HOW BIG FUND-RAISER FOR DEMOCRATIC PARTY PROSPERED AS A BUILDER

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 17, 2013
• Sequence Number: 1
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-RDP78b0'5706A600400090001-0
- ?
?
ZcCloskey's Story
How Big Fund-Raiser
Fr Democratic Party
Pilospered as a _dailder
He Wins Negotiated Contract
On CIA Project; Stadium
Job Figures in Baker Probe
Praise , From Matt's Clients
By MONROE W. KARMIN
Stu]; Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
WASHINGTON ? A fascinating building
tucked away in the southeast sector of this
growing Capital is, to the aesthetic eye, typi.
'cal of :nuch local architecture?white, cold, un-
appeal lies not in its beauty but
1.:a .nystery.
'.? Chain link- fencing bars the unwanted; win-
-- - dows f bro,..,mish glass brick prohibit pc..tne-
tratir.;; vision; and Government officialdom
shuns discussion of the prc,ct. It's "classi-
fied."
The man whose company recently corn-
pleoted -this secret structure appears to be of
opposite design. To
many a visitor, Mat-
thew H. McCloskey, Jr.,
personifies grand Gael-
? ic charm?rosy, warm,
witty. Fittingly, he rep-
resents this country in
Ireland as ambassador.
't
t. And as this career
draws to a close, Matt
McCloskey resumes two ?
; others. As a. master
contractor, he's earned
millions building pub-
lic works; as a master politician, he's col- '4
leted millions for the Democratic Party.
Nevertheless, he- too is most int-e'ing in his
mystery. Much about Mr. 1VIcato:?.hey is hid-
den from. view.
Like that project in southeast Washington.
The ambassador, who has been back in the
U.S. for a holiday, won't talk about it. Nor
will son Torn, president of the family com-
pany in Philadelphia. Nor is much enlighten-
ment offered by the General Services Admin.
istratien, which iy,:,?-,:tiated the construction
contract. Only persistence elicits the bare in-
formation that McCloskey & Co. got the job
in November 1881?the first yeat' of the Ken-
nedy Ac.ministration?and that construction
.1 was co.npieted recently "on sehedule."
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-liDP78B05708A000400090001-0
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0
John E. Byrne, the agency's information
? officer, explains that competitive bidding was
skipped because of the "classified" nature of
the facility and the "critical time element in-
volved." He says GSA experts considered five
contractors with building experience in Wash-
ington, decided on Mr. McCloskey "because
of his reputation to be able to do a job of this
?ypo (al,ering and -reconstructing an existing ?
shell) within the time framework,"
rd it to him personally, and "that was 44
? t he time, Mr. McCloskey was quite
?-?, ready ;,o devote attention to his private busi-
ness. As national treasurer of the Democratic
Party,, he had been occupied with the chore of
? wiping out the multi-million-dollar deficit run
up by Prsident Kennedy's 1960 campaign, as
managed by brother Bobby. Mr. Byrne is
:1 quick to assure that "the recommendation to
do this particular job came from our profes-
sional staff and there was no politics involved."
Search fc: Similar Cases
? Still, :Sir. Byrne describes the procedure as
' "very unusual." The contract wasn't even dis-
cussed with the four other builders considered
capable, he says. He can't recall a previous
occasion when competitive bidding was es-
chewed o41 a major Washington project; cer-
tainly mit since the McCloskey award, nor
during :h.:, decade before. Searching for cases
even reMytely comparable, Mr. Byrne re-
quires Oct ks to discover the $9.7 million con-
tract negotiated in 1962 with the firm headed
by Del E. Webb?a registered Democrat who
says he's a sometimes-contributor to both par-
ties?to build the U.S. pavilion at the New York
World's Fair.
But GSA refuses to discuss the money in-
volved in the McCloskey deal in any terms,
other that. to say that the company was paid
cost plus a 3.35% fee fo,r the work. Even such
general in.ormation as to whether costs ex- ?
ceeded oesectations is stamped "classified."
Rival builcors declare that after they'd no-
ticed construction activity beginning, they were
told informally by GSA officials the contract
amounted to between $2 million and $3 million.
But as it stands today, the mystery building
Is adjudged a $10 million effort.
