burden is on the defense to prove that the court has got jurisdiction and that he was acting as an officer at the time and the State contends that there is no evidence to support his claim that he was acting as an officer.

The COURT. The exception will be noted.

Mr. GARRETT. Now, will your Honor permit the State of Georgia to prosecute an appeal on that issue without trying the main case, that is, the preliminary matter, suspend the trial of the main case until that matter can be passed on by the higher court?

Mr. BOOTLE. We will be glad to cooperate with him on that.
The COURT. All right; I will give it that direction.

JUNE 19 (legislative day, MAY 28), 1940.—Ordered to be printed

Mr. BROWN, from the Committee on Claims, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 7825]

The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7825) for the relief of C. S. Hobson, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with the recommendation that the bill do pass without amendment.

The facts are fully set forth in House Report No. 2324, Seventy-sixth Congress, third session, which is appended hereto and made a part of this report.

[H. Rept. No. 2324, 76th Cong., 3d sess.

The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7825) for the relief of C. S. Hobson, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill, as amended, do pass.

The amendment is as follows:

Strike out all the language of the bill after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following:

"That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of sections 15 to 20, both inclusive, of the Act entitled "An Act to provide compensation for employees of the United States suffering injuries while in the performance of their duties, and for other purposes," approved September 7, 1916, as amended, the United States Employees' Compensation Commission is hereby authorized and directed to receive and consider, when filed, the claim of C. S. Hobson, of Rison, Arkansas, for disability alleged to have been incurred by him as a result of arsenical poisoning contracted while employed in the field service of the Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture, during the period from March 10, 1931, to November 30, 1931: Provided, That such claim be filed within six months after the passage of this Act: And provided further, That no benefits shall accrue prior to the approval of this Act."

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to waive the time limitations of the United States Employees' Compensation Commission in favor of C. S. Hobson, on account of the injuries which are alleged to have resulted from arsenical poisoning contracted by him during the year 1931, when he was employed as an agent in tick eradication in Arkansas by the Bureau of Animal Industry, and to authorize and direct the Commission to consider his claim, under the remaining provisions of the act.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The records of the Bureau of Animal Industry show that C. S. Hobson was employed as an agent in tick eradication in Arkansas from March 10 to November 30, 1931, his duties being to dip and otherwise handle cattle and other livestock. He was in charge of the vat in which was contained the mixture used for dipping cattle, and which was made up of large portions of arsenic. In some instances where it was not expedient that the cattle or other livestock be dipped in the vat, he was furnished the same mixture to be administered by means of a spray. The air from the spray became saturated with this poison and it was impossible for Mr. Hobson to escape it.

As a consequence of his employment over a period of about 9 months he contracted arsenical poisoning, from which he now suffers, his condition having grown worse from year to year and he has been advised by some physicians that his condition has become chronic and that recovery is doubtful, if not impossible. His injury manifested itself about the time his employment was ended but his physician did not diagnose his ailment to be arsenical poisoning until about the year 1936. Claimant did not know that any provision existed by law compensating him for the injury until the spring of 1939, at which time he filed claim with the United States Employees' Compensation Commission, pursuant to which he was informed that his claim was barred by his failure to file the same within the required time.

After reviewing the facts in the case, it is the opinion of your committee that this proposed legislation should receive favorable consideration, inasmuch as it merely waives the time statute of limitations of the Employees' Compensation Act and authorizes and directs the Commission to consider the claim of Mr. Hobson, which is alleged to have been caused as a result of injuries sustained in the performance of duty.

Appended hereto are reports from the Employees' Compensation Commission, and the Department of Agriculture, together with other pertinent evidence.

UNITED STATES EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION COMMISSION,

CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON CLAIMS,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

Washington, March 20, 1940.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your letter of February 27, 1940, requesting report upon the bill, H. R. 7825, for the relief of C. S. Hobson, and indicating that your committee will not consider extending any relief to Mr. Hobson otherwise than in the form of a bill waiving in favor of Mr. Hobson the bar of the time limitations in the Federal Employees' Compensation Act of September 7, 1916. The bill, H. R. 7825, provides:

"That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to C. S. Hobson, of Rison, Arkansas, the sum of $5,000. The payment of such sum shall be in full settlement of all claims against the United States by the said C. S. Hobson for damage sustained as a result of arsenical poisoning contracted while employed in the field service of the Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture during the period from March 10, 1931, to November 30, 1931."

