for part of the time as assistant postmaster for approximately 28 years. I became assistant postmaster in 1938 and, in accordance with law, gave bond to the United States with good and approved security, conditioned for the faithful discharge of all duties and trusts imposed upon me, either by law or the rules and regulations of the Post Office Department I have faithfully discharged all such duties and trusts and am neither factually nor legally liable to refund or pay to the United States the sum of $6,000 or any other sum. This sum of $6,000 mentioned was apportioned to me as assistant postmaster at the Bradenton post office, Bradenton, Fla., as my alleged share of the liability for the shortage in the accounts of such post office, caused by the embezzlement of one Clarence E. Dickey, but such apportionment has been made without my consent and over my protest and I have denied and do now deny any liability therefor and thereunder

In 1941 Clarence E. Dickey, who was then a clerk in the Bradenton post office. admitted that he had for some time past been embezzling the funds of the office Dickey was in charge of the Federal savings accounts and postal savings depository funds; Dickey as such and in accordance with the custom and practice existing in the Bradenton post office was accountable direcly to the postmasters and was not under affiant's control and supervision and affiant was not required to give and did not furnish any additional bond with reference to these Federal savings accounts and postal savings depository funds.

During the regime and term of office of Postmistress Alethea Arthur, affiant was appointed assistant postmaster and Mrs. Arthur specifically discussed with affiant, affiant's duties with reference to Dickey, and the method and manner in which she desired to have affiant discharge his duties concerning Dickey and his work. Dickey at that time had in his charge a safe and a cabinet where needfu! documents and papers entrusted to him by the postmaster in the discharge of Dickey's duties in charge of the Federal savings accounts and postal savings depository funds were kept and Dickey had complete charge and care of the funds. papers, forms, and documents coming into his hands and within the scope of his requirements as clerk in charge of such deposits and moneys. Affiant was definitely and specifically instructed and directed by Mrs. Arthur that Dickey was to be left in complete charge of such deposits and moneys and the handling of such part of the work of the post office just as he had been prior to affiant being made assistant postmaster. She further gave affiant definite, specific instructions with reference to Dickey's reports and assumed responsibility for such reports and directed affiant to sign them up for her when presented by Dickey as approved. and these instructions were followed implicitly by affiant.

When Postmaster Sam Wooten was appointed the Dickey situation was gone over in minute detail and fully explained to Mr. Wooten and Postmaster Wooten expressly and specifically directed that it be continued just as it had been conducted and carried on under Mrs. Arthur.

In 1940 affiant was informed that Dickey was gambling heavily, and this information was confidentially, but promptly, transmitted to the postmaster and the postmaster later advised affiant that he had gone into the matter to his satisfsetion and that he was satisfied there was no reason for any alarm or concern with reference to Dickey or his course of conduct in this behlaf or on any account.

Affiant is making this affidavit in support of the bill now pending in Congress to relieve him from the alleged $6,000 liability and in so doing affiant respectfully desires to restate that he is in nowise responsible for what has occurred: that as assistant postmaster he was acting under the specific directions and direct instructions of the postmasters who were fully advised of, who brought about. assented to, and directed the specific course of conduct employed by him and imposed upon him by the unequivocal directions and specific instructions of the postmasters.

Affiant is 63 years of age and has served the United States generally and the Postal Service thereof particularly, conscientiously, faithfully, honestly, and honorably during the greater part of his life and there has been no blot or stain upoa his escutcheon, and he accordingly respectfully, without the admission in anywise of a scintilla of liability, asks, prays, and requests the passage of this act in his behalf by Congress, not as a matter of favor or grace, but as a matter of justice and right.

Further affiant saith not.

F. M. MALOY

ALMA VIOLA ROWE,
Notary Public.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19th day of June A. D. 1943. [SEAL]

My commission expires May 2, 1944.