Nor Will Mr. Byrne identify the building's g
?
occupants. Yet the saluting guard at the old
Navy we't :ons factory enclave, site of the
mystery, c:leerfully points out to the inquiring
, stranger this "Central ,Intelligence Agency
building." Thus, curiosity is heightened. CIA
of course does secret spying, but does it do
all its building in the dark? In fact, no. Dur-
ing the latter part of the Eisenhower Admin-
istration, when the agency erected its
enormous headquarters complex in nearby
Langley, Va., not only were competitive bids
asked, but GSA put out a news release. Full
details on ibids and costs are public. (Inci-
dentally, McCloskey & Co. bid on some of the ?
work but didn't wi ?Iny.)
A Competih J. Comments
Against this background, resentment over
the 1961 mystery contract lingers among Mr.
, McGloskey's competitors. One declares: "In
?.1 my book, it was clear that Matt McCloskey
AI was a prominent Democrat, had raised a lot
- of money for the party, :.,d they felt they
could throw him this job, perfectly legally,
without competitive bids."
Informed of this sentiment, Tom McCloskey
dismisses it as sour grapes. "I don't blame
them for feeling that way," he comments, but
invokes "security" as a bar to further dis-
cussion.
Another McCloskey mystery was brought to
attention.?but apparently will remain unsolved
?by the Senate Rules Committee investiga-
tion into Robby Baker's, tangled business ac-
tivities while secretary to the Senate Demo-
crats.
Don B. Reynolds, the insurance man who
, Please Turn to Page 18, Column. 1
,
4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17 : CIA-DP78B05708A000400090001-0
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17 : CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0
- 4
Continued From Page One
took Bobby in as a silent but influential part-
ner, testified that in the spring of 1960 (though
nobody seems to be able to mark the date
precisely), Matt McCloskey joined him and
Bobby in Mr. Baker's Capitol office?along
with William N. McLeod, Jr., clerk of the
House Committee for the District of Columbia,
and Chairman John L. McMillan (D., S.C.) of.
the House committee. Mr. McLeod testified
a McCloskey vice president, whose name he ,
couldn't remember, attended, too.
This committee hail handled legislation au-
thorizing construction V the big D.C. Stadium
costliest structure ever built by the D.C. gov-
ernment. Mr. Reynolds, in his testimony, ?
quoted Mr. Mca:zkey.es expressing a desire
to bid on the stadium job. But Rep. McMil-
lan's memory is that Mr. McCloskey already
had established himself as low bidder, and ;
the meeting's intent was to "meet Mr. Mc-
Closkey and look over the plans for the
stadium." Mr. McLeod's recollection is that
Mr. McCloskey had not been designated low
bidder at the time but "he was pretty Sure
he was going to be able to get (the award),
because he said it was a contract involving a
lot of cement work and he said that was his
experience."
Interviewed at his Palm Beach vacation
home, the ambassador parries questions as to
the meeting's specifics with this generalized
reply: "I went in to see Baker on another
matter, and he said 'I'd like you to meet some
people,' and that's all there was to it." As for r Mr. Baker himself, Bobby is "taking the Fifth"
?refusing to talk about anything, on the
ground he might be incriminated.
If thethe meeting, indeed, did take place in the
,spring of 1960, then Mt. McCloskey couldn't
have been certified as?the winning low bidder
at that time. Invitationvkito bid were sent out'
on April 19; bids were pened June 10; Mc- "
Closkey & Co. gest/the official award July 7
with a bid shaved just $244,750 under the next
lowest bidder.
Performance Bond
Having won the award, Mr. McCloskey, as
Is customary, was required to post a perform-
ance bond to insure the contracting authority
?in this case the D. C. Armory Board?that
he would fulfill his contract. On many other
contracts, McCloskey. & Co. has bought such
Insurance from Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.,
Hartford, Cons., through the firm of Hutchin-
son, Rivinus & Co., Philadelphia, as agent. Mr.
McCloskey's son-in-law, J. B. McHale Jr., is a
Hutchinson, Rivinus partner.
The D. C. Stadium performance bond
traveled this customOy route?except for an
initial detour. Mr. Re molds acted as broker,
for which he received a commission of $10,-
031.56. He promptly distributed $4,000 to Mr.
Baker and another $1,00 to committee Clerk
McLeod. Mr. Reynolds says he made the pay-
ment to Mr. McLeod for, among other favors,
having helped get the stadium lc,slation
through the House, and to Mr. Baker for bring-
ing the stadium performance bond to him. Mr.
