of June 30, 1921, 1 Comp. Gen. 1; id., 214; id., 523. A discharge by reason of dependent relatives is not a discharge for the soldier's own convenience. The discharge is not by way of favor or for the convenience of the soldier but for a cause authorized by law, and under such facts the discharge may be considered involuntary, entitling the soldier to the deferred enlistment allowance if he otherwise comes within the provisions of the law, 13 Comp. Dec., 686. The claimant received an honorable discharge, and the settlement is reversed, $90 being certified due him.

MEDICAL TREATMENT-RETIRED NAVAL OFFICERS.

The provision of section 1586, Revised Statutes, prohibiting the payment of expenses for medical treatment of a naval officer when not on duty precludes the reimbursement of the Public Health Service from naval appropriations for medical treatment furnished a retired naval officer when not on active duty by a Veterans' Bureau hospital.

Comptroller General McCarl to the Secretary of the Navy, November 4, 1922. I have your letter of September 28, 1922, requesting decision as to whether payment is authorized of a bill for $15 rendered against the Navy Department by the Public Health Service for medical services rendered to Ensign John C. Sumpter, United States Navy, retired, by the United States Veterans' Hospital No. 51, of Tucson, Ariz.

You state that Ensign Sumpter was admitted to the Veterans' Bureau Hospital, Tucson, Ariz., at his own request without the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, Navy Department, being advised relative thereto until the said bill was presented for payment.

While not so stated, it is understood that this officer was not on active duty at the time the said services were obtained.

Section 1586, Revised Statutes, provides:

Expenses incurred by any officer of the Navy for medicines and medical attendance shall not be allowed unless they were incurred when he was on duty, and the medicines could not have been obtained from naval supplies, or the attendance of a naval medical officer could not have been had.

Navy Regulations, 1920, articles 1187-1189, prescribe the conditions and circumstances under which an officer of the Navy on duty may be furnished medical services where the services of a naval medical officer are not available, but no provision is made therefor for an officer not on duty.

Ensign Sumpter appears to have had no authority on behalf of the Navy Department to incur the expense in question, and, the medical treatment thus having been obtained contrary to the law and regulations providing for furnishing medical treatment to officers of the Navy, there is no obligation on the part of the Navy Department to pay for same. See 12 Comp. Dec., 28.

The question presented is answered accordingly.

989449 052-21

QUARTERMASTER SUPPLIES ISSUED TO RESERVE OFFICERS' TRAINING CORPS AND NATIONAL GUARD WHEN NOT ON FEDERAL DUTY-OVERHEAD PERCENTAGE.

Such flat per cent as measures the actual cost of issues to Reserve Officers' Training Corps when not in Federal service, under authority of the act of June 30, 1922, 42 Stat., 719, is chargeable under the appropriation for quartermaster supplies, etc., Reserve Officers' Training Corps, and such cost of like issues to the National Guard not on Federal duty under the appropriation available for the Army proper.

Comptroller General McCarl to the Secretary of War, November 4, 1922. I have your letter of October 20, 1922, reading:

Your decision is respectfully requested as to whether a flat rate of four per cent or any other sum may be charged against National Guard and Reserve Officers' Training Corps appropriations upon issues to Reserve Officers Training Corps and National Guard when not in Federal service under the authority contained in the Appropriation act, fiscal year, 1923, to cover cost of packing and crating, and if not, whether the appropriation "Transportation of the Army and its supplies" may be charged therewith, and if not payable out of those appropriations, is there any appropriation available for that purpose. The Quartermaster General states that it has been the practice of his office upon issue to the National Guard not in Federal service and Reserve Officers' Training Corps to charge a flat rate in accordance with the provisions of Special Regulations 40, 40a, and 40b, War Department, reading:

"The articles herein enumerated, when furnished to the National Guard not in the Federal service, and to other executive departments of the Government, shall have added to the prices herein given 4 per cent to cover the cost of packing, baling, or crating."

