Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
471800948
label
1966: Unidentified Flying Objects, May (folder B48-26)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
471800948
contentType
document
title
1966: Unidentified Flying Objects, May (folder B48-26)
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Legislative Issues Files
subjects
Unidentified flying objects
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
471800948
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1966-05-01
month
5
year
1966
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1966-05-01
month
5
year
1966
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
83ef3696c25eec75
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box B48, folder "1966: Unidentified Flying Objects
(folder 26)" of the Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers at the
Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the
United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives
collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in
the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are
presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject
to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
1966: Unidentified Flying Objects, May (folder B48-26)
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
LEGISLATIVE
UFO
(VAN HORN, W.)
RE: STUDY
May 19, 1966
Mr. William E. VanHorn
Civil Defense Director
Hillsdale County
Hillsdale, Michigan
Dear Mr. VanHorn:
I wish to thank you for sending ne a copy of your letter of May 12th
to Representative Hutchinson along with material substantiating the
report on the UFO sighting.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
I appreciate your making this available to me and in turn I thought
you would like to see the enclosed releases, the most recent of which
tells of the university investigation which is to be made as a result
of my urging that a Congressional investigation be held.
Kindest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:jb
enc.
William E. Van Horn, Director
HILLSDALE COUNTY CIVIL DEFENSE
40 S. Manning Street
HILLSDALE, MICHIGAN 49242
May 12, 1966
Honorable Edward Hutchinson,
4th District Congressman,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
Thank
Dear Sir;
You are no doubt familiar with the U.F.O. incident that
occured in Hillsdale, Michigan on March 21st, 1966. This
is the incident in which the Hillsdale College co-eds,
their house director and I had the opportunity to witness
what I refer to as an Unidentified Flying Object.
For the past seven weeks some of my staff members and I
have been conducting an investigation into the U.F.O. sit-
uation and the side effects upon the people of our own
locality. From the many letters I have received from peo-
ple all over the United States, my observation would be
that most of the people throughout the entire country have
reacted the same way.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD BRARY
I was extremely aggrevated to have the United States Air
Force and Dr. J. Allen Hynek, come into our city, spend
so little time in their investigation and then attempt to
make us look like a group of idiots. I can honestly say
that I expected this and in fact made a statement to the
Hillsdale Daily News as to what their findings would be
previous to the Air Force and Dr. Hyneks statement to the
press was released. This was very much in line with the
U.F.O. investigation and their Project Blue Book.
I have enclosed a portion of the results of our own invest-
igation and also one of the photographs. This is the mat-
erial that I want to release at this time.
I am sure that if you will study this report that you will
see that we are not a group of idiots as the Air Force and
Dr. Hynek has attempted to make us look. I also am
very sure that there are many other people who have been
laughed at, ridiculed and embarrassed because they reported
what they observed and were very sincere in doing SO.
It is my sincere opinion that many people have made very
good observations of U.F.O.'s and have withheld the inform-
ation because of the fear of being made to look like fools.
I do not think that this is right and feel that this has for
some reason been intentionally done to cause people to shut
up and to stop bothering the Air Force.
William E. Von Horn, Director
HILLSDALE COUNTY CIVIL DEFENSE
page 2
40 S. Manning Street
HILLSDALE, MICHIGAN 49242
I feel that this situation is very serious and that this
has been demonstrated by our investigation. No, not the
U.F.O.'s, but rather the trend that has developed from the
entire mode of investigation that has been carried on by
the Air Force regarding the situation. What I am saying,
gentlemen, is the American people are afraid and hesitant to
report anything because of being ridiculed. Stop and think!
This could well be the common denominator by which our aver-
age citizen could fail to report even a subversive or un-
American act or person. This is my honest concern. As far
as the U.F.O. situation is concerned, I definitely feel that
Unidentified Flying Objects are present, even though I was
a skeptic previous to this incident.
Perhaps more serious thought and attention should be given
to the U.F.O. investigation and that in some manner the invest-
igation should be conducted so that the findings released
would not cause ridicule and embarrassment to those that are
concerned.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD BRARY
I therefore, as a citizen and public official, request that
there be a Congressional Investigation conducted, not into
the U.F.O, situation but into the- ineffective, inadequate,
and assinine methods and answers being issued by the Air
Force in regards to their investigation and findings. It
would be far better to release no information than to use the
Marsh Gas Theory.
Sincerely, William E.Uanthen
William E. VanHorn
Civil Defense Director,
Hillsdale Co., Hillsdale, Mich.
Copy to:
Hon. Weston E. Vivian, 2nd Cong. Dist.
Hon. Gerald Ford, 5th Cong Dist.
lvh
Fage 3
Release Date
Release to: Press, Radio and Television
From: William "Bud" Van Horn, Civil Defense Director,
Hillsdale County Michigan
Regarding: U.F.O. observation March 21, 1966 and the
investigation by the U.S. Air Force and Dr. J.
Allen Hynek.
On the evening of Earch 21, 1966 a group of College
Co-eds and myself had the opportunity of observing an
Unidentified Flying Object. Upon the release of this news
and on March 24ᵗʰ, 9 Dr. J. Allen Hynek representing the
United States Air Force arrived in Hillsdale to carry on an
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
investigation of our observation. Dr. Hynek was accompanied
by two young Airmen, one of which was a Chauffeur and the
other Airman, Second Class Dennis Hambly, who I was told was
an official member of the investigating team.
After spending the short time of 3 hours in the City
of Hillsdale and making what I would consider a whirwind
investigation or our observation the representativies left
the City.
Having previously heard of the type of investigations
that were conducted by the United States Air Force with
regards to the U.F.O. sightings, I was very interested in the
type of personell that would conduct this investig tion,
and the methods that would be used. It was my considerate
opinion that Dr. Hynek had his mind made up as to what his
Page 2
findings would be before he ever reached the City of Hillsdale.