McLeod first told the committee his payment
was for personal legal services to Mr. Rey-
nolds; later he described it as a gift.
r
Ambassador McCloskey agrees he did cut
Mr. Reynolds in on the performance bond as
a favor to Mr. Baker, whom be describes as
friend of mine." He explains it this way.
During the years when he was Democratic
treasurer (1955-62), he received many requests
from people for inforation from Capitol Hill
and Mr. Baker was Iuil'contact man in Con-
gress, though I raver too much about
him."
"One day he was Ailing me about the sta-
dium and asked if I were going to bid on
it," Mr. McCloskey recalls. "I said 'Yes, I
am,' and he said 'If you get the contract
will you let my friend, Reynolds, write the
bond?' This is not an unusual thing. So when
I got the job, I let his friend write the bond."
Mr. McCloskey denies that he received any-
thing in return for this gesture.
Stadium Contract
The stadium contract is an interesting docu-
ment. The winning McCloskey low bid amount-
ed to $14,247,187.50. Yet at the end of construc-
tion, the contract totaled $17,266,015.58. Ex-
planation: In between, the D.C. Armory Board
had issued 236 "change orders"?alterations of
specifications which boosted the price by some
$3 million. In addition, McCloskey & Co. is ask-
ing the D.C. Contract Appeals Board to award
? It more than another $1 million, on the ground .
that bad weather forced the employment of
"unusual and costly procedures not contem-
plated in the original contract."
? An official of the Capitol Architect's Office
reports that an informal survey of recent Fed-
eral construction showed "change orders" nor-
mally run 6% to 10% of contract cost. Other
Government and industry experts agree; view-
ing the 21%. jump in the McCloskey contract,
one exclaims, "This just isn't normal." He
adds "that's poor management at the least.
You could go in below cost if you knew you ,
were going to get that, many changes." A loser
In the stadium bidding voices a similar com-
? plaint:. "If we had known there were going
to be that many ex-;.ras, we could have shaved
our bid lower than McCloskey's."
The point is that change orders can be the
most profitable part of a building job. Indus-
try and Federal sources estimate a contrac-
tor can often reap a 10% profit on changes,
which are negotiated, compared with a typ-
ical 6% or smaller return on work in the origi-
nal competitive bid contracts.
Concession Equipment Omitted
A closer look reveals about $1.3 million
worth of the changes were for equipping con-
cession stands?with such essentials as water
piping and electric wiring, and equipment in-
cluding hot dog warmers, sinks and drink dis-
pensers. Why were such necessities of a spec-
tator sporting life emitted from the original
contract?
A. J. Bergman, Armory Board manager,
has an explanation. When the contract specifi-
cations were drawn up, he says, the- board
was undecided whether to ask the concession-
aire to equip the stands. Later it was con-
cluded that a concessionaire would demand a
long-term lease before providing his own equip-
ment, which the board was opposed to, so the
chore was handed to the general contractor
after all.
Plausible as this pay be,_it doesn't impress
the contracting community. One builder uses
,the adjective "silly.!' He doubts anyone would
seriously think hot' dog and hamburger pur-
veyors would want to sink $1.3 million into
such a venture, certainly not without the pro-
tection of a long-term pact.
This opinion is shared by the company that
now operates the stadium concessions under a
3.0-year lease. A spokesman for Sportservice
Corp., of Buffalo?which claims to be the big-
gest in the industry with gross business of
about $100 million annually?says, "We cer-
tainly would not have considered investing
anything like 11.3 million without at least a
?
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0 ii
_
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17 : CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0
4 I
11
) ---?
20-year lease, and I seriously doubt we would
have done it even with that." Describing the
Armory Board's wish as "very illusory," he
notes it canvassed the concession industry and
found no interest.
"Could Have Been Cheaper"
Even J. A. Blaser, the stadium's contract-
ing officer, confesses to disPleasure over the
way things turned t out. "Including (the con-
cession equipment) at the beginning would
have been a lot less messy for a lot of rea-
sons," he sighs, "and it could have been
cheaper." ?