The first notice to the Commission of any injury or disability to Mr. Hobson was contained in a letter dated Washington, D. C., August 16, 1939, from Hon. W. F. Norrell, M. C., which reads as follows:

"Messrs. Hooker & Hooker, attorneys, Pine Bluff, Ark., advise me that recently their firm has filed with the Bureau of Animal Industry the claim of Mr. C. S. Hobson, of Rison, Ark., for compensation for disabilities growing out of his service in the tick-eradication program of the Bureau in Cleveland County, Ark., in 1932. "It is assumed that the claim will be referred, in due time, to your Commission. I shall appreciate it very much if expeditious consideration may be given the claim, as Mr. Hobson is in very distressing circumstances.'

The Commission subsequently received copy of a letter dated Washington, D. C., September 18, 1939, addressed to the Commission, from J. R. Cohran, business manager, Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture, transmitting copies of correspondence and affidavits received by the Bureau of Animal Industry in connection with the claim of Charles S. Hobson, of Rison, Ark., filed with that Bureau, for compensation for "loss of time and suffering endured as a consequence of alleged arsenical poisoning contracted while an agent in tick eradication in the field service of this Bureau."

It appears from the papers so transmitted that Mr. Hobson was employed from March 10, 1931, to November 30, 1931, by the Bureau of Animal Industry, as an agent in the Division of Tick Eradication and Special Diseases, and that his services were terminated as of the latter date. It does not appear that he has subsequent thereto been in the employ of the Federal Government.

Since it did not appear from the file in this case that written notice of injury or claim for compensation had been filed within 1 year from the date the alleged condition became manifest, as is required by the mandatory provisions of sections 15 to 20 of the Federal Employees' Compensation Act of September 7, 1916, the Commission had no authority of law to exercise its jurisdiction in this case, and Messrs. Hooker & Hooker, attorneys for Mr. Hobson, were so advised by a letter dated September 25, 1939.

Since, for the reasons stated above, the Commission had no authority to inquire into the merits of this case, no final determination has been made with respect thereto and the Commission, therefore, can express no opinion thereon.

The bill H. R. 7825, if enacted, would apparently be a direct grant of $5,000 to Mr. Hobson, upon a legislative determination of his right thereto, "in full settlement of all claims against the United States" by him for damage resulting from "arsenical poisoning contracted while employed in the field service of the Bureau of Animal Industry" and would not impose any duty upon this Commission in connection with the case.

In view of the comment contained in your letter of February 27, 1940, it may not be out of place to point out that in similar cases where claim for compensation has been barred by the time limitations of the act of September 7, 1916, special legislation for the relief of the injured employee has usually been in the form of a bill merely waiving the bar of the time limitations with respect to any claim that may be filed in his case under the provisions of the Federal Employees' Compensation Act of September 7, 1916, and leaving the Commission free to determine all questions of fact and law in connection with the claim.

In view of the foregoing, the Comission feels constrained to withhold any favorable recommendation with respect to the advisability of the enactment of the bill H. R. 7825, in its present form, but the Commission would have no objection to a bill waiving the time limitations in sections 15 to 20, inclusive, of the act of September 7, 1916, in favor of Mr. Hobson.

Very truly yours,

(Mrs.) JEWELL W. SWOFFORD, Chairman.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, March 9, 1940.

Hon. AMBROSE J. KENNEDY,

Chairman, Committee on Claims, House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. KENNEDY: Reference is made to your letter of February 27, 1940, requesting a report on H. R. 7825, a bill authorizing the payment of $5,000 to C. S. Hobson, of Rison, Ark., in full settlement for injuries alleged to have been sustained by him as a result of arsenical poisoning while employed by the Bureau of Animal Industry of this Department during the period from March 10 to November 30, 1931.