AFFIDAVIT BY SAM WOOTEN, POSTMASTER AT BRADENTON, FLA., STATING HIS REASONS FOR BELIEVING BILL SHOULD BE PASSED RELIEVING HIM FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLARENCE E. DICKEY'S SHORTAGE

STATE OF FLORIDA,

County of Manatee:

Before me this day personally appeared Sam Wooten, to me well known and known to be the undersigned affiant, and also known to be the postmaster at Bradenton post office. and he being duly sworn, says:

I was checked in on October 16, 1939. as postmaster at Bradenton, Fla., to succeed Mrs. Arthur, who had been acting postmistress before that time. It is now known to all concerned that at the time I was checked in the clerk, Clarence E. Dickey, had embezzled large sums of money from the Post Office Department and had thereby created a shortage through the use of duplicate certificates. Some of the original certificates had been presented for payment and paid by him, but because the duplicates of these certificates had been cashed (through forgery by Dickey) and forwarded to the Department with his regular monthly reports, the originals could not be sent in. Dickey used three of these certificates of $500 each to balance his accounts when I came into office They were counted with other paid certificates They were then several years old and marked paid October 2, 1939, but no interest was endorsed on them These three $500 certificates in question were removed and others substituted in their place by Dickey when the report for that period ending October 15, 1939, was sent to the Department. I am not an auditor, but from my past business experience, it is clear that the audit that was made of the Postal Savings Department at that time, particularly when a change of local administration was being made, was not as thorough as it should have been. Had a complete description of each certificate (which represented cash) been made, or had the inspector required the report, for the final accounting period of Mrs. Arthur's administration, to be delivered to him, and had he mailed the report to the Department (which would not have allowed further access to the paid certificates by anyone in this office), the shortage would have been discovered then, and not months later during my term of service.

I am informed that the inspector who checked the Postal Savings Department did all that was required of him by the rules and regulations. However, that is for the Post Office Department to decide and the rules are made by the Department. I do know, however, that the audit was not as thorough as it should have been. The Post Office Department, through its inspectors, checked in this embezzler clerk, Clarence E. Dickey, and left him as a clerk in the post office when I came in as a new postmaster. I believe the Department itself should assume the responsibility for this situation which was created before I came into office and over which I could not possibly have had any kind of control. Through no fault of mine, a person who had been misappropriating Government funds for some time was checked into my administration of the post office, with a good record and under no suspicion. Because of these facts about the situation and because I have not been intentionally negligent in any respect with reference to the shortage by Clerk Clarence E. Dickey, I contend that no part of this shortage should be assessed against me or my bond but that the same should be relieved by appropriate congressional action.

Other affiant sayeth not.

SAM WOOTEN, Postmaster, Bradenton, Fla.

Subscribed and sworn to before me at Bradenton, Fla.. this 29th day of June

Before me, a notary public in and for the State of Florida at large, personally appeared Mrs. Alethea P. Arthur, to me well known and known to be the undersigned affiant, and she, being duly sworn, says:

My name is Alethea P. Arthur and I served as postmaster at the Bradenton, Fla., post office from the time of the death of my late husband. W. E. Arthur.

until the present postmaster, Mr. Sam Wooten, came into that office on the 15th day of October 1939. It has now been made to appear that during the time I was postmaster, Clarence E. Dickey, a clerk who was employed in the office before I had any official connection with it, succeeded in embezzling certain funds from the Post Office Department. Mr. Clarence E. Dickey had been a trusted clerk of the office long before I came into the office and his embezzlement was accomplished by resort to clever forgery as well as misappropriation of funds. Clerk Dickey and another employee of the Post Office Department had charge of the postal savings department and Dickey was able by resort to misappropriation and forgery to keep the other clerks misled and misinformed about what was going on and, by the use of duplicates, was able to cover up his illegal acts and hide them from the inspector who checked me out and checked Mr Wooten in when the latter became postmaster.

I was without negligence in connection with this matter and had no suspicion of Clerk Dickey and no reason to believe that forgery and embezzlement were being perpetrated in connection with the duties of Clerk Dickey.

I, therefore, feel that I should be relieved and my bondsmen likewise from any answerability because of the shortages by Clarence E. Dickev Mrs. ALETHEA P. ARTHUR

Sworn to and subscribed before me on this 5th day of July 1943 [SEAL)

My commission expires January 5, 1946.

EMIL WEISS,
Notary Public.

