2173-2181. ARMY TRANSPORTS. 2182-2185. GOVERNMENT-OWNED VESSELS. 2186-2200. PRIVATE VESSELS. ARMY TRANSPORTS Secs. 2173. FREIGHT. 2174. LEASE. 2175-2178. PASSENGERS. 2179-2180. SEAMEN. 2181. USE. FREIGHT 2173. A request was made by the commissioner and secretary of the Chinese Republic Commission for the use of a United States Army transport in conveying Chinese exhibits to the Panama-Pacific International Exposition, at San Francisco, Calif. These exhibits were the private property of Chinese merchants, and the request amounted to one for the use of Government transports in transporting private property. The act of March 2, 1907 (34 Stat. 1170), contains the following provision: That no part of this appropriation shall be applied to the payment of the expenses of using transports in any other Government work than the transportation of the Army, its supplies, and employees. Held, That this provision, in view of the context, has been regarded as permanent legislation and as restricting the use of Government transports to the purposes stated therein, with certain exceptions expressly authorized by Congress; and that the effect of the statute was to prohibit the use of Army transports for the purpose requested. 94–110, July 30, 1914. The Legation of Panama in Washington requested, through the State Department, authority to send on an Army transport, with a view to securing the cheapest freight rate possible, a shipment of 15 tons of sugarcane, the property of the Republic of Panama, from Porto Rico to Panama, for distribution among farmers of that Republic. There being no commercial line operating regularly and directly between Porto Rico and Panama, competition with commercial carriers would not be involved. Held, That in the absence of an emergency or of the serving of any military purpose, the object of the request being merely to obtain the cheapest possible transportation, there is no warrant of law for granting same. 541.2, Oct. 19, 1929. LEASE 2174. The local military authorities of the Philippine Islands recommended that the U. S. A. T. Seward, which had been recommended for survey with a view to condemnation, be chartered, pending legislation authorizing its final disposition, to private parties who had offered to pay the United States $1,000 per month for its use and to insure the vessel against loss. Held, That in the absence of congressional sanction there is no authority for the disposal of property of the United States by executive agency, and that the chartering of an Army transport is a hiring out and a partial disposition of the same. Held further, That, admitting that it might be legal to charter the vessel to private parties, complications would then arise as to the navigation laws of the Philippine Islands to which the vessel would become subject as soon as it assumed a commercial character; that the vessel would have to be registered, and that when placed in the position of a commercial vessel it would become liable in certain cases to seizure and to fulfill many obligations involving severe penalties for their violation, all of which would constitute an insuperable objection to chartering. 94-111, Aug. 26, 1912. PASSENGERS Secs. 2175. CONGRESSMEN. 2176. FAMILIES OF GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL. 2177. LABORERS. 2178. PORTO RICAN TEACHERS. CONGRESSMEN 2175. Congressmen traveling on unofficial business are entitled to transportation on the United States Army transports when, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, accommodations are available for them. Act of March 2, 1907 (34 Stat. 1158, 1170). 541.1, Feb. 18, 1919. FAMILIES OF GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL 2176. The act of March 2, 1907 (34 Stat. 1170), reads in part as follows: When, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, accommodations are available, transportation may be provided for the officers, enlisted men, employees, and supplies of the Navy. the Marine Corps, [and] officers of the War Department while traveling on official business, and without expense to the United States, for the families of those persons herein authorized to be transported * The Secretary of the Navy requested transportation on a United States Army transport for the father-in-law, mother-in-law, and sister-in-law of a chief electrician in the Navy from San Francisco, Calif., to Honolulu, Hawaii. It appeared that the wife of said chief electrician had died, and that he and his two minor children had made their permanent home with said relatives. Held, That while the law did not specify who should constitute the family of an officer or enlisted man who might be furnished transportation on an Army transport, or how closely related to the officer or enlisted man they must be in order to constitute such family, the persons for whom it was proposed to furnish transportation having been attached in their family relations to the chief electrician might be considered as members of his family. and that transportation on an Army transport might be furnished them, if they were removing to the station of the chief electrician and to a home such as they had occupied with him before making the change, and were not making the trip merely as a visit. 94-110, Mar. 11, 1913. The question having been submitted as to whether, under the act of March 2, 1907 (34 Stat. 1170), a member of an officer's family who would be allowed to accompany him when traveling on official business would be permitted to join him by a later transport than the one upon which he proceeded to his station, Held, That, considering the fact that the order under which an officer changes his station often required him to leave on such short notice as not to permit him to take his family with him, a regular member of such officer's family who would have been allowed under the provisions of said act to accompany him might be provided, at a later date, with transportation on an Army transport for the purpose of joining the officer at his new station. 