against the curb and the center of Broad Street, which was the path of travel that was being taken by this driver, as well as all others who were using this street, and that into his path of travel was then extended, without his knowledge, and without any opportunity of seeing it, the rear end of this truck as a barricade to Broad Street, and without any opportunity of seeing his danger, and because of the negligence of the Government agent, his automobile collided with the rear end of this truck, which impact broke the glass of the windshield and window of his automobile, and the pieces of broken glass pierced the eye of the said Geraldine Ash, the occupant of the front seat, and so injured it that in spite of the care and attention of a specialist in eye troubles it had to be removed in order to save her other eye, and that the said Geraldine Ash was thrown against the body of the car and knocked unconscious and she was carried to the hospital where she received medical aid and attention.

THELMA STRICKLAND.
RUFUS ASH.

Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 23d day of February 1939. [SEAL]

(My commission expires February 1941.)

Hon. ROBERT RAMSPECK,

CLARA E. SMITH, Notary Public, Georgia, State at large.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D. C., July 1, 1939.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR BOB: With further reference to my bill, H. R. 2901, in behalf of Miss Geraldine Ash, and the statement of the Department of Agriculture that no parking regulations are in force on Broad Street where the Soil Conservation Service truck was parked at the time Miss Ash was injured, I wish to call attention to the parking regulations contained in section 538 of the city code of Athens, as follows:

"Parking regulations. In parking automobiles or other such vehicles the right front wheel shall be near or touching the curb and the body of the automobile at an angle of approximately forty-five degrees from the curb; this applying to cars parking on streets within the fire limits, excepting on College Avenue between Washington and Clayton Streets where all vehicles shall be parked in the center of College Avenue.'

The truck was parked within the fire limits.

The truck was parked at an improper angle. It should have been parked at an angle of 45° from the curb, whereas it was parked at an angle of more than 90°, causing the truck to extend out into the street, where traffic is very heavy, approximately 8 feet further than the rear of the cars alongside of it.

I also call attention to the fact that the Georgia law requires all motor vehicles while using the streets or highways at night to burn front lamps and a rear lamp, the rear light to be a red light visible at a distance of at least 100 feet behind the vehicle. (Sec. 68-302, Georgia Code, 1933.)

The evidence in this case shows that this truck had no light burning, and this was a violation of the Georgia law above cited.

The negligence of the operator of the truck in improperly parking it, violating the city ordinance, and having no rear light burning in violation of the State law, caused the injury to Miss Ash's eye and resulted in the loss of the eye, and I feel that she certainly should be compensated therefor.

In Georgia, as you know, we do not follow the common law rule of contributory negligence precluding a recovery but we have the rule of "comparative negligence" which allows the jury to lessen the amount to be recovered by the percentage of contribution, if any, that the plaintiff was chargeable with as his negligent act. In other words, suppose the driver of the car had been negligent, this could not be attributed to the claimant in this case.

The evidence clearly shows from the standpoint of the plaintiff that the driver of the car in which she was riding was not negligent, and, for the sake of argument, suppose he had been partly negligent, under the laws of the State of Georgia this could not be attributed to Miss Ash who was only an occupant of the car.

I am familiar with the facts of this case and feel very deeply about it. I am satisfied in my own mind you could not select a jury anywhere who would fail to give this claimant some damage in view of the fact that the Government

violated the laws of the city and the State in that the truck was parked improperly and had no rear light burning. The owner of a car or truck must comply with the statutes of the State and city in operating and parking cars, or trucks.

Sincerely yours,

PAUL BROWN.

SHACKELFORD & SHACKELFORD,
Athens, Ga., July 8, 1939.

Re: Claim of Miss Geraldine Ash, H. R. No. 2901.

Hon. PAUL BROWN, M. C.,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR PAUL: We wrote for Miss Ash and her father, Carl Ash, to come to the office and they are here today. I have talked over the items of expenses they were put to by reason of the injury to her eye.

I note that you said that you would not care to have an itemized statement of these expenses, but only an approximate cost.

She was treated by Dr. Cabanias here, a well-known eye specialist and he removed the eyeball and she had to have a glass eye put in. She also went to the hospital, and she incurred other expenses besides the loss of her eye. All of which are set forth below:

She was 24 years of age at the time of the injury and she was earning between $15 and $20 per week, and these wages have gone up until the people that are doing the same work that she was doing at the mill are making $25 and $30 a week, and she because of the eye injury, not having but one eye, is unable to do this kind of work now, and so she earns only about one-half that amount.

In fact she has a permanent injury and will be unable to earn, working at the hosiery mill but half wages for the rest of her life, and this is an item which we hope the committee will keep in mind in compensating her for her damages. For her medical care and attention under Dr. Cabanias and the purchase of a glass eye, the approximate cost and expenses will be $200.