I also observed the his main line of questioning was relative
only to that which would fit the Marsh Gas theory. Although
there was nothing to my knowledge from the information
given Dr. llynek that would fit the Harsh Gas theory, he
irregardless found it fit to state that Marsh Gas is what
we were observing. Dr. Eynek was not or at least didn't
to me display any intent interest in the type of movement of
the Vehicle that we were observing nor did he volunteer any
thought or explanation of the observation the girls had made
of the object descending from the sky which prompted them to
call the Civil Defense Office. At no time did Dr. Hynek
step a foot into the area where the Vehicle was located
that the girls and myself had been observing.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
It is my very considerate and sincere opinion that:
1) The observation that was made by the girls
and myself was a U.F.O. and definitely was
not Harsh Gas.
2) That the investigation conducted by Dr. Hynek
and the Air Force was very incomplete and was
merely a token apperance sort of act.
3) That from the many, many very good sightings
we have had reported to us, came from very
responsible people in most cases, and that
they are very well founded. It is my sincere
belief that the people making these reports
have made a definate observation. In some of
the cases we have been able to prove that it
was not & U.F.O. and in many of the cases we
could either make no decision or did definitely
confirm them as U.F.O.'s.
With the aforementioned thoughts in mind, and having
seen many of our good people laughed at and ridiculed and
caused embarrasment because they reported most sincerely
Page 3
that which they had witnessed, by men and myself for the
past seven weeks have conducted a most sincere and open
minded investigation into the U.F.O. situation in our
own locality. I have attached a majority of our findings
for the peoples consideration,
Previous to our original sighting on March 21ˢᵗ, 2
I-1
could have been considered a "Skeptic," However, now after
seeing the investigation that was conducted here in Hillsdale,
by the Air Force, and after conducting our own investigation
(3 hrs. VS 7 week7), I am firmly convinced that the U.F.O.
does exist.
And in conclusion, I would state that if the whirl-
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
wind investi ation that was conducted by the Air Force
regarding the Millsdale U.F.O., and the personell that
conducted it are representatives of our U.S. Air Force,
I the feel that our people have a great deal more to be
con'erned about than the U.F.O. situation.
From this investigation I have found that the people
are afraid to make any statements with regard to what they
have witnesses. This is true in our own locality and I
would say pretty generally throughout the entire United
States. I say this from the great number of letters that
I have received from people from all our United States.
It is my sincere opinion that this fear of comminicating
that has been instilled in people, could well be the common
denominator which would cause, or maybe has c used people
Page 4
to fail to report some subversive or unamerican acts or
persons.
It is my belief that the U.S. Air Force could use a
more tactful mode of investigation than has been used in the
past, rather than that which makes those people who in all
sincerity report something, to look like fools.
Euilliam E. Dan Herr, Derector,
Hillidar County Civil Defense
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
REGARDING U.F.O. INVESTIGATION
BY
HILLSDALE COUNTY CIVIL DEFENSE
THE ATTACHED INFORMATION IS THE RESULTS OF THE U.F.O. INVESTIGATION
CONDUCTED BY THE HILLSDALE COUNTY CIVIL DEFENSE ORGANIZATION, HILLSDAI E
COUNTY, MICHIGAN.
THE REPORT ISIN FOUR PARTS AS FOLLOWS:
PART 1 at Dr. J. Allen Hynek's Press release of March 25, 1966
which is page 1 through page 5. My referals and comm-
ents to Dr. Hyneks statements are found on pages
6 through 11.
PART 2 & This part contains the reports of a soil analytical
test which was conducted from soil and various things
taken from the area where the U.F.O. was located when
we observed it on March 21, 1966. Also attached to this
part is a photograph of the element Boron which is
found floating on a pond, which was very near the
location.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
PART 3 - This part contains a photostatic copy of a letter
which was written to myself by Dr. llynek. Also
on pages one and two are found my answers and or
questions to Dr. liynek's letter.
PART 4 @ This part contains a photograph taken in July of
1965 in Hillsdale County. I have had the negative
of this picture in my possession and have had this
checked and found it to be authentic. The object is
in focus which discounts a spot on the lens of the
camera. Also the negative does not have any flaws
and it definitely is not a superimposure.
This is a part of our findings that we want at this time to
release. However in the future there may be more information
which we will want to release.
Signed William
William E. Van Horn, Director,
Hillsdale County Civil Defense
PART NUMBER ONE
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
Page 1
STATEMENT ON THE DEXTER AND HILLSDALE UFO SIGHTINGS
by DR. J. Allen llynek
Scientific Consultant to Project Blue Book;
The Air Force has asked DO to make a statement on my
findings to date. This I am happy to do, provided it is clearly
understood that my statement will refer to the two principal
events as reported to me: The event near Dexter, Mich. on
Karch 20, and a similar one at Hillsdale, Eich., on March 21,
It does not cover the hundreds of unexplained reports as opposed
to the thousands of explained cases made not only to Project
Blue Book, but those from other countries, over the past several
years, as described in recent books and articles, I have not
investigated those such as the one near Exeter, N. II, and those
in the western states last year, not the puzzling foreign cases,
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I IBRARY
such as that at Cuernavaco, Exico, last fall. I have recom-
mended in my capacity as Scientific Consultant, that competent
scientists quietly study such cases when evidence from responsible
people appears to warrent such study. There may be much of
potential value to science in such events. We know a very great
deal more about the physical world in 1966, than we did in 1866
but, by the same token, the people in the 2066 may regard us
as very incomplete in our scientific knowledge. We must not
in our haste to have answers, br Fredrick Smiths.
If then, It is understood I am not making a blanket
statement to cover the entire UFO phenomenon over the past 20
years in this and other countries, 1 am prepared to discuss
1-1
the Dexter and Hillsdale sightings.
