[No. 16] FOR THE RELIEF OF JAMES WALSH (H. R. 12433) 26255-1172-L. NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, December 6, 1926. The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Replying further to the committee's letter of May 26, 1926, inclosing the bill H. R. 12433, "For the relief of James Walsh," and requesting the views and recommendations of the Navy Department thereon, I have the honor to advise you as follows: The records of the Navy Department show that James Walsh enrolled in the Naval Reserve Force on May 8, 1917, as a lieutenant; attained the rank of lieutenant commander on September 5, 1917; on January 7, 1920, he was transferred to the inactive list. At that time he was serving in the rank of lieutenant commander. On May 7, 1921, he was honorably discharged from the naval service. Mr. Walsh now seeks to be appointed a lieutenant commander in the United States Naval Reserve and to be immediately thereafter placed upon the retired list with the retired pay of that grade. In this connection attention is invited to the fact that the retired list of the Navy is solely for the benefit of the regular active list; that is, its sole purpose is to keep the regular active list a healthy, sound, and efficient body, and for that purpose the retired list is correctly conceived to take care of disabled regulars. Officers and men not of the regular establishment who become disabled during a war which calls out excess man power over and above the regular establishment should be liberally cared for. Also, though the expense of this care and treatment should be borne by the Government, it should not properly be charged against the regular appropriations of the Navy Department. There are many cases similar to that of Mr. Walsh and the appropriations for the naval service can ill afford to bear the continuing drain of retirements for such purposes. Such expense, if justified, should be borne by the United States Veterans' Bureau. The bill H. R. 12433, which will cost the Government $1,890 per annum if enacted into law, was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with information that the Navy Department contemplated making an unfavorable report thereon, and under date of August 3, 1926, the Navy Department was advised that this proposed report would not be in conflict with the financial program of the President. Attention is invited to the fact that the act approved February 28, 1925 (43 Stat. 1081), expressly repealed all provisions of the act of July 12, 1921, relating to the Naval Reserve Force. As the apparent purpose of this bill is to confer upon Mr. Walsh the benefits provided by section 6 of the act of July 12, 1921, it would appear necessary to redraft the bill H. R. 12433 so as to authorize his appointment as a lieutenant commander in the United States Naval Reserve and to provide that he be placed upon the retired list of the Naval Reserve with the pay authorized by law for officers of the Navy retired on account of physical disability incident to the service. A provision should also be incorporated in the bill requiring Mr. Walsh to undergo examination by a naval retiring board for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not he incurred physical disability incident to the service in time of war in order to entitle him to the benefits proposed by the bill. In view of the reasons above set forth, and as this proposed legislation is for the benefit of an individual and its benefits are not extended to many other former temporary and reserve officers who may have suffered physical disability in line of duty during the period of their active naval service, the Navy Department does not recommend the enactment of the bill H. R. 12433. Sincerely yours, T. DOUGLAS ROBINSON, Acting Secretary of the Navy. A BILL For the relief of James Walsh Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President is authorized to appoint James Walsh a lieutenant commander in the United States Naval Reserve Force, class 3 (in which grade and force he served honorably during the World War), · and to retire him and place him upon the retired list of the Navy with the retired pay and emoluments of that grade: Provided, That no back pay, allowances, or emoluments shall become due because of the passage of this act. [No. 17] FOR THE RELIEF OF R. J. GRAFF, FORMER ENSIGN, SUPPLY CORPS, UNITED STATES NAVAL RESERVE FORCE (H. R. 11814) 26255-1158:2-L. NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, December 6, 1926. The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Replying further to the committee's letter of May 3, 1926, inclosing the bill H. R. 11814, "For the relief of R. J. Graff, former ensign, Supply Corps, United States Naval Reserve Force," and requesting the views and recommendations of the Navy Department thereon, I have the honor to advise you as follows: The bill H. R. 11814 was introduced for the purpose of relieving R. J. Graff, formerly ensign, Supply Corps, United States Naval Reserve Force, from the following disallowances which were raised in his accounts by the General Accounting Office: 13. Amount claimed as expended on public bill No. 74, W. Hare & Co. (fuel and transportation 17-18) disallowed Feb. 12, 1923; public bill and supporting vouchers have not been furnished. 14. Amount for which credit is taken on account current as a transfer of funds.. Amount taken up by H. N. Hartley, 3/19 ctf. 15557-D. $41.00 $690.00 Difference disallowed Feb. 12, 1923 (name of officer to whom this 15. Amount credited on account current as expended per public bills.. Amount expended as per schedule of disbursements. 69.00 $13, 937. 00 235. 