the past, and items for reimbursement of such sums lost by the defalcation of supply officers have been incorporated in appropriation and deficiency bills. The bill H. R. 15489, if enacted into law, will result in an additional cost to the Government of $485. The bill (H. R. 15489) was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with the above information as to cost and a statement that the Navy Department contemplated making a favorable recommendation thereon. Under date of January 23, 1929, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that this proposed recommendation is not in conflict with the financial program of the President. In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department recommends that the bill (H. R. 15489) be enacted. Sincerely yours, CURTIS D. WILBUR, STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK GARDNER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA The CHAIRMAN. We shall be glad to hear you at this time, Mr. Gardner. Mr. GARDNER. Leonard T. Newton, the beneficiary in the pending bill, while serving on the U. S. S. Henderson, in October and November, 1921, deposited money for safekeeping with Pay Clerk Samuel H. Warner, United States Navy, to the amount of $665 from which, prior to November 18, 1921, he withdrew a total of $180, leaving the sum of $485. On November 18, 1921, Pay Clerk Warner deserted and absconded with funds in the safe, including this remainder of $485 belonging to said Newton. In proof of this statement I will submit a copy of a letter received by Mr. Marcus LaFayette Newton, Eckerty, Ind., father of Leonard T. Newton, from A. C. Fraenzel, chief boatswain, United States Navy, commanding the U. S. S. Tadousac, as follows: U. S. S. "TADOUSAC," Port au Prince, Haiti, February 27, 1923. Eckerty, Ind. Mr. MARQUIS LaFayette Newton, DEAR SIR: In reply to your letter dated January 17, I beg to inform you as follows: 1. Leonard Truman is attached to the U. S. S. Tadousac. 2. Yes, he is married, as shown by record on file. 3. Correspondence and receipts show that he deposited $625 with the paymaster's assistant, U. S. S. Henderson, who later deserted with same and to date has not been apprehended. As shown by receipt, this deposit was solely at the owner's risk. 4. Yes, he has purchased a residence. 5. From a transcript of his current service record, and from the date of reporting on board this vessel. January 14, 1923, he has a clear record and is in present good standing in the Navy. 6. His pay per month is $92.40. 7. His present rating is pharmacist mate, first class. Due to the fact that your son has been transferred about since your writing, your letter has just recently reached me, therefore making a great delay to the reply, which I regret very much. Yours truly, A. C. FRAENZEL, Mr. GARDNER. Also, I have the following letter from the Chief of the Bureau of Navigation of the Navy Department concerning this matter. It says: NAVY DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF NAVIGATION, My DEAR Mr. GARDNER: With reference to the case of Leonard T. Newton, pharmacist mate, first class, United States Navy, as discussed in your letters of March 28 and April 13, this bureau has obtained the following facts, which are supplied for your information. Newton, while serving on the U. S. S. Henderson in October and November, 1921, deposited money for safekeeping with Pay Clerk Samuel H. Warner, United States Navy, to the total amount of $665, from which, prior to November 18, 1921, he withdrew a total of $180, leaving the sum of $485. Although the Government of the United States is not legally responsible for this sum, yet it was accepted by an agent of the Government for safekeeping in an official safe. At least a moral responsibility is believed to rest upon the Government. There is no possibility, however, of refunding this sum to Newton without special legislation. In recent years similar cases have arisen which have been covered by appropriate legislation. These cases include: (a) The loss of funds deposited for safekeeping on the battleship Georgia, which were stolen by an absconding pay clerk and authority for the reimbursement of which was contained in the naval appropriation act of August 22, 1912. (b) The loss of funds from the safe of the naval hospital at Hampton Roads on April 1, 1921, reimbursement for which was carried in Private Act No. 158, of February 2, 1923. (c) Loss of Liberty bonds deposited for safekeeping in the office of the naval prison, at Portsmouth, N. H., stolen March 23, 1920, and authorized to be reimbursed by section 23 of the naval omnibus act of March 4, 1925. In view of these precedents and of the moral responsibility