AUGUST 2, 1922, 2 COMP. GEN. 70

AUGUST 2, 1922, 2 COMP. GEN. 70

RELIEF OF NAVY DISBURSING OFFICERS A DISBURSING OFFICER OF THE NAVY WHO MADE AN OVERPAYMENT DUE TO AN APPARENT ERROR IN HIS ACCOUNTS MAY NOT BE RELIEVED FROM LIABILITY THEREFOR BY A CERTIFICATE BY THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY UNDER THE ACT OF JULY 11, 1919, 41 STAT. 153, NOR IS SUCH A PAYMENT ONE WHICH THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE IS AUTHORIZED TO CREDIT IN THE ACCOUNTS OF DISBURSING OFFICERS UNDER ACT OF APRIL 21, 1922, 42 STAT. 497.

DECISION BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL, AUGUST 2, 1922:

BY CERTIFICATE NO. 18372-D, DATED NOVEMBER 7, 1921, THE NAVY DEPARTMENT DIVISION OF THIS OFFICE DISALLOWED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF ENSIGN PERCY R. GUESS, UNITED STATES NAVAL RESERVE FORCE, FOR THE THIRD QUARTER, 1919, THE SUM OF $18.40, AS FOLLOWS:

NO. 91. JOHN FRANCIS O-DAY, SEAMAN 2D CLASS, TAKEN UP WITH BALANCE DUE OF $9.20, SHOULD BE OVERPAID $9.20. THE SUM OF THESE TWO DISALLOWED "PAY OF NAVY, 1919.'

THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, UNDER DATE OF MARCH 13, 1922, REQUESTED REMOVAL OF THE DISALLOWANCE AND FURNISHED A CERTIFICATE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF JULY 11, 1919, 41 STAT. 153.

THE ACT OF JULY 11, 1919, AUTHORIZES AND DIRECTS THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS TO ALLOW CREDIT IN THE SETTLEMENT OF THE ACCOUNTS OF DISBURSING OFFICERS OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS FOR PAYMENTS TO OFFICERS AND ENLISTED MEN "NOT ORDINARILY ALLOWABLE UNDER THE STATUTES," COVERING THE PERIOD OF THE EXISTING EMERGENCY AS THEREIN DEFINED, ON THE CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY---

AS HAVING BEEN INCURRED UNDER MILITARY NECESSITY, OR AS HAVING BEEN OCCASIONED BY ACCIDENTAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS OVER WHICH SUCH DISBURSING OFFICERS HAD NO CONTROL, AND FOR WHICH THEY WERE NOT JUSTLY RESPONSIBLE.

UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS NOT BELIEVED THAT THE CERTIFICATE IS SUFFICIENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENABLING THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS TO CREDIT THE PAYMENT MADE BY THE DISBURSING OFFICER AS COMING UNDER PAYMENTS "NOT ORDINARILY ALLOWABLE UNDER THE STATUTES.' THIS IS THE CASE OF A DISBURSING OFFICER MAKING AN ERROR APPARENT ON ITS FACE, AND IT IS DIFFICULT TO CONCEIVE THE MILITARY NECESSITY OR ACCIDENTAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS OVER WHICH THE OFFICER CLAIMING CREDIT HAD NO CONTROL THAT COULD HAVE CAUSED THE ERRONEOUS PAYMENT.

WHEN A PAYMENT BY A DISBURSING OFFICER TO OFFICERS AND ENLISTED MEN NOT ORDINARILY ALLOWABLE UNDER THE STATUTES IS SUCH A PAYMENT AS COMES WITHIN THE ACT OF JULY 11, 1919, THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER SUCH PAYMENT WAS UNDER MILITARY NECESSITY OR AS HAVING BEEN OCCASIONED BY ACCIDENTAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS OVER WHICH SUCH DISBURSING OFFICER HAD NO CONTROL, AND FOR WHICH THEY WERE NOT JUSTLY RESPONSIBLE IS ONE FOR THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, AND THIS OFFICE WILL NOT QUESTION A CERTIFICATE UNDER OTHERWISE PROPER CIRCUMSTANCES. THE FACTS IN THIS CASE, HOWEVER, REMOVE THE PAYMENT FROM THE OPERATION OF THE ACT OF JULY 11, 1919.

THE ACT OF APRIL 21, 1922, 42 STAT., 497, AUTHORIZES THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL TO ALLOW CREDITS TO DISBURSING OFFICERS AND DISBURSING AGENTS OF THE WAR AND NAVY DEPARTMENTS FOR PAYMENTS MADE DURING PERIOD APRIL 6, 1917, AND NOVEMBER 18, 1921, NOTWITHSTANDING FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF EXISTING LAW OR REGULATIONS PURSUANT THERETO.

THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE ITEM IN QUESTION WAS NOT DUE TO ANY OMISSION BY THE OFFICER TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF EXISTING LAW OR REGULATIONS PURSUANT THERETO, BUT BECAUSE THE PAYMENT OF THE AMOUNT IN ANY MANNER WAS ILLEGAL AND UNAUTHORIZED.

THE ACT OF APRIL 21, 1922, CONTAINS NO AUTHORITY FOR GRANTING RELIEF IN SUCH CASES, BEING DESIGNED MERELY TO EXCUSE NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE STRICT REQUIREMENTS OF EXISTING LAW OR REGULATIONS PURSUANT THERETO AND BUT FOR WHICH FAILURE TO SO COMPLY THE PAYMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN LEGAL.