Where Commissioner of Internal Revenue stated
in letter that value of life policies was not tax-
able but stated further that only part of estate
transfer tax overpayment was refundable in view
of limitation statute, and rejected refund claim
as to balance, there was no "account stated" as
to rejected portion such as would give rise to an
agreement "implied in fact" within the jurisdic-
tion of the Court of Claims although the Com-
missioner was in error in his interpretation of
the statute of limitation. Braun et al., 176.
ACCOUNTING METHOD NOT BINDING.
See National Industrial Recovery Administration Act XI.
ACCRUAL OF PAY.
See Pay and Allowances III.
ACT OF MARCH 4, 1913.
See Pay and Allowances XIII.
ACT OF JUNE 25, 1938.
See National Industrial Recovery Administration Act III, IV, V, VI.
ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR.
There is nothing in the statutes or Army Regula-
tions which probihits the correction of an obvious
administrative error when discovered. Rob-
bins, 479.
Where the secretary-treasurer of corporation, duly
authorized to present a claim for refund of cor-
porate income taxes, presented forged corpora-
tion minutes to the Bureau of Internal Revenue in
proof of said claim, with the knowledge that the
minutes were forged; such action on the part of
an authorized officer was the action of the corpo-
ration. Standard Oil Company of Kansas, 201.
See Air Mail Contracts I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI,
XII.
AIR MAIL ROUTE CERTIFICATES.
See Air Mail Contracts XII, XIII, XIV, XVII.
I. Where, at the invitation of the Postmaster General,
representatives of air line operators, including
plaintiffs, met in Washington and after confer-
ences among themselves, agreed to the alloca-
tion to certain of such conferees of seven pro-
posed air mail routes and further agreed to
submit to determination by the Postmaster Gen-
eral of the allocation of five other such routes;
and where, thereafter, none of said operators,
including plaintiffs, made any attempt to ob-
tain the right to carry air mail over any of said
routes unless such operator was so designated
in said allocation or selected by the Postmaster
General in accordance with said agreement, all
without competitive bidding; it is held that such
agreement was in violation of section 3950, Re-
vised Statutes, and contracts held by parties to
such agreement were subject to annulment by
the Postmaster General in accordance with the
provisions of the statute.-Pacific Air Transport,
et al., 649.
II. While representatives of air line operators, in
conference, agreeing to the allocation of air mail
contracts without competitive bidding, may have
been thinking largely along the line of such con-
tracts being awarded by extensions of routes
rather than on bids following advertisements,
such agreement was never expressly so limited,
and the principal conferees, including plaintiffs,
always conducted themselves thereafter as if
their agreements applied to contracts awarded
after advertisements for bids as well as to con-
tracts awarded by extension. Id.
III. It is immaterial that the Postmaster General con-
sented to agreements to allocate air mail routes
without competitive bidding, or that the Post-
master General urged such agreements upon the
operators of air mail lines called into confer-
ence by him; section 3950, R. S., makes no ex-
ception of a combination or agreement consented
to or instigated by a public officer. Id.
IV. The obvious purpose of the power conferred by
statute upon the Postmaster General to grant
"extensions" of air mail routes was to promote
the public convenience and economy by adding
a segment to an air mail line, so that there would
AIR MAIL CONTRACTS—Continued.
be continuity in its service, utilizing on the ex-
tension the facilities already existing on the
line; and to grant an extension to an existing
line flown by A, with the understanding that the
extension was to be immediately sublet to B
who would fly the extension and receive the pay
for it, was the opposite of such purpose; and
such procedure, as used in the instant cases, was
a device for awarding an air mail contract to
B without competitive bidding; and was an eva-
sion of the statute requiring advertisements for
bids.
V. An agreement among operators of air mail lines
to carry out a device by which extensions of
existing lines would be granted and contracts for
such extensions would be sublet to other selected
operators was a combination to avoid competi-
tive bidding for such contracts. Id.
VI. An agreement on the part of operators of air
mail routes, including plaintiffs, to accept "ex-
tensions" of such routes as requested by the
Postmaster General and to sublet such extensions
to nominees of the Postmaster General, so far
as participants in such agreements were con-
cerned, could have no other effect than to give to
selected operators the emoluments of air mail
contracts without giving an opportunity to bid
to competitors who might be willing to do the
work for less, and such agreement was in this
respect in violation of section 3950, R. S., and
contracts of operators who entered into such con-
tracts were under the provisions of the statute
liable to annulment. Id.
VII. In the instant cases the agreement among operators
of air mail routes, including plaintiffs, as to the
allocation of certain air mail routes among them-
selves evolved, as the necessity for such evolution
is shown to have developed, into an understand-
ing that even if the Postmaster General should
be required to advertise for bids covering certain
routes still there would be no competitive bidding
by those, including plaintiffs, who had partic-
ipated in such agreement in conference; and the
evidence adduced shows that such understand-
ing was scrupulously followed by all the principal
participants, including plaintiffs. Id.
AIR MAIL CONTRACTS-Continued.
VIII. In the matter of the establishment of the "southern
transcontinental route," which under the policy
of the then Postmaster General, had been allo-
cated to the Aviation Corporation (not a plaintiff)
in accordance with the conference agreement
to which plaintiffs were parties, it is established
by the evidence adduced that said Aviation Cor-
poration before bids were asked for or submitted
had proceeded to comply with the Postmaster
General's desires that Aviation Corporation "take
care of the equities" of other operators who had
been carrying passengers, and in some cases mail,
between some of the towns along the proposed
route, by buying out or absorbing such operators;
and advertisements for bids for said southern
transcontinental route were withheld until said
Aviation Corporation notified the Post Office De-
partment by telegram that it "was satisfied to
have advertisement published tomorrow"; and
such advertisement was so published; and Avia-
tion Corporation, bidding 100% of the maximum
permissible rate, was the sole bidder.
IX. In the matter of the establishment of "the middle
transcontinental route", it is established by the
evidence adduced that Transcontinental Air
Transport and Western Air Express (both of
which had participated with plaintiffs in a con-
ference called by the Postmaster General, but
neither of which is a party to the instant suits),
had been informed by Postmaster General
Brown, in accordance with the agreement arrived
at in such conference, that if the said two com-
panies would form a combination to operate said
route as a single unit he would give them the air
mail contract; and when such combination was
formed and submitted a bid and a third company,
United Avigation, Inc., not a party to said agree-
ment, also submitted a bid, it is established by
the evidence adduced that representatives of
plaintiffs and of other companies which were
parties to said agreement exerted themselves to
secure the withdrawal of said bid by said United
Avigation, Inc. Id.
X. In the matter of the establishment of an air mail
line from Omaha, Nebraska, to Watertown, South
Dakota, it is established by the evidence adduced
that in response to pressure to establish such
|