As affiant now recalls the truck stopped some 40 to 45 yards, after striking the girl, and was not moved from that place until the arrival of Sheriff Barnett. Other measurements were taken, but affiant does not now remember the exact distances from the point made.

Affiant has been requested by Mr. and Mrs. Hunt to make a statement of the facts remembered by him and, especially, of the fact that the truck was owned by the United States Government, and was, at the time, being driven on official business. Affiant now states these are the facts.

Affiant is, in no way, related to the parties, nor financially interested in the claim for compensation being made by Mr. and Mrs. Hunt.

STATE OF TEXAS,

County of Bexar:

HUBERT D. BURKE.

Personally appeared before me, M. H. Mueller, a notary public in and for said county and State, Hubert D. Burke, witn whom I am personally acquainted, and who made oath, before me, in due form of law, that he subscribed to the statements above, and that the statements made in the foregoing are true. As witness my hand and seal of office, at San Antonio, Tex., this 3d day of June 1943. [SEAL] M. H. MUELLER, Notary Public.

My commission expires tne 31st day of May 1945.

IN THE MATTER OF CICERO B. HUNT AND WIFE ZADA HUNT-COMPENSATION FOR DEATH OF CHILD

The undersigned, Carl Poore, makes oath to the following statement:

I am 30 years of age, and reside at this time, and for the greater part of my life at Hohenwald, Lewis County, Tenn., In 1934 and 1935 I was a labor foreman at the Civilian Conservation Corps camp located at Waynesboro. Wayne County, Tenn., and was so engaged on May 16, 1935, when the truck owned by the United States Government, and kept and operated by said Civilian Conservation Corps camp at Waynesboro, struck and killed the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Cicero B. Hunt.

Affiant states that he was riding on the truck at the time of the accident which occurred on United States Highway No. 64 about 1 mile west of the courthouse in Waynesboro. On said truck with him was the crew of about 15 men and all the tools used by them in the work they had that day been doing near Clifton, Wayne County, Tenn. The truck was driven by one of the boys in the camp, Robert Hand, and riding in the cab with him at the time was Capt. Hubert D. Burke, who was in charge of said crew and truck that day.

But he does know

Affiant did not see the girl at the time of the accident. that the truck struck the girl, knocking her down, and the left rear wheel passed over her chest and head, crushing the body and killing her instantly. The truck was stopped as quickly as possible, and Captain Burke and all members of the crew stayed at the point of accident until the sheriff of the county came and made an investigation of the matter.

The truck was owned by the United States Government, used by the Civilian Conservation Corps camp, and at the time of the accident was on official business, and was returning the work crew to the camp.

As affiant remembers, the girl was killed on the highway almost opposite her home. The truck was at the time returning from work near Clifton, was traveling the usually traveled highway from the point of work back to camp, and was at the time of the accident approaching the edge of the town of Waynesboro, Wayne County, Tenn., where such Civilian Conservation Corps camp was located, and was traveling down a long hill on such highway, the accident occurring near the foot of the hill. At or near the place of the accident was a small road-side garage, and some automobiles were parked near it. It was apparent that the little girl, about 8 or 9 years of age, had started across the highway to the south side from her home on the north side when struck and killed.

Affiant is in no way related to any of these parties, and is not financially interested in the claim for compensation now being made by Mr. and Mrs. Cicero B. Hunt, the parents of the child. He makes this statement to the end that the

truth of the matter as he knows it may be used by the parents of the child for the record in their claim for compensation for the loss of their said child.

STATE OF TENNESSEE,

County of Lewis:

CARL POORE.

Carl Poore made oath before me that the statements made above and subscribed to by him are true to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief. This the 16th day of June 1943.

