Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

I have on occasions seen Lieutenant Van Meter, after Captain Wright counted out the money, turn the same over to Mr. Barricklow. Further deponent sayeth not.

NORMAN D. ANDERSON,

Staff Sergeant, Finance Detachment. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 17th day of August 1928.

Wm. B. WRIGHT, Jr.,

Captain, Air Corps, Adjutant. A true copy:

E. SULLIVAN, Colonel, Air Corps.

EXHIBIT G

(First endorsement)

KELLY FIELD, Tex., August 24, 1928. From: First Lt. F. H. Kuhn, Quartermaster Corps. To; Vaj. E. P. Pierson, Inspector General's Department, investigating officer,

office of the corps inspector, Fort Sam Houston, Tex.

1. I have examined the photostats of the original vouchers as enumerated above and the signatures of the certifying officer appear, and to the best of my judgment and belief are, the genuine signatures of First Lt. I. D. Van Meter, Quartermaster Corps, and are not forgeries.

2. During my period of incumbency as agent finance officer, Kelly Field, Tex., I have never turned over cash to Mr. E. J. Barricklow, or any other person, on quartermaster civilian pay rolls, without being instructed to do so by Lt. I. D. Van Meter; and then only on a receipt signed by Lieutenant Van Meter. I have often turned over cash to Lieutenant Van Meter, who in turn would hand same over to Mr. Barricklow, in my presence, to make payments to temporarily employed civilians.

3. I have at all times endeavored to exercise reasonable precaution and use good business judgment in the discharge of my duties as agent finance officer.

4. Due to the methods employed—that is, Mr. E. J. Barricklow being authorized by Lieutenant Van Meter to handle cash and make payments, and for which I was not responsible and over which I had no control, I cannot see why I should be held responsible for these alleged fraudulent payments; and to do so would appear unjust and unwarranted. On the contrary, I believe the fraudulent payments, if any, would be a proper charge against the certifying officer. I hereby protest any action taken to charge these alleged fraudulent payments against my account, or holding me responsible in any manner whatever.

5. Attached hereto are affidavits of Staff Sgts. Reid P. Smith and Norman D. Anderson, Finance Department.

F. H. KUHN,
First Lieutenant, Quarter master Corps.

E. SULLIVAN, Colonel, Air Corps.

A true copy:

ExHIBIт н KELLY FIELD,

County of Bexar, State of Texas, 88: 1. Personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority for administering oaths, one Norman D. Anderson, staff sergeant, Finance Department, who, after being duly sworn, deposes and says:

That he was on duty as finance clerk in the agent finance office, Kelly Field, Tex., from January 15, 1927, to August 24, 1928. That from the period of January 15, 1927, to February 14, 1927, Lt. F. H. Kuhn, Quartermaster Corps, was agent finance officer, and thai he assisted Lieutenant Kuhn in the handling of the civilian pay-roll vouchers of the Quartermaster Corps by making computations, checking name, and scrutinizing the signatures of the certifying officer. That to the best of his knowledge and belief Lieutenant Kuhn never did turn over cash to Mr. E. J. Barricklow, civilian clerk, Quartermaster Corps, Kelly Field, Tex., without being instructed to do so by Lieutenant Van Meter; that a receipt was always obtained from Lieutenant Van Meter for the amount so turned over; that Lieutenant Kuhn exercised all reasonable precaution in executing the duties imposed upon him, and it was impossible to detect fraud-due to the methods employed. That the signatures of the certifying officer on the pay vouchers appeared to him to be genuine and not forged. Further deponent sayeth not.

NORMAN D. ANDERSON,

Staff Sergeant, Finance Department. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 24th day of August, 1928.

R. W. Gibson, Second Lieutenant, Air Corps, Personnel Adjutant. A true copy:

E. SULLIVAN, Colonel, 'Air Corps.

EXHIBITI STATE OF Texas

County of Galveston, ss: Personally appeared before me the undersigned authority for administering oaths, one Řeid P. Smith, staff sergeant, Finance Department, who, after being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that:

He was on duty as clerk'agent finance office, Kelly Field, Tex., from about June 1922 to January 15, 1927, that during the period from October 1, 1934, to January 15, 1927, he was clerk under First Lt. F. H. Kuhn, Quarter Master Corps, who was agent finance officer, Kelly Field, Tex.; that he assisted Lieutenant Kuhn in the payment of all vouchers that were paid by the agent finance officer, Kelly Field, Tex.; that at no time did Lieutenant Kuhn ever turn over cash on ci vilian pay rolls, Quartermaster Corps, Kelly Field, Tex., to Mr. E. J. Barricklow, civilian clerk, or any other civilian clerk without first being instructed to do so by Lieutenant Van Meter, and then only on the receipt signed by Lieutenant Van Meter; that in questionable cases, when Lietuenant Van Meter was out of the office, he (Sergeant Smith) would personally verify the signature of Lieutenant Van Meter on receipt by personally checking same with him. That at one time after having obtained a receipt signed by Lt. I. D. Van Meter for the cash turned over for payment of a civilian pay roll, the roll in question was not signed by Lieutenant Van Meter and upon returning the roll to Mr. Barricklow he (Mr. Barricklow) signed Lieutenant Van Meter's name on the roll in his (Sergeant Smith's) presence.