The appropriation for quartermaster supplies, etc., Reserve Officers' Training Corps, act of June 30, 1922, 42 Stat., 719, provides:

*

*

*

For the procurement and issue, under such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of War, to institutions at which one or more units of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps are maintained, of such supplies, tentage, equipment, and uniforms as he may deem necessary for transporting said * supplies and equipment from place of issue to the several institutions and training camps $3,100,000, to remain available until December 31, 1923: Provided, That uniforms and other equipment or material issued to the Reserve Officers' Training Corps in accordance with law shan be furnished from surplus or reserve stocks of the War Department without payment from this appropriation, except for actual expense incurred in the manufacture or issue, in so far as said stocks are in excess of actual requirements of the Regular Army for the fiscal year 1923:

The appropriation requires that the War Department furnish uniforms, equipment, or matériel from surplus or reserve stocks without charge except the actual expense incurred in the issue thereof. If the flat rate of 4 per cent measures the actual cost of issue, the appropriation is properly chargeable therewith.

The appropriation for arms, uniforms, equipment, etc., for field service, National Guard, act of June 30, 1922, 42 Stat., 749, provides:

To procure by purchase or manufacture and issue from time to time to the National Guard upon requisition of the governors of the several States and Territories, or the commanding general, National Guard of the District of Columbia, such number of United States service arms with all accessories, Field Artillery and Coast Artillery, matériel, Engineer, Signal, and sanitary matériel, accouterments, field uniforms, clothing, equipage, publications, and military stores of all kinds, and a reserve supply of such arins, matériel, accouterments, field uniforms, clothing, equipage, and military stores of all kinds, as are necessary to arm, uniform, and equip for field service the National Guard of the several States, Territories, and the District of Columbia, $2,000,000:

Provided, further, That the Secretary of War is hereby directed to issue from surplus or reserve stores and matériel now on hand and purchased for the United States Army such articles of clothing and equipment and Field Artillery, Engineer, and Signal matériel and ammunition as may be needed by the National Guard organized under the provisions of the Act entitled "An Act for making further and more effectual provision for the national defense, and for other purposes," approved June 3, 1916, as amended by the Act approved June 4, 1920. This issue shall be made without charge against militia appropriations. The appropriation expressly directs the Secretary of War to issue, from surplus or reserve stocks, such articles of clothing, equipment, matériel, etc., as may be needed by the National Guard, and it expressly provides that such "issue shall be made without charge against militia appropriations." The direction to issue, and without charge against militia appropriation, requires that the burden of issue, the cost, be borne under the regular appropriation for the Army proper, namely, the appropriation for Army transportation. Answering the questions specifically, (1) such flat rate per cent as measures the actual cost of issue is authorized to be charged, in connection with issues to the Reserve Officers' Training Corps, under the appropriation for quartermaster supplies, etc., Reserve Officers' Training Corps, 42 Stat., 719-20, and (2) the costs of issue, in connection with issues to the National Guard, are required to be borne under the appropriation available for the Army proper.

REPAIRS TO ARMS PROCURED FROM WAR DEPARTMENT. Appropriations under the control of the Post Office Department can not be used to reimburse the War Department for repairs to arms returned to it in an unserviceable condition, which it had issued to the Post Office Department under authority of the act of March 3, 1879, 20 Stat., 412, for the use of the Railway Mail Service in the protection of public money and property. Comptroller General McCarl to the Postmaster General, November 6, 1922. I have your letter of October 27, 1922, requesting decision whether the War Department may be reimbursed out of any appropriation under the control of the Post Office Department for the cost of repairing shotguns procured from the War Department for use in the Railway Mail Service and returned to the War Department in an unserviceable condition.

The act of March 3, 1879, 20 Stat., 412, authorizes and directs the Secretary of War, at the request of a head of a department, to issue arms for the protection of public money and property. The act provides that the arms are to be accounted for to the Secretary of War and are to be returned when the necessity for their use has expired.

In the case stated by you the arms have been returned to the custody of the War Department. Whatever repairs might be necessary is a proper charge against the appropriation which was made

for that purpose to the War Department and which is exclusively available therefor.

You are advised that reimbursement of the cost of repairing the arms in question from any appropriation under your control is not authorized.

BOARD AND LODGING-FURNISHING of, as PART OF COMPEN

SATION.

The Veterans' Bureau may furnish board and lodging to its employees as part of their compensation where its appropriations are available for the employment of personal service and do not fix the compensation payable for the service to be employed, provided the individual contracts of employment each contain a provision to the effect that board and lodging will be furnished to the employee as a part of his compensation.