# 1
Page 2
Now, in addition to these two specific cases there has
been a flood of other reports from this area, both before and
after last Sunday and Monday, and I could not possibly have had
the time to investigate all of these. I have had time, however,
to determine that in Hillsdale, over and above the sincere and
honest reporting by the young ladies at Ilillsdale College of
2
a very puzzling sighting, certain young men have played pranks
with flares. And, I have also determined that the pictures
released yesterday to the press were taken on March 17, near
Hilan, Mich., and have no reference whatever to the sightings
on March 20 or 21 st, and are without any question a time
e.posure of the rising cresent moon and the planet Venus. I
emphasize that this explanation refers to those specific pictures
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I IBRARY
and not to the two cases now in question.
At long last now, the Dexter and Hillsdale cases: Here are
the hard facts, the residue, the common denominator after
3
sifting out as much of the subjective, peripheral, and inconsistent
statements as I have been able to do in this short time.
4
The majority of observers in both cases reported only
lights--red. yellow and green, silent glowing lights, near the
ground. They have not described an object. Even the only two
observers who did describe an object have stated that they were
no closer than 500 yards better than a quarter of a mile away
8 distance which does not allow details to be determined.
$5
Witnesses have described glowing lights lights that seemed to
move but never far from a definite local, or which suddenly
disappeared and popped up at another place.
# 2
Page 3
6
Now what was the locale in both instances? In both cases, a
swamp, In both cases the location of the glow was pin-pointed:
in Dexter it was seen between two distant groups of people,
and at Hillsdale it was seen in a swampy depression between
#7
the girls and distant trees. It was in both cases a very
localized phenomenon. I think that this is a most significant
point
8
* dismal swamp is a most unlikely place for a visit from
outer space: It is not a place where a helicopter would hover
for several hours, or where a soundless, secret device would
likely be tested.
Now what is a swamp? It is a place of rotting vegetation
and of decomposition. Swamps are not the normal province of
the astronomer; he usually has his eyes trained toward loftier
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
plades--yet the Dutch astronomer, Minnaert, in his book,
is Light and Color, in the Open Air, If has this to say about
swamps. Ile describes lights that have been seen in swamps by
the astronomer Bessel and other excellent observers. The lights,
he says, resemble tiny flames, sometimes seen right on the ground,
sometimes floating above it. The flames go out in one place
and suddenely appear in another, giving the illusion of motion.
The colors, he says, are sometimes yellow, sometimes red and
blue-greed. No heat is felt, and the lights do not burn or
char the ground. They can appear for hours at a time and
sometimes for a whole night. Generally there is no smell, and
usually no sound, except the popping sound of little explosions,
such as when a gas burner ignites.
# 3
Fage 4
Where does the gas come from, and what lights it? The
rotting vegetation produces marsh gas which can be trapped by
ice and winter conditions. When a spring thaw occurs, the gas
may be released in some quantity.
The flame, Minnaert says, is a form of chemical luminesence
and its low temperature is one of its peculiar features.
Exactly how it occurs is not known and this in itself might
be made a subject of an interesting study.
The glowing lights on the swamp near Dexter and Ilillsdale
#
9
were observed for two to three hours. No sounds were heard.
except for popping sounds. The lights were red, green or
10
yellow and they appeared to move sideways, and to rise a short
distance. I emphasize this would not be seen frequently--it
11
is of a unique character. I have never seen it myself and I
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
can easily understand the dismay of the witnesses who say it
and who sincerely described what they saw.
It seems likely that as the present spring thaws came the
trapped gases CH4, H2S, PH3, resulting from decomposition of
organic materials were released. The chemistry book by Sienko
and Plane has this to say: "In air, phosphine, PH3, usually
bursts into flame, apparently because it is ignited by a
spontaneous oxidation of the impurity P₂H₄₀ The will-o-the
wisp, sometimes observed in marshes, may be due to spontaneous
ignition of impure PH3, which might be formed by reduction
of naturally occurring phosphorous compounds."
# 4
Page 5
Other scientists have pointed out to me that in swamps
the formation of H2S and CH4 from rotting vegetation is common.
these could be ignited by the spontaneous burning of the
Phosphine, PH3°
It would seem to me that the association of the sightings
with swamps, in these particular cases, is more than
12
coincidence. No group of witnesses observed any craft coming
to or going away from the swamps. The glow was localized
there. Deputy Fitzpatric described the glow as coming from
beyond a rise adjacent to the swamp, and visible through the
trees. He stated that the lights brightened and dimmed much
as stage lights do smoothly and slowly. The girls at
Hillsdale described almost the identical thing. This could
have been due to the release of variable quantities of marsh
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
gas.
The disappearance of the light when people got close with
flash-lights or car lights, would indicate that the glow seemed
# 13
bright only to dark-adapted eyes. The night was dark there
# 14
was no moon. The Hillsdale girls kept their rooms dark in
order to see the lights in the swamp.
I emphasize in conclusion that I cannot prove in a Court
of Law that this is the full explanation of these sightings.
It appears very likely, however, that the combination of the
conditions of the particular weather conditions that night
15
there was little wind at either location Mere such as to
have produced this unusual and puzzling display.
# 5
# 1
Dr. Hynek states he is refering specifically to the
Dexter and Hillsdale areas, I am answering only to
the Millsdale investigation of which I am most
familiar.
# 2
Dr. llynek was very well aware that the flare incident
occured on Wednesday March 23rd and not on the evening
of Narch 21st
# 3
The only statements that Dr. Hynek was interested in
were the inconsistant ones and it is my belief and
knowledge from questioning people that the inconsistant
statements were very few.
# 4
We did not describe the outline of an object but Dr.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
Hynek was not interested when we attempted to describe
to him the ascending and descending in a uniform manner
of two seperate color lights to a height of approximatily
100-150 feet. He was informed by myself that at one
time I could make out a convexed surface between the
two lights which I estimated 25 feet between.
