But, he said, without the government pressure, the bank still might have completed the deal.

“It’s hard for me to project what I ultimately would have done,” Mr. Lewis said when asked if he would have walked away from the Merrill Lynch purchase. “But, yes, we were strongly considering it.

The twists and turns of the Bank of America’ marriage to Merrill Lynch have attracted scrutiny since early this year when the government provided a second round of bailout money to help the bank absorb Merrill’s surprise losses.

The New York attorney general, Andrew M. Cuomo, has been investigating bonuses paid by Merrill and questions of whether Merrill’s losses should have been disclosed before the merger was closed. Shareholders, angry over the price the bank paid for Merrill, voted to strip Mr. Lewis of his chairman title in the spring, and regulators have pressured the bank to shake-up its board and management.

Mr. Lewis’s honesty and intentions were called into question Thursday morning at the hearing held by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

“No matter how great Bank of America is doing today the means does not justify the end,” said Elijah E. Cummings, Democrat from Maryland. “In other words through these transactions, we must have honesty transparency and integrity, period.”

Mr. Lewis was careful not to strongly criticize government officials and described them in his opening statement as “people of good intentions.” The two officials that have been most associated with the situation are Ben S. Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, and Henry M. Paulson, the former secretary of the Treasury. The committee is planning to call them both to testify next.

To read this complete Fred Harteis News Article visit our news partner at;