at Lackland AFB. Jolly couldn’t have been more gung-ho. On June 11, a 28-year-old West wrote to a 34-year-old Gottlieb a detailed letter about his short-term and long-term goals with regards to the hypnotizing of human subjects—a resource he ostensibly had an endless supply of—as part of his new project for the CIA. Among those readily available subjects were basic airmen, whom he could summon by simply telling the folks in HR to: “Send us 10 high I.Q. airmen at 0900 tomorrow,” he bragged. Other potential subjects would include volunteers who worked on the base, hospital patients, and a miscellaneous category of “others,” including prisoners in the local stockade and returning POWs.
He had the subjects. He had the know-how. He had the drive. He had the space—though he’d need to purchase some suitable new equipment. He could hire the necessary staff.
But there was a problem, Jolly informed Sidney. The problem’s name was Robert Williams, who, by the way, should not be confused with Robert J. Williams, who oversaw Project Artichoke in the CIA’s Office of Scientific Intelligence before it was reassigned to Inspection and Security. Nope, this guy was Robert L. Williams, who was chief of Neurology at Lackland AFB. Jolly informed Sidney that, after Williams had received his certification by the American Board of Neurology and Psychiatry—with coaching from Jolly in preparation for the psychiatry portion of the exam, he pointed out—Williams started eyeing Jolly’s territory. Williams persuaded Colonel Robert S. Brua, commander of Lackland’s 3700th Medical Group, to combine the two divisions into one and to put Williams on top.
As you can imagine, Jolly was fuming over this power grab. Here was someone Jolly described as being “several years my senior professionally although his experience in psychiatry is considerably less than mine” getting in the way of Jolly doing whatever he wanted. He’d be a giant roadblock to the hypnosis research the two men were discussing, Jolly contended.
“This is a most unhappy turn of events from the point of view of our experiments,” he lamented.
“Dr. Williams is extremely acquisitive and will be an uncomfortably close scrutinizer of my activities,” he said. “The fact that I am still Chief of Psychiatry doesn’t alter the fact that it is now merely a section in this new Service, and that many of my administrative and even professional decisions can be hamstrung.”
He later added: “And, most unfortunately, he is one of those conservative traditionalists who actively opposes research or treatment involving hypnosis, states that it is ‘tampering with the soul,’ and spoken out against some of my previous work; he will undoubtedly hamper my efforts in many ways.”
Jolly had some suggestions on how to fix this unlivable situation. Going back to the old organizational structure was one possibility. Transferring Williams the heck out of San Antonio to some other base was another one. Or, geez, maybe Jolly should, you know…leave. That last option wasn’t very realistic though. Because the Air Force had foot the bill for Jolly’s medical training, he was obligated to serve there until June 1956. For him to even entertain the possibility of leaving in July of 1953 was indicative of…what…his immaturity? His arrogance? His bullheadedness? Take your pick—I can’t decide.
“The ultimate solution to the repeated occurrence of this type of situational crisis is, of course, a return to civilian status. If I were back on the staff at Cornell Medical Center where my previous research was done, there would be no problem. I could receive some funds from you disguised as a U.S. Public Health Service grant, or some such thing, gon [sic] onto a half-time research basis, and plub [sic?] away at the problem with considerable independence. This future eventuality we’ll have to discuss at a later date; meanwhile, we have the local problem to solve. If someone in the Surgeon General’s office, or the Surgeon General himself, were in on this whole complicated situation, it might make the solutions a little easier.”
Um, I’m sorry, but has this 28-year-old never had a boss before? I mean, sure, it’s a drag that his division got usurped and all, but who among us hasn’t had something like that happen at our jobs without our feeling the need to run to our boss’s boss’s boss in hopes that they’ll fix it? Plus, some might say that Jolly could have used a little more supervision at that time, don’tya think? (Did I mention he was 28?)**
**Dear 28-year-olds: I have nothing against you. If you happen to be in this age group, that’s fantastic. It’s a super fun age to be. It’s just that, occasionally, people in your age bracket have been known to think they have all the answers when in fact they really don’t. (Not you. Other people.)
Sidney Gottlieb was undeterred by the likes of Robert L. Williams. He asked Jolly for the names and contact information of Lackland’s top brass, which were Col. Brua, Col. Cowles (who oversaw the Human Resources Research Center), and Brigadier General Steele (who commanded the entire base). Although Sidney wasn’t willing to give these men all the goods on MKULTRA just yet, he would explore obtaining Top Secret clearance for each one, just in case. He also would contact Donald Hastings, a psychiatrist at the University of Minnesota who was to collaborate with Jolly on the project. Hastings had been chief of psychiatry for the Army Air Forces during WWII, so he was much more seasoned in dealing with military brass. If anyone could arm wrestle them into acquiescence, he could probably do it without their having to bother the surgeon general over trivial workplace politics.