# 5
This was by no means the description that was given
Dr. Hynek with regards to the lights in the Hillsdale
area. The lights did increase and decrease in brilliance.
It is very evident that his description as stated in his
release could have been taken from any one of many
books describing Marsh Gas.
# 6
# 6
The Fillsdale area where the observation was made is
not a swamp but rather a wooded area, And how would
Dr. Hynek know what the area was as he was never in it.
The closest he got to the erea was the center of Barber
Drive, a road which runs parallel to the area.
# 7
This to me was no phenomenon as this was definitely
some type of a vehicle which had the atility to ascend
and descend and to move very freely and smoothly from
one side to the other and in doing so, both lights
being observed moved uniformly and remained a stationary
distance apart.
# 8
I disagree with this for two reasons:
A. A swamp is usually a place where there are no
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
people around and also in most cases requires &
period of time to enter and get to.
B. Also a swamp is generally a source of water which
could well be needed by a space vehicle.
# 9
To the best of my knowledge there were no sounds heard
in the Tillsdale incident and Dr. lynek was very definitly
informed of this. With regards to the popping sounds
this again is a discription which can be found in any
one of many books describing Marsh Gas.
# 10
I do not Mall lights ascending and descending to end
from 8 height of 100 to 150 feet a short distance.
# 7
# 11 Dr. llynek states that he has never seen the phenomenon
of Marsh Gas. I have personally many times witnessed
this as a young hoy having been raised near a swamp in
Jonesville, Wichigan. I can very assuredly state we
were not observing Harsh Gas the evening of Earsh 21st
His further formula description of Earsh Gas is very
correct.
# 12 Dr. Hynek is way off in left field on this statement.
He was told not only by myself but also by the College
girls of the observation made by the 17 girls of the
approach of the object from the northeast, flashing
by their window, disappearing to the south of them and
then reappearing over the area and descending to where
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I IBRARY
we observed it. Dr. llynek was not interested in listening
to this type of information and was extremely avasive
on any questions that were asked regarding anything such
as this. In addition, the glow was not localized as
stated by Dr. Hynek but rather the lights did as I
have stated before secend and descend and sove from
side to side in a uniform manner.
#: 13 The night was dark as most nights are, but there was an
occasional sighting of the moon as the sky condition
was from a broken to a scattered condition.
#1: 14 This statement is true that the lights were off in the
room from which we were baking the observation. However
just outside end below the windows there is this row
# 8
of flood lights which were on which discounts the total
darkness theory.
# 15 I offer the following wind velocities from an official
recorded source in defience of Dr. Hynek's statement
that there was little wind the evening of March 21st
I estimated the wind approximately 10 miles per hour
and the following wind velocities are taken from the
record of an official U.S. agency for the area:
March 21, 1966
Time
Wind Velocity
9 p.m.
130° at 10 K.
10 p.m.
130° at 7 K.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
11 p.m.
110° at 10 K.
12 p.m.
120° at 8 K.
March 22, 1966
1 a.m.
040° at 8 K.
2 a.m.
100° at 10 K.
The air has to be extremely quiet and calm for Marsh
Gas or Methane to accumulate in mass and form a glow,
The above wind conditions would prove that this could
not happen. We also offer the following evidence and
research to support our statements that this was not
Marsh Gas: Marsh Gas as known under the chemical term
of Methane (CH₄) ) is a gas which is created and produced
from rotting vegitation. This process of decay is created
by an enzyme which is produced by bacteria. There is an
# 9
optimum temperature at which these bacteria are most
active and that temperature is from 35° C to 40° C.
A temperature of 60° C will destroy them and as the
temperature lowers below 35° C, the bacterial action
will become gradually retarded which in essence means
that the process of decay is gradually slowed meaning
that the gas formation is slowed or eventually stopped.
To further substantiate my theory that Marsh Gas
could not have been present at this time and with the
fore going explanation of the bacterial action to produce
the Marsh Gas I herewith provide an account of the
temperatures of our area from November 1 1st 1965 through
March 21st 1966 to show that the optimum temperature
was not present for this action.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
These temperatures are given as observed by the
official United States Weather Observer for our area:
November 1965
Average High
9°
C
Average Low
Average Mean
4°c
December 1965
Average Eigh
4° C
Average Low
-3° o C
Average Mean
-1° -1 C
January 1966
Average High
-30 C
Average Low
-11° C
Average llean
-7° C
February 1966
Average Figh
30 C
Average Low
-7° C
Average llean
-30 C
March 1966
Average High
11° C
(to 21st.) 1
Average Low
-1° C
Average llean
5° C
# 10
For 5 month period
Average High
Average Low
-1° -1 -6° o C C C
Average Hean
It is my sincere belief that the bacterial requiring
a temperature of 35° to 40° C optimum temperature and
our average mean temperature being -1° C that it would
have been impossible for little gas if any to have
been present at this time of the year. If any gas was
present, my contention is that it could not possibly
have been present in quantity enough to last for the
period of time that we were makeing the observation.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
# 11
PART NUMBER TWO
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
May 3, 1966
Mr. William Vanhorn
40 So. Manning St,
Hillsdale, Mich.
Dear Sir:
We the undersigned give full consent for the usage of out report
or any part there of. These tests may be used for any purpose or end
to your suiting.
We are sending with this letter an extra copy of our report and
two photographs which we feel shows some signifigance to our con-
clusions.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
Sincerely
Kysling Vandenberg
Jerry Wilson
RESERCH ON HILLSDALE U.F.O. SIGHTINGS
Index-I
Index of Tests Taken.
