money-order funds in the bank. No attempt was made to check the business transacted by Mr. Barber to see that certificates were issued for all the checks he put through the money-order department. When the Post Office Department issued orders that receipts for certificates to be exchanged for postal-savings bonds should not be left in the possession of postal-savings employees, Mr. Barber was requested to turn in such receipt forms to the bookkeeper. He complied with said request except as to three blank forms which he retained and used later for receipting to depositors for postal-savings certificates which he treated as paid instead of having them exchanged for postal savings bonds. Mr. Barber profited thereby to the extent of $4,500, plus interest.

Mr. Barber, according to the report, was able to conceal a shortage of $2,264 in his cash account in connection with lost certificates. Applications would be made by depositors for duplicate certificates and same would be issued to them. Later many originals were located and returned to the post office. Mr. Barber failed to turn in such original certificates to his supervisors but retained them in his possession and used them from time to time in order to conceal shortages in his cash account. All that was necessary for him to do was to take out funds from his cash and replace a corresponding amount in certificates. When a depositor brought in a check for postal savings certificates, he would put the proceeds of the check in the cash drawer and remove the certificates. In some instances sufficient money was not obtained at the close of the day to cover the certificates. It was necessary for him to turn the certificates in to the bookkeeper as having been paid, which he did, and the bookkeeper checked them as paid certificates and turned them over to Assistant Postmaster Beeman. Later, Mr. Barber would advise the assistant postmaster that he had made a mistake in interest or some other error and request that he be permitted to examine certain certificates. Mr. Beeman did not question the propriety of those requests but turned over the paid certificates to Mr. Barber who would take them to his cage and remove the certificates which had been lost, but later found, and replace them with certificates paid on a later date.

The finance division of the post office, the report shows, was under the supervision of Assistant Postmaster Beeman but he did not attempt to give any section of the finance division his personal attention and rarely visited the postal-savings cage. He left the matter of checking up the postal-savings accounts to the bookkeeper. In a report dated April 8, 1935, case No. 71775-C, relating to the supervision of the post office, recommendation was made that Assistant Postmaster Beeman be demoted to station superintendent. Mr. Coates, bookkeeper, believed his position not one of a supervisory capacity but merely one of a checker and did not notice anything irregular in connection with Mr. Barber's cash or accounts. The inspector concludes his report with the statements that the supervision of the division of finance on the part of Assistant Postmaster Beeman was extremely lax; that he was incapable of giving supervision of the kind necessary at a post office of the size of Oak Park; that the laxness of his supervision was partially responsible for the conditions resulting in the shortage; that the bookkeeper, Willis H. Coates, did not appear to be on the alert; that he should have noted the weakness in the procedure in effect in the post office and advised the postmaster of the impossibility of making a check against the receipts given to those who desired to exchange their personal checks for postal-savings certificates; and that he believed Mr. Coates was responsible to a degree for the conditions which permitted the defalcations of Mr. Barber. The opinion is expressed by the inspector in the report that the postmaster, assistant postmaster, and bookkeeper should be held responsible for the shortage and that the amount thereof should be apportioned among them on the basis of the amounts of their respective bonds.

The records of this office show that Kenneth T. Barber embezzled postal-savings funds aggregating $18,285.75. There were applied as credits thereto sums aggre gating $3,882.65, consisting of $3,000 paid by the American Surety Co., surety on Mr. Barber's bond; $847.45, the amount of Mr. Barber's credit in the civil-service retirement fund; and $35.20 as salary due Mr. Barber, leaving a balance of $14,403.10. The Post Office Department apportioned the liability for the balance of the shortage among the postmaster, assistant postmaster, and bookkeeper, in the following amounts:

Lester B. McAllister..
Jesse W. Beeman___
Willis H. Coates__.

Total...

$11, 165. 20 2,791, 30 446, 60

14, 403. 10

The records of this office show that Willis H. Coates, former bookkeeper at the Oak Park post office has liquidated his share of the loss administratively allocated to him, $446.60, in full. With respect to the share of Jesse W. Beeman, former assistant postmaster, Oak Park, Ill., it appears that the Post Office Department authorized the acceptance of installment payments of $20 per month and that the said Beeman to October 31, 1942 (last date of settlement of the former postmaster's accounts), had made payments totaling $1,350 on account of his share of the loss administratively allocated to him, $2,791.30, reducing the indebtedness to $1,441.30. The monthly payments of $20 have continued during the past year and are still continuing so that it is assumed the amount of the indebtedness has been further reduced. Lester B. McAllister, former postmaster at Oak Park, Ill., has made no payment on the amount apportioned to him, $11,165.20. On June 18, 1940, the uncollected balance of the indebtedness of Lester B. McAllister and his surety, the National Surety Corporation, New York, N. Y., was reported to the Attorney General for collection. No valid legal reasons have been presented to this office to show that relief should be granted the former postmaster. Also, in view of the laxity on the part of both Jesse W. Beeman and Willis H. Coates in the performance of their duties, whereby a loss to the Government occurred, no valid reason appears why they should be relieved of their proportionate shares of the loss. The granting of relief in such cases may have the dangerous effect of tending to encourage laxness in the conduct of the postalsavings business. Accordingly, I am unable to recommend favorable action on the pending bill.

There have been a number of bills introduced in previous sessions of the Congress for the same relief as in the pending bill, and this office has reported unfavorably upon some of them. See H. R. 11518, Seventy-fourth Congress; S. 2042 and H. R. 6333, Seventy-fifth Congress; S. 2537 and H. R. 4524, Seventy-sixth Congress; and H. R. 483 and S. 1611, Seventy-fourth Congress.

As to the pending bill, if favorably considered for enactment, it is suggested that, in the case of Mr. Beeman, since the original charge against him has been reduced, the bill should provide for allowance of credit only for the unpaid amount charged against him on the date the bill is enacted into law, and in the case of Mr. Coates, since the charge against him has been liquidated, allowance of credit in his case should be eliminated from the bill, unless it is proposed to refund the amounts paid by them on such charges, in which event the bill should be amended to provide specifically, for refunding such amounts.

Sincerely yours,

LINDSAY C. WARREN, Comptroller General of the United States.

AFFIDAVIT

Lester B. McAllister, being first on oath duly sworn, deposes and says as follows: My name is Lester B. McAllister. I reside at 247 South Kenilworth Avenue, Oak Park, Ill. I was postmaster of Oak Park from March of 1931 to February of 1935.

During my term as postmaster, Kenneth T. Barber, the postal-savings clerk, embezzled slightly in excess of $18,000. This defalcation occurred over a period of a year and a half. Barber was a civil-service employee.

When the shortage was discovered in the accounts of Kennteh T. Barber, he confessed, admitting that he was solely responsible for this loss and that no one in the office was aware of the shortage; he was arrested and sentenced for this theft. His surety paid the amount of his $3,000 bond and there was a $35.20 salary deduction and a recovery of $847.45 from the retirement fund. The balance of his shortage in the amount of $14,403.10 was charged to William H. Coates, bookkeeper, $146.66; Jesse W. Beeman, assistant postmaster, $2,791.30; and to me as postmaster, $11,165.20.

The circumstances under which the embezzlement occurred are as follows: During my term as postmaster the postal savings increased from $9,000 to over a million dollars. When the banks started failing there was a rush to transfer funds to postal savings. The Postal Department sent out instructions that we were not to issue postal-savings certificates for checks, but were to hold them until the checks had cleared. No system of handling this was suggested.

After discussing the matter with the assistant postmaster and others in the office, it was decided to print mimeographed receipts which were issued to parties leaving checks with instructions to return within about a week or 10 days when

the checks would have cleared. I gave strict instructions that the postal certificates were to be executed when the checks were received, to be held in escrow until they had cleared.

Barber adopted the practice of not issuing the certificates when the checks came in on certain occasions. Some certificates were, of course, purchased for cash. These certificates were issued immediately and Barber put part of the cash in his own pocket and covered this by checks of the purchasers who were given receipts. When the persons who had been given receipts came in for their certificates, Barber would issue them and would cover the amount due by checks from new purchasers. The defalcations in no wise showed up in the records.

My job was primarily to act as a buffer between the Postal Department and the public. During my term of office I carried on no other business and kept regular office hours. I made it a practice to take care of all complaints personally and to meet any of the public that came in on any matter relating to the post office. I did not keep the books nor did I do the banking. I required monthly audits which I checked carefully. Barber's default could not be ascertained from thees statements. My office was thoroughly checked at least once every 6 months by the postal inspectors. The only criticism which I at any time received was that my system of requiring monthly audits was unnecessary and expensive to the Government. Although the postal inspectors themselves made a thorough audit of all the books and accounts at least twice and probably three times during the period of Barber's defalcation, they did not discover the same, nor did they criticize in any way my manner of handling the postal-savings accounts. The bookkeeper took care of all the accounts and the assistant postmaster did all of the banking. The foregoing statement should not, however, be construed as inferring in any way that either the assistant postmaster or the bookkeeper were at fault in the matter. Both of these individuals were also civil-service employees.

The defalcations were never caught by an investigation of the books. After the bank crisis passed the rate of deposit decreased rapidly. Barber found it increasingly hard to cover up his shortage. Finally, one noon while he was at lunch a customer presented a receipt and asked for the certificate. The assistant postmaster became suspicious when he was unable to locate this, and started an investigation which led to disclosing the situation.

In view of the fact that I had no way of catching the defalcations, I feel that it is most unjust to hold me on this claim. Prior to my appointment as postmaster I was engaged in business in Oak Park for a number of years. I considered that my job as postmaster was largely administrative and left the detective work to the postal inspectors who had far more experience in that line than I. None of the inspectors found any evidence of the defalcation, nor was the method of handling the postal savings criticized. I do not intend these latter statements to be construed as any criticism of the methods used by the postal inspectors. My point is only that if these men, with their experience and training, did not discover the situation, it is both unfair and unreasonable to impute any fault to a man in my position.

LESTER B. MCALLISTER.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23d day of March A. D. 1945. [SEAL] E. J. CORTESI, Notary Public.

My commission expires April 27, 1948.

OBSERVANCE OF PATRICK HENRY WEEK

MAY 24, 1949. Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. BRYSON, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the

following

REPORT

To accompany S. J. Res. 12

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the joint resolution (S. J. Res. 12) authorizing the President to proclaim the week in which June 6, 1949, occurs as Patrick Henry Week in commemoration of the sesquicentennial anniversary of the death of Patrick Henry, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the joint resolution do pass.

STATEMENT

This resolution will authorize and request the President of the United States to issue a proclamation designating the week in which June 6, 1949, occurs as Patrick Henry Week.

The membership of the Patrick Henry Memorial Foundation, Inc., includes many outstanding Americans. The foundation is engaged in a commendable effort to commemorate the life and patriotic service of Patrick Henry and to preserve his home and last resting place at Red Hill, Va., as a shrine. The work of the foundation is being financed by the voluntary contributions of liberty-loving citizens throughout the land. Many school children have contributed their dimes and quarters to its work. The Federal Government is not being called upon for any financial assistance. It seems highly appropriate that favorable consideration should be given this resolution to the end that Nation-wide observance of Patrick Henry Week be encouraged by Presidential proclamation.

The great contribution of Patrick Henry to the cause of our national independence and to the establishment of our liberties is well known to all. His name and immortal utterances have been an inspiration to the school children of America. He had a brilliant career as lawyer, orator, and statesman. In an incredibly short time. he gained sufficient

H. Repts., 81-1, vol. 3-102

knowledge of the law to pass the examination and be licensed to practice. He was the leader in litigation before the Colonial courts and, at the age of 27, attained fame as a lawyer in the celebrated Parsons case.

From the field of law, Patrick Henry went on to gain fame as a statesman. He was a member of the House of Burgesses and the Continental Congress and served with distinction as Governor for several terms. He was offered many high positions, which he declined. In the field of public affairs, we honor him for his many acts on behalf of the Colonies and the individual citizen and we recall with pride his part in the fight that resulted in the adoption of the Virginia resolutions resisting the British Stamp Act and his successful fight in the First Congress in support of the 10 amendments now known and cherished as the Bill of Rights.

As an orator Patrick Henry excelled and because of that is best known and honored. Gen. Andrew Jackson said of him, "No description which I have ever heard, no conception I have ever formed, gave me any just idea of his powers of eloquence." Thomas Jefferson described him as "the greatest orator that ever lived." There is little doubt that his eloquence was one of the chief forces of the American Revolution and he must be regarded as one of the greatest leaders for American independence. His voice was the voice of America struggling for freedom and his inspired eloquence at St. John's Church in Richmond, Va., on March 23, 1775, when he delivered his famous "Give me liberty or give me death" speech fired the Colonies with a desire for freedom.