Sidney closed his letter with “I feel that we have gained quite an asset in the relationship we are developing with you. We will work this thing out one way or another. It is of the greatest importance to do so.”
Less than a year later, Jolly wanted out of Lackland. Maybe he’d predicted correctly, and Robert L. Williams had rained all over Jolly’s MKULTRA plans. Or maybe it was plain old bureaucratic red tape. The laboratory where he needed to conduct his research still hadn’t been built. No matter the reason, at some point along the way, Jolly decided to look elsewhere for a job. As far as his obligation to the Air Force was concerned, he’d have to cross that bridge when he came to it.
In April 1954, he arrived at the bridge. He’d been offered the position of professor and head of the Department of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Behavioral Sciences at the University of Oklahoma, and he would now need to seek approval from the Office of the Surgeon General before he could accept the position. Of course, he’d have to do so strategically and with finesse, since he had no intention of taking no for an answer.
University officials did what they could to get the Air Force to relinquish Jolly. The dean of the medical school promised to build Jolly the laboratory he needed to conduct his “special research assignment” for the CIA and USAF, including technical assistance and equipment. The laboratory was to be called the Air Force Psychosomatic Laboratory, likely as camouflage. Best of all, he would be able to conduct his research as he saw fit, with no questions asked. Still, months went by as Jolly tried to convince the assorted colonels and generals that the Air Force would be better off with him in Oklahoma than in Texas. He proposed transferring to Tinker Air Force Base, in Oklahoma City, where he could split his time between the university and military base, but the Air Force said no. Practically speaking, there was no need for a psychiatrist of his stature there.
Despite the string of disapprovals, the Office of the Surgeon General began coming around to see things Jolly’s way. In August 1954, they offered a compromise in which Jolly would be granted 60 days of unpaid leave per year over and above any accrued leave he had, all of which he could use to work for the university. On September 26, 1954, the university announced that Jolly West would be joining their faculty.
After all was said and done, Brigadier General H.H. Twitchell, in the Office of the Surgeon General, let Jolly know what had gone on behind the scenes that brought about the Air Force’s change of heart.
“It seemed ill advised to establish the Air Force Psychosomatic Laboratory either at Lackland or an Air Force base in Oklahoma only to have to abandon the project upon your release from the service 20 months from now. Therefore, General Powell, Major Hughes, Major Kollar, and myself conferred to discuss the best way to get your special research project underway on a continuing basis. It was decided that the Air Force Medical Service should withdraw from the project as it now stands leaving you and Major Hughes free to organize the program within your department at the University on a contract basis with the Agency that Major Hughes represents. Major Hughes indicated that other than the slight delay involved in establishing your program at the University of Oklahoma this will not seriously interfere with the conduct of the research since the acceptance of your professorship was predicated upon the unquestioned full support of this project. Major Hughes also indicated that he would discuss the details of this matter with you in the near future.”
Hmmm. Major Hughes sure sounds as if he had a lot of sway in the matter, doesn’t he? But who was he? Brigadier General Twitchell and General Powell both worked in the Office of the Surgeon General. Major Kollar worked at Lackland AFB. But this was the first I’d ever heard of Major Hughes.
My guess? I think Major Hughes was our friend Sidney Gottlieb. Here’s why:
Sidney liked to use pseudonyms. In his July 2, 1953, letter to Jolly West, he signed his name Sherman C. Grifford, a pretend person who was affiliated with the pretend organization Chemrophyl Associates. In a meeting with the military men, I can see him taking on a more suitable pseudonym for the occasion—something with a rank that was respectable, but not too high—and a last name that was a little more forgettable than Gottlieb.
Major Hughes was representing an Agency—with a capital A. General Twitchell was being cautious with his wording, but there’s no question that he was referring to the CIA.
Major Hughes seemed to be closely tied to Jolly’s research project. In fact, the way General Twitchell described it, Major Hughes and Jolly would be working together to organize the program in Jolly’s new department.
The person from the CIA with whom Jolly was working most closely on this project since June 1953 was Sidney Gottlieb.
Credit: CIA; Was Sidney Gottlieb Major Hughes?
In December 1954, Jolly wrote to a friend telling him that he’d started at Oklahoma, and by January 1955, he’d submitted a proposal to the Geschickter Foundation (another CIA front organization) for MKULTRA funding. By March 1955, he’d received approval for a $20,000 grant to begin his infamous work which came to be known as Subproject 43.