All of which suggests McCloskey & Co. was
either smarter or luckier than its rivals. Every
other bidder must have been aware the conces-
sion equipment was missing from original
specifications. One bidding loser agrees, but
says the mere fact that the equipment was
omitted originally tended to erode his confi-
dence that this job would be given to his firm
If it became the general contractor. Tom Mc-
Closkey minimizes the importance of the
change orders. "Any contractor bidding on a
,? job that size can't bid hoping to get a. wind-
fall on change orders," he asserts.
The McCloskey record in this town of un-
inhibited spending does turn up a larger pat-
tern of change orders?some of "normal" di-
mensions and some beyond. Look at Capitol
Hill, for example. In the years since Mr. Mc-
Closkey became Dethocratic Party treasurer
?and these have been years of Democratic
Party control in both the Senate and House
?seven contracts piessing the million-dollar
mark have been let through competitive bid-
ding to improve the area. McCloskey & Co.
won three of them including the one that
dwarfs the rest: The mammoth and luxurious
Rayburn Office Building now scheduled for
Congressional occupancy Jan. 1. Depending on
what figures you choose, this may be the cost-
liest Federal structure in history.
McCloskey is erecting the superstructure
under the major contract, awarded in March
1960 on a $50,793,000 bid. Since then, Congress
has decided to add a cafeteria, health suite,
swimming pool and other conveniences. All this
has fattened the McCloskey contract by $1.1
1 million to date, says Philip L. Roof, execu-
tive assistant to the Capitol Architect. But D.
Stafford fiolley, the Capitol Architect's repre-
sentative on the job, states that $4 million in
changes already have been ordered?and more,
maybe another half-million-dollars or so, are
' in the works.
Change Boosts Contr.iet
McCloskey Sz o. al/ dug the hole and built
, the foundation for the Rayburn Building. The
firm won the contract with a $6,666,000 bid,
but a major change in design posted the con-
tract total to $8.8 million. Now the contractor
has filed an appeal for still more money, a
? claim that is treated as a dark secret by the
, Capitol Architect's office. However, $800,000 is
an accurc,?a estimate of the amount.
And history provides a footnote. During the
turmoil of World War II, the Government
poured nearly $170 million into a concrete ship
and barge program which Ships for Victory,
a Government-commissioned history of '
'weituut
war-
1.
time m eldpbailding, describes as "a
conspicuous eillst or au expenditure which
produced relatiVelir little." One beneficiary:
McCloskey & Co. With Government help, a
yard was developed at Tampa, Fla. Originally,
the cost was estimated at $2.7 million but it
? mounted to more than $7.5 million. McCloskey
delivered 24 ships f?most of which served in
:isuch une.elebrated roles as floating storehouses
and training vessels), in 1948-44 that cost Uncle
Sam $48 million, soAie $20 million more than
the contract price. ?
Ships for Victory concludes:
"The yards and the ships were built under
contracts that guaranteed reimbursement of
costs and payment of minimum fees, even
when, as happened under McCioskey's con-
tract, the cost proved much more than double
the contract price. In such a case clearly the
Government paid an outrageous amount com-
pared to what it received." .
"Not Economic"
The ambassador now recalls the concrete
ship as "not economic because the hull
weighed two-and-a-half times steel."
On those rare occasions when politicians
?Republicans, of course?have tried to build
heat against Matt/ McCloskey, they've pro- ,
duced more fnurky smoke than visible flame.
Senator Williams of Delaware, at the time
of the Senate's confirmation of Mr. McCloskey
as ambassador in 1962, pleaded unsuccessfully
for time to look again at some old allegations
against the nominee. One involved the 1946
sale of a Government-owned shipyard in
Jacksonville, Fla., t$ a Louis Wolfson firm.
Mr. Williams told the Senate Mr. McCloskey
was associated with Mr. Wolfson in the deal
and that a man whri worked for a Wolfson-
owned firm paid $25,000 to a Government of-
ficial in a position to help Mr. Wolfson buy
the yard. Mr. McCloskey, in a letter to the
Senate, confirmed being associated with Mr. ,
Wolfson early in the bidding for the shipyard ,
but said he -pulled out before the sale and '
denied any knowledge of the alleged payoff.
He noted a House subcommittee in 1947 in-
vestigated the sale and "never even called me
as a witness."
Sen. Williams told his colleagues the cir-
cumstances were investigated by a grand jury,
that returned no indictments; he noted a key
Government witness died before the grand
jury completed its work. "I am convinced that
the allegations are not entirely unfounded,"
he asserted.
