Attention is invited to the fact that "Sunnydale" appearing on page 3, line 13 of the bill should read "Sunnyvale.'

In view of the fact that the Navy Department's policy on the general subject of lighter-than-air development is in a suspended status awaiting the results of studies and investigations by highly competent authorities the Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill, H. R. 2253.

The bill H. R. 2253 is not in accord with the program of the President.

Sincerely yours,

CLAUDE A. SWANSON.

о

AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO LIGHTER-THAN-AIR CRAFT AND AUTHORIZING AN APPROPRIATION THEREFOR (H. R. 2694). MR. McGRATH

NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, March 5, 1937.

The CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The bill (H. R. 2694) authorizing the construction of two lighter-than-air craft and authorizing an appropriation therefor, has been referred to the Navy Department by your committee for report and recommendation.

The purpose of the bill is to authorize and direct the Secretary of the Navy to prepare plans and specifications for the immediate construction of two lighter-than-air craft and to authorize the appropriation of $5,500,000 for that construction, at least one of the craft to be constructed at Moffett Field, Sunnyvale, Calif.

In view of the fact that the Navy Department's policy on the general subject of lighter-than-air development is in a suspended status, awaiting the results of studies and investigations by highly competent authorities, the Navy Department does not recommend the enactment of the proposed legislation.

As to the provision that at least one of the proposed lighter-thanair craft be constructed at Moffett Field, Sunnyvale, Calif., attention is invited to the fact that this field is no longer under jurisdiction of the Navy Department.

The proposed legislation is not in accord with the program of the President.

Sincerely yours,

91216-37-No. 212

CLAUDE A. SWANSON.

(439)

о

TO CORRECT THE NAVAL RECORD OF JOHN H. BURD (H. R. 894).

MR. BEITER

NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, March 8, 1937.

The CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The bill (H. R. 894) to correct the naval record of John H. Burd was referred to the Navy Department by your committee with a request for report and recommendation.

The purpose of this bill is to consider John Henry Burd as having been honorably discharged from the naval service of the United States. The records of the Navy Department show that John Henry Burd was born on June 6, 1880, and enlisted in the Navy on October 19, 1899. During his enlistment he committed 16 offenses for which he was punished by his commanding officer and on two occasions tried by summary court martial. On September 17, 1902, Burd broke arrest and was absent without leave for about 5 days; on his return he was confined in double irons to await trial by general court martial. On November 20, 1902, he had liquor in his possession and was guilty of disorderly conduct, for which offenses he was given 5 days on bread and water. On December 26, 1902, he created a disturbance and was insolent and threatening to the petty officer of the guard and was again punished by 5 days on bread and water. In April 1903, Burd was tried by general court martial for the offenses committed on September 17, 1902, was found guilty and sentenced to be confined for a period of 2 years, extra police duties, and loss of all pay and allowances except $3 per month for prison allowances, and to be dishonorably discharged from the Navy. On December 12, 1903, the Navy Department directed that the unexpired portion of the confinement be remitted, and that he be discharged from the Navy in accordance with the remaining terms of his sentence. He was dishonorably discharged from the naval service at Boston, Mass., on December 15, 1903.

This bill, if enacted into law, would result in no cost to the Navy; however, it is probable that a charge under the Veterans' Administration would be involved now or in the future.

The Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill H. R. 894.

Sincerely yours,

CLAUDE A. SWANSON.

91216-37-No. 213

(441)