I. Soil Tests
A. Acid- Base Test
B. Solubility Test
C. Composition Test
D. Radiological Test
II. Plant Tests. (Green and Fungi)
A. Paper Chromatography
B. Tests for Measuring Life Functions.
C. Starch Test
D. Clorophyll TestE.
E. Radiological Test
F. Spectrum Test on Plants Clorophyll
III. Animals Tests
A. Blood Hemoglobin Test
B. Metabolism Check
C. Reflex Test
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
D. Radiological Test
IV. Mineral Tests
A. Acid-Base Test
B. Type of Rock Specimens
c. Check of Characteristics (chemical o' structural changes)
D. Radiological Tests
V. Water Tests
A. Microscopic Analysis
B. Acid-Base Test
C. Composition of Materials in the Water
D. Radiological Test
Index II
Environment Facts Index.
I Temperature
II Pond Life
III Range and Time of Radiological Changes
LV Changes of Visible Appearance caused by the U.F.O.
Continued
Page II
Index III
Conclusions Indox
I Conclusions of Soil Tests
II Conclusions of Plant Tests
III Conclusions of Animal Tests
IV Conclusions of Mineral Tests
V Conclusions of Water Tests
VI Conclusions of Environment Facts
VII Main Conclusions
#1
I Soil Tests
a. Acid-Base Test
Acid content of three which is very heavy and Base content of seven or
eight which is almost neutral.
b. Solubility Test
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
The seil was very soluble in a water solution.
c. Composition Test
There was no change in soil compostion except for a elight additive of
Boron.
d. Radiological Test
The redition reading on the soil was thirty-one hundredth roentgens per hour.
(.31r/hr.)
II Plant Tests (Green and Fungi)
a. Paper Chromatography Test.
There were found only green and yellow pigments in this test, the blue
pigment did not show up in this test, so we presume the blue pigment was
destroyed.
b. Tests for measuring life functions.
The plants were found to be healthy.
C. Starch Test.
This was found to be normal. (content)
d. Clorophyll Test.
This was found to be normal. (content)
e. Radiological Test.
The reading on the plants was threehundred fifteen thousanths roentgens per
hour. (.315 r/hr)
f. Spectrum Test on Plant Clerophyll
The blue pigment was gone, 1t did not show up in this test presuming again
that the blue pisment was completely destroyed.
(continued)
Page III
III Animal Tests
a. Blood Hemeglebin Test
Amphibian: The hemeglobin was slightly reduced.
Crustation: The hemoglobin showed no change from normal.
b. Metabolism Test.
Amphibian: Had slower than normal metablism but now improving.
Crustation: Could detect no metabolic change from normal.
c. Reflex Test.
Amphibian was slugish when first captured but has now improved.
Crustation no change detected,
d. Radiological Test.
Crustation: Three thousand one hundred twenty five -ten thousanths. (.3125 r/hr)
Amphibiant Three thousand seventy five-ten thousanths (.3075 r/hr)
IV Mineral Tests.
a. Acid-Base Test
All rocks, ingenous, metmorphic and sedimintary were found to be neutral.
b. Type of Rock Specimen.
I. Ingenous
2. Metamorphic
3. Sedimentary
c. Check of Characteristics,
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I IBRARY
All charecteristics of the rocks found to be normal for each type of rock.
There were no chemical or structural changes.
d. Radiological Tests
1. Ingenous .31 r/hr
2. Hetamorphic .31r/hr
3. Sedimintary .3125 r/hr
V Water Tests
a. Microsconic Analysis
All mieroscopic animals and plants dead,cause unknown.
b. Acid-Base Test
The water was neutral of both acid and base.
c. Composition of materials in the water,
All minerals found in the water normal with the exception of a slight trace
of Boron
d. Radielogical Test.
The water had a .315 r/hr reading.
VI Environmental Tests Taken 3/23/66.
a. Temperature
1. Water 42°
2. Air 54° F
No unisual heat shown
Continued
Page IV
B. Pend Life
1. Crustation
2. Amphibiens, there was an unusally large number of them.
0. Range and Time of Radiological Changes,
The first meter reading the meter showed thirty three hundreths roontgens
(.33 r/hr) and its last reading 3 hours later showed twenty seven hundreths
roentgens (.27r/hr)
d. Changes of visible apperance caused by the U.F.O.
No apparent changes in evironment were visible.
CONCLUSIONS:
SOIL:
I. The soil had above normal radiation and also had abnormal content of
Boron. The Boren is alien to this type of soil.
II. PLANT
The plants had above normal radiation. Blue pigments did not show up in the
tests and were presumed to be destroyed but this did not seem to effect the
life junctions of the plants.
III POND LIFE
Crustation and Amphibian radiation was higher than normal but the highest
radiation was recorded in the emphibian. Also the amphibian was effected
noticeably where the erustation was not.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I IBRARY
IV Mineral
Sedimentary rocks were elightly higher in radiation than either ingenous
or metamorphic rocks, There was no other change dither chemical or structural,
V. WATER
All microscopic plants and animals were dead. The water had above normal
radiation and abnormally contained Boron.
VI Environment
The environment had above normal radiation and it contained a small amount
of Boren which is foreign to this soil.
MAIN CONCLUSION:
VII The area contained an abnormally high amount of radiation from some unknown
source. The area also strangely contained Boron which WSB found in both
water and soil, These two facts are the only ones which would substanViate
the presence of a U.F.O. In our opinion were not saying that there was a
U.F.O. but we also do not know how to account for these two facts. However
we belaeve it could not. be swamp gas because of the high winds on the night
of the sighting. With these high winds the gas would not have formed a mass
and remainesstationary. We also do not believe it was pranksters because ve
searched the swamp thoroughly for any sign of evidence to explain the
phenomen.
Kipling Vandenberg
Jerry Wilson
PART NUMBER THREE
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
(wed- 3
DEARBORN OBSERVATORY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
EVANSTON, ILLINOIS 60201
29 March 1966
Mr. Van Horn
Van Horn Funeral Home
Hillsdale, Michigan
Dear Mr. Van Horn,
I am much interested in the new evidence that I hear you are turning up in
the UFO matter. The high radioactivity, if confirmed, would surely be a
significant matter.
