element." My work is of such a nature that "time is money" and every hour counts. Is not there some way of adjusting these items without my getting a bill introduced in Congress to reimburse me? I do not feel it would be just to make me make good these moneys. As both Mr. Bennett and you know, I have no fund to assist the probationers and parolees. In the past 6 years and a half it has cost me personally at least $1,500 to aid the probationers and parolees adjust themselves "for the good of the system." At present the car is jointly owned by Mrs. Upton and myself. I am enclosing copies of letters written the United States marshal regarding these items of suspension. Very sincerely yours, Mr. GEORGE VICE, CHARLES H. UPTON, JULY 2, 1937. United States Marshal, Post Office Building, San Francisco, Calif. DEAR SIR: In reply to your letter of June 16 in which you state that the Attorney General has suspended items in my expense account amounting to $29.90, because the ownership of my car is vested in Mrs. Upton, I wish to state that the car is registered in Mrs. Upton's name although it is jointly owned. However, within the next 2 days the car will be jointly registered. I am enclosing a copy of a letter I wrote you on April 3 regarding these suspensions. I am also enclosing $1.25 to cover the overcharge in voucher No. 3307. Respectfully, CHARLES H. UPTON, GEORGE VICE, ESQ., APRIL 3, 1937. United States Marshal, San Francisco, Calif. DEAR SIR: In reply to your letter of March 23, in which you state the Attorney General has suspended items in my expense accounting to $60.75 because the ownership of my car is vested in Mrs. Upton, I wish to state: 1. The car is registered in Mrs. Upton's name although it is jointly owned. I am paying for the car and for oil, gas, upkeep, etc. I am attaching available canceled checks showing that I have paid for gas, oil, etc.; and given Mrs. Upton to make payments. 2. Mrs. Upton wanted the car registered in her name and, as she is a very sick woman, I agreed. She is now away, in a dangerous condition, and no one is allowed to see her. 3. It is impossible for me to get the registration changed at this time, also to secure receipts for actual cost of transportation as mentioned in your letter. 4. This money was spent in performance of my duties as chief probation and parole officer for northern California under "Authority to use own automobile, probation system authorization No. 3, dated July 1, 1936, Department Order 2615, dated October 1, 1934." Respectfully, CHARLES H. UPTON, NOVEMBER 16, 1937. Mr. GEORGE VICE, United States Marshal, Post Office Building, San Francisco, Calif. DEAR SIR: This will acknowledge receipt of General Accounting Office suspensions as follows: Also vouchers disapproved by the Attorney General for the March quarter of 1937: With reference to these suspensions, would say that I am taking the matter up with Hon. J. V. Bennett, Director of Prisons, for his advice. Respectfully, CHARLES H. UPTON, Chief Probation Officer. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES MARSHAL, San Francisco, March 23, 1937. CHARLES H. UPTON, Esq., Probation Officer, San Francisco, Calif. DEAR SIR: The Attorney General has suspended items in the following expense accounts, payments of which were made to you during the quarter ended December 31, 1936: The Attorney General gives the following reason for the suspension: "It is noted that ownership of car used by Mr. Upton is vested in Mrs. Upton. Inasmuch as paragraph 12 (a), General Travel Regulations, permits travel of Government employees only in their personally owned automobiles, all charges for mileage will have to be disallowed. Mr. Upton can be allowed only the actual expenses of transportation for gas, oil, storage, etc., supported by all the necessary receipts, etc., as required by paragraph 12 of General Travel Regulations." Comptroller General McCarl, under date of September 10, 1934, handed down the following decision regarding personally owned automobiles: "Mileage for the use of a personally owned automobile under the act of February 14, 1931 (46 Stat. 1103), as amended by section 9, act of March 3, 1933 (47 Stat. 1516), may not be paid to an employee when the travel is performed in an automobile registered, and the license plates therefor issued, in the name of the employee's wife." However, if the automobile is owned jointly by your wife and yourself the item can be allowed, as under date of December 18, 1936, Acting Comptroller General Elliott decided as follows: "An automobile registered jointly in the name of an employee and his wife is the employee's own automobile within the meaning of that term as used in the act of February 14, 1931 (46 Stat. 1103), and the amendment of March 3, 1933 (47 Stat. 1516), and the mileage may be paid for travel performed by an employee in an automobile so registered where otherwise proper." If the automobile in question is owned jointly by your wife and yourself kindly write me to that effect, making your letter in triplicate. If it is not owned jointly it will be necessary for you to furnish receipts for the gas, oil, storage charges, etc., used and incurred on the trips. Respectfully, GEORGE VICE, United States Marshal. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES MARSHAL, San Francisco, October 5, 1937. CHARLES H. UPTON, Esq., Chief Probation Officer, Post Office Building, San Francisco, Calif. DEAR SIR: Enclosed please find notice of exceptions from the General Accounting Office, Washington, D. C., in regard to your expense accounts as follows: Voucher 3917, charge for mileage May 5, 10, 15, 1936.- $18.00 12. 80 16. 60 34. 03 41. 25 12. 05 You will note all of the exceptions are based on the ownership of the automobile being in your wife's name. Kindly make your reply in duplicate. Respectfully, GEORGE VICE, United States Marshal. By JOHN A. ROSEEN, Chief Deputy. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES MARSHAL, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CHARLES H. UPTON, Esq., Chief Probation Officer, San Francisco, Calif. DEAR SIR: Referring to your expense accounts for January, February, and March 1937, the Attorney General has suspended the vouchers for the following reasons: Voucher 2418, period January 2 to 14: "Inasmuch as paragraph 12 (a), General Travel Regulations, authorizes use of personally owned auto only on a mileage basis, charge of $8.50 is not allowable since Form 1012e shows that car used was owned by Mrs. Upton. This amount should be collected and deposited. Mr. Upton may submit another voucher for actual expenses of travel only, if he desires, supported by necessary receipts for gas, oil, etc., as required." Voucher 2740, period January 16 to February 13: Same exception as to voucher 2418; amount $19.85. Voucher 3307, period March 7 to 26: "Correct charge for per diem on March 26 should be $2.50. Collect and deposit $1.25 overcharge. (See par. 51, General Travel Regulations)." Kindly make your reply in triplicate. Mr. CHARLES H. UPTON, Chief Probation Officer, Post Office Building, San Francisco, Calif. DEAR MR. UPTON: I have your letter of April 8, regarding the refund of $223.83 for automobile expenses which was suspended by the General Accounting Office. I am taking the matter up with the proper official here in the Department and just as soon as we can get a opinion I will write you. It was indeed a pleasure to see you here in Washington during the parole conference and I am sorry that we could not have had a leisurely visit together. It was very fine of you to show sufficient interest to come all the distance from the west coast to attend the conference. DEAR MR. UPTON: I have submitted your file relative to reimbursement for automobile travel to our Division of Accounts and the only suggestion that they can make is that you have introduced in Congress a bill in relief. This, of course, is a personal matter for you and would not come through the Department. I am very sorry indeed that this peculiar rule has worked such a hardship on you and it is my opinion that you should be granted the relief. Cordially yours, RICHARD A. CHAPPELL, Supervisor, Probation System, United States Courts. O JUNE 5 (legislative day, MAY 28), 1940.-Ordered to be printed Mr. CAPPER, from the Committee on Claims, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 6967] The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6967) for the relief of Thomas Boyd, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with the recommendation that the bill do pass without amendment. The facts are fully set forth in House Report No. 2239, Seventy-sixth Congress, third session, which is appended hereto and made a part of this report. [H. Rept. No. 2239, 76th Cong. 3d sess.] The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6967) for the relief of Thomas Boyd, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. The purpose of the proposed legislation is merely to waive the bar of the time statute of limitations of the Employees' Compensation Act and to authorize and direct the Employees' Compensation Commission to receive and consider, when filed, the claim of Thomas Boyd, of Philadelphia, Pa., for disability alleged to have been incurred by him during January of 1934 when engaged in authorized activities while an employee of the Norfolk Navy Yard, and to leave the Commission free to determine the claim upon its merits under the remaining provisions of the act and afford him such measure of relief as the facts, when established, may show him to be entitled to. STATEMENT OF FACTS Mr. Thomas Boyd, of Philadelphia, Pa., was formerly employed as a laborer and shipfitter's helper stationed at the Norfolk Navy Yard, Norfolk, Va., employment No. 124293. In January of 1934 he was employed as a shipfitter's helper, and on the day he was injured was engaged in assisting in unloading a barge. There was a large iron hanging door on this barge, which opened by sliding from side to side on a track. Several other employees emerged from inside of the barge on the deck, and attempted to open this door. The gate or iron door was partly open, but as these men attempted to open it further, the door became unfastened from its upper track and started to fall to the deck. When Mr. Boyd saw this about to happen, he ran forward and with all his strength got the full weight of the gate upon his upper chest and kept it from falling to the deck for several moments, during which interval the other employees succeeded in jumping to safety. Had Mr. Boyd not held this door, the men who were under same at the time would undoubtedly have been seriously hurt and probably killed. |