Findings of Fact 145 C. Cls. Macon: Provided, That claims of fee owners and leasehold owners, excepting the city of Macon, relating to the same property shall be joined in one action and the amount of damages allowed, if any, shall not exceed the amount that could have been recovered had all the interests in such property been vested in one party. The claims of the city of Macon with respect to lands owned by it shall be determined under the terms and provisions of its leases of such lands to the United States. This Act shall be construed to waive the lack of privity of contract between the United States and the said fee owners or between the United States and the said leasehold owners; to waive the requirement of such leases to the city of Macon of notice by the lessors to the city in order for claims of restoration to be asserted, and to waive the immunity from suit of the United States in favor of the parties and with respect to the claims described in this Act, but not otherwise to affect any rights of the parties. Sec. 2. Proceedings for the determination of these claims shall be had in the same manner as in cases against the United States of which the district courts of the United States have jurisdiction under the provisions of paragraph "Twentieth" of section 24 of the Judicial Code, as amended, but the monetary limit which is applicable in such cases shall not be applicable in the determination of these claims: Provided, That all suits hereunder shall be instituted within one year after the enactment of this Act. 29. In the District Court action, the plaintiff asserted that the entire two tracts had been totally destroyed and made useless for kaolin mining. The amount sought to be recovered represented the alleged value of the plaintiff's property. Judgment was entered on January 5, 1953, in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of $22,537.50. The court found that the plaintiff's lands, in October 1940, were worth $50 an acre and that plaintiff should recover the full value of the 56.5 acres in the restricted areas and one-half the value of the remaining 788.5 acres, making a total of $22,537.50. The award with respect to the lands outside the restricted area was made despite the court's conclusion that the evidence disclosed very little, if any, likelihood of danger in the unrestricted This judgment was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Georgia Kaolin Co. v. United States, 214 F. 2d 284 (1954), cert. den. 348 U. S. area. 39 Syllabus 914). Plaintiff has refused to accept payment of the judgment, although tendered by defendant. 30. The instant petition was brought pursuant to the mandate of House Resolution 250, 84th Congress, 1st session, which provides as follows: Resolved, That the bill (H. R. 6401) entitled, "A bill for the relief of the Georgia Kaolin Company", together with all accompanying papers, is hereby referred to the United States Court of Claims pursuant to sections 1492 and 2509 of title 28, United States Code; and said court shall proceed expeditiously with the same in accordance with the provisions of said sections and report to the House, at the earliest practicable date, giving such findings of fact and conclusions thereon as shall be sufficient to inform the Congress of the nature and character of the demand, as a claim legal and equitable, against the United States, and the amount, if any, legally or equitably due from the United States to the claimant. GEO. D. EMERY COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES [Cong. No. 3-55. Decided February 11, 1959. Plaintiff's motion to amend judgment overruled June 3, 1959] ON THE PROOFS Congressional reference; equitable claim for expenses incurred in anticipation of Government contract not executed. The court is asked by Congress to determine whether plaintiff has a legal or equitable claim against the United States, and the amounts, if any, due from the United States. It is reported to Congress that on the basis of the whole record the plaintiff is equitably entitled to receive $20,000 as compensation for its out-of-pocket and other expenses incurred in preparing to establish an abaca plantation in Ecuador, plaintiff having been urged by the Reconstruction Finance Corporation and other Government agencies to commence the project, with the understanding that a contract would ultimately be made with plaintiff. The Government finally decided that the project should not be completed and no contract was entered into. United States 69 (6) Congressional reference; equitable claim; contract-failure to award after plaintiff had incurred expense.-Where the Government has induced a contractor to incur expense in making surveys Opinion of the Court 145 C. Cls. and planning a project which both parties intended should ripen into a contract but the Government ultimately decided that it did not wish the project completed, the contractor is at least equitably entitled to relief at the hands of Congress to the extent of its out-of-pocket expenses. United States 69 (6) Mr. Irwin Geiger for the plaintiff. Messrs. Geiger, Harmel & Schuchat were on the brief. Mr. Martin E. Rendelman, with whom was Mr. Assistant Attorney General George Cochran Doub, for the defendant. JONES, Chief Judge, delivered the opinion of the court: This is a congressional reference case. It involves reimbursement and compensation for services performed by the plaintiff between 1950 and 1953 in cooperation with the Reconstruction Finance Corporation and other Government agencies in connection with a project to establish an 8,000acre abacá plantation in Ecuador for the Government pursuant to the Abacá Production Act, 64 Stat. 435, 50 U.S.C. § 