This Department has no information to indicate that the defendant Sering was ever apprehended. He failed to appear either at the hearing before the United States Commissioner or at the time set for his trial. The Department has no information whether the surety John P. Hart made any effort to apprehend him. Whether, in the light of all the circumstances, a refund should be made on the Sering bond is a question of legislative policy as to which I prefer not to make any suggestions. Sincerely yours, ROBERT H. JACKSON, Attorney General. Hon. ROBERT H. JACKSON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, March 8, 1940. Attorney General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: I am enclosing herewith several copies of H. R. 6060, a bill for the relief of John P. Hart, and call your further attention to the report made to this committee on June 13, 1939, by the then Attorney General Frank Murphy. It is stated in General Murphy's report that the files of your Department show that bail was deposited in the case of each of the defendants named in the bill, with the exception of Fred Sering. It is also stated that available information does not indicate that John P. Hart had any connection with the transaction. Enclosed herewith is a copy of the report of the Comptroller General on a previous similar bill, H. R. 6265 (74th Cong.), wherein it is stated that a Liberty bond valued at $1,000 was deposited for Fred Sering, along with other defendants in the same case. It is also apparent from the report of the Comptroller General that there is no question that John P. Hart furnished the bonds. This committee has taken favorable action on the bill, insofar as refunding the amount of $1,000, representing the value of the bond deposited for Sering is concerned. The rest of the money has been disallowed. This action was taken on the strength of the court order also referred to in the Comptroller General's report, authorizing the refund of the sum of $1,486.55, but which order the clerk was not able to comply with, as the money had already been covered into the Treasury of the United States. This committee would like to have a further report on this bill, in view of the information referred to, together with your recommendation as to the payment of the sum of $1,000 to John P. Hart, representing the amount of the bond deposited for Fred Sering. Very truly yours, AMBROSE J. KENNEDY, Chairman. HON. AMBROSE J. KENNEDY, Chairman, Committee on Claims, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D. C., June 13, 1939. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. Kennedy: I have your letter of May 12, 1939, requesting my views concerning the merits of the bill (H. R. 6060) to provide for the payment of $7,000 to John P. Hart as reimbursement for the loss claimed to have been sustained by him as a result of the forfeiture of a bail bond filed in a criminal proceeding against Fred Sering, Carl Anderson, John Meyer, John Becker, L. Knapp, John Smidt, and Floyd Milford in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The files of this Department show that on March 5, 1926, an information was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Fred Sering, Carl Anderson, John Meyer, John Becker, L. Knapp, John Smidt, and Floyd Milford in case No. 14388 charging them with violations of the National Prohibition Act. Each of the defendants, with the exception of Fred Sering, deposited with the clerk of the court Liberty bonds of the par value of $1,000 as bail. On April 2, 1926, a plea of not guilty was entered by each of them. On April 27, 1926, the date set for the trial, none of the defendants appeared. The bonds were ordered forfeited, and on January 31, 1927, judgment was entered and the collateral subsequently sold, the proceeds from which totaled $8,486.55. Fred Sering, for whose appearance no bond was required, also failed to appear on the date set for the trial, and has not been apprehended, so far as the records of this Department show. Available information does not indicate that John P. Hart had any connection with the transaction. Moreover, it does not appear that any of the defendants have ever been apprehended. In view of the foregoing, I do not recommend favorable consideration of the measure. With kind regards. FRANK MURPHY, Attorney General. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, Washington, May 31, 1935. Chairman, Committee on Claims, Hon. AMBROSE J. KENNEDY, House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. KENNEDY: Reference is had to your letter of May 17, 1935, receipt of which was acknowledged May 18, relative to H. R. No. 6265 (74th Cong., 1st sess.), entitled "A bill for the relief of John P. Hart." The bill provides as follows: "That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $6,486.55 deposited as bail for the following defendants in the case of United States against Fred Sering, Carl Anderson, John Meyer, Elmer Knapp, John Smidt, and Floyd Milford. "Such sums represent amounts covered into the United States Treasury by reason of the forfeiture and sale of collateral deposited for the appearance of the said defendants who were charged with violations of the National Prohibition Act, and the informations against whom were dismissed on authority of the Attorney General on July 31, 1933." The material facts as shown by the record on file in this office are as follows: On January 9, 1926, Fred Sering, Carl Anderson, John Meyer, Elmer Knapp, John Smidt, Floyd Milford, and John Becker (the last not being named in the above-quoted bill) were arrested for violation of the National Prohibition Act and brought before United States Commissioner Beitler, who fixed the bond for each defendant at $1,000 and John P. Hart deposited six $1,000 Liberty bonds as bail for six of the defendants, $1,000 in cash being deposited as bail for Meyer. January 19, 1926, six of the defendants, not including Sering, waived examination before the commissioner and were held for court under the same bonds. Sering failed to appear before the commissioner and his bond was declared forfeited. When the cases were called in court all seven of the defendants failed to report and the court ordered the forfeiture of the bonds of six of the defendants. May 1, 1926, scire facias was issued against six