Puslapio vaizdai


[ocr errors]

been assigned you; will proceed to Habana, Cuba, via rail to Key West, Fla., and assume the duties of adviser to the Cuban Government in naval affairs.

“6 2. Prior to assuming the above-mentioned duty you will report to the American minister at Habana and inform him of the object of your presence at Habana, Cuba.

663. This employment on shore duty beyond the seas is required by the public interests.

6.F. D. ROOSEVELT, Acting.' “ Decision by the Comptroller of the Treasury is requested as to the rate of pay to which Mr. Parker is entitled, and whether or not he is entitled to commutation of quarters and heat and light while on duty under the above orders. Mr. Parker's normal pay is $3,120 per annum, after 15 years' service. An early decision is requested."

As I understand this submission, the only question involved is as to whether the character of the duties to which this officer was assigned (adviser to the Cuban Government) would deprive him of the 10 per cent increase in pay and the commutation of quarters and other allowances provided by law for service in Habana, Cuba.

The language of this order might indicate that this officer's services were to be rendered to the Cuban Government rather than to the United States. I know of no law specifically authorizing the loaning or detailing of United States naval officers to the Cuban Government; and that the same could not be done without such specific authority might be clearly inferred from the fact that Congress has expressly authorized details of Army officers under the Cuban Government. (Act of Apr. 19, 1910, 36 Stat., 324.) But be that as it may, I do not think it is within the province of this office to question the authority of the Secretary of the Navy in making this assignment.

There is no law expressly prohibiting an assignment to such duty as that described in the orders issued in this case, and said orders emanated from competent authority, therefore the officer had no choice but to obey said orders.

Regardless of whether there was any authority of law for this assignment, the officer was in fact assigned to duty and station at Habana, Cuba, and duty at said station is regarded as “shore duty beyond seas."

You are advised, therefore, that he is entitled to the same rates of pay and allowances as though the assignment had been to purely naval duty for the United States. (See Billings v. United States, 23 C. Cls., 166, and authorities therein cited.)


Where, after due advertisement, a contract is made for a specific quantity or

number of supplies or articles, and it later develops that the number or quantity so advertised and contracted for is insufficient, additional supplies can not be purchased at the contract rate from the same contractor without readvertisement.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Comptroller Downey to the Secretary of the Interior, February 24, 1914:

I am in receipt of your letter of the 19th instant requesting my decision whether supplies contracted for or obtained by you under circumstances stated would be considered as being contracted for or purchased as required by law, i. e., after the advertisement contemplated and required by section 3709 of the Revised Statutes.

In decision of this office dated October 21, 1913 (20 Comp. Dec., 250), reversing an earlier decision (55 MS. Comp. Dec., 139), dated October 11, 1910, it was held that where a contract covered a specific number of articles with a stipulation, however, that the contract number might be increased or decreased, during the contract period, by 25 per cent, supplies ordered of and delivered by said contractor in excess of the full contract quantity plus the authorized increase could not be said to be contracted for or purchased after due advertisement as required by section 3709 of the Revised Statutes, and that any of the contract articles over and above the full quantity originally advertised could properly only be bought after new advertisement.

You now submit the question whether I would hold “that the necessary advertising had been given (as in the case of the 25 per cent increase referred to) were the Commissioner of Indian Affairs to publish in his specifications a clause setting out that when agreed to in writing and approved by the sureties of the contractor quantities additional to the 25 per cent may be bought during the fiscal year

in which the contract is effective under the terms of the contract." By the use of the words “ when agreed to in writing” I understand you to mean an agreement in writing subsequent to the performance of the specific contract and at the option of the contractor.

It is noticeable that in your presentment of the question you suggest:

" It might be said that the 25 per cent increase referred to could be changed to 50 per cent and a wider margin obtained for additional orders, thereby obviating possibly the necessity of entering into the additional agreements, but bidders do not like to tie themselves up in a contract for possible future deliveries on account of market changes and possibly for other reasons, and the greater the tentative increase is the more bids the Indian Service will get with the increase clause entirely eliminated. But the contractors are willing to enter into these agreements at the time the articles are wanted if the market is right for them,




[ocr errors]

This statement of itself clearly indicates the unauthorized character of the proposed procedure. It means simply that after the contract quantities have been delivered the contractor, dependent upon the state of the market, may be willing to furnish the Government an additional quantity at the contract price, but can not be required to do so, the solution of the question resolving itself into a matter of private negotiation,

Having contracted to furnish and having furnished, for example, a hundred wagons, the contract being fully consummated, it is proposed to negotiate privately with him for 500 more wagons at the same price, which he will agree to furnish, or not, as it seems profitable or otherwise to him, at his option.

Possibly some other contractor would then be willing to furnish those wagons for a lesser price. But however that may be, the transaction would be as clearly a private purchase, without compliance with section 3709, as it would be if there had never been

any contract between him and the Government.

The only way a purchase of an additional quantity at contract price could be authorized would be through the provisions of a contract binding upon the contractor and in accordance with the terms upon which other contractors had had an opportunity to submit their bids.