WINONA MACHINE & FOUNDRY CO.

MAY 24, 1949.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed

Mr. JENNINGS, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the

following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 2224]

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2224) for the relief of Winona Machine & Foundry Co., having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

An identical bill was favorably reported by the committee, passed the House and Senate and vetoed by the President. The committee has been advised that objections have been withdrawn, and your committee again recommend favorable consideration to the bill.

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to authorize the Comptroller General of the United States to relieve the Winona Machine & Foundry Co. of all liability to pay to the United States $7,148.77, together with interest and any other charges arising out of the termination of contract NOs-74270, dated June 11, 1940.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Following invitation for bids by the Navy Department, the Winona Machine & Foundry Co., a corporation, of Winona, Minn., and 11 other bidders on or about May 10, 1940, submitted bids for the manufacture of stretcher weights under schedule 1492. The bid forms furnished prospective bidders specified May 14, 1940, as the date of opening of bids and indicated that bids might be accepted by the Navy Department at any time within 60 days after the date of opening. The material to be used in the manufacture o the stretcher weights was scrap iron, which was available from local sources on May 10, 1940, at a price of $8.50 to $9.75 per ton.

The bids were opened at the Navy Department on May 14, 1940. The three lowest bidders on the basis of delivery f. o. b. cars on wharf at or near contractor's works were as follows:

The Navy Department needed the materials covered by schedule 1492 at the Naval Fuel Depot, Tiburon, Calif., and the bid of the Winona Machine & Foundry Co. was the lowest received after adding freight, handling, and other charges to the f. o. b. bids.

On the basis of its understanding that it was not the low bidder, the Winona Machine & Foundry Co. by letter dated June 5, 1940. requested the Navy Department to return a certified check for $13,100 which was forwarded with the company's bid. Prior to receipt of the letter, the Navy Department by notice of award, dated June 6, 1940, informed the Winona Machine & Foundry Co. that it was awarded contract Nos-74270 covered schedule 1492. The notice of award was received by the company on June 8, 1940. Thereafter, contract Nos-74270, dated June 11, 1940, was executed by the parties.

Between May 14, the date of opening of bids, and June 8, 1940, the date of receipt of the notice of award, war events in western Europe and the decision of the Government to embark upon a tremendous preparedness program cause the price of scrap iron, necessary for the Navy contract, to increase to a point far beyond the prevailing price on the date of submission and opening of bids. Due to the understanding of the Winona Machine & Foundry Co. that it was not the low bidder and belief that the contract would not be awarded to it, the company did not undertake to purchase scrap iron or other material, to protect itself, at the then prevailing price upon which the bid was made on May 10, 1940.

On June 13, 1940, the Winona Machine & Foundry Co. advised the Navy Department of the increased cost of scrap iron and requested an adjustment of $49.50 added cost per weight. The Navy Department on June 24, 1940, notified the company that it was without authority to increase the contract price because of increased costs of material. Thereafter, on October 24, 1940, the Winona Machine & Foundry Co. requested a cancellation of the contract without penalty upon the ground that performance of the contract was not possible with its present equipment at present costs. The company also furnished the Navy Department a report of Charles C. Kawin Co., dated October 18, 1940. This report set forth facts as to the company's equipment and methods and concluded that it was impractical for the company to attempt to perform the contract.

On November 2, 1940, the Navy Department advised the Winona Machine & Foundry that in view of its inability to perform the contract a purchase against the company's account would be made in accordance with the provisions of article 5 of the contract and that the company would be informed as to the excess costs, if any. The Navy Department also advised that bids for the purchase against the company's accounts would be opened on November 22, 1940.

Following the opening of bids on November 22, 1940, the Navy Department awarded a contract for the stretcher weights to the lowest bidder, the American Car & Foundry Co. Thereafter, the Navy Department informed the Winona Machine & Foundry Co. that the excess costs resulting from the purchase against its account amounted to $7,148.77 and certified the said sum to the Comptroller General as a debt against the Winona Machine & Foundry Co.

Under the provisions of the proposed legislation, the Winons Machine & Foundry Co. would be released from liability to the Government in the amount of the excess costs certified to the Comptroller