defendants not including Sering and the clerk of the court sold all six Liberty bonds realizing $6,486.55 therefor, which together with the $1,000 cash bond was covered into the Treasury of the United States. The $486.55 over the face value of the bonds represented interest and premium realized from the sale. John P. Hart recently filed in this office a claim for refund of the face value of the bond deposited for Sering and also for the premium and interest realized from the sale, having secured an order of the court directing the clerk of the court to pay to him $1,486.55 with which order the clerk was not able to comply as the money had been covered into the Treasury. By decision of May 24, 1935, A-61844, the claim for refund of the $1,000 face value of the bond was disallowed as it was shown to have been properly forfeited but the claim was allowed for $481.68 ($486.55 less 1 percent for handling as authorized by section 828, Revised Statutes). Since each of the seven bonds was legally and properly forfeited upon failure of the defendants to comply with the conditions of the bonds by making proper appearance, the fact that some 7 years later, after the law under which the arrests had been made had been repealed, the informations may have been dismissed would not appear to create any legal or equitable right in the defendants or the person depositing collateral for them to a refund of the amount of the forfeited bonds. Consequently, I find no merit whatever in the bill. But even if the bill is to be favorably considered by the Congress, it is to be noted that it does not sta e to who.n the payment is to be made, and, as herein before shown, the amount is not correct. A copy of the decision of May 24, 1935, is enclosed for your informa ion. Sincerely yours, F. W. HEATON JULY 1, 1940.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed Mr. COFFEE of Washington, from the Committee on Claims, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 6512] The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6512) for the the relief of F. W. Heaton, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill, as amended, do pass. The amendments are as follows: Line 6, strike out the sign and figures "$2,334.50" and insert in lieu thereof "$1,834.50". Line 9, after the word "received" insert the language "on July 29, 1938". The purpose of the proposed legislation is to pay to F. W. Heaton, of Albuquerque, N. Mex., the sum of $1,834.50 in full settlement of all claims against the United States on account of the loss of an eye and other permanent disabilities resulting from injuries received while working at the Mescalero Indian Agency, N. Mex., and while in private employ on Government property. STATEMENT OF FACTS Mr. F. W. Heaton, of Albuquerque, N. Mex., was employed by the Way Machinery Co. as a mechanic service man, when on July 25, 1938, he was called to the Mescalero Indian Reservation to overhaul a Government tractor. When Mr. Heaton arrived at the reservation he was furnished with a helper, an Indian boy named Ernest Marden, and they went to the garage on the reservation where the tractor was awaiting repair. Mr. Heaton stated that there were two other Indian boys, Miguel Dorame and Woodrow Harold Wilson, working on a tire in the shop on the forenoon of July 29. The two young men had a truck wheel lying on the floor and they were mounting a steel rim upon it with a sledge hammer. At about 11:30, Mr. Heaton laid down the tools he had been using and turned partly around away from his work to pick up other tools. As he straightened up he noticed that he was facing these two boys, and at that moment one of them, Wilson, struck the steel rim a heavy blow with the hammer. A chip of steel broke off this boy's hammer and was driven completely through the middle of Mr. Heaton's right eye, causing complete rupture. Mr. Heaton was immediately taken to the Government hospital and given first-aid treatment by Dr. R. J. Enochs. He was then sent with a Government nurse to Dr. E. C. Matthews, in Albuquerque. Dr. Matthews sent Mr. Heaton to St. Joseph's Hospital, and removed his right eyeball on July 30. In connection with this injury Mr. Heaton incurred expenses as follows: . Dr. Matthews, enucleation.... Hospital bill... Dr. Matthews, calls Artificial eye---. Anesthetic_____ $100. 00 27.50 97. 00 100. 00 10. 00 Total actual hospital and doctor bills... 334. 50 The Department of Interior makes no recommendation with reference to the enactment of this legislation, "in view of the lack of conclusive evidence as to where the responsibility for Mr. Heaton's injury lies." It is stated by the Department that Mr. Heaton was also hammering a metal bar with a heavy sledge hammer, and there is a question whether the splinter of steel that caused the loss of his eye came from his own hammer or from the sledge hammer of Woodrow Wilson. Your committee is in receipt of evidence that definitely establishes the fact that this splinter did not come from Mr. Heaton's hammer, since the hammer used by him was not chipped. Furthermore, there is a statement which will be found hereafter appended, made by Woodrow Wilson, in which he states that the splinter that pierced Mr. Heaton's eye came from his (Wilson's) hammer. Prior to Mr. Heaton's injuries he averaged $177 per month as he was a first-grade machinist. Since he was injured he is unable to perform this sort of work, due to his impaired eyesight, and his present employment, as a salesman, pays him a much lower salary. After having investigated all the facts in this case very thoroughly your committee is of the opinion that the claim has merit and recommends the payment of $1,834.50, $334.50 for actual expenses involved and $1,500 to compensate Mr. Heaton for the loss of his sight, pain and suffering, and his impaired earning power. Appended hereto is the report of the Department of the Interior, together with other pertinent evidence. Hon. AMBROSE J. KENNEDY, Chairman, Committee on Claims, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Washington, August 4, 1939. House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your request of June 14 for report on H. R. 6512, for relief of F. W. Heaton, who claims to have been injured at the Mescalero Indian Agency, N. Mex., while employed by a private contractor. |