Vote of Confidence
But the Senate failed to find Mr. Williams' -
alarms compelling and awarded Mr. McClos-
key a rousing vote of confidence. This senti-
ment prevails today among Federal contract-
ing officials. Mr. Byrne on the mystery build-
ing, Mr. Blaser on the stadium, and Mr.
Kelley on the Rayburn Building, all express
satisfaction with the McCloskey construction
skill.
Back home in Philadelphia (the ambassa-
dor says he's built "most of the schools"
there), city authorities agree. "Generally
speaking," says Thorns.s J. McCoy, director of
the Philadelphia Housing Authority, "he has
a fine reputation as a builder." Public con-
struction is the McCloikey specialty; son Tom
figures the ratio is at least 80% public, no
more than 20% private.
Many McCloskey competitors, not all of
whom approve of his simultaneous pursuit of
contracts and political funds, attest to his
prowess as a contractor. A focal point of ad-
miration: Meeting an "impossible time limit"
in building the D. C. Stadium. One describes
him as "a tough competitor, a good builder."
Amidst this widespread acclaim, there are
some detractors. Kemmel & Co., Inc., a Penn-
sylvania painting outfit, is one. Now bankrupt,
It worked for McCloskey as a subcontractor
on a contract to build a 1,000-unit Government
housing project at Yost George G.,Meade, Md.,
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0
;
In 1958-59. The opinion of Federal District Court
Judge J. Wood, handed down last May, tells -
the story:
At the start, Kemmel agreed to do all the
painting on the job for $290,000. But this turned
out not to be a simple task. Plaster walls
wouldn't take paint and had to be doctored:
some 600 painted doors were damaged and had
to be re-done; more extra work became neces-
sary when floors buckled and plaster fell; and
many exteriors required repainting after later
road construction covered them with dirt.
. During these difficulties, Matt McCloskey,
his own firm beset by-mounting penalties for
tardiness, told Kemmel to get the job done by
employing more men and forget about the cost;
he'd take care of the bills on a cost-plus basis.
And the McCloskey company did shell out $530,-1
? 298, nearly twice the contract price. But Kern-
mel complained this wasn't enough and sued.
In court McCloskey accused Kemmel of in-
ferior workmanship. Judge Wood ordered Mc-
? Closkey to ante up another $271,346?But the
case is now on appeal.
Even within the U.S. Government, certain
second thoughts about the merit of McCloskey
performance have cropped up, though not with
undue haste.
Back in Truman's time, 1950, a $10,563,000
McCloskey bid won the contract to build a
1,000-bed Veterans Adininistration hospital in
Jamaica Plain near Boston. Within a year
after the hospital's opening in 1952, outer walls
bulged and cracked, window frames buckled.
("When winds were nigh," one hospital offi-
cial has recalled, "screens from the windows
were flying all over the place.")
But not until Sen. Williams got wind of the
fiasco, a decade later, was it decided to de-
mand an accounting from the builder. Under
the Senator's prodding, Attorney General Rob-
ert Kennedy's Justice Department in January
socked McCloskey, along with the architects
and engineers, with a civil suit for $4.9 mil- r'
lion. The particulars against McCloskey: "Nu-
merous departures" from contract specifica-
tions, "defective workmanship and deficient
equipment and Materials," and failure to pro-
vide proper inspection and supervision.
McCloskey Comments
The McCloskey rebuttal places blame on
the hospital's design, not its construction. And
the ambassador is quite philosophical about
the whole thing: "You can't be in business all
the years I've been and not run into a few
headaches. We're going to try this thing in
the courts."
If the McCioSkey talent for erecting big
buildings is impressive, equally so is his knack
for collecting big money for the Democrats.
In a reflective mood on his 71st birthday re-
cently, the ambassador, his white hair gleam-
ing, absorbed the Florida sun at the poolside
of his exquisite and expensive vacation retreat
and spoke at length. He calculates at $30 mil-
lion to $35 million the amount he's captured
for national and local party coffers over the
30 years he's been in the business.
A majestic hat wan the $11.5 'million John
F. Kennedy clitigatOri four years ago. (The
1961 Stevemion asatpaign cost a compara-
tively modest $5.5 million.) And it's in the fond
recollection of the late President that the
puckish McCloskey humor shines. After the
election, when $4.5 million in bills were still
unpaid, the ambassador' remembers Mr. Ken-
nedy asked him the state of party finances.