There is no record that during this period of employment any claim or report of injury of any kind was made by Mr. Hobson. The alleged injury was first brought to the attention of the Bureau of Animal Industry in a letter dated August 15, 1939, from Hooker & Hooker, attorneys for Mr. Hobson. Photostat copies of the file covering this case are enclosed. Included are statements made by two Bureau employees who worked with Mr. Hobson during 1931. Both recall that Mr. Hobson had an infected hand during that time, the recollection of one being that the infection was due to "poison oak" and the other that his condition resulted from the irritating action or poisonous effect of the arsenical dip he had been using.

In view of the information outlined in the foregoing, the Department is unable to recommend the passage of the bill as drawn. However, if the bill is amended, as suggested in your letter, so as merely to authorize the United States Employees' Compensation Commission to receive and determine the claim, notwithstanding the time limitation, the Department would not object to the proposed legislation.

Sincerely,

CLAUDE R. WICKARD,
Acting Secretary.

HOOKER & HOOKER

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PINE BLUFF, ARK., August 21, 1939.

Re claim C. S. Hobson, Rison, Ark.
BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUStry, Department of Agriculture,

Washington, D. C.

It

GENTLEMEN: We hand you herewith certificate from Wade Clinic, Hot Springs, Ark., dated August 17, 1939, to be used in connection with the above claim. appears that client has lately undergone examination in the clinic.

Thanking you, we are,

Yours truly,

T. M. HOOKER.

AUGUST 21, 1939.

Hon. W. F. NORRELL,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. NORRELL: This will acknowledge your letter of August 16, relating to the claim filed by Hooker & Hooker, attorneys, of Pine Bluff, Ark., on behalf of Charles S. Hobson, of Rison, Ark., who claims to have sustained injuries as the result of arsenical poisoning contracted during his employment with the Government.

Mr. Charles S. Hobson was employed as an agent in tick eradication in Arkansas from March 10 to November 30, 1931, but the Bureau can find no record of accidental injury occurring to him as a result of this employment. However, such investigation as is possible at this late date will be made and whatever information is secured, together with his claim, will then be forwarded to the United States Employees' Compensation Commission for its consideration.

Very truly yours,

J. R. MOHLER, Chief of Bureau

IN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF C. S. HOBSON FOR DISABILITY COMPENSATION

I, C. S. Hobson, on oath state that I was at all times hereinafter stated a resiIdent of Cleveland County, Ark. That on or about March 10, 1931, I was employed by the Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture, in the field service of said Bureau, my duties being to dip and otherwise handle cattle and other livestock. That my duties were to have charge of the pit in which the mixture used for dipping cattle was contained and which was made up and contained large portions of arsenic. This arsenic was required in all mixtures for the destruction by poison of ticks and other insects.

In some instances where it was not expedient that cattle or other livestock should be dipped in the vat, I was furnished with the same mixture which was to be administered by means of a spray. The mixture containing a large percent of arsenic, a deadly poison, made it extremely dangerous to handle. The air from the spray becoming saturated with this poison, there was no way for me to escape contact with it. I had nothing to do with the preparing of this material so used, but same was supplied me by those directly in charge of the work and to whom it was my duty to report.

As a consequence of my service and employment which lasted for about 9 months or until November 1, 1931, I contracted arsenical poisoning, from which I have suffered from time to time ever since. My condition has grown worse from year to year and I am now advised by some physicians that my condition has become chronic and that my recovery is extremely doubtful if not altogether impossible. I have lost practically the entire time since my injury, which manifested itself about the time my employment ended, at which time I consulted a physician who while he treated me, did not diagnose or pronounce my ailment to be arsenical poisoning, and I did not learn of its true nature until about the year 1936.

I was earning at the time of my employment by the Bureau of Animal Industry about $80 per month. I have not been able to engage in hard physical labor for several years and have lost practically the entire time since my services ended in 1931. The infection which began in my left arm has extended to other portions of my body, and has now reached to my eyes from which I suffer great pain and discomfort and from which I fear a total loss of eyesight eventually.

I did not know that any provision existed by law for providing me compensation at the time of my injury and did not learn of such provision until in the spring of