For hospital expenses, nursing, and drugs, $40.

She was injured on January 10, and because of her injury she was unable to go back to work at the hosiery mill until September 11, so she lost 8 months' time, and at the time she was injured she was making about $70 a month, and for the 8 months she lost $560.

Now Paul, there is another item of damage which you might bring before the committee, and that is that Miss Ash is a very attractive young lady and to have the misfortune of losing her eye and replacing it with a glass eye was a disfigurement for which she should receive substantial compensation, and of course, if the case went to a jury, we would ask that to be considered by them in estimating the damages, and the committee should give it thought and consideration in making up their minds about the amount that they would be willing to recommend to her as compensation for her injuries.

We hope that we have covered the subject matter as fully as you desire us to do, and we know that you will push the matter to the best of your ability, and get for Miss Ash as large amount as you can from the committee and Congress. With kindest personal regards, we are,

Yours very truly,

SHACKELFORD & SHACKELFORD.
S. C. UPSON,
By THOS. J. SHACKELFORD.

P. S.-The nerves of the other eye have been injured and when she uses this eye constantly it pains her, and she was compelled to have glasses made to suit this other eye.

T. J. S.

Hon. AMBROSE J. KENNEDY,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., March 28, 1989.

Chairman, Committee on Claims, House of Representatives.

MY DEAR COLLEAGUE: In support of my bill, H. R. 2901, in behalf of Geraldine Ash, I am submitting affidavits of Miss Ash, D. M. Patterson, and joint affidavit of Thelma Strickland and Rufus Ash.

This evidence shows that on January 10, 1938, about 6:30 p. m., on Broad Street in Athens, Ga., the car in which the claimant and three others were riding

crashed into the rear end of a Government truck being used by the Soil Conservation Service, said truck being improperly parked, which resulted in the loss of her right eye.

The Government truck was a very long truck and the body of it extended far beyond the rear line of the automobiles parked beside it. The night was dark and there was no way for the driver of the automobile in which the claimant was riding to see the body of the truck extending beyond the rear line of other parked cars. There was no rear light burning on the truck, and the visibility was very poor. The driver of the car had the right to believe that all vehicles were complying with the city ordinance and the State laws as to rearlights and to drive along this space, which seemed safe and secure for him to travel, and therefore he was in the exercise of due care and caution in driving at the proper speed of not exceeding 25 miles per hour. Therefore the accident was solely due to the negligence of the driver of the Government truck in parking his truck at an angle of 90° instead of a 45° angle as required by city ordinance, and not having left his lights burning so that the rear end of the truck would have a lighted signal to attract the attention of other travelers on Broad Street that night as they approached the Government truck.

Under the Georgia statutes "every motor vehicle using the highways at night shall be equipped with a lamp or lamps clearly visible for a distance of not less than 100 feet from the front and rear.'

The driver of the automobile was complying with the law in every respect and no negligence was attributed to him in any way whatever in the accident.

I certainly believe in the merits of the claim and hope the committee can see proper to make a favorable report.

Sincerely yours,

PAUL BROWN.

O

JUNE 5 (legislative day, MAY 28), 1940.—Ordered to be printed

Mr. BROWN, from the Committee on Claims, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 2354]

The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2354) for the relief of S. T. Enloe, 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. 2222, Seventy-sixth Congress, third session, which is appended hereto and made a part of this report.

[H. Rept. No. 2222, 76th Cong., 3d sess.)

The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2354) for the relief of S. T. Enloe, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill, as amended, do pass.

The amendments are as follows:

Line 6, strike out the sign and figures "$5,000" and insert in lieu thereof "$2,673,000".

Line 8, after the word "injuries" insert "and property damage".

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to pay to Mr. S. T. Enloe, of Clover, S. C., the sum of $2,673 in full settlement of all claims against the United States for personal injuries and property damage sustained by him when the automobile which he was driving was struck by a Government truck operated in connection with the Civilian Conservation Corps on January 9, 1937, near York, S. C.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

At about dark on January 9, 1937, Mr. S. T. Enloe was driving his Chevrolet coach at a speed of 15 to 20 miles per hour in an easterly direction on State Highway No. 5, also known as East Liberty Street, within the corporate city limits of York, S. C., and was approaching a slight curve to the left (for the private car). At the same time, a Government truck operated in connection with the Civilian Conservation Corps on official business and being driven by one Lamar W. Coates, was proceeding at a speed of 20 miles per hour in a westerly direction on this same highway. The weather was foggy and the roadway was wet and slippery. There were no witnesses to the accident other than the occupants of the two involved vehicles; that is, Mr. Enloe, Mr. Coates, and several other Civilian Conservation Corps men. In spite of the foggy weather, both drivers stated that they could see the headlights of the other vehicle.