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 O. 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 O. 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 success. 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 AGRICULTURE, 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. The Farm Security Administration has never authorized any field employee to guarantee any debts of any individual client to his creditors. In this respect, the Administration operates in the same way as any lending agency. It may lend money for use for a particular purpose, and may advise a merchant that the loan is pending, but any merchant who extends credit on the basis of this advice must do so without looking to the lender for payment of the debt. Since the inception of the lending activities of the Farm Security Administration and its predecessor, the Resettlement Administration, a great many letters have been received from merchants in different parts of the country claiming that guaranties have been made by field employees. Field employees have been carefully and repeatedly instructed to make it perfectly clear to merchants that the Government does not guarantee any accounts with borrowers from the Farm Security Administration. Even if a field employee did guarantee an account, the Government would not be answerable for this guaranty on the familiar legal principle that the Government is not responsible for the unauthorized acts of its agents. If this claimant were paid, there would be hundreds of similar claims against the Farm Security Administration which could, with equal justice, be paid. We have no doubt that other lending agencies of the Government have had similar claims presented, and the total cost to the Government of paying all such claimants could reach a very substantial amount. In view of the opinion expressed above, this Department has not made any detailed check of the amount claimed by the Growers Fertilizer Co. It might be noted, however, that the claimant has in various correspondence stated his claim in different amounts, the lowest being $620.43, in a letter dated April 9, 1938, addressed to one of the field officers of the Farm Security Administration. Sincerely yours, HARRY L. BROWN, Acting Secretary. MAY 16, 1939. Mr. HARRY L. BROWN, Acting Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. BROWN: Hon. Pat Cannon has just furnished me a copy of your report to the Committee on Claims, House of Representatives, in connection with H. R. 5151, introduced by Representative Cannon to reimburse the Growers Fertilizer Co. for fertilizer furnished clients of the Farm Security Administration in the sum of $2,017.84. I am referring especially to the third paragraph of your report. First, let me advise that I am enclosing you herewith a copy of a letter that I am today addressing to Mr. Frank W. Williamson, district supervisor of the Farm Security Administration, Bradenton, Fla. This letter sets out certain facts with reference to your report. Let me call your attention to the second sentence of the third paragraph of this report which reads as follows: "These farmers needed fertilizer for their farming operations and obtained necessary supplies from the claimant on creait." I do not know how you arrived at this sentence. If the report of Mr. Williamson was such as to justify that statement, then let me say to you that the report is not representative of the facts. We did not sell the farmers, clients of the Farm Security Administration, on credit, but only sold them when we were advised by Charles W. Arrants, supervisor of this district, that the loans had been approved and that the money was available with which to pay for it. In view of this fact the entire paragraph referred to above, that is the third paragraph of your report, certainly is based on statements that are not in accordance with the real happenings. I cannot help believing that you want to be fair in this matter, that you would not willfully or willingly take from the Growers Fertilizer Co. that which really belongs to them; and still if your recommendation or report is allowed to stand and the bill is not passed to reimburse us, then we are the ones who would suffer the loss, after having exercised that due diligence usual and customary in business transactions. Of course, I do not know the instructions given to your supervisors or the supervisors of the Farm Security Administration in this State. I have no way of finding them out, but I had full faith and credit in our Government, and in those employed by the Government to represent them. That is why we accepted the word of Mr. Arrants that the loans were approved and that the money was available. We accepted the statements as facts and furnished fertilizer. It is true we might not have a legal claim against the Government because of the specific instructions to the men, but these instructions were not referred to this company or its representatives. In further support of these statements, I am enclosing you herewith copies of certain statements made by certain clients of the Farm Security Administration, also a copy of a statement made by representative of the Growers Fertilizer Co. in the Palm Beach area, Mr. R. H. Howell, of West Palm Beach, Fla. The originals of these statements, properly signed, have been furnished Congressman Pat Cannon, and I am writing him asking him to get in touch with you over the telephone that you might see some of these statements, that is, the original signed statements. I feel sure that if it is your desire to be fair with us after you have seen these statements that you are going to amend your report to the Committee on Claims and withdraw your recommendation that the bill be disapproved. May I say further that Mr. Frank W. Williamson was the first to come to my office and contact this company and the writer before we sold fertilizer to the clients of the Farm Security Administration, and