of the Government it is believed that any bill which you might cause to introduce leading to the reimbursement of Pharmacist Mate (First Class) Newton in the above amount would meet with the favorable indorsement of the Navy Department. Sincerely yours, R. H. LEIGH, Rear Admiral, United States Navy, Chief of Bureau. Mr. GARDNER. Also, I have two copies of certified copies of receipts. They read as follows: U. S. S. "HENDERSON," November 5, 1921. Received from L. T. Newton, United States Navy, for safekeeping, at the owner's risk, the sum of two hundred and ninety dollars and no cents ($290.00). S. H. WARNER, Pay Clerk, United States Navy. U. S. S. "HENDERSON", October 24, 1921. Received from L. T. Newton, United States Navy, for safekeeping, at the owner's risk, the sum of three hundred and seventy-five dollars and no cents ($375.00). S. H. WARNER, Date: October 29. Returned, $15. Signature of supply officer: S. H. Warner. Mr. GARDNER. In view of the fact that on November 18, 1921, Pay Clerk S. H. Warner deserted and absconded with the balance of $485 belonging to this claimant, and in view of the fact that said Warner was an agent of the Government, and as such received this money, for safekeeping in an official safe, there is certainly, at least, a moral obligation on the Government to reimburse this claimant for the money he so lost. In view of the fact that this claimant has a clean record and is still serving his country in the United States Navy, now in Nicaragua, and in view of the fact that there are precedents for the reimbursement herein asked for, and in view of the fact that the Navy Department recommends that this bill be enacted into law, I respectfully request that favorable action be given this bill by your committee. Mr. BURDICK. I notice that we have a similar bill covering two other men who lost by defalcation. Commander WILKINSON, Bureau of Navigation. Yes, sir; H. R. 15976, for the relief of Lieutenant Tate and Paul Franz, torpedo man. The circumstances in these three cases are exactly alike. Mr. BURDICK. It seems that the pay clerk in Newton's case was not apprehended, but in the case of Lieutenant Tate and Torpedo Man Franz he was apprehended and sent to prison. Commander WILKINSON. That is true. The CHAIRMAN. Are these pay clerks under bond? Commander WILKINSON. The pay clerks are under bond to properly account for Government funds, but the bonds do not cover private moneys. FOR THE RELIEF OF ARCHY W. BARNES, SUPPLY CORPS, UNITED STATES NAVY (H. R. 16899) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, Monday, February 11, 1929. The subcommittee this day met at 11 o'clock a. m., Hon. Clark Burdick (chairman) presiding. Mr. BURDICK. The next bill for consideration is H. R. 16899, for the relief of Lieut. Archy W. Barnes, Supply Corps, United States Navy. The bill in question and a report thereon by the Navy Department read as follows: A BILL For the relief of Lieutenant Archy W. Barnes, Supply Corps, United States Navy Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the General Accounting Office is hereby authorized and directed to credit the accounts of Lieutenant Archy W. Barnes, Supply Corps, United States Navy, in the amount of $804, which sum represents payments made to Willie Perry Conway, aviation chief machinist's mate, Fleet Naval Reserve, for retainer pay during the period from July 1, 1926, to June 30, 1927, disallowed by the Comptroller General in statement of differences K-30398-N dated July 31, 1928. [No. 17] PROVIDING FOR SUNDRY MATTERS AFFECTING THE NAVAL SERVICE NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, November 27, 1928. The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Referring to the bill (H. R. 9352) providing for sundry matters affecting the naval service, a draft of which was referred to you by the Navy Department on January 12, 1928, and to which were added two sections transmitted by letter of May 23, 1928, the purpose being to relieve various disbursing_officers of the Navy of certain charges standing against them in their accounts, I have the honor to submit herewith a draft of two more sections and to request that they be added to the bill. The first item of the inclosed draft authorizes and directs the Comptroller General to credit the accounts of Lieut. Archy W. Barnes, Supply Corps, United States Navy, in the amount of $804, which sum represents payments made to Willie Perry Conway, aviation machinist's mate, Fleet Naval Reserve, for retainer pay during the period from July 1, 1926, to June 30, 1927, disallowed by the Comptroller General in Statement of Difference K-30398-N dated July 31, 1928. The second item of the inclosed draft authorizes and