[00.33.27-side view of ERVIN and BAKER seated at table] AFTERNOON SESSION, FRIDAY, JUNE 29, 1973 Senator ERVIN. The committee will come to order. Mr. Dean, Was Governor George Wallace of Alabama, on the list of enemies? [00.34.11] Mr. DEAN. Senator, I never really have gone through the list of enemies so I cannot name that, The only thing I know about Mr. Wallace in that relationship at all is that, the fact that, I understand that during Mr. Wallace's--Governor Wallace's--last gubernatorial campaign, that a substantial amount of money was provided by Mr. Kalmbach somewhere between $200,000 and $400,000, to Mr. Wallace's opponent. Senator ERVIN. That was provided in the last Governor's race in Alabama? Mr. DEAN. That is correct. Senator ERVIN. Yes. Between $200,000 and $400,000? Mr. DEAN. 200. Senator ERVIN. 200,000. Mr. DEAN. And $100,000, yes. I do not know the precise figure. Senator ERVIN. Yes. I have no further questions. Senator Baker. [00.35.05] Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Do I understand that, you know that, of your own knowledge, Mr. Dean? Mr. DEAN. That was told me by Mr. Kalmbach, who apparently made the arrangements. Senator BAKER. Thank you very much. Mr. Dean. this is your fifth day on the stand, and it is, I hope, the last session for this committee and for you and, therefore, I intend to abbreviate my questions, although following the same technique, I did yesterday. Let me, tell you in advance the two questions I -want to ask which will require multiple answers and try to suggest a format for the purposes of abbreviation. Obviously if you have an elaboration that you wish to make on any of these points you are free, to do so. But if you could answer them first and then elaborate, it would help us along. [00.35.56] My primary thesis is still what did the, President know, and when did he know it? On yesterday, I asked you to respond and you did respond, in terms of the quality of your knowledge, that is to say, whether it was direct first-hand information, whether it, was circumstantial or whether it was second-hand or hearsay information. Mr. DEAN. And I also believe I added documentary. Senator BAKER. Documentary evidence, that, is Correct. What I would like to do today is to limit that inquiry to the remaining meetings that that we did not cover and to direct information only. This is not to imply that I am not interested in the other but I hope to contain this to about 20 minutes, and if you could tell me In seriatim what you know first-hand of your own knowledge of the President's knowledge, and the date of that knowledge beginning where we left Off yesterday in February and working your way through the ending of your employment at the White House, I would be grateful. [00.37.01] Now, the second question I am going to put, to you after we finish that is one that really is, I am afraid, cumbersome and awkward. But You are a lawyer and I am a lawyer and we both understand the necessity for this. Rather than me asking you detailed and probing questions on particular areas of conflict in your testimony and those of other witnesses who have testified or witnesses we may have hereafter about Which you have personal knowledge, would you identify for me important elements of controversy that you know or suspect to exist. [00.37.38] This is Once again for the sake of organizing your rather voluminous testimony so that we have some Idea of how to test it, against the testimony of other witnesses. If you think either of those questions unfair I will try to revise them. If, you are, a agreeable to trying to proceed in that manner I would appreciate It If, you began first -with your first-hand knowledge of Presidential involvement, in February where we concluded our interrogation yesterday, [00.38.07]