CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE

fund of an overpayment of their Federal

income-tax liability for the calendar

year 1950.

The records of the Treasury Department show that the taxpayers filed a

timely joint income-tax return for 1950

and that, on March 1, 1955, the taxpayers filed an untimely claim for refund in

the amount of $1,303.50. The claim for

refund alleged that no part of the proceeds from the sale in 1950 of certain

inherited property was includible in

gross income and also that the taxpayers

failed to take certain deductions for the

year 1950. This claim for refund was

filed almost 1 year after the expiration

of the 3-year period of limitations prescribed by law for filing such claims and,

therefore, the claim was rejected.

The amount of the taxpayer's overpayment for the year 1950 has never been

verified by the Internal Revenue Service. Such verification would require a

determination of the fair market value

of certain property at the time it was

inherited by Mr. Hall, and would also

require a determination as to the validity

of certain deductions claimed by the

taxpayers.

The taxpayers believe that the statute

of limitations should be waived in their

case because Mr. Hall was stationed in

Germany as an officer in the Armed

Forces from January 1950 to May 1953,

and because Mr. Hall received inexpert

advice concerning his 1950 tax return.

These circumstances do not seem to

justify the taxpayers' failure to file a

claim for refund until March 1, 1955.

The statutory period of limitations,

which Congress has included in the revenue system as a matter of sound policy,

is essential for finality in tax administration. Granting special relief in this

case would discriminate against other

taxpayers similarly situated and would

create an undesirable precedent.

Under the circumstances, therefore, I

am constrained to withhold my approval

of the bill.

On September 2, 1958:

MR. AND MRS. W. G. HOLLOMON

H. R. 8759. I am withholding my approval from H. R. 8759, for the relief of

W. G. Hollomon and Mrs. W. G. Hollomon.

This bill would provide for the payment to Mr. and Mrs. W. G. Hollomon

from Treasury funds of $3,189.15 in settlement of their claims against the

United States for personal injuries and

related damages suffered by them on

September 2, 1956, when two United

States soldiers committed armed robbery at the Hollomon's general store in

Brooklyn, Ga. The store also comprised

a United States post office, of which Mr.

Hollomon was the postmaster. Mr. Hollomon was shot and wounded by one of

the soldiers. The two servicemen were

then on leave from Fort Benning, Ga.,

and were dressed in civilian clothes.

The gun with which Mr. Hollomon was

shot had not been issued to the soldiers

by the Army but had been purchased by

one of them.

It is obvious that the two soldiers were

not acting in line of duty, and in these

circumstances no legal liability could be

imposed upon the United States for their

conduct. I appreciate, of course, that in

its exercise of its legislative discretion as

to private relief measures pertaining to

the wrongful conduct of Federal employees, the Congress need not and, in appropriate circumstances, should not be

limited by strict concepts of legal liability. But I believe that any deviation

from those concepts would be unwise except in cases in which there are overriding equitable considerations or facts

which clearly suggest some moral obligation on the part of the United States.

I do not believe that such facts or con- siderations exist here. The only fact

which is urged in support of legislative

grace is that the two individuals who inflicted the harm were soldiers of the

United States Army. I do not conceive

that this is a consideration which suggests any moral obligation on the part

of the United States. To accept the assumption that the United States has a

moral obligation to underwrite the

purely personal, particularly criminal,

conduct of any of its missions of employ- ees and servicemen, in situations of this

kind, would constitute a most undesirable precedent. Therefore, to single out

these claimants for favored treatment

would, I believe, be an unwarranted expenditure of public funds.

For the foregoing reasons, I have been

constrained to withhold approval of the

bill.

On September 2, 1958:

D. A. WHITAKER

H. R. 9950. I have withheld my approval from H. R. 9950, for the relief of

D. A. Whitaker and others.

The bill (H. R. 9950) provides that,

notwithstanding any statute of limitations or lapse of time, jurisdiction is conferred upon the court of claims to hear,

determine, and render judgment upon

the claims of D. A. Whitaker and other

named employees of the Radford Arsenal, Department of the Army, "for

basic and overtime compensation and

shift differential pay as governed by the

provisions of the Federal Employees Pay

Act of 1945, as amended," for services

performed since 1945 at the Radford Arsenal, Radford, Va.

These claims relate to employment as

fire fighters or fire-fighter guards between February 15, 1946, and February

16, 1952. The employees worked a 2-

platoon system which required that they

be on duty every other day for 24 hours,

for which they received basic compensation each week for 40 hours and overtime pay for 16 additional hours. The

claims involve the rights to overtime pay

for the second 8-hour shift worked in one

day and for shift differential pay for that

work, and also for right to compensation

for the third 8-hour shift during the

period when the employees were said to

be "on call duty."

By the act of March 3, 1863 (12 Stat.

767), and by repeated enactments thereafter, it has been provided that claims

not filed in the Court of Claims within 6

years from the time the claims accrued

shall be barred. These claims pertain to

work performed in some cases more than

12 years ago. The claims were not asserted in timely fashion by the claimants and it is no longer feasible or even

possible to obtain the records essential

to an adequate presentation of the facts

to the court. This is the very kind of

situation which proves the wisdom of a

statute of limitation. Without it in such

cases it is doubtful whether it is possible to have efficient and orderly administration of the affairs of government.

If I were to approve this bill, I could

not in all fairness refuse to approve other

bills setting aside the statute of limitations on old claims for overtime or other

compensation for either individuals or

groups of Federal personnel who delayed

is presenting their claims.

For the foregoing reasons, I have

withheld my approval of the bill.

On September 2. 1958:

DUNCAN MOORE

H. R. 11156. I am withholding my approval from H. R. 11156, for the relief of

Duncan Moore and his wife, Marjorie

Moore.

The bill would provide that, notwithstanding any statutory period of limitation, refund or credit shall be made or

allowed to Duncan Moore and his wife,

Marjorie Moore, South Bend, Ind., of any

overpayment of income taxes made by

them for the taxable year 1949, if claim

therefor is filed within 1 year after the

date of enactment.

The records of the Internal Revenue

Service show that on March 14, 1953,

the taxpayers filed a timely claim for

refund of income tax for 1949 based upon

the exclusion from gross income of certain disability payments under section

22 (b) (5) of the Internal Revenue Code

of 1939. This claim was disallowed by

the Service on March 19, 1954, and the

taxpayers did not contest the disallowance of their claim by filing suit in court

within the 2-year period prescribed by

law.

In 1957 the Supreme Court of the

United States decided that disability

payments of the type involved in this

case were excludable from gross income.

At this time the statute of limitations

barred refunds to Mr. and Mrs. Moore

and to a substantial number of other

taxpayers similarly situated.

I have signed into law the Technical

Amendments Act of 1958, which contains

general legislation designed to grant non- discriminatory relief to all taxpayers in

the same situation as Mr. and Mrs.

Moore. Since general relief is now available, this private relief bill is no longer

necessary.

On September 6, 1958:

TITLE 10, U. S. C.

H.R. 1061. 1 have withheld my approval from H. R. 1061, to amend title 10,

United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of

the military departments to settle certain claims for damages to, or loss of,

property or personal injury or death, not

cognizable under any other law.

As indicated in its title the purpose of

the bill is to confer upon the Secretaries

of the military departments authority

to settle, in an amount not in excess of

$1,000, certain claims for damages caused

by civilian employees of military departments or by members of the Armed

1958 19723