94-110, Mar. 14, 1913. LABORERS 2177. The only persons who may avail themselves of the privilege of transportation by Army transports are those specifically named in acts of Congress. Laborers from Porto Rico do not come within any of the classes mentioned in these acts of Congress, and may not legally be carried upon Army transports, even though compensation be made to the United States for such service. 541.1, June 11, 1923. PORTO RICAN TEACHERS 2178. Application was made for transportation of a number of school-teachers of continental birth and residence in the employ of the government of Porto Rico between their stations and the United States. It was desired that a transport be specially assigned for their use. The act of March 2, 1907 (34 Stat. 1158, 1170), regulating the use of Army transports, provides for their use for, inter alios, members and employees of the Philippine and Hawaiian governments, officers of the War Department, Members of Congress, other officers of the Government traveling on official business * * *. The word "Government" where last above used, within the intendment of this statute, means "Government of the United States." These teachers in Porto Rico are not officers of the Government of the United States or otherwise included within the meaning of the provision cited; and there is no legal authority to furnish the transportation requested. 516, Apr. 15, 1920. Secs. SEAMEN 2179. MEDICAL TREATMENT. 2180. PAY AND ALLOWANCES. MEDICAL TREATMENT 2179. A seaman in the Army Transport Service was sent to an Army hospital ashore for temporary treatment. Held, That seamen in the United States Army Transport Service are entitled under their contract of employment to all the benefits which usually pertain to the service of a seaman, or which may be provided for such service by regulation, which include needful medicines and medical attendance; and when one receives treatment ashore by authority of the officers of the vessel on which he is engaged, the expenses therefor are a charge against the United States. Held further, That the appropriation for medical attendance and supplies under the control of the Medical Department is chargeable with the expenses of such treatment, said appropriation being more specific as to this purpose than that for the transportation of the Army to which the service is incidental. C. 24389, May 28, 1912. A civilian officer on a Government vessel employed in inter-island commerce in the Philippine Islands was admitted to hospital for an operation for hernia, described as "bilateral, congenital, and in no wise incidental to his service." He signed no shipping articles, but men employed in this service were liable at any time to be ordered to China or Japan, in which case they signed the usual shipping articles. Held, That men employed upon vessels of the United States engaged in inter-island commerce come within the operation of the rule giving to seamen generally medical care and treatment when they become sick or are injured in the service of their vessels, and that the official in this case was entitled to the benefit of the rule, although he signed no shipping articles providing for such treatment; but Held further, That he was not entitled to be treated and cured at the expense of the United States of a chronic disorder which existed at the time he entered the service, but that he might be treated for illness incurred in the service although such chronic disorder might have been the cause of such illness, and although a surgical operation might be the means indicated for restoring him to his otherwise normal condition. 94-120, Apr. 7, 1913. Members of a care-taking crew of four Army transports out of commission and laid up at Newport News, Va., were by order required to comply with the rules and regulations for the Army Transport Service, so far as applicable, as well as with those governing the duties of the care-taking crew. They signed no shipping articles. Held, That in the case of one of said employees that he was not entitled to be treated at the expense of the United States for an injury received in the course of his employment as a member of the care-taking crew, as he was not a seaman within the meaning of the rule giving to seamen medical treatment. 94-124.1, Apr. 16, 1913. A transport surgeon at San Francisco, Calif., after rejecting, on October 1, 1914, a temporary employee as physically unfit for the transport service and therefore ineligible to sign the ship's articles, and after the latter's employment of about two weeks as water tender on the transport had ceased, gave him a letter, dated October 5, 1914, to the Letterman General Hospital, stating that "bearer is an employee of the transport service, who desires treatment for hernia * *." Subsequently a claim was presented to the Medical Department on behalf of the hospital fund for reimbursement of $10.40 for the patient's subsistence while under treatment at the hospital from October 6 to 31. Held, That the patient having ceased to be an employee of the transport service before his admission to the hospital and the disability for which he was treated having antedated his service, there was no provision of law or regulation authorizing the payment of the said expenses from public funds. Held, further, That the hospital fund was entitled to reimbursement and that as the transport surgeon seemed to be responsible for erroneously causing the patient's admission into the hospital as an employee of the transport service, he should be held liable for the payment of the claim. 94-120, Jan. 12, 1915. Crews on Army transports chartered under a time form of charter are civilian employees of the United States, and