Mr. CADIGAN. It is about 50 times enlarged. Mr. EISENBERG. And had you treated the paper chemically before you made this photograph? Mr. CADIGAN. No. Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us a little bit about that photograph and what it shows? Mr. CADIGAN. Well, actually all this shows is an enlarged area, a very small area, I might point out. It merely shows the surface structure, shows some of the fibers, and shows an imperfection. The dark line down the center of the photograph is actually a fold in both papers, merely to bring them close together so that they can be seen together. But it gives you some idea of the surface texture, how the fibers lie in there. In this instance you have two little imperfections in these fiber bundles here, you can't see the brown-colored fibers that are actually present. Mr. DULLES. That imperfection, however, would not be repeated, would it? Mr. CADIGAN. Oh, no; it is purely accidental. Mr. DULLES. They are accidental. Mr. CADIGAN. They are bundles of fibers in the paper itself. Mr. EISENBERG. In your opinion were the two samples identical in the characteristics shown in this photomicrograph? Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; they have the same appearance. Mr. EISENBERG. Did you also break down the papers to test them, to determine the morphology of the fiber? Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. Subsequently, I ran a fiber analysis of the paper, the known paper sample from the Texas School Book Depository, Commission Exhibit 677, and the paper bag, Commission Exhibit 142, and on the same day I had our spectrographic section run a spectrographic test on these same papers. Mr. DULLES. Do I understand correctly, though, you have testified that a sample taken 10 days later was different--or approximately 10 days later? Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. Mr. EISENBERG. Approximately 10 days. Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; this was a sample taken December 1. I could tell that it was different from this sample, 677, taken on the day of the assassination, and different from the bag, Exhibit 142. Mr. DULLES. Do you happen to know whether another roll was put in the machine between the 22d and the 1st of December? Mr. CADIGAN. May we go off the record? (Discussion off the record.) Mr. EISENBERG. On the record. Do you know whether the Dallas office of the FBI has attempted to make a determination as to whether the replica paper bag, the paper in the replica paper bag, prepared on December 1, Commission No. 364, was, or may have been, or wasn't taken from the same roll as the replica piece of paper or the sample piece of paper, Exhibit 677, which was obtained from the Depository November 22? Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. Mr. EISENBERG. And can you tell us what you understand the results of their investigation to have been? Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; they were unable to determine whether the paper from the replica sack, Exhibit 364, came from the same roll or a different roll as the known sample obtained November 22. Commission Exhibit 677.