Comptroller General McCarl to the Director, United States Veterans' Bureau, November 7, 1922.

I have your letter of October 24, 1922, as follows:

Pursuant to the ruling contained in the decision of the Comptroller of the Treasury, dated May 17, 1921, 27 Comp. Dec., 982, wherein it was held that the Federal Board for Vocational Education (United States Veterans' Bureau) is authorized to furnish board and lodging in kind to persons undergoing courses of vocational rehabilitation in special cases, this bureau has been furnishing board and lodging to trainees at a number of vocational schools maintained by it.

This service in the past has been furnished under contract with private agencies, but on account of the dissatisfaction that has arisen it is the intention of the bureau on December 1, 1922, to take over this service and furnish it as a strictly bureau activity. This will, of course, involve the employment by the bureau of personnel skilled in work of this character, and it is the desire of the bureau in the employment of this personnel to adhere to the prevailing custom and furnish board and lodging as a part of the compensation to be paid for services to be rendered.

A question has arisen, however, as to the authority of the bureau to include meals and lodging as a part of the compensation payable to its employees, and for this reason your decision in the premises is respectfully requested.

If there is an appropriation to your bureau under which there is authority for the employment of personal services of the character stated and the appropriation does not fix the compensation payable for such services, the proposed arrangement would be authorized provided the appointment or contract of employment in each case specifically stipulates that board and lodging will be furnished by the Government as a part of the compensation. The amount to be expended on this account should be stated.

See also the act of March 4, 1913, 37 Stat., 790.

DISABILITY COMPENSATION-RECEIPT OF, BY SAME PERSON FROM VETERANS' BUREAU AND EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION COMMISSION.

A person is not entitled for the same period to compensation under both the war risk insurance act and the employees' compensation act, and, upon his election, to receive under the war risk act the amount received for the same period under the employees' compensation act must be repaid to the United States and may be deducted from payments accrued under the war risk act. (See 2 Comp. Gen., 582.)

Decision by Comptroller General McCarl, November 9, 1922.

James E. Turner requested, September 23, 1922, allowance of $30 deducted from the August, 1922, payment of compensation made him by the United States Veterans' Bureau in partial liquidation of $845.33 compensation erroneously paid him subsequent to September 23, 1919, by the United States Employees' Compensation Commission,

Claimant was in the military service during the recent emergency as a private, Company I, One hundred and sixteenth Infantry. After his discharge, April 2, 1918, from the military service he secured civilian employment in the Quartermaster Corps of the Army at the Army supply base, Norfolk, Va., and appears to have been standing beside a truck, while on duty, when he was struck, September 23, 1919, by a motor cycle, resulting in concussion of the brain, laceration of the scalp, and contusion of the back. He was paid by the United States Employees' Compensation Commission, under the provisions of the act of September 7, 1916, 39 Stat., 742, compensation at the rate of $66.67 per month for the period September 26 to October 6, 1919, and from November 5, 1919, to June 15, 1921. Claimant stated that he was discharged from the military service by reason of tuberculosis, and he was paid by the Bureau of War Risk Insurance, later the United States Veterans' Bureau, under the act of October 6, 1917, 40 Stat., 405, the sum of $3,092.69 in disability compensation from the day following his discharge to June 30, 1922. Effective July 1, 1922, his disability, under the war risk insurance laws was rated as permanent and total, and his compensation increased to $100 a month.

When it was ascertained that there were being made payments of compensation by both the Veterans' Bureau and the Employees' Compensation Commission, claimant was required to elect which he would continue to receive. See 27 Comp. Dec., 829. He elected to receive the compensation paid by the Veterans' Bureau, and on July 31, 1922, he had been paid a total of $4,080.35, whereas he was entitled to have been paid only $3,235.02, resulting in an overpayment of $845.33, which is now being stopped at the rate of $30 a month against the compensation.

The question presented for decision is whether claimant, having been discharged from the military service and in receipt of compensation for a disability determined to have been incident to that service, is also entitled to be paid compensation by the United States Employees' Compensation Commission by reason of a different disability sustained as a civilian employee of the United States.