60 Difference disallowed Feb. 12, 1923.. Under orders dated May 19, 1919, Mr. Graff was relieved from active duty in the Naval Reserve Force, but as he had not cleared up the differences in his accounts the Bureau of Supplies and Accounts of the Navy Department advised him of the status thereof on April 25, 1924, and requested him to furnish information as to the action which he intended to take to reconcile all differences. On April 30, 1924, Mr. Graff furnished some information and advised said Bureau of Supplies and Accounts that his records were lost in shipwreck. The letter of April 30, 1924, was forwarded to the Comptroller General for consideration, and the inclosed copy of decision, dated November 14, 1924, indicates the action taken by that official in this matter. It is noted from the bill H. R. 11814 that the retained records of Mr. Graff are alleged to have been lost from the United States submarine boat Parksville in a storm at sea, whereas in a letter addressed by Mr. Graff to Senator Wadsworth, dated April 30, 1926, copy attached, it is stated that they were lost from the United States submarine boat Lake Duncan in a storm off Cape Hatteras. However, sufficient time had elapsed since Mr. Graff's release from active duty to permit him to reconcile his accounts had the proper steps been taken. It will be noted that the major portion of the amount outstanding is an account current difference representing a discrepancy between the amount claimed on the account current and schedule of disbursements as the amount expended on public bills, and the amount actually expended as substantiated by the public bills forwarded with his returns for the second and third quarters, 1919. The Bureau of Supplies and Accounts of the Navy Department has made every effort to identify this difference from the records in said bureau, but without success. The committee's attention is invited to the fact that the bill H. R. 11814 is improperly drawn, since it proposes to reimburse Mr. Graff in the sum of $345.60, whereas the purpose intended is to authorize the Comptroller General to remove from a certain statement of differences in the accounts of Mr. Graff the amount above mentioned. The bill should be corrected accordingly. The bill H. R. 11814 was referred to the Director of the Bureau of the Budget with a statement to the effect that the Navy Department contemplated making an unfavorable recommendation thereon, and under date of August 3, 1926, the Navy Department was advised that this report would not be in conflict with the financial program of the President. In view of the above and the further fact that Mr. Graff has furnished no satisfactory explanation in connection with the Government funds for which he was held responsible, the Navy Department does not recommend enactment of the bill H. R. 11814. Sincerely yours, T. DOUGLAS ROBINSON, COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, CHIEF, BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS, Navy Department, Washington, D. C. SIR: Consideration has been given your letter of August 11, 1924, requesting certain information in connection with the accounts of Ensign R. J. Graff (S. C.) United States Navy, wherein by settlement No. N-4005-E, of February 12, 1923, were disallowed certain items, a part of which were subsequently allowed after satisfactory explanation, etc., the request for information, etc., being as to the disallowances continued and reported in supplemental settlement No. M-6698-N, of April 16, 1924, as follows: Period Mar. 25 to June 30, 1918: Item 13. Amount claimed as expended on public bill 74, W. Hane & Co. (W. Harre & Co.) (Fuel and transportation, 17-18), public bill and supporting vouchers not furnished (disallowed) Period Oct. 1, 1918, to Feb. 10, 1919: $41.00 Item 14. Amount for which credit is taken on account current as a transfer of funds.. $690. 00 Amount taken up by W. N. Hartley, 3/19, ctf. No. 15557-D. 621. 00 Difference not accounted for (disallowed). 69.00 Period Oct. 1, 1918 to Feb. 10, 1919: Item 15. Amount credited on account current as expended for public bills Amount expended as per schedule of disbursements... Difference disallowed Total disallowances.. $13, 937. 00 13, 701. 40 235.60 345. 60 In explanation of the items thus disallowed R. J. Graff submitted April 30, 1924, the following: "It is requested that item No. 13 be allowed for the following reasons: (a) That this material was purchased and received from W. Hane & Co. and duly paid for and that such completed copies of this transaction as I had in my possession have been furnished the bureau in an endeavor to complete this transaction. "(b) That evidence in the usual manner by check would have been received had the bureau supplied me with the necessary check books and forms at the time this bill was contracted and paid. That the lack of these various forms and checks made it impossible to comply with the regulations of the Navy and that the material was needed, and that in order to expedite the sailing of the ship this material was ordered and received and paid for by personal check and evidence of such payment furnished the bureau. "(c) That this amount be raised, as no further bills have been received from this company on this account, and that I hereby certify that this amount and material is true and just and has been received and paid for. "2. It is requested that item No. 14 be raised for the following reasons: "(a) That to the best of my knolwedge and belief this item covers a transfer of meat from the U. S. S. Chatham to the U. S. S. Polar Bear (?) and that the difference arises from the fact that the supply officer of that ship took a survey of that meat after it was received and deducted the amount in question from my transfer and that a copy of that survey was forwarded by that officer in his returns to the bureau and that I should get credit for the same on my returns. "(b) That this amount be raised, as there is no evidence of fraud or collusion and was simply due to the fact that my returns were in before Supply Officer Hartley's and therefore could not be included in my returns. "3. It is requested that I be supplied with a copy of account current showing difference disallowed so that I may endeavor to locate the differences, if any, as I have furnished the bureau from time to time my file copies regarding this matter and I am at present at a loss as to just where this amount is derived from. "4. It is requested that the bureau raise all amounts against my account and that the bureau take cognizance of the fact that I was ordered aboard this ship without sufficient supplies or time to perform the different actions in accord with Navy Regulations, and that it was the understanding that everything was to be done to expedite the sailing of this ship, and had these items been held up pending the proper execution of the public bills, etc., it would have meant delaying the ship. |