Mr. MCCARRAN, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 748] The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (S. 748) for the relief of Charles L. Bishop, having considered the same, do now report the bill to the Senate favorably without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. STATEMENT Attached hereto and made a part of this report are letters from the Department of Justice and the Post Office Department. AUGUST 26, 1947. 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 a report on the bill (S. 1503) for the relief of Charles L. Bishop. The bill would provide for the payment of the sum of $350 to Charles L. Bishop, the said sum representing the aggregate amount of money orders erroneously paid by Mr. Bishop while acting as assistant Navy mail clerk at the Naval Air Station, Alameda, Calif. The bill would further provide for the payment to him of an amount equal to any portion of such sum heretofore paid by him pursuant to such claims. At your request, a report was obtained from the Post Office Department concerning this matter. That report, which is enclosed, states that on or about November 24, 1944, while on board an army transport en route to San Francisco, Calif., one John P. Lynott, torpedoman's mate first class, had a wallet containing four money orders stolen from his sea bag. Three of the money orders were for $100 each and one was for $50. The money orders were subsequently presented to Mr. Bishop who was the money-order clerk at the Navy post office at the Alameda Naval Air Station. The person who presented the money orders for 1 payment, Joseph Washington, Jr., was a cook second class in the Navy and was required to furnish evidence of his identity only. Pursuant to instructions that had been issued by the naval authorities, Mr. Bishop did not require evidence as to the authenticity of the endorsements on the money orders. The report further observes that while Mr. Bishop failed to ascertain that the endorsements on the money orders were the true signature of the payee, as required by the postal regulations, he did require correct identification of the presenter, which he entered on the reverse of the money-order coupons. It is the view of the Post Office Department that the erroneous payment of the money orders appears to have resulted from the irregular practice placed in effect at the branch post office by the naval officers in charge. Accordingly, the report concludes with a statement that the Post Office Department would interpose no objection to the enactment of the proposed legislation. The Department of Justice has no objection to the enactment of the bill. The Director of the Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the submission of this report. Sincerely yours. HAROLD I. BAYNTON, Acting, the Assistant to the Attorney General. JULY 25, 1947. Hon. H. GRAHAM MORISON, Acting, the Assistant to the Attorney General, Department of Justice, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR MR. MORISON: Reference is made to your request for a report on S. 1503, a bill for the relief of Charles L. Bishop, in the sum of $350, representing the aggregate amount of money orders erroneously paid by him during 1944, while acting as assistant Navy mail clerk at the naval air station, Alameda, Calif., to a person then in the armed forces of the United States who had stolen such money orders and fraudulently endorsed them in his own favor. This case was made the subject of investigation by post-office inspectors, and copies of pertinent papers are herewith submitted. The facts are summarized as follows: One John P. Lynott, torpedoman's mate first class, had in his possession three money orders for $100 each and one money order for $50, which he had purchased at New York, N. Y. On or about November 24, 1944, while Mr. Lynott was on board the Army transport, Willard Holbrook, en route to San Francisco, Calif., his wallet containing the four money orders was stolen from his sea bag. The money orders subsequently were presented to Charles Leroy Bishop, the money-order clerk at the Navy post office at the Alameda Naval Air Station, by Joseph Washington, Jr., who was a cook second class in the Navy. Pursuant to instructions that had been issued by the naval authorities, Mr. Bishop only required the presenter to furnish evidence of his identity. Mr. Bishop did not require evidence as to the authenticity of the endorsements on the money orders. In his affidavit of June 22, 1945 (copy herewith), Joseph Washington, Jr., admits that he forged the endorsements and cashed the money orders in question. He is now serving a term in the Nevada State Penitentiary, Carson City, Nev., for burglary. It has been ascertained that he does not have funds to make restitution for the money orders. Although Mr. Bishop failed to ascertain that the endorsements on the money orders were the true signature of the payee, as required by the postal regulations, he did require correct identification of the presenter, which he entered on the reverse of the money-order coupon. The wrong payment of the money orders appears to have resulted from the irregular practice placed in effect at the branch post office by the naval officers in charge. In view of the unusual circumstances involved in this case, and the fact that Mr. Bishop appears to have been following the usual practice at the branch post office at the time he paid the money orders, this Department will interpose no objection to the enactment of the proposed legislation. Sincerely yours, J. M. DONALDSON, Acting Postmaster General. POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR, Alleged wrong payment of money order No. 81489, October 20, 1944, $100, issued at New York, 10811 Branch, New York, drawn on St. Louis, Mo.; remitter, J. P. Lynott, torpedoman's mate first class; payce, J. P. Lynott torpedoman's mate first class. INSPECTOR IN CHARGE, Chicago 7, Il.: 1. Personal attention was given this case at Carrollton, Ill., September 24, 1946. 2. As requested by the Third Assistant in his letter dated August 8, 1946, Charles L. Bishop, paying employee, was interviewed with a view to collecting the amount of the subject money order, as well as those involved in cases Nos. 27518-K, 27519-X, and 27530-K, total $350. Herewith is the affidavit of Mr. Bishop, in which he agrees to make reimbursement; however, he indicates he cannot make payment in a lump sum and requests permission to make installment payments at the rate of $20 per month. 3. Mr. Bishop is employed in the Carrollton, Ill., post office as a substitute carrier and at present earns slightly over $200 per month. He has a family to support and has very little savings. Mr. Bishop advised that during the last 2 years of his service in the Navy he was not required to furnish a bond. 4. In consideration of the above facts it is recommended that Mr. Bishop be permitted to make installment payments. The case is returned for departmental ruling. M. J. MCGEE, Inspector. POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR, San Francisco, Calif., September 5, 1945. New York, N. Y.: Wrong payment of money order No. 81489, issued at New York, 10811 Branch, New York, October 20, 1944, amount $100, drawn on St. Louis, Mo., remitter-payee J. P. Lynott, torpedoman's mate first class. INSPECTOR IN CHARGE, San Francisco, Calif. 1. Cases 27517-K to 27520-K, inclusive, cover the cashing on forged endorsements of money orders 81489 to 81492, inclusive. Numbers 81489, 81490, and 81491 were each issued for the maximum sum of $100 and No. 81492 for $50. Photostatic copies of each accompany this report. 2. The four money orders were forged and cashed at the Navy post office located at the Naval Air Station, Alameda, Calif.; one-No. 81490-on November 27, 1944, and the others on the following day. The orders had originally been contained in a wallet of the payee, which was stolen from him aboard a transport on which he was returning to this country. Investigation has now determined that the orders were forged and cashed by Joseph Washington, Jr., 20-year-old Negro, who was a cook second-class in the Navy at the time of the offense, and whose service number was 5768194. 3. Washington was discharged from the Navy as undesirable on May 15, 1945, and he is currently serving a term in the Nevada State Prison, Carson City, for first-degree burglary. When he was interviewed there on June 22, 1945, he admitted the offenses covered by these cases, and his affidavit to that effect is in the file of this case. He claimed he had no money with which to make restitution, however, saying he had spent the proceeds of his forgery. The offender's parents are deceased, but he has an aunt in Los Angeles, Calif., who, he said, might be willing to repay the money. That person has since been interviewed and has stated that her financial position will not permit such action. 4. The criminal feature of this case is being given attention concurrently. Word is now being awaited from naval authorities as to whether they will undertake punishment of the offender. Since the man is now a civilian, a negative response is expected and the assistant United States attorney here, with whom the matter was discussed informally, has expressed the desire to present the facts to a grand jury if the Navy wishes such action taken. In that event, formal presentation to the attorney will be made and three copies of the letter will be furnished your office; if an indictment is returned, information that Washington is wanted for prosecution in Federal court upon his release from present confinement will be furnished Nevada prison authorities. 5. Payment on the forged instruments was made by Charles Leroy Bishop, mailman second class, who is a money-order clerk in the Navy post office, Alameda Naval Air Station. When interviewed, Bishop recalled the circumstances fairly clearly, saying that Washington had come to his window with the four orders on November 27 and had stated that he needed money very badly since all of his possessions had been lost. Bishop had insufficient funds, he said, with which to make full payment; therefore, he cashed one of the $100 orders and suggested that Washington return the next day. When the latter appeared on November 28 with the other three orders, Bishop proceeded to cash them for him. 6. Bishop stated he had been a regular substitute clerk-carrier at the post office in Carrollton, Ill., in civilian life for about 2 years. This constituted his only postal experience prior to entering the Navy. During that period, he said, he had some limited money-order experience, and had cashed some money orders which were presented to him personally by payees with whom he was acquainted Bishop declared he had never been asked to make payment on an order which had been endorsed by the payee to another person, and he did not know of the instructions in the Postal Guide that such endorsements must be known to be genuine or be guaranteed by someone financially responsible. 7. Bishop claimed to have been in the Navy for the past 19 months, during all of which time he has been a mailman assigned to the naval air station. Not once, he said, was he asked as to the extent of his previous financial experience, nor was anything mentioned to him concerning the identity of endorsers' signatures. He asserted that the only instructions issued concerning money-order payments was that the persons presenting orders were to be identified. Also, he pointed out that a large number of money orders were paid by him daily, many of which were endorsed; that he would have no way of knowing whether the signatures were genuine and could not ask that they all be guaranteed because this would be impracticable for most Navy men to do; and that such procedure would unduly inconvenience patrons and slow up service. Therefore, in this instance as in others, he had made payment after identity of the person presenting the orders was established. He said he had not noticed the similarity Washington's writing bore to the alleged signature of the original payee, nor the fact that the latter's name had been spelled differently than it was shown on the face of the order. 8. Bishop contended that he should not be held financially liable for the wrong payments, in view of his limited experience and the nature of instructions under which he had performed his duties. He added that his monthly salary of $96 and the fact that he had no savings to speak of would not permit his standing such a loss. 9. The postal officer at the air station is Lt. Michael L. McEvoy. He took over his duties there in September 1944, and was a postal clerk at New Orleans, La., for some years prior to entering the Navy. Bishop was engaged on his money-order assignment when he (McEvoy) reported for duty, said the lieutenant, and he assumed the clerk was qualified for the position. The Navy mail clerk in the office is Charles H. Klinker, chief mailman, who was a civilian postal employee at Lafayette, Ind. He took over his present assignment on February 1, 1945. The postal officer at the time Bishop was assigned to a money-order window was Lt. John N. Osler, now district postal officer, Seventeenth Naval District, care of Fleet Post Office, Seattle, Wash. The Navy mail clerk was William R. Kneppler, chief specialist (mail), now deceased. Both of these men had been postal employees for several years in civilian life. 10. Lieutenant McEvoy and Chief Klinker both informed me that it would be practically impossible for most Navy men to have endorsers' signatures on money orders guaranteed. They pointed out that a large percentage of the orders cashed at the station were those that had been endorsed by the payee to another person, and that they were usually presented by persons who were in a transient status at the air station and who were not in a position to have their first signatures guaranteed by anyone known to postal employees. For this reason, they said, they had requested money-order clerks to thoroughly satisfy themselves of the identity of endorsees in the belief that, being Navy men, those persons could subsequently be held financially liable if forgeries should develop. They added that the present instance is the first of improperly paid money orders since they have been on duty at the office. |