When Mr. McCloskey re:realed the enormity of
the deficit, the President exclaimed: "My
God, Matt, what would we have done if we
had, lost?"
Replied Matt: "What do you mean 'we'?
I had a one-way ticket to Mexico."
But the Democrats had not lost; Mr. Mc-
Closkey raised the millions. Just the inaugural
gala in Washington brought in $1,250,000. Matt,
punching his fist through the air, says hel got
the rest by ;"bang, bang, banging away" .at
state chairmen and contributors.
Ambassador Is Resigning
He'll be doing more of the same for Presi-
dent Johnson this summer. The ambassador,
now in Dublin winding, up affairs, is resigning
his diplomatic post and plans to hit the fund-
raising trails around May or June. Not this
time as treasurer, since that post is filled now
by Richard Maguire; Matt expects to serve as
finance committee chairman, or in some simi-
lar capacity.
But he'll not completely neglect the family
business. Throughout his ambassadorship, the
elder McCloskey has continued to serve as the
compiny's chairman (he relinquished the presi-
dency to son Tom in 1961 after transferring
his stock holdings to his children), and he
plans an active future role in the enterprise.
Why the return to /Antics? The formal Mc-
Closkey answer is philosophic: He believes
deeply in the principle that party members
should support their corvictions with contribu-
tions. "If you belong to a political party, you
should be a dues-paying member."
? In more casual conversation, he puts it a
? little differently: "I've been dealing with these
people for years, and I know where the bodies
are buried."
Mr. McCloskey describes his fund-raising
formula: First, find out who baa the money:
- second, have the courage to ask for it ("It's
surprising how timid people are in asking for
money"); third, make a "hit" with the pros-
pective contributor. He'll give willingly. In
pressing his doctrine upon subordinate fund-,
raisers, Matt has no patience with poor per-
formance. One fellow Democrat tells of witness-
ing a transformation of this genial Irishman
Into a "ruthless" driver "with the coldest blue j
eyes I've ever seen."
Are "convictions" the only motives for.
political
./ political contributing? "How much (a con-
tributor) pays determines how much attention ,
he gets," Matt remarks, "and I do whatever
I can to help a fellow?anything that doesn't
hurt the taxpayers and lets me sleep at night."
But he quickly adds: "I could give you a , .
list of a lot of people who have given a lot
of money and have asked for nothing in re- :.
turn."
$100-a-Plate Dinners ,
And, then there's the $100-a-plate dinner. By
now this is such a stApdard item for both
parties that young folk may think it began
about the same time as baby-kissing. But Mr.
?- McCloskey claims he invented it in 1934.
Matt likes nice round figures, and after the
Stevenson campaign in 1956, to wipe out the
$750,000 deficit, he formed a "750 Club"?
enrolling members at $1,000 a head. Pennsyl-
j
Declassif ed and Approved
vania contributed 25 members, of whom nearly
one-third were McCloskeys. "I made a con-
tribution," the ambassador explains, "and got
my kids to do the same."
If carried to the fullest, this tribal generos-
ity could finance quite a lot of democracy.
Besides six McCloskey children there are 29
grandchildren all living_ within a five-mile
radius of the manor house in Philadelphia. But
+1,ei vse+14 ft wee% A."11.....
For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-RDP78B05708A000400090001-0
contributions to the party. "I'd rather you
didn't know."
Nor does the McCloskey .dedication to the
liberal cause stop at the dollar sign. The firm
employs many Negroes on construction jobs
("We've always been sympathetic to their
problems" says Tor), and the ambassador -
has contributed re ;Alarly and substantially
to the support of- St. Elizabeth's Catholic
Church in predomlantly Negro North Phil-
adelphia. Too, son dMatthew H. III has been
a member of what now is the state Commis-
sion on Human Rights since Its creation in
1955.
There's no doubt that McCloskey means
millions, and since money breeds power, Matt
possesses considerable of the latter, too. The
facts and figures of personal or corporate
wealth are unavailable, but the Palm Beach
villa is testimony. So was Mr. Kennedy's teas-
ing endorsement of Mr. McCloskey's re-elec-
tion as party treasurer during the 1960 con-
vention. "I would hope," nominee Kennedy
told the Democratic National Committee, "that
you re-elect as treasurer my friend, Matt Mc-
Closkey, who tells me he has a lot (of money)
buried in his cellar and is ready to contribute
It to this campaign." Matt was renamed by
acclamation.