That pretty much sums things up, except there may be a little more to the story. In an article for the investigative site The Intercept, authors Tom O’Neill and Dan Piepenbring brought to light a gut-wrenching story in which Jolly West played a critical role. It concerns a murder that took place near Lackland Air Force Base at around midnight July 4, 1954. The victim was a three-year-old girl named Chere Jo Horton who’d been playing in the parking lot of a tavern while her parents and brother were inside. (Helicopter parenting was definitely not a thing in the ‘50s.) A search went on, and, tragically, her lifeless body was found in the nearby gravel pit.
The man who was charged with the murder, Jimmy Shaver, had come walking up from the gravel pit before her body had been discovered, almost as if he was in a trance. His body was bloody and scratched from brambles. Chere Jo’s underwear were dangling from his car door. An Associated Press story that ran the following day said that Shaver had written in a statement that he remembered putting her in his car and driving away. His last memory was of removing her from the car, and “then I blacked out.” Shaver was employed at Lackland AFB as a drill instructor. Up until that moment, he’d been a law-abiding citizen.
According to the Waco Times-Herald, Jolly testified at Shaver’s trial that Shaver was “given over to his care two months after the crime.” During that period, Jolly had given Shaver sodium amytal which, according to the paper, “put Shaver into an hypnotic trance.” A United Press wire service story said that West had examined Shaver “under hypnosis and truth serum.”
Jolly stated to the court that Shaver had been ridiculed and abused as a child by a little girl, and when he saw Chere Jo, Shaver was mentally transported back to his childhood. He killed her—a voice in his head had told him to do it—but he thought he was killing the abusive girl, Jolly told the court. Shaver was “insane” at the time of the killing and “did not know right from wrong,” the paper quoted him as saying.
Jimmy Shaver died from the electric chair on July 25, 1958.
It’s a horrible, tragic story that I’ve avoided writing about for a while. Here’s why I want to discuss it now: First, this was all happening while Jolly was trying to leave Lackland AFB. At the time of Chere Jo’s murder, Jolly had already been offered the job, and he was trying to convince the Office of the Surgeon General that he’d be of more use to them in Oklahoma than in Texas. In September, during Shaver’s trial, Jolly’s name, along with the name of Lackland Air Force Base, was being splashed on newspapers across Texas, and beyond. It was precisely at this time when the Office of the Surgeon General gave the green light for Jolly to conduct his research elsewhere.
Could it be that the surgeon general decided to make the Jolly West P.R. problem go away by approving his early move to Oklahoma? They’d allow him to continue with his experiments, but just not on their turf.
The reason I pose this question is that in Tom O’Neill’s and Dan Piepenbring’s piece, they raise the question of whether Jolly West may have actually been conducting hypnotic experiments on Shaver before the murder and perhaps even introduced false memories during his hypnosis sessions after the murder. You can read the story and see the evidence for yourself.
I’d like to focus on one detail. Jolly had said under oath that Jimmy Shaver was “given over to his care two months after the crime.” But in O’Neill’s and Piepenbring’s piece, O’Neill had actually spoken with another psychiatrist at Lackland, a man named Gilbert Rose, who’d taken part in the sessions with Jolly West and Shaver.
In 2002, he said the following:
“[Rose had] also never known how West had found out about the case right away. ‘We were involved from the first day,’ Rose recalled. ‘Jolly phoned me the morning of the murder. He initiated it.’”
If what Rose said is true, then Jolly had committed perjury when he told the court of his later involvement. Why would he say that if he didn’t have something to hide? And again, were any of the Air Force officials knowledgeable?
There’s one last person we need to discuss, and that person is Doc Switzer. Where does Doc factor into all of this?
In our running theory, Doc was considered “essential” by the Office of the Surgeon General in September 1952. At that time, the surgeon general was Harry G. Armstrong. However, when Jolly West received the OK to move to Oklahoma in 1954, the surgeon general was Dan C. Ogle. And once West was doing his work at the University of Oklahoma, the Office of the Surgeon General had purposely written themselves out of the equation.
I have no idea what Surgeon General Harry Armstrong wanted from Doc Switzer. Perhaps he helped keep him up to speed on things. But by the time Jolly West moved his laboratory to the University of Oklahoma, there would have been no need for his services, at least in that regard.
To look at it another way, could it be that the perfect window of time when Doc Switzer was considered “essential” to Project Artichoke happened to coincide with the time that Ronald Tammen disappeared from Miami University?