He (Sergeant Smith) knowing this procedure to be irregular took the roll to Lieutenant Van Meter and asked him if this was his signature; and Lieutenant Van Meter replied, “I do not know if it is or is not”; he (Sergeant Smith) replied, “I have just seen Mr. Barricklow sign your name to this roll” that he (Sergeant Smith) asked Lieutena Van Meter what he wished to do about Mr. Barricklow signing the roll, and that Lieutenant Van Meter replied, “Let it go this time but it will not go again.” That he has been connected 8 years with disbursing officers and agent finance officers, and during that time he has never come in contact with any other agent finance officer who has been more sincere and painstaking as to disbursement of funds than Lt. F. H. Kuhn, Quartermaster Corps; that Lieutenant Kuhn at all times exercised reasonable precaution and used good business judgment in the discharge of his duties as agent officer. That due to the system employed, Mr. Barricklow being authorized to receive funds on rolls and further that Lieutenant Van Meter was informed and aware of all disbursements, it was impossible for him (Sergeant Smith) to detect fraud or forgery without Lieutenant Van Meter's knowing it. Further deponent sayeth not:

REID P. SMITH, Staff Sergeant, Finance Department, United States Army. Subscribed and sworn to before me, at Fort Crockett, Tex., this 23d day of August 1928.

G. A. McHENRY,

First Lieutenant, Air Corps. A true copy:

E. SULLIVAN, Colonel, Air Corpo.

EXHIBIT J

[Eleventh endorsement) From: War Department, Judge Advocate General's Office, February 1, 1930. To: The Adjutant General.

1. The opinion of this office is requested as to the individual responsibility and, liability for payments, aggregating $3,175.33, on fraudulent pay rolls as for civilian employees, Quartermaster Corps, at Kelly Field, Tex., during the period July 1926 to June 1928. (A. G. 333.8, April 2, 1929, Off.)

2. During the period mentioned First Lt. I. D. Van Meter, Quartermaster Corps, was the post quarter master at Kelly Field. He was responsible for making and certifying the pay rolls of the Quartermaster employees at that place. His office force included, among others, Mr. Joseph H. Devlin, chief clerk, and Mr. E. J. Barricklow, known as assistant chief clerk. It was through frauds and forgeries committed by Mr. Barricklow in making and causing to be paid false pay rolls that the losses here in question occurred. (Other frauds are alleged to have been committed by Mr. Barricklow resulting in losses aggregating $5,608.38, but they are not involved in the questions now under consideration.) Mr. Barricklow was tried in the United States district court in Texas for the alleged fraud; he pleaded guilty, and was given a penitentiary sentence.

3. The disbursing officers who made the erroneous payments on the fraudulent vouchers aggregating $3,175.33, were: First Lt. F. H. Kuhn, Quartermaster Corps---

$1, 060. 98 Capt. William B. Wright, Jr., Air Corps....

502. 00 First Lt. E. Sullivan, Air Corps.

1, 613. 25 These three officers each in turn served as class B agent finance officers at Kelly Field under designations by the commanding officer of that station. The accountable officer was Maj. W. D. Dabney, finance department, finance officer, United States Army, Fort Sam Houston, Tex.

4. During all the time the three officers mentioned served in turn as agent finance officers over a period from June 30, 1924, to June 2, 1928, and probably prior to the first date, it was the practice for the agent finance officer not to make payments in person to the quartermaster employees, but to deliver from time to time to the quartermaster, usually to one of his clerks (Mr. Devlin or Mr. Barricklow) upon the quartermaster's request, the cash for pay rolls which, after being certified by the quartermaster, Lt. Í. D. Van Meter, were taken to the Agent finance officer who turned over to the clerk the requisite cash for payments, taking “hand receipts” signed by Lieutenant Van Meter and usually the third copy of the pay roll. When a pay roll was returned to the agent finance officer showing the payments made, the hand receipt would be destroyed and the transaction closed. Such was the procedure respecting the legitimate pay rolls, both as to the regular semimonthly pay rolls and as to what were known as short-form pay rolls, the latter being usually used when it became necessary to pay employees discharged during any period between the regular pay days. This system afforded Barricklow his opportunity. He was clever at imitating the handwriting of Lieutenant Van Meter and others to such an extent, it is said, that it was well-nigh impossible to tell the false from the genuine. Ile was timekeeper, made up the pay rolls, received the cash from the agent finance ofhcer upon "hand receipts," paid the employees, and made return of the pay rolls to the agent officer. In a signed confession made shortly after the frauds were discovered, he said with reference to 31 vouchers paid by Captain Wright, Lieutenant Kuhn, and Lieutenant Sullivan that:

"I prepared all of the above vouchers, used fictitious names setting out the dates employed with the rates of pay and signed the fictitious employees' names in the proper spaces and also forged the signature of the quartermaster, Lt. I. D. Van Meter, passed these fictitious vouchers into the agent officer acting for Maj. W. D. Dabney, Finance Department, finance officer, assigned on the respective dates, received the amounts of money indicated on each voucher from the above referred to agent, all of which was appropriated to my own use and benefit.”

The 31 vouchers here referred to are a part of the total number paid by the 3 officers mentioned and found to be fraudulent. Mr. Barricklow according to the records, denied that he forged the others, all of which bore the name of Lieutenant Van Meter as certifying officer. It is not clear whether Barricklow's denial was intended to mean that he had had no part in the frauds committed with reference to the other vouchers or not, or whether his denial was only to the effect that he did not forge Lieutenant Van Meter's name as certifying officer. Each of the agent officers asserts that he turned over no money for the payment of these vouchers without first being informed by Lieutenant Van Meter, either in his presence or by telephone, that it was all right to do so. This is denied by Lieutenant Van Meter, who states that, "Personal approval of quartermaster was not ordinarily obtained by agent officer before money was paid over," and that "it was not customary for the agent officer to verify signature on hand receipts by personal inquiry from me." The inspector, Eighth Corps Area, expresses doubt as to whether any of the certifying signatures of Lieutenant Van Meter were forgeries, and recommended that neither of the three agent officers be held responsible for the payments of the fraudulent vouchers, but that Lieutenant Van Meter be held responsible.

This recommendation was concurred in by the commanding general, Eighth Corps Area, but upon recommendation of the Inspector General, the War Department concluded that the three agent officers should be held pecuniarily responsible for the illegal payments on the ground that the agent officers violated that part of paragraph 5a, Army Regulations 35-120, which provides that, “Except as otherwise prescribed by law and regulations, payments of public money may be made only to persons to whom the money was originally due,” and stoppages were ordered against their pay to reimburse the United States.

5. Upon requests of the officers concerned, the case has been reopened, and after some further investigation, both the commanding general, Eighth Corps Area, and the Inspector General, adhere to their opposing views. he commanding general, Eighth Corps Area, after quoting the regulation (par. 5a, A. R. 35-120) in full, referred to by the Inspector General, and which reads as follows:

"Except as otherwise prescribed by law or regulations, payments of public money may be made only to the persons to whom the money was originally due. Disbursing officers must personally supervise every voucher paid by them, and either see that all checks or other funds actually reach the person to whom they are payable or adopt proper measures to insure their delivery,” says:

"In his citation of this paragraph, in paragraph 1c of the fifth endorsement, the Inspector General quotes only the first of the two sentences above quoted.

"It is but fair to the officer concerned, that in construing this regulation, full consideration be given to the second sentence as well as to the first.

“In my judgment the question fundamentally at issue in the cases of Captain Wright, Lieutenant Kuhn and Lieutenant Sullivan is, in effect: Did the officer concerned personally supervise every voucher paid by him and did he adopt proper measures to insure the delivery, to the persons to whom payable, of the funds concerned? If the answers to both these questions be in the affirmative, then the statements of the Inspector General, in paragraph lc of the fifth endorsement:

“ 'Every one of these payments by Captain Wright and Lieutenants Kuhn and Sullivan was made in violation of these regulations' and '* they were required to pay this money only to the persons to whom the money was originally due, and their violation of this elemental provision of the regulations was the direct cause of these losses and they alone are personally responsible therefor,' are, in my opinion, inconsistent with a reasonable and fair interpretation of the regulations above quoted.

"2. I have accordingly had a further investigation made, under the direction of the corps area inspector, with the view of determining insofar as might be practicable the detailed procedure followed by Captain Wright, Lieutenant Kuhn, and Lieutenant Sullivan, in connection with payments of cash for civilian employees on short-form pay rolls and particularly the character and extent of the measures adopted by them to insure the delivery, to the persons to whom payable, of these funds. In this connection, attention is invited to enclosures Nos. 2 to 8, inclusive, to this endorsement.

“3. As a result of a careful consideration of all of the evidence available it is my opinion:

"(a) That until very recently it has been the practice for some time at Kelly Field for the money for the payment of civilian employees, on both long- and shortform pay rolls, to be turned over by the agent finance officers to the quartermaster or to his representative for actual payment to the civilians concerned.