541. The plaintiff's petition was filed pursuant to S. Res. 102, adopted May 19, 1955, which reads as follows: Resolved, That the bill (S. 427) entitled "A bill for the relief of the Geo. D. Emery Company", now pending in the Senate, together with all accompanying papers, is hereby referred to the United States Court of Claims pursuant to sections 1492 and 2509 of title 28, United States Code; and said court shall proceed expeditiously with the same, in accordance with the provisions of said sections, and report to the Senate, at the earliest practicable date, giving such findings of fact and conclusions thereon as shall be sufficient to inform the Congress of the nature and character of the demand, as a claim legal or equitable, against the United States, and the amount, if any, legally or equitably due from the United States to the claimants. The evidence for this case was taken before Mastin G. White, one of our trial commissioners, who heard the witnesses and examined the documents in the case. A brief summary of the facts, as well as the conclusions we have reached are set forth at the end of this document under the heading "Recommendation". 71 Findings of Fact We have adopted his findings, which are as follows: 1. On January 14, 1955, there was introduced in the Senate of the United States a bill designated as S. 427, 84th Congress, "A bill for the relief of the Geo. D. Emery Company." It was provided in the bill that the Secretary of the Treasury should pay to the Geo. D. Emery Company the sum of $250,000 "* "*** in full settlement of all claims of the said Geo. D. Emery Company against the United States for reimbursement and compensation due for services performed between 1950 and 1953, in cooperation with the Reconstruction Finance Corporation and other Government agencies in connection with the project to establish for the Government an eight-thousand-acre abaca plantation in Ecuador ***" 2. On May 19, 1955, the Senate of the United States adopted S. Res. 102, 84th Congress, referring S. 427, 84th Congress, to the Court of Claims in accordance with Sections 1492 and 2509 of Title 28, United States Code, and directing the court to “*** report to the Senate, at the earliest practicable date, giving such findings of fact and conclusions thereon as shall be sufficient to inform the Congress of the nature and character of the demand, as a claim legal or equitable, against the United States, and the amount, if any, legally or equitably due from the United States to the claimants.” 3. The Geo. D. Emery Company (which will usually be referred to in these findings as "Emery") is a corporation organized under the laws of Maine. It maintains its principal office in New York City. Emery was developed from a hardwood manufacturing business in Kentucky, established by Geo. D. Emery in 1869. From 1869 to 1882, it operated as a proprietorship; from 1882 to 1902, it operated as an unincorporated company; and since 1902, it has operated as a corporation. Emery's operations are confined principally to Ecuador, Brazil, and the Philippines; and the principal products handled by the company are balsa wood and Philippine mahogany, although it also handles Paraná (Brazilian) pine, lignum vitae, Spanish cedar, and other tropical woods for special purposes. In conducting its operations, Emery has carried on activities in and dealt Findings of Fact 145 C. Cls. with Latin American countries for approximately 50 years. 4. (a) Abacá, the commodity mentioned in S. 427, 84th Congress (see finding 1), is a plant similar to the banana plant. It grows only in the tropics. Abacá needs at least 100 inches of rainfall a year, and the moisture must be distributed with reasonable evenness throughout the year. The abacá stalk grows to a height of from 25 to 30 feet, and the diameter of the matured stalk ranges from 12 to 18 inches, or even more where conditions are especially favorable for the growth of the plant. The stalks grow in clumps or mats. A mat may contain as many as 100 stalks. Abacá is propagated by obtaining bits or pieces of the root material from an existing mat and then planting them. (b) The fiber of the abacá plant has great tensile strength and good resistance to salt water. Its principal use is for marine cordage, but it is also used extensively wherever heavy, strong rope is needed. It is a strategic and critical material, and an adequate supply is vital to the military and industrial requirements of the United States. (c) The Philippines had been virtually the sole source of the abacá fiber used in the United States prior to World War II. When the Japanese military forces occupied the Philippines during World War II and shut off the supply of abacá fiber from that source, the United States, acting through a subsidiary of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (which will usually be referred to in these findings as the "RFC"), proceeded to establish abacá plantations in Central America. It happened that, many years prior to World War II, an employee of the U. S. Department of Agriculture had obtained some abacá root material from the Philippines, transported it to Panama, and planted it in the experiment station operated there by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. Then in 1925, the United Fruit Company had obtained some abacá root material from the experiment station in Panama and used it to establish an abacá plantation in Panama. This plantation consisted of approximately 2,000 acres at the outbreak of World War II. When the RFC undertook the establishment of abacá plantations for the United States during World War II, it contracted for the services of the United Fruit Company in |