The New York herald. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1920-1924, 1920-11-10

the contract was awarded In
| 1920, after bids had been reject
ed three times, was $9S6,700. |
The committee will go thorough |
ly into this contract.
by board officials. enforcement OF the
new Merchant Marine act and evasions
Of the Seleetive Service act.
Taking up in detail seven general
phases Of the boards activities, the re-
port charged gross waste Of Government
funds. improperly drawn contracts which
cost the Government large sums and
failure OF the various divisions of the
board TO cooperate efficiently and the
almost complete failure of some OF the
divisions TO function at all.
Padded Payrolis and Plain Theft.
Padding of payrolls by firms repairing
Shipping Board vessels, ownership by
COMPANIES operating Government 7essels
Of stock in companies furnishing sup
plies TO those craft at prices ranging
from 30 to so per cent. above wholesale
costs theft of supplies and equipment
from ships, and the loss OF millions of
dollars through improperly secured loans
made to contractors building Govern
'nent vessels also We're charged.
An allegation in the report was that
many firms holding construction con-
tracts during the war inausurated Lib
erty bond, selling crusades In their plants
and charged to ship construction 10 per
cent, of the money thus obtained as the
cost for selling the bonds. 1t was charged
that in some cases the Emergency Fleet
Corporation authorized contractors to
take from their appropriated funds sums
to purchase Liberty bonds and that sub
sequently these bonds were sold or n.y.
pothecated at loss and the money
thus realized used for plant purposes"
Going into the matter OF salvage of
shipbuldlng plants. uncompleted hulls
and material and stores, the report al
legged that it was asserted by persons in
position to know that the sale of the
millions Of dollars worth of material
owned by the Fleet Corporation had net
ted no more than 1874 cents on the
dollar at a time when the Shipping
Board at other points was purchasing
the same materials in the open market
at prices in advance OF the original cost
prices of the material sold
However" said tine report. "the ques-
ton seems to be one of maladnlinistra-
ton. rather than one Of fundamental
conditions. in so far aSYthe limited re-
turns from the sale of these materials
is concerned
The report said that "tIle Barde Com
paisy'' was trying to purC base under a
blanket contract all supplies and stores
o. the Fleet Corporation and charged
thai ono Of the officials of this company
was also an, advisor TO the Shipping
Board's. cancellation and claims board.
The shipping Board announced last
might a sale of surplus material on
the Pacific coast va ued at about $751;
mn 10 49,
York.
The report said that the shipping
Board entered into contract with
George F. Rog rs to remove hu Is which
were on the ways ~ an unfinished state
at the time the Go g. t was signed o
10 procure from the Lu iders or the own-
ers of the land unon which the bulls
and why's rested a release lrom furth
liability.
For some reason said the report,
1.-THE United states Shipp ng Board saw
1T to make cont act with 20 ers to
pay him SIS 0e7 pr hui for each hull
hus handled b. him Til resr'i' has
been that in many ses the n ping
Roard has paid an additional $4,000 ner
hull to have Rogers sell the hull or give
II a~ays IN many asses the cost OF tn
hui representing several thousand dol
lars. Rog rs has found no difficulty in
selling these hulls at a We fair price.
which revenues revert to Rorers. in ad-
dtion to which ne collected from the
Emergency Fleet Corporation $1,000 per
hull fee"
The report said the contract entered
fr;c, with the American Lumber Sales
Company should be gone into by this
committee. because Il presents come fea-
tues that are questionable. 10 say the
last" The renort then goes on e
charge that the company was. 20 some
exteut composed Of persons previously
ereeged with the Fleet Corporation
that j. purchased materials from the
ccI poration at a stipulated price ahd
cold these materials where is as Is" Mt
m advance sometimes of more than 100
per cent. over the purchase price and
ii at In many cases Il appeared that the
company used Fleet Corporation plants
and equipment Ito reap enormous profits
from the sale of materials which II hal
purchased" from the Fleet Corporation
The contract with the Southern Scrap
Material Company. which. II was stated.
had been abrogated. also was criticised.
II was charged that the contract was
rrade by an agent of the board at New
Orleans without the knowledge Of his
u, me Office" and that materials in
many cases not declared surplus were
sold TO tho company az prices far below
tie market quotations az the time of the
s9lcg.
The report further charged hat tho
organization Of the boards supply anc
safes department particularly ITS por
tprcseutauvcs was used by the com.
pany to sell materials purchased from
tho Shipping Board and that IN many
cases the port representatives sold these
supplies for perhaps 100 TO 1875 per cent.
ret profit 10 the company. and that
certified checks for same were made
cot 10 order OF Southern Scrap Ma
tcrial Company
While many OF the Government ships
are making a profit. tho report said.
others are operating at a loss. and u
was asserted that there were many who
believed that a final accounting OF the