« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
MARCA 21, 1944. Mr. EDWARD REYNOLDS, Acting Chief, Supply Service, The Surgeon General's Office,
Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. REYNOLDS: It was kind of you and Colonel Hewitt to cooperate with us in getting the services of Major Tidwell for our organization. Please accept my thanks. We need him for an important assignment and it is my understanding that he will report here about March 27. Sincerely yours,
W. L. CLAYTON, Administrator.
ARMY SERVICE FORCES,
SURGEON GENERAL'S OFFICE,
March 17, 1944. To Chief, Personnel Service, S. G. 0.
1. Recommend acceptance.
3. The officer concerned has served honorably, faithfully, and satisfactorily, and his record is such as to warrant separation under honorable conditions.
R. E. HEWITT,
ARMT SERVICE FORCES,
Washington, March 15, 1944.
(Attention Classification and Replacement Branch through the Surgeon
General.) 1. It is requested that the undersigned (William P. Tidwell, major, Medical Administrative Corps, Army of the United States, serial No. 0-505928) be relieved from active duty under the provisions of AG 210.85 (December 30, 1943) PO-A-A January 12, 1944, paragraph 3 of said letter.
2. The undersigned was commissioned as major in the Army Specialist Corps on October 28, 1942. Upon dissolution of the Army Specialist Corps, he was commissioned in the Army of the United States on December 2, 1942, and assigned to duty in the Materials Branch, Production Division, Headquarters, Army Service Forces.
3. On April 3, 1943, the undersigned was transferred to the Surgeon General's Office for the performance of specific duties in the Supply Service in connection with administration. Such duties have been completed.
4. It is felt that the undersigned can contribute a more effective service under present circumstances by being relieved from active duty and returned to inactive status at the earliest practicable date in consonance with accumulated annual leave.
5. In view of the fact that the undersigned will continue in the war effort in a civilian capacity with the Surplus Property Policy Board, it is requested that this relief from active service be expedited. The Surplus Property Policy Board has requested that the undersigned report to that organization at the earliest practicable date.
William P. TIDWELL, Major, Medical Administrative Corps, Army of the United States.
(RESTRICTED] Symbols, DP-By direction of the President
TDM-Travel directed is necessary in military service
WP-Will proceed to
mobile is authorized. DS for officer's travel is authorized,
par. 1 e, AR 605–180, changes No. 1
PCS-Permanent change of station
WASHINGTON 25, D. C., 20 April 1944.
EXTRACT Paragraph 6. Lv of absence is granted MAJ PEYTON TIDWELL 0505928 MAC for 1 month and 5 days eff 24 Apr 1944. DP MAJ TIDWELL reld fr asgmt and duty Washington, DC, to arrive home Forest Hills, NY, on 30 May 1944 revert inact status. The AUS apmt of MAJ TIDWELL will continue in force during the period of the present emergency and for 6 months thereafter unless sooner terminated DP. PCS. TDN. 1-5000 P 431-01, 02, 03, 07, 08 A 0425-24. BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR:
G. C. MARSHALL,
Chief of Staff OFFICIAL: ROBERT H. DUNLOP, Brigadier General,
Acting The Adjutant General. A true copy:
William P. TIDWELL, Major, Medical Administrative Corps.
Washington, October 30, 1944. Hon. Dan R. McGEHEE, Chairman, Committee on Claims,
House of Representatives. DEAR MR. McGEHEE: The War Department is opposed to the enactment of H. R. 5010, Seventy-eighth Congress, a bill for the relief of Maj. William Peyton Tidwell.
The proposed legislation would require the Secretary of the Treasury to pay from Government funds the sum of $770 to Maj. William Peyton Tidwell for services rendered as secretary of the Surplus War Property Policy Board for a period of 35 days at the rate of $8,000 per annum. Such 35-day period extended from April 24, 1944, the date on which the officer concerned was granted terminal leave of absence, to May 30, 1944, the date on which he reverted to inactive status and on which his compensation commenced as secretary of the Surplus War Property Policy Board.
The records of the War Department indicate that Major Tidwell was appointed in the Army Specialist Corps on October 8, 1942, and subsequently received the temporary appointment of major in the Army of the United States on November 30, 1942. He served on active duty until May 30, 1944, when he reverted to an inactive status, upon his own request, under War Department policy which permitted the relief of certain officers over 38 years of age from active duty when no suitable assignment existed for them. Prior to his relief from active duty, Major Tidwell was granted a leave of absence of 1 month and 5 days, effective April 24, 1944, under the normal practice of granting terminal leaves of absence equal to the amount of their accumulated leave to those officers of the Army of the United States who are relieved from active duty under honorable conditions. During this leave period Major Tidwell remained in an active status as an Army officer and received the pay and allowances of such office in the amount of $515.53, representing base pay at the rate of $250 per month, and subsistence and rental allowances of $168 per month.
H. Repts., 79-1, vol. 1-67
The act of May 10, 1916, as amended (5 U. S. C. 58), provides that no money appropriated by any act, unless otherwise specifically authorized by law, shall be available for payment to any person receiving more than one salary when the combined amount of said salaries exceeds the sum of $2,000 per annum. Also existing law prohibits any officer receiving a salary of $2,500 per annum from being appointed to or holding any other Federal office to which compensation is attached unless specially authorized by law (sec. 2, act of July 31, 1894, as amended; 5 U. S. C. 62).