directs the Comptroller General to credit the accounts of Lieut. Arthur W. Babcock, Supply Corps, United States Navy, in the amount of $402, which sum represents payments made to Willie Perry Conway, aviation machinist's mate, Fleet Naval Reserve, for retainer pay during the period from July 1, 1927, to December 31, 1927, disallowed by the Comptroller General in Statement of Difference K-25607-N, dated April 28, 1928. The disallowances above referred to represent further payments of retainer pay to Conway covering periods subsequent to the period covered in the case of (697) 2197-29-No. 127 Captain Seibels, Supply Corps, United States Navy, mentioned in section 19 of the bill H. R. 9352, the circumstances of which case were as follows: In a decision dated August 31, 1923, Review 4285, the Comptroller General held that Conway was not eligible for transfer to the Fleet Naval Reserve, and that such transfer was illegal. As a reult of this decision, Captain Seibels, Supply Corps, United States Navy, protested further payments to Conway and in a letter dated April 1, 1925, the Secretary of the Navy directed payment of retainer pay in Conways's case from and after July 10, 1923, the date of his transfer to the Fleet Naval Reserve. This order of the Secretary of the Navy was based on two opinions of the Attorney General. (The first, dated July 17, 1924, 34 Atty. Gen. Op. 250, and the second in the form of a letter to the Secre tary of the Navy dated February 5, 1925.) The Conway case was reconsidered by the Comptroller General under dates of November 24, 1924 (Review No. 4285, reconsideration); March 17, 1925 (4 Comp. Gen. 773); August 19, 1925 (R-4285); and April 15, 1926 (5 Comp. Gen. 722), but the original finding was sustained. The payments mentioned in the cases of the two officers named above having been made in accordance with orders of the Secretary of the Navy, the Navy Department considers that said officers were without fault or negligence in connection therewith. The inclosed draft was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with the above information and a statement that the Navy Department contemplated recommending to the Congress that the two sections referred to be enacted. Under date of November 20, 1928, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that the legislation proposed in the draft is not in conflict with the financial program of the President. In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department recommends that the two sections submitted herewith be enacted. With further reference to the bill H. R. 9352, sections 4 and 6 were included in the bill H. R. 10276, which was approved by the President on May 14, 1928 (Private No. 123, H. Rept. No. 585), and the items covered by sections 1 and 11 have been recently allowed by the General Accounting Office. It is, therefore, also requested that sections 1, 4, 6, and 11 be eliminated from the bill (H. R. 9352). Sincerely yours, CURTIS D. WILBUR, Item 18: Lieut. Archy W. Barnes, Supply Corps, United States Navy, in the amount of $804, which sum represents payments made to Willie Perry Conway, aviation machinist's mate, Fleet Naval Reserve, for retainer pay during the period from July 1, 1926, to June 30, 1927, disallowed by the Comptroller General in Statement of Differences K-30398-N dated July 31, 1928. Item 19: Lieut. Arthur W. Babcock, Supply Corps, United States Navy, in the amount of $402, which sum represents payments made to Willie Perry Conway, aviation machinist's mate, Fleet Naval Reserve, for retainer pay during the period from July 1 to December 31, 1927, disallowed by the Comptroller General in Statement of Differences K-25607-N dated April 28, 1928. A BILL Providing for sundry matters affecting the naval service Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the General Accounting Office is hereby authorized and directed to credit the accounts of Lieutenant Commander Robert B. Huff, Supply Corps, United States Navy, in the amount of $517.55, which amount represents a charge in the accounts of one Isaac Fassett, steerage steward. United States Navy, which was raised by decision of the Comptroller General, Department Memorandum Numbered 220, dated February 1, 1923, and which was credited in the accounts of Fassett by Lieutenant Commander Huff, Supply Corps, while he was disbursing officer at the Naval Home, Philadelphia, subsequent to the receipt of request for checkage by the Comptroller General. SEC. 2. That the General Accounting Office is hereby authorized and directed to credit the accounts of Lieutenant George M. Snead, Supply Corps, United States Navy, in the amount of $111.72, which amount represents a charge in |