I sun enclosing a copy of my actual press release which I hope you will read
carefully and let me have your comments. You will note that I have limited
my discussion to the two "swamp cases". I have received many letters
written prior to the release, from people in farm areas who proposed this
solution independently, stating that they have been familiar with such
glowing lights over swamps since childhood.
You will also note that I have recommended that a basic scientific study
of well-attested UFO cases be made. I made such a recommendation as long
ago as 19521 The terrific "noise" represented by the thousands of misiden-
tifications etc., I believe prevented such recommendations from being taxen
seriously. If there was 80 much "noise" there probably wasn't any "signair.
I, on the contrary, have always felt that the whole UFO phenomenon is wor-
thy of investigation and independently said so on the dust jacket of Jacques
Vallee's book, The Anatomy of a Phenomenon, which, incidently, I suggest
you read.
I am anxiously awaiting your report on the sightings of the lights we talked
about on the phone just before I left Ann Arbor. Was rapid motion ever
definitely established? If there is any substance to the reports of lights
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
high in the sky, then of course this is worthy of further investigation.
I repeat that my interpretation applied only to the swamp areas.
I am anxious for you to read my press report since many of the things I
said were taken out of context, as they most frequently are.
You are undoubtedly one of the most responsible witness observers in the
entire Michigan Affair" and I think it would be most unfortunate 1f you and
I found ourselves in opposite camps. I'm sure that we both want to know
what the actual facts are.
J. J. Sincerely, aller Allen Hynek Hyndr
JAH:mmp
Enclosure
Regarding Dr. llynek's Letter
Attached is a photostatic copy of a letter written to
me by Dr. J. Allen Ilynek on March 29, 1966.
This letter to me is quite confusing in as much as
it would give quite a different opinion of Dr. Hynek than
I derived of him upon his visit to [lillsdale during the
investigation. In reading this letter one would be led
to believe that Dr. Eynek was very sincere in getting more
to the bottom of the U.F.O. situation than he was upon his
visit to Hillsdale. However, as I have previously stated it
did not appear to me that Dr. llynek was interested in any
statements other than those which might fit the Narsh
theory,
In the second paragraph of his letter Dr. Eynek states
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
that his findings of Earsh Gas were in essence from the letters
that he had recieved from farm area people, proposing the
Marsh Gas explanation. Still in his press release he admits
that he has never witnessed Marsh Gas, I too have recieved
letters 'from people in the farming areas who claim that
it could not have been Marsh Gas at this time of the year.
I have seen Marsh Gas and know that this WEB not what tre
were observing. To me, it is unusual for an expert to
form an opinion such as this without further researching,
especially when one is as unfamiliar with something as
Dr. Hynek was with Marsh Gas.
# 1
You will notice in the third paragraph of his letter
that he states he had recommended a basic scientific study
of the well-attested U.F.O. cases be made. Ile has in fact
also stated on the dust cover of the book "The Anatomy of
a Phenomenon," that he has always felt that the U.F.O.
phenomenon was worthy of investigation.
In the fourth paragraph of his letter, Dr. Hynek is
refering to one of our most unusual sightings, which I
witnessed myself. This particular sighting I shall not
release any information on at this time other than to say
that it occured on the evening of Earch 24, 1966 at
approximately 8 p.m. The sighting was referred to Selfridge
Air Force Base Radar and I was told that there were two
inantimate blips on the Radar Scope.
After studying Dr. Hynek's letter and if his feelings
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
are as stated in the letter, I have a question in my mind.
Dr. Hynek being the scienfific consultant to the Air Force
regarding the U.F.O. situation, and having made the recom-
mendations, where then is the block and why hasen't more
intensive research been carried out? Someone, somewhere is
forming-this block for some unknown reason and I believe this
is the thing that should be found.
# 2
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
PART NUMBER FOUR
LEGISLATIVE
UFO
(VALLACE, E. E.)
RE: STUDY
May 19, 1966
Mr. and Mrs. Paul B. Wallace
4609 Palos Verdes Drive, North
Rolling Hills Estate, California
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Wallace:
Thank you for your posteard of May 11th telling me that you are in
favor of further investigation of unidentified flying objects. 1
appreciate having your support and thought you would like to see the
enclosed releases.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
Kindest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:jb
enc.
4609 Palas Verdes Dr. n.
Rulling Hills E satates, Calif.
How. Gerold R: Gord
may 11, 1966
House Office Bldg. Washington d.c.
Hear Sir:
We are in favor of further
investigation of Unidentified I lying
Objects.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORDI BRARY
Respectfully yours,
Eleanar 15. Wallace
GREAT RESTATES, D.C.VS Pw 186.64 84
1966
40
THIS SIDE OF CARD IS FOR ADDRESS
U.S.POSTAGE
How. Gerald R. Ford
House Office Bldg.
Washington, H.C. 20515
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
LEGISLATIVE
UFO
(*2 nd
RE: SEC. def
May 17, 1966
Mr. Robert E. Barrow
4167 Cleveland Road
Syracuse, New York 13215
Dear Mr. Barrow:
Thank you for your letter of May 9th concerning UFOs and a statement
made by the Secretary of Defense. While I did not see Mr. McNamara's
full statement, I am sure that it is important for our national security
to quickly and thoroughly identify any flying objects that pass over
our borders.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
While I had called for public Congressional hearings of UFOs, I feal
that the announcement that a contract is being let to a university
where teams of scientists will study the unexplained sightings, is
a step in the right direction. I am told that the report will not
be biased in favor of the Air Force and that it will be made available
to the public. Officials of NICAP tell me that this meets with their
general satisfaction.
Kindest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:jb
VPO
4167 Cleveland Road
Syracuse, New York 13215
May 9, 1966
Congressman Gerald R. Ford
Congress of the U.S.