Mr. Williamson requested that we get in touch with Mr. Arrants, who was supervisor of this territory, stating that he did handle the business in this territory, in order to save the clients of the Farm Security Administration as much on the purchase of their fertilizer as was possible. Let me say again that we had no intention of extending credit to the clients of the Farm Security Administration, and sold them only after we were told that the loans had been approved and the money was available. If you have the correspondence between Mr. Williamson and myself you will notice that Mr. Williamson answered only one letter in writing. The other letters were answered by personal calls at our office. Evidently there was some reason why he did not want to answer these letters where a record would show. In view of these facts set out above, I am very anxious that you amend your report to the Committee on Claims. I will appreciate hearing from you. Yours very truly, GROWERS FERTILIZER CO., MEMORANDUM BRIEF IN BEHALF OF GROWERS FERTILIZER Co. The Growers Fertilizer Co., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, with its principal place of business in Fort Pierce, Fla., begs to submit this its statement of facts with reference to its claim 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 the above-named counties. HISTORY Late in the summer of 1936, Mr. J. E. Nobles, president and general manager of the Growers Fertilizer Co., conversed with Mr. Frank W. Williamson, district rural rehabilitation supervisor, District 5 of Florida, of the Farm Security Administration, in which the said J. E. Nobles quoted prices of their fertilizers for the benefit of farmers securing loans through the Farm Security Administration. The said J. E. Nobles was referred to Mr. Charles W. Arrants and instructed to quote prices to the said Charles W. Arrants and leave a price list at the company's produces for the consideration of the farmers securing loans. As a result of the conversations with the said Frank W. Williamson and the said Charles W. Arrants, the representative of the Growers Fertilizer Co. called upon the growers who had secured commitments of loans and submitted prices direct to the growers on fertilizers and many orders were placed with the company, and as orders were placed with the company for fertilizer by the farmers securing loans, they were referred to the said Charles W. Arrants and he O. K.'d each of the said orders. Late in the season of 1936-37, the said Charles W. Arrants would frequently from time to time hand in names on paper, specifying thereon the names of farmers securing loans, the amount of fertilizer, and direct an order that the fertilizer be shipped to the said farmers. All accounts so handled at that time were in regular course of events paid with the exception of an order which was directed to be shipped by the said Charles W. Arrants to Teppe & Helpin, which was in April 1937 and amounted to $225. Shortly thereafter the said Charles W. Arrants informed the company that the said Teppe & Helpin had used up their available loans for that season but that within a short time applications would be taken for Lew loans for the 1937-38 season, at which time he would include a sufficient amount to reimburse the Growers Fertilizer Co. for fertilizers furnished. On August 1, 1938, the said Charles W. Arrants requested the Growers Fertilizer Co. to forward a small amount of fertilizer in the sum of $7.22 to the said Teppe & Helpin and assured the company at that time that the Farm Security Administration would have checks out within a short time with which to pay the account of Teppe & Helpin in full. During the first part of the season 1937-38, the said Charles W. Arrants from time to time submitted orders to the company, through its agents and salesmen, with the name and address of farmers securing loans from the Farm Security Administration, and instructed that the orders be forwarded immediately to the farmers, and stated that loans had been already approved for each of the farmers for which orders were so placed and that funds would be immediately available to pay for all of the fertilizers so furnished, and in the regular course of business checks came through in the regular manner and a substantial amount of the orders were paid for. During the month of December, many orders were placed in the same manner as set out above, but were not paid promptly as had been in the past and several are unpaid as evidenced by true and correct copies of invoices thereof attached hereto and made a part hereof. In each instance, however, the said Charles W. Arrants assured the company that loans had been approved and that the money would be forthcoming immediately and the goods would be paid for. When some of these accounts were not paid promptly, it was called to the attention of the said Charles W. Arrants and in each instance he offered a plausible explanation to the effect that the funds would be available immediately and checks would be mailed out in a short time. In the latter part of February 1938, J. E. Nobles, the president of the company, again called to the attention of the said Charles W. Arrants that several of these orders were unpaid, and again the said Charles W. Arrants advised that funds would be forthcoming immediately with which to pay same. In the latter part of March 1938, J. E. Nobles president of the company, ascertained the fact that the said Charles W. Arrants had ceased his connections as an officer and supervisor of the Farm Security Administration. As a result of all of these facts and as a result of the complete faith and reliance in the agent of the Farm Security Administration, the Growers Fertilizer Co. has sustained a loss of $2,017.84 for goods furnished by order of the agent of the Farm Security Administration and which is still due and unpaid and for which goods were furnished as itemized in the invoices