Power and Warm-Heartedness
? Dimensions of the McCloskey power can
only be surmised,- but there are clues. And,
If they are not misleading, these are traces
also of McCloskey.warm-heartedness.
Sen. Joseph Clark, Democrat of Pennsyl-
vania, is a clue. Hi sponsored Mr. McCloskey's
ambassadorship before the Senate Foreign Re-
lations Committee. "We love him," an aide N.
to the Senator proclaims. "We think of him '
as an Irish Santa Claus. Because of Matt Mc-
Closkey the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania
never has had real money problems in cam-
paigns." '
Miss Catherine A. Coyne is a clue. A for-
mer nurse, she attended Mrs. McCloskey dun.
ing the birth of her daughter, Anne, during
the early 1930s. Then she went to work for
the state. For some time, progress was slow;
after 21 years her salary had reached $7,400.
But during the regime of Democratic Gov.
Lawrence, a close McCloskey friend (they
drove home together from the recent Clay-
Liston fight in Miami), things moved. In 1959
she was named to a $12,500-a-year job as con-
fidential secretary ,to the Secretary of Labor
and Industry, a post that had been vacant for
five years. _ I
Two years later Miss Coyne was appointed
executive director ok the Bureau of Employ-
ment Securi's at an :48,000 salary, one of the
highest paid by the state to a woman. A news-
paper writer unkindly attributed the belated
rise to "McCloskey muscle." The ambassador,
however, doesn't accept this. "She merely
moved up; she'd been with the state for years.".
Now retired on a $526.36 monthly pension, Miss
Coyne has been visiting the McCloskeys in
- Palm Beach in recent weeks.
John J. Lynam is a clue. He worked for
McCloskey St Co. for many years, mainly as
a troubleshooter. He's been close to the fam-
ily, too; took the kids to the movies and
amusement parks when they were young. In
1955, Mr. Lynam went to work for the state;
by 1959 he rose to be assistant .executive di-
rector and by 1961 executive director of the
General State Authority. This GSA supervises
most construction under state contract, in-
cluding that done by MoC2oskey &' Co. Now
retired, Mr. Lynam is wintering in Palm
Beach.
Political Seecetary
Miss Marian it. Fetid is a clue. She's been
a long-time McCloskey associate, served as his
political secretary. In a celebrated case, Miss
Ford's nephew, David K. Dard, and two
accomplices were sentenced to die for killing
?a bystander in a 1947 holdup. In 1956 Demo-
cratic Gov. Leader commuted the trio's sen-
tences to life imprisonment on the unanimous
recommendation of the state board of pardons.
Subsequent political furor stirred Mt. ( Mc-
Closkey, who had testifiel before the board,
to make this statement: "I deny that at any
time, to anyone, either directly or indirectly,
have I paid out any money in connection with
the Darcy case." But he did confirm he'd dis-
tributed copies of a court opinion to members
of the all-Democratic pardons board. ?
? The ambassador, himself, is a clue. He has
told the story of his diplomatic appointment.
After election a grateful President Kennedy,
according to Mr. McCloskey, told him: "I want
to do something for you, Matt." The quick
and sentimental reply; "Send me to Ireland."
The ambassador says he's good friends with
President Johnson, too; has known him longer
than he did Mr. Kennedy.
But perhaps the most certain sign of the
McCloskey power is a matter of feeling rather
than fact. A reporter inquiring around Phila-
delphia discovers a surprising reticence on the
subject of Matt McCloskey. Everyone knows
of him, but many say they don't know much,
and a surprising number insist they don't
really know him at all. Among those who do
concede knowledge, most iconversation clings
to the superficial. And of the few willing to
venture deeper, almost all insist upon anonym-
ity.
A sense of the awe that McCloskey majesty
inspires in the hearts of many Philadelphians
was perhaps conveyed by the reply of a promi-
nent Democrat 'to a phoned request for an
appointment to einat about the topic.
"God, no" the horrified voice shrieked, "I
don't want .any trouble with Matt McCloskey."
11102=MISI2S
iiiimummim Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/12/17: CIA-RDP78B05708A000400096001-0