The War Department does not favor legislation which would grant to one individual a right to dual compensation denied by general law to other persons under similar circumstances. Although Major Tidwell was precluded from receiving compensation for both offices at the same time, he could have become eligible to receive the higher compensation as Secretary of the Surplus War Property Policy Board at the commencement of the period in question by waiving his terminal leave, with attendant loss of military pay and allowances for such period and thereby reverting to an inactive status on April 24, 1944.
In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the proposed legislation be not favorably considered.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is no objection to the submission of this report. Sincerely yours
HENRY L. STIMSON,
Secretary of War.
FEBRUARY 20, 1945.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and
ordered to be printed
Mr. McGEHEE, from the Committee on Claims, submitted the
(To accompany H. R. 2092)
The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2092) for the relief of Growers Fertilizer Co., having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.
A similar bill was favorably reported by this committee in the Seventy-eighth Congress.
The facts will be found fully set forth in House Report No. 24, Seventy-eighth Congress, which is appended hereto and made a part of this report.
(H. Rept. No. 24, 78th Cong., 1st sess.) The purpose of the proposed legislation is to pay the sum of $2,017.84 to the Growers Fertilizer Co., a Florida corporation, in full settlement of all claims against the United States for goods furnished to the clients of the Farm Security Administration of the Department of Agriculture, upon the order and authority of an agent of said Farm Security Administration, during the period from April 15, 1937, to March 22, 1938.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The Growers Fertilizer Co. had its principal place of business at Fort Pierce, Fla., and the claim involved is for reimbursement for fertilizer furnished certain farmers in the counties of Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Indian River, State of Florida, by orders of Mr. Charles W. Arrants, supervisor of the Farm Security Administration in these counties.
According to the claimant company, late in the summer of 1936, their president and general manager conversed with Mr. Frank W. Williamson, district rural rehabilitation supervisor, district 5 of Florida, of the Farm Security Administration. He quoted prices of their fertilizers for the benefit of farmers securing loans through the Farm Security Administration and was referred to Mr. Charles W. Arrants and instructed to quote prices to Mr. Arrants and to leave a price list of the company's products for the consideration of the farmers securing loans. As a result of the conversations with Mr. Williamson and Mr. Arrants, a representative of the Growers Fertilizer Co. called upon the growers who had secured commitments of loans and submitted prices on fertilizers direct to the growers, and as a result thereof many orders were placed with the company. As the orders were placed by the farmers securing these loans, they were referred to Mr. Arrants and he 0. K.'d each of the said orders. As a matter of fact, Mr. Arrants would frequently from time to time present the claimant company with names of farmers securing loans and direct an order of fertilizer to be shipped to said farmers.
The claimant company certainly had no cause to question the authority of Mr. Arrants, especially in view of the fact that all of the accounts so handled up to the time this claim accrued were, in the regular course of events, paid.
This claim represents the amount of loss sustained by the claimant company in its transactions with various farmers whose loans were finally disapproved by the Department of Agriculture. The farmers naturally did not have the funds with which to pay their debts to the claimant company, the fertilizer having been purchased only on the strength of the loans which they believed to be forthcoming, and which loans had been 0. K.'d by Mr. Arrants, the duly authorized representative of the Farm Security Administration in that locality. Their inability to pay is further strengthened by the fact that the United States Government holds mortgages and liens upon all the properties of each of the farmers involved and the claimant company is left without any legal redress to collect the amounts due them for fertilizer furnished.
The claimant company was operating in a normal and logical manner and felt that it was cooperating with the Government in furnishing the fertilizer in advance upon the assurance of a representative of the Government that they would be paid, and thereby helping to make the Farm Security Administration program a
The Department of Agriculture, however, is against the enactment of the proposed legislation, contending that their field employees had been carefully and repeatedly instructed to make it perfectly clear to merchants that the Government would not guarantee any accounts with borrowers from the Farm Security Administration. They state that there would be hundreds of similar claims against the United States, but your committee feels that this is not a proper excuse for refusing to allow this claim for a loss which has been suffered by the claimant company through its transactions with an agency of the United States Government.
It is the opinion of your committee that this bill represents an equitable claim against the United States and accordingly passage of the bill is recommended.
Appended hereto is the report of the Department of Agriculture together with substantiating evidence in support of the claim.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURA,
Washington, April 20, 1999. Hon. AMBROSE J. KENNEDY,
Chairman, Committee on Claims, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. KENNEDY: This will reply to your letter of March 29, 1939, submitting H. R. 5151 for the consideration of this Department. The bill proposes a payment of $2,017.84 to the Growers Fertilizer Co. of Fort Pierce, Fla., in payment of certain claims it has against the United States. This Department recommends that the bill be disapproved.
The claimant has corresponded with this Department in the past with reference to its claim and this Department has carefully considered the contentions of the claimant and has advised it that there is no liability on the part of the Government.
The Farm Security Administration of this Department made loans to certain farmers in four counties in Florida. These farmers needed fertilizer for their farming operations and obtained necessary supplies from the claimant on credit. The claimant extended this credit upon being advised by the local representative of the Farm Security Administration that applications for loans by these farmers were pending and would probably be approved. In the cases in question, the proposed loans were finally disapproved upon careful consideration, and, as a result, it seems that the farmers did not have funds with which to pay their debts to the claimant. A great many other farmers in these counties received loans from the Government and paid their debts promptly to the claimant. Our field officials advised us that the claimant was informed prior to his extension of credit that the Government would not be responsible for these accounts.