vessel-inspection laws would expire on March 1, 1949. This amendment will extend these powers until June 30, 1949. Your Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce is particularly concerned with the question, What programs and policies are required to insure the operation of a strong American-flag merchant marine on the sea lanes of the world? This question has farreaching implications, relating not only to our peacetime commerce but also to the national security and defense of the United States. Your committee, therefore, considers this legislation as temporary in nature. Its immediate enactment is necessary, however, to avoid disrupting current operations of American shipping, until such time as the Congress shall have opportunity to consider legislative recommendations to be made by this committee-growing out of comprehensive studies about to be initiated. Failure by the Congress to insure continuation of present chartering arrangements until June 30, 1949, might well force smaller companies out of business, thereby depriving the American people of the essential service these operators render. The Senate committee did not hold hearings on Senate Resolution 51. In the interest of expediting congressional action on this urgent legislation, it designated Senator Warren G. Magnuson to attend and participate in the hearings on House Joint Resolution 92-an identical bill-before the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries. The House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee heard representatives of the Maritime Commission, the American Federation of Labor, the CIO, the National Federation of American Shipping and numerous persons speaking for vessel-operating companies. During these hearings several major and very difficult problems involving the different segments of the industry were reviewed and various suggestions were made to the committee. Because of the short time before expiration of the existing authority of the Maritime Commission and the Coast Guard, your committee was unable to make a careful and longer study required to resolve these various problems and points of view. Accordingly your committee has approved a bill extending the presently existing program for a period of 4 months, with the understanding that the Commission will make no changes in its present procedures during that period so as to enable the committee to make a thorough study of the entire problem. It is contemplated that the Maritime Commission will continue to sell, charter, and operate ships in accordance with existing procedures and without any changes in policies now effective. The Maritime Commission has recommended extension of this authority until June 30, 1950, and has made some suggested amendments, which will be considered at the time the long-range program is before your committee. Pending such long-range study and determination your committee recommends that Senate Joint Resolution 51, as amended, be enacted. Mr. MCCARRAN, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT (To accompany S. 208] The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (S. 208) for the relief of Ella L. Browning, having considered the same, do now report the bill to the Senate favorably, without amendment, and recommend that the bill do pass. STATEMENT This bill is identical with a bill of the Eightieth Congress (S. 2299), which passed the Senate unanimously on June 18, 1948. The facts are fully set forth below in extracts from Senate Report No. 1749 of the Eightieth Congress. JUNE 15, 1948. Hon. ALEXANDER WILEY, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR: This is in response to your request for the views of this Department relative to the bill (S. 2299) for the relief of Ella L. Browning. The bill would provide for payment of the sum of $3,552.50 to Ella L. Browning, Bar Harbor, Maine, in full satisfaction of her claim against the United States for compensation for damages to a swimming pool and stone terrace wall situated at Pointe d'Acadie on Mount Desert Island, which damage was allegedly caused by experimental work conducted by the United States Navy. In compliance with your request a report was obtained from the Navy Department concerning this legislation. That report, which is enclosed, states that Bald Porcupine Island was leased to the Navy Department by claimant at a rental of $1 per year. The island is part of a rock formation which runs through to claimant's estate on adjoining Mount Desert Island. During the spring of 1944 extensive experimental shelling of Bald Porcupine Island was conducted by naval vessels. In August 1945 claimant filed a claim with the Navy Department for damage to the swimming pool and terrace wall which she attributed to the vibration incident to the shelling. The swimming pool and wall have been repaired by claimant at a cost of approximately $3,500. Investigation by naval representatives disclosed that the shelling could have caused the damage to the dam of the swimming pool and/or caused small fissures to open under the dam. The cost of the repairs made by claimant has been supported by a receipted bill of the contractor, and the cost thereof compares favorably with estimates made by the naval investigator. The Navy Department states that in view of the generous attitude exhibited by claimant in leasing Bald Porcupine Island to the Navy Department at the rate of $1 per year and that there was extensive shelling of the island thereafter which naval representatives have reported as the cause of the damage, and considering further that the repair costs seem reasonable, that Department recommends enactment of the bill. The Department of Justice concurs in the recommendation of the Department of the Navy. The Director of the Bureau of the Budget has advised that there will be no objection to the submission of the report. Yours sincerely, PEYTON FORD, The Assistant to the Attorney General. NAVY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL, The honorable the ATTORNEY GENERAL, Washington 25, D. C. SIR: Reference is made to Mr. Ford's letter of March 31, 1948, requesting the views of the Department of the Navy relative to the bill (S. 2299) for the relief of Ella L. Browning. The purpose of the bill is to compensate for damage to a swimming pool and stone terrace wall on Mrs. Browning's estate located at Pointe d'Acadie, on Mount Desert Island, Maine, which is claimed to have been caused by detonations conducted by the Navy on Bald Porcupine Island during and after 1943 in connection with experimental work with ordnance materials. Bald Porcupine Island was leased to the Navy Department by Mrs. Browning at the nominal rental of $1 per year. The island is part of an agneous rock formation which runs through to Mrs. Browning's estate on adjoining Mount