Office of the Minority Leader
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Ford:
A few days ago, I read a summary of Robert S. McNamera's
views on unidentified flying objects, which had been
made during the closed session on the Administration's
Foreign Aid Bill.
I find myself utterly infuriated by what I have read.
For one thing, McNamera said each report of a UFO is
thoroughly investigated and that "If anything, I am in-
clined to think the investigations are more extensive
than actually required. it This statement alone demonstrates that
either the Defense Secretary has a closed mind on the pos-
sibility of UFOs flying in our atmosphere or that he is
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD BRARY
just repeating the customary denial long given by the Air
force and Defense Department.
McNamera went on to say that the Air Force does not place
"any real credence in the reports we have received to date,"
and "That doesn' mean that a report tomorrow may not be
sound and warrant the full investigation that we give it."
How, I would like to know, will McNamera know if tomorrow's
report warrants full investigation if he maintains his
view that "the investigations are more extensive than ac-
tually required?" In other words, if The Defense Secretary
believes that investigations should be reduced, how does he
expect to know when a report needs investigating? I hope
that does not seem like double-talk.
McNamera continued his testimony and stated that photos
of UFOs are nothing other than illusions. He said, "The
condition of the viewer and the physical circumstances in
the environment at the time generally create optical illu-
sions if How can anyone with as much authority as our Defense
Secretary make such a ridiculous statement? He is questioning
the reliability of military and reputable civilian personnel
as a whole, and obviously not wishing to discuss the authen-
ticity of each individual photo. And what about motion pic-
tures of disc-shaped objects, such as the one taken by Chief
Warrant Officer Delbert C. Newhouse, Navy Photographer? There
are several such films taken by honest, in many cases trained,
individuals. And how about gun camera photos taken by the
Air Force pilots?
With such an attitude, I am most surprised that Mr. McNamera
places faith in photographs taken by military men in Viet
Nam of Viet Cong locations. How can he accept Viet Nam pho-
tos as truth, but reject UFO photos (taken by men with just
as much experience) Both types are taken by military men,
and I am angered by the fact that McNamera refuses one kind
just because he can't conceive of anything flying in our at-
mosphere that has better speed and mancuverability powers
than aircraft known to him.
By making such absurd statements, our Secretary of Defense
has furthered the Air Force cause of "explaining away"
UFOs and, even more important in my mind, the ridiculing of
honest observers. Honest people are harder to find these
days, and I am disheartined by this policy of "stepping"
on sincere observers just to keep an outmoded policy of
official UFO censorship going. It seems more likely to
me each year that the policy is only existing because the
few behind it are afraid of the consequences to them should
Congress discover that the facts are being hidden.
If UFO photos are not to be believed, I wish that someone
would tell the Air Force that they can release the photos
taken over three weeks age by Ohio police officers who
chased one in a patrol car for one and at half hours. The
Air Force immediately stepped in and took the officers'
negatives, promising a full report after analysis. But
that was morethan three weeks ago. How long does it take
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
photo experts to analyze a photo? I'm certain that the
Air Force would just as soon forget that photo or
at
least that the public would,
Because 80 many reliable photos have been taken recently
---19 this the reason McNamera made it a point to "debunk"
past UFO photos?
These are more reasons adding to the solid, undeniable
fact that public hearings must be held. Let the Air Force
bring out its files and prove that thousands of obsevers
in this and other countries are deluded or mistaken. Let
them give sufficient reason why all of their own men have
made 80 many"errors" in misrepresentation of conventional
objects. Let the Air Force prove, and not just quickly
deny, the censorship and sighting information in
the Files of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial
Phenomena If is false. I'm sure that public hearings
would cause a few faces to become red and I do not mean
those of the NICAP staff and members.
Sincerely,
Robert RobertBarrow E. Barrow
Robert
Member, National
Investigations Committee
on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP)
LEGISLATIVE
UFO
(KEIFER, E.)
RE: SUPPORT INVEST
May 16, 1966
Mrs. E. Keifer
11120 National Blvd., Apt. 5
Los Angeles, California 90064
Dear Mrs. Keifer:
This is just a note to acknowledge and thank you for your recent
postcard supporting my proposal for an investigation of unidenti-
fieddflying objects.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
While as you know the House Committee on Armed held one day of
hearings which were published, the investigation ended there. How-
ever a contract is to be let to a university where teams of investi-
gators will begin work this fall. I am assured that this indepen-
dent report will be made public and while I had called for a Con-
gressional investigation, this is a step in the fight direction.
Kindest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:jb
MAY
How Gerald R Ford
5-5-66
Please use all possible
means
to bring the facts in re U.F.O.
to light. E. very interested person
has seen U.F.O. dion eyes,
knows of so many th sightings his and/or
planations so offered are all insult
that all these ridiculous ex
to the intelligence of the V: spuble
and much information E keifer -
The government In any pretures
Respectf ally aptl 5-11120 national Blvd
Los angeles Calix 90064
40
THIS SIDE OF CARD IS FOR ADDRESS
U.S.POSTAGE
Hon. Gerald R. 7 ard
House Office Bldg.
Washing tou, N. C.
20515
LEGISLATIVE
UFO
(EARLY, G. W.)
RE: INFO
May 18, 1966
Mr. George W. Eatty
9 Hiram Lane
Bloomfield, Connecticut
Dear Mr. Early:
Thank you for your letter of May 11th telling me of the difficulty you have
been having in getting information about UFOs from the Air Force, and in-
dicating your support for my proposal for a Congressional investigation.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
I appreciate your support and thought you would like to see the enclosed
copy of the hearings held by the llouse Committee on Armed Services, As
you know further hearings are to be held this fall and an investigation
made by an university, independent of the Air Force, and the results in
the form of a report are to be made public.
We called the Air Force Láiison and they said they were pleased to send
us some of their information on UFOs. They are sending it to me and I
will forward it on to you under separate cover.