attached hereto. The company, through its officers, agents, and employees, has investigated the circumstances of each of the farmers and finds that the United States Government, through the Farm Security Administration, holds mortgages and liens upon all of the properties of each of the farmers, and that the company has no legal redress with which to collect said sums from said farmers so long as the Farm Security Administration holds mortgages and liens against all of the farmers' properties. ARGUMENT The Growers Fertilizer Co., having full faith and credit in its Government and cooperating to the fullest extent possible by it with the Government in meeting the emergency which confronted the farmers of this country due to the great economic depression, finds itself in the position of sustaining a substantial loss by reason thereof and a loss which the company itself is not financially able to sustain. These same moneys that were loaned to the farmers were moneys collected by taxes from corporations and individuals and this company has made its contribution to the fullest extent to these resources, and there can be no argument that the company should visit its charities indiscriminately in the district when the Government is collecting taxes to meet this very need, and the company has contributed its share. Surely if the people of this country cannot rely upon the representative agents and officers of the Farm Security Administration, as well as other officers and agents of the Government, then the very economic structure of this Government itself cannot hope to be successful. These matters were entered into in good faith by the company and wholeheartedly in the spirit of cooperating with the Government in meeting the national emergency that existed, and now finds itself in the embarrassing situation in which it must sustain a substantial loss in the total sum of the unpaid bills for fertilizers delivered to the farmers securing the loans, and used by the farmers for their benefit and for the benefit of the Government in repaying loans made by it and loans which were made with funds that this company itself has contribued in a large portion through taxation. For these reasons, the company feels that the Congress of the United States should enact such legislation as may be necessary to reimburse the company for these goods furnished at the request of the Government by and through its agencies, and for which the Government itself has realized some benefit to the total loss of the company without justification. GROWERS FERTILIZER CO., SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF ON BEHALF OF GROWERS FERTILIZER Co. To the Congress of the United States: The Growers Fertilizer Co., a corporation, being the claimant in the abovestyled matter, begs to submit this its supplemental brief in its behalf. In the main brief submitted by the company, in the history of the brief, it is stated"All accounts so handled at the time were in regular course of events paid, with the exception * * The company at this time wishes to supplement that statement by showing unto the Congress the manner in which said claims were paid. As the farmers who had placed their applications for loans and secured the fertilizer upon the order of the said Charles W. Arrants, received the money loaned, it was handled in the following manner: The checks were forwarded to the said Charles W. Arrants, who secured the endorsement of the applicant farmer, and the check was then forwarded to Frank W. Williamson, district rural rehabilitation supervisor of district 5 of Florida of the Farm Security Administration, in Bradenton, Fla., which funds were placed in a trust account for the applicant farmer, and the funds were paid out as follows: Accounts authorized by the said Charles W. Arrants were forwarded to the said Frank W. Williamson and a check was duly drawn on the trust account. That check was then forwarded to the said Charles W. Arrants, who secured the signature of the applicant farmer and placed his signature as a countersignature on each of said checks. This is the manner in which many orders of fertilizer were paid to the company, which orders had been delivered upon the express instructions of the said Charles W. Arrants. All of the goods that were furnished by the company through the order of the said Charles W. Arrants that were paid, were paid in the abovestated manner, and in no other way. Respectfully submitted. Attest: GROWERS FERTILIZER CO., SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN BEHALF OF GROWERS FERTILIZER CO. The Growers Fertilizer Co., the claimant in the above-captioned matter, begs to submit this, its supplemental brief, in behalf of its claim and to clarify herewith certain facts that seem to have been misconstrued or misunderstood by the United States Department of Agriculture. HISTORY First, it has been contended by officials of the Farm Security Administration, who incurred these obligations with the claimant, that the fertilizer sold and delivered by the claimant was sold to the various individuals upon credit when in fact the fertilizer was not sold or delivered to the various parties until such time as Charles W. Arrants, district supervisor of the Farm Security Administration, instructed the claimant to deliver the fertilizer and stated that the funds were available to pay for same, and that he personally would see that it was paid, and in no case did the claimant ever deliver any of the fertilizer in question until such time as it was advised by the said Charles W. Arrants that money was available and would be paid from funds of the Government being loaned to the various individuals receiving the goods. The claimant never at any time solicited the business of the Farm Security Administration and never at any time intended to supply fertilizer to its clientele on credit. That in the beginning of the claimant's business transactions with |