Desert Island. During the spring of 1944 extensive experimental shelling of Bald Porcupine was conducted by naval vessels. In August 1945 Mrs. Browning made a claim against the Navy Department for the damage to the swimming pool and the terrace wall, which she attributed to the vibration incident to the shelling. Investigation by naval representatives disclosed that the shelling "could have caused the damage to the dam of the swimming pool and/or caused a small fissure to open under the dam." The swimming pool and the wall have been repaired by Mrs. Browning at a cost of approximately $3,500. This figure compares reasonably with the estimates made by the naval investigator, and the expenditure has been supported by the receipted bill of the repair contractor. Since the damage did not occur to property under the lease the claim submitted by Mrs. Browning could not be adjusted under the provisions of the lease, nor was it considered as one within the purview of the act of July 3, 1944 (46 U. S. C. 797). While it was cognizable under section 114 of the Naval Appropriation Act of 1946, as a claim resulting from the administration or operation of the naval service, that statute (now expired) limited the authority of the Secretary of the Navy to payment of claims so arising which were not in excess of $1,000. Thus, it appeared that the only means of redress would be a bill for private relief. In view of the generous attitude shown by Mrs. Browning in leasing Bald Porcupine Island to the Navy Department at the rate of $1 per year and considering that there was extensive shelling of the island thereafter which naval representatives have reported as the cause of the damage of which Mrs. Browning complains, and considering further that the repair costs seem reasonable, the Department of the Navy recommends enactment of the bill. Respectfully yours, Mr. MCCARRAN, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 592) The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (S. 592) for the relief of Edwin B. Anderson, having considered the same, do now report the bill to the Senate favorably, without amendment, and recommend that the bill do pass. The purpose of the proposed legislation is to relieve Edwin B. Anderson, a post-office employee of Newton, Iowa, from all liability to make refund to the United States of any amount received by him as a result of overpayment of salary from May 1, 1945, to October 16, 1946. The amount involved is $361.54. STATEMENT Attached hereto and made a part of this report is a letter received from the Postmaster General, which sets forth in detail the facts in this case. Hon. KENNETH MCKELLAR, POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, President pro tempore of the United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR: I am submitting herewith, for consideration by the Congress, a bill for the relief of Edwin B. Anderson, a city letter carrier in the post office at Newton, Iowa. On May 1, 1945, Mr. Anderson, a substitute postal employee at the Newton, Iowa, post office, was promoted to the position of a regular city letter carrier by the former postmaster, and thereafter was paid at the rate of compensation provided for a regular city letter carrier. However, the postmaster failed to notify the Department of this promotion, and Mr. Anderson was carried on the roster as a substitute employee until October 16, 1946, the date his promotion to the position of regular city letter carrier was made effective by the Department. This case has been investigated by a post-office inspector, and it appears that Mr. Anderson has been made the unfortunate victim of a series of circumstances brought about by the inefficiency of the former postmaster and the derelictions of the former assistant postmaster. The following is quoted from the inspector's report: "Mr. Harry E. Sprinkle had been the assistant postmaster at Newton for many years and had provided efficient service. It appears that early in 1945 his mind began to fail to the extent that he was unable to perform the duties of assistant postmaster. The postmaster had never taken an active part in the management of the office and had permitted Mr. Sprinkle to handle all official correspondence as well as all other management of the office. During November 1945, following Sprinkle's sudden retirement on October 31, the postmaster found that Sprinkle had not submitted quarterly reports from the Newton office for either the June or September quarters of that year. The postmaster also found that Sprinkle had hidden and destroyed correspondence from the Department concerning these delinquencies, and concerning other matters, among which was some correspondence concerning Anderson's appointment as a carrier.” The inspector further states: "Anderson repaid the amount of $361.64 on January 29, 1947. It was necessary for him to mortgage his home to obtain the money. In view of the fact that his wife is in poor health and has been confined in a hospital the necessity for repayment of the salary overpayment was a very distinct hardship on him and his family. He is 33 years and has his wife and one child to support.' The sum "$361.64" referred to in the above quotation should be "$361.54." The General Accounting Office had disallowed the salary payments to Mr. Anderson as a regular city letter carrier between May 1, 1945, and October 15, 1946. Accordingly, credit in the gross amount of $782.74 was withheld in the city-delivery account of John H. Gribben, former postmaster at Newton, Iowa. Although it would appear from Mr. Anderson's affidavit [copy herewith] that he repaid only $361.54 of this amount the General Accounting Office states that "on July 14, 1947, the former postmaster deposited with his designated depositary office sufficient funds to balance his account, and it is assumed that such deposit included the reported collection from Mr. Anderson." Thus, it would appear that Mr. Anderson, or some other person or persons on his behalf, repaid the full amount charged against the account of the former postmaster. In view of the unusual circumstances in this case, it is believed that Mr. Anderson should be relieved of all liability to refund the salary overpayments to the United States Government. Accordingly, this Department recommends that favorable consideration be given to the enactment of the proposed legislation. This legislation will involve no appropriation of additional funds as all payments covered by it have been expended and credit claimed therefor in the postmaster's accounts. Copies of pertinent papers from the files of this Department are herewith submitted. This Department has been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the presentation of this proposal to the Congress. Sincerely yours, J. M. DONALDSON, O |