Kindest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:jb
enc.
5/20/66 : Material sent
GEORGE W. EARLEY
9 HIRAM LANE
bloomfield, CONNECTICUT
06002
11 May 66
Rep. Gerald Ford
House Office Building
Washington, D.C.
coming 5/18 AF
Dear Representative Ford:
I have tried on several occasions to obtain ufo information from the USAF, informati
which they have publicly proclaimed is available to the public. I am still without
my requested information, or answers to questions I asked of them. I am attaching a
copy of a letter sent them last November, well before this year's flap. In March,
when I resubmitted this letter, I also requested a copy of their summary for 1965
which I had heard from a newsbroadcast was available. Still no response. Having
gotten no response some months ago from Representative Daddario, I am turning to your
in the hope that you can obtain this information for me.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
I would also like to say that I certainly support your call for a full inquiry into
the USAF handling of the ufo controversy. If nothing else, the public relations aspect
of it is in bad need of improvement.
I shall look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience and extend my
thanks in advance for any aid you can give me on this.
yours very truly,
Georgia Enly
18 November 1965
USAF U.F.O. Office
The Pentagon
Washington, D.C.
Dear Sir:
I have just received a copy of a magazine called UFO International, publixhed in
Los Angeles by a Mr. Gabriel Green.
In this issue (No. 23, dated October 1965), Mr. Green publishes a number of "saucer"
photographs taken at various locations in New Mexico by a Mr. Apolinar (Paul) Villa,
Jr., 601 Niagra, N.E.; Alberquerque, New Mexico. Mr. Villa allegedly took 8 pictures
during April 1965; 7 are shown in the magazine. The story also indicates that an
earlier series was taken in June, 1963 and Mr. Green has had postcards made up showing
one of these photographs. A copy of this post card is onclosed for your information.
(All pictures were taken in color. I would appreciate knowing if the USAF has made
any sort of an investigation into Mr. Villa's experiences - he claims to have met with
and talked to persons operating these saucers - and photographs and if so, what conclu-
$ions have been reached about them.
Also in the same issue of Mr. Green's magazine, mention is made of a Mrs. Madeline
Fodeffer of 12905 Falmouth Drive, Silver Spring, Waryland who showed about 10 minutes
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
of filmof a UFO on the Oct 7th (1965) Mike Douglas TV show. I would appreciare knowing
if this has been investigated and hwat conclusions have been reached by the USAF.
I have also heard, mainly on some local radio stations, reports of flying saucers in
the Plainville/Southington areas of Connecticut. Has the Air Force done any investigating
of these reports and what results have been obtained?
Any other information which you may have regarding the above flying saucers reports, as
well as any material on saucersightings of this past summer would be welcome.
Thank you very much; I shall look forward to hearing from you at your earliest con-
venience.
very truly yours,
A copy 1 this letter was again sent to the USAF on
March 15, 1966 but I still have no reply. As I was using
6 Herhead stationery, there is HOW no way the address could
have been loot.
LEGISLATIVE
UFO
(LEVINE, J.)
RE: INFO
May 18, 1966
Mr. Joel Levine
68-54 Kessel Street
Flushing, New York, New York 11375
Dear Mr. Levine:
Thank you for your recent letter asking if an investigation will indeed
be conducted and if I can send you information about it. I appreciate
your support of my proposal for a Congressional investigation.
As a result of my action, the House Committee on Armed Services did hold
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
one day of hearings after which it was decided that a contract would be
let to a university. Teams of investigation are due to start work in
September on a part-time basis, and I am sorry bht that is all the infor-
mation that I have been given at this time.
I do not know what University will be chosen, nor do 1 know when the re-
port will be finished or when it will be made phblic. I do know however,
that the report will be made fully available tp the public, and I assume
that at that time, public announcement of its availability will be made
in the papers.
I regret that I cannot give you more information at this time. While 1
had called for a Congressional investigation, I feel that this is a step
in the right direction.
Kindest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:jb
Dear Denator,
I am a high school
student, and d attend an Earth
Science class. Under direction
of our teacher we have been
conducting extensive research
concerning Unidentified
glying objects. The were
very happy to lear you propose
a congressional inguing into
the matter, for such an
investigation aside from being
invaluable in its own right,
would serve to reaffirm the
general public's right to know
about important issues.
& have written to ask you
if such an investigation will
indeed be conducted, and if
so, would you be generous
enough to furnish no information
about it.
may d wish you the
best of luck in your enterprise.
Thank you very much for
your attention and patience.
Sincerely yours,
Joel Levine
LEGISLATIVE
UFO
(JOHNSON, R. 8.)
RE: SIGHTING
May 12, 1966
Mrs. Ruth B. Johnson
95 Cottage Street
Randolph, Massachusetts
/
Dear Mrs. Johnson:
I wish to acknowledge and thank you for your letter of May 2nd
enclosing the article about the UFO that you and your husband
saw.
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I iBRARY
1 appreciate having your support of my proposal for an investi-
gation of these sightings and am glad that you wrote Be on this.
Thank you for your support and encouragement.
Kindest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:jb
PHOTOCOPY FROM GERALD FORD I BRARY
Jo:
Rep. Genald Ford
PORTER-SEAL CORPORATION
anmed Services Committee
Porter-Seal Permanently Seals
Hause office Buil ding
Radiators - Blocks - Boilers
"Mechanics Choice Since 1915"
Washington D.C.
RANDOLPH, MASSACHUSETTS, U. S. A.
Telephone 963-3300
SUBJECT
DATE
U.F.O.
5/2/66
Speed Letter
Dear Mr. Lond:
Here is a clipping about those" crazy"
until the other night are saw else one
U.F.O. my hushand & I were when sceptics
mr. me namara on any one
now can't convience me that there rent the such truth a
thing out Leo what american you people get Good luck !
can
to
Sincerely,
Ruth B Johnson