(b) That this practice was based upon the representations of the quarter. master, Lt. I. D. Van Meter, that such practice was necessary in view of the local conditions, in order to pay this personnel without undue loss of time.

"(c) That this practice conformed in general to the procedure prescribed by the commanding officer, Kelly Field, Tex., for the payment of the enlisted men of the organizations and detachments at that post (enclosure No. 7).

"(d) That the agent finance officers, Captain Wright, Lieutenant Kuhn and Lieutenant Sullivan, personally supervised every voucher paid by them.

*

[merged small][ocr errors]

"(e) That Captain Wright never turned any money over to the civilian clerk, Barricklow, without being told, in each specified instance, to do so by Lt. I. D. Van Meter.

"That it was the general practice of Lieutenant Kuhn to turn money over to the civilian clerk, Barricklow, only when the quartermaster, Lieutenant Van Meter, was absent from the office, that this practice was in accordance with the general instructions of Lieutenant Van Meter to Lieutenant Kuhn and that when, in accordance with these instructions, Lieutenant Kuhn did turn money over to Barricklow, he (Lieutenant Kuhn) later advised Lieutenant Van Meter accordingly.

"That it was the general practice of Lieutenant Sullivan either to secure the
personal approval of Lt. I. D. Van Meter before turning money over to Barrick-
low or later to check with Lieutenant Van Meter personally any such payments
to Mr. Barricklow or to do both.

"U) That the preponderence of evidence is that Captain Wright, Lieutenant
Kuhn, and Lieutenant Sullivan, in turning funds for payment of civilian em-
ployees over to the quartermaster, Lt. I. B. Van Meter, another commissioned
officer, or in turning such funds over to Mr. Barricklow under the conditions set
forth above, did adopt reasonable and proper measures to insure the delivery of
the funds involved to the persons to whom payable.
"() That Lt. I. D. Van Meter repeatedly brought the clerk, Barricklow, with
him to the finance office to receive these funds; that he repeatedly notified the
finance officer that he (Lieutenant Van Meter) was sending the clerk, Barricklow,
to receive such funds; that he invariably approved the action of the finance
officers in turning over such funds to Mr. Barricklow when later informed that
such action had been taken; that he advised the finance officers, from time to
time, that the clerk, Barricklow, was authorized by him to receive such funds.

"(h) That reports having been made to Lt. I. D. Van Meter from time to time
as to the unreliability or dishonesty of the clerk, Barricklow, he took no corrective
action but continued, for a period of more than year, to utilize Mr. Barricklow
as set forth in (9) above, and that he sought to prevent the fact that he had
received such reports from being brought, later, to the attention of the inspector.
"(i) That the losses of the funds herein referred to were due primarilo to either
the culpability or the gross negligence of the quartermaster, Lt. I. D. Van Meter,
that this officer is both morally and legally responsible for these losses; and that
he, primarily, should be held pecuniarily responsible therefor."

6. The records strongly indicate that Lt. I. D. Van Meter was so lax and negligent in conducting and directing the affairs of his office pertaining to money matters, including those affecting pay-roll disbursements, that it became easily possible for a faithless employee to carry on fraudulent practices without much danger of immediate detection. While it appears, therefore, that Lt. I. D. Van Meter cannot excape a high degree of blame for the losses that resulted from payments of the fraudulent pay rolls by the three agent officers, nevertheless the responsibility of the latter officers in connection with their duties as class B agent officers must be measured and determined, not solely in relation to Lieutenant Van Meter's part in the matter, but if they are to avoid primary responsibility it must appear that the losses are not traceable to their own failure in the first instance to observe the limiting laws and regulations governing the duties of class B agent officers. These laws and regulations will now be examined.

7. Agent finance officers are authorized by a provision in the National Defense Act, as amended (41 Stat. 776), reading as follows:

"Under such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of War, officers of the Finance Department, accountable for public moneys, may entrust moneys to other officers for the purpose of having them make disbursements as their agents, and the officer to whom the moneys are entrusted, as well as the officer who entrusts the money to him, shall be held pecuniarily responsible therefor to the United States."

Regulations prescribed pursuant to this statute, and contained in Army Regulations 35-320 of 1922, provide that officers to whom public moneys are, by accountable officers, entrusted for disbursement, are known as agent officers; that they are divided into two classes, A and B;' that class A agent oflicers are officers, other than duly appointed inance officers, who are detailed by local commanding officers as agent officers for the purpose of making specified payments, and that class B agent officers are "officers who are detailed as finance officers of posts, camps, stations, or other commands, either by the War Department or by local commanding officers, who are directed by the Chief of Finance to perform their duties as agent officers, instead of as accountable officers.” The regulation, in paragraph 1, announced that the term "pecuniarily responsible,"

[ocr errors][merged small]
« iepriekšējāTurpināt »