[SEAL]

A. M. RASBURY,
County Court Clerk.

O

HOME INSURANCE CO. OF NEW YORK

May 31, 1944.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed

Mr. SCRIVNER, from the Committee on Claims, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 3431]

The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 3431) for the relief of the Home Insurance Co. of New York, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to appropriate the sum of $135.05 to the Home Insurance Co. of New York in full settlement of all claims against the United States for losses and damages sustained to the property of Allen A. Lowe, which loss and damages were occasioned to the Home Insurance Co. of New York by the payment of a claim by said company to Mr. Lowe, its insured, to indemnify him against property loss occasioned to his Plymouth sedan which resulted from an accident involving a Government vehicle owned and operated by the War Department, near Clarkson, N. Y., on December 18, 1936.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

It appears from the evidence that on December 18, 1936, a Plymouth sedan owned and operated by Allen A. Lowe, was involved in an accident near Clarkson, N. Y., with a War Department vehicle, which accident was attributable to the driver of the Government vehicle. As a result of the accident Mr. Lowe sustained the loss of property damage in the sum of $135.05. His car was covered by a $50 deductible collision insurance policy issued by the Home Insurance Co. Settlement was made by the insurance company.

The War Department in its report of December 18, 1939, states:

There is no doubt that the Government is responsible for damage to Mr. Lowe's car to the extent of $185.05, and further that only $50 has been allowed, the remaining amount of the damage, $135.05, having been paid to Mr. Lowe by the insurance company under its policy of insurance, for which it has not been reimbursed.

H. Repts., 78-2, vol. 3- -80

The Department calls attention to the fact that if the Home Insurance Co. had submitted a claim for damages within 1 year from the date of accrual of its claim, the War Department would have considered such claim with a view to making proper disposition thereof under the provisions of the act of December 28, 1922 (42 Stat. 1066). After carefully considering all the facts in the case your committee recommends that favorable consideration be given to the proposed legislation.

Appended hereto is the report of the War Department, together with other pertinent evidence.

Hon. AMBROSE J. KENNEDY,
Chairman, Committee on Claims,

WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, December 18, 1939.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. KENNEDY: Careful consideration has been given to the bill H. R. 6589, Seventy-sixth Congress, first session, for the relief of the Home Insurance Co. of New York, which you transmitted to the War Department under date of November 7, 1939, with request for information and the views of the Department relative thereto.

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to pay the Home Insurance Co. of New York the sum of $135.05 in full settlement of all claims against the United States for loss and damages sustained to the property of Allen A. Lowe, which loss and damages were occasioned to the Home Insurance Co. of New York by the payment of a claim by said company to Allen A. Lowe, its insured, under a policy of insurance issued to Allen A. Lowe to indemnify him against property loss occasioned to his Plymouth sedan which resulted from an accident involving a War Department vehicle, near Clarkson, N. Y., on December 18, 1936, and which loss became a legal obligation of the Home Insurance Co. of New York, under its contract of indemnity with Allen A. Lowe, and because of said payment the Home Insurance Co. of New York has by assignment been subrogated to the rights of Allen A. Lowe.

A Plymouth sedan, owned and operated by Allen A. Lowe, was damaged in the amount of $185.05 as the result of an accident involving an Army vehicle near Clarkson, N. Y., on December 18, 1936, under circumstances denoting negligence on the part of the Government driver.

It appears that Mr. Lowe's car was covered by a $50 deductible collision insurance policy issued by the Home Insurance Co. of New York and that Mr. Lowe submitted a claim to the company under the terms of his policy to cover the damage to his car above the deductible amount. Settlement was made by the insurance company upon Mr. Lowe's signing a note in the amount of the settlement ($135.05) payable upon his recovery of damages from the Government. Mr. Lowe submitted his claim to the War Department in the full amount of the damage rather than for the uninsured portion thereof.

Upon review of the case in the War Department, the claim was approved in the amount of $50 and Mr. Lowe was requested to submit a statement of acceptance of that amount to meet the requirement of the law under which the claim was approved. This statement was refused by Mr. Lowe with the explanation that any recovery by him up to the amount of $135.05 would have to be paid to the insurance company is accordance with the terms of the note.

In the administration of the acts providing for the settlement of property damage, the War Department recognizes subrogation claims of insurance companies separately from those of the owners of the insured property, where the damage is the result of negligence on the part of the Government personnel. Regulations of the War Department under which claims are processed and determined provide that separate reports shall be made upon the claims of the insurance companies and that deductions shall be made from the claims of property owners for any insurance recoveries which were or should have been realized. The effect of these regulations is not to preclude the insurance companies from submitting and prosecuting claims covering the losses under their policies in proper cases, but merely provides for the severance of the subrogation claim from that of the owner of the property.