[ocr errors]


Printing required in the prosecution of the work for which the appropriation

“Field investigations of public health, 1914," was made, the need for which arises exclusively out of the conduct of such investigations in the field, as distinguished from the departmental work of the Public Health Service proper in Washington, including its exercise here of administrative control over such field work, may be procured from private printers, at

points where needed, and paid for out of that appropriation. Comptroller Downey to the Secretary of the Treasury, February 25, 1914:

By your reference of the 21st instant I have the letter of the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service of the 20th instant asking whether all printing necessary for the prosecution of the work for which the appropriation "Field investigations of public health, 1914,” was made, whether of an emergency nature or otherwise, can be procured from private printers, at points where needed, and paid for out of that appropriation.

The appropriation is as follows:

"Field investigations of public health matters: For investigations of diseases of man and conditions influencing the propagation and spread thereof, including sanitation and sewage, and the pollution of navigable streams and lakes of the United States, including personal service, $200,000, of which the sum of $10,000 shall be immediately available.” (Act of June 23, 1913, 38 Stat., 25.)

You are advised that all printing, whether of an emergency nature or otherwise, and whether of forms, circulars, or other matter, the need for which arises exclusively out of the conduct of such investigations in the field, as distinguished from the departmental work of the Public Health Service proper in Washington, including its exercise here of administrative control over such field work, may be so procured and paid for. (67 MS. Comp. Dec., 442, Oct. 25, 1913; 47 id., 216, Dec. 2, 1908.)


The appointment of a pay clerk for duty with the pay officer of a supply

ship, in addiion to the pay clerk occupying that office, who is under treatment in a naval hospital and whose appointment has not been ordered revoked, is unauthorized.

Comptroller Downey to Secretary of the Navy, February 25, 1914:

I have your reference of the 19th instant transmitting letter of Passed Assistant Paymaster M. H. Karker, United States Navy, of January 4, 1914, and asking whether a pay clerk may be appointed for duty with said pay officer as the pay officer of the U. S. S. Supply, in addition to Pay Clerk Frank L. Jones, United States Navy, who now holds that office, but is absent from the vessel undergoing treatment in the naval hospital, Las Animas, Colo.

As to the need for such an appointment Pay Officer Karker states:

“On April 6, 1913, Paymaster's Clerk Frank L. Jones, United States Navy, attached to and serving on board this vessel, was found to be suffering from acute pulmonary tuberculosis contracted "in line of duty' and was transferred to the naval hospital, Las Animas Colo., for treatment. During September, 1913, Mr. Jones was ordered before a naval retiring board and the decision of the board was that he was temporarily incapacitated for active service' and recommended that'he be retained on the active list of the Navy and be continued under observation and treatment. He was accordingly directed to return to the naval hospital, where he is now under observation.

“The pay officer of this vessel has been deprived of the services of a clerk for nine (9) months and further deprivation of such necessary aid will work to the detriment of the Government interests."

The offices of Navy pay clerks were created by section 1386, Revised Statutes, which provides :

“Paymasters of the fleet, paymasters on vessels having complements of more than one hundred and seventy-five persons, on supply steamers, store vessels, and receiving ships, paymasters at stations and at the Naval Academy, and paymasters detailed at stations as inspectors of provisions and clothing, shall each be allowed a clerk.” (See also secs. 1387 and 1388, Rev. Stat., and acts of Mar. 4, 1911, 36 Stat., 1265, and July 21, 1911, 37 Stat., 3.)

The offices thus created are peculiar ones. Their existence is dependent upon a pay officer becoming a pay officer in one of the capacities enumerated in section 1386. On his acquirement of that status he is entitled to "a clerk," and thereby one office of pay clerk automatically comes into existence, continues during his continuance in that status, and terminates automatically on his being divested of that status.

It is difficult to see how the pay officer of a supply ship, whose status under section 1386 entitles him to “a clerk," or creates only one office of pay clerk, is entitled to two pay clerks to that one office at the same time.

I do not feel justified in extending by construction the authority for the appointment and payment of pay clerks, and therefore, notwithstanding the apparent necessities of the situation, I must hold that pending the retirement of Pay Clerk Jones, or the issuance of orders revoking his appointment, the appointment and payment of another person for duty with Pay Officer Karker as pay officer of the Supply is unauthorized. To hold otherwise would amount to a virtual repeal of section 1386, for if a pay officer may have two pay clerks to the one office without any action revoking the appointment of either, it is not seen why he may not have any number of pay clerks attached to that office that the department may see fit to appoint, provided one only of them be in the performance of actual duty.



Shipments by the Government on its bill of lading are subject to the rates and

conditions applicable to the carrier's bill of lading. The notation “ Carrier's Risk” on the Government bill of lading, by long

usage, simply means that the shipment is made at the increased valuation provided therefor and subject to the corresponding rate.

Comptroller Downey to Secretary of War, February 28, 1914:

I have received, per your indorsement of the 18th instant, your request for a decision upon a question presented by the depot quarter

a master, Washington, D. C., per letter of February 8, 1914, as follows:

"1. I submit herewith inclosed a voucher stated in favor of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., amounting to $284.26, for transportation of 9,014 pounds household goods and professional books at carrier's risk, under B. L. No. 21, July 2, 1913, from San Francisco, Cal., to Washington, D. C., also inclosed.

“ 2. Settlement is offered on the basis of carload, 20.000 pounds, class A, as provided in Western Classification No. 51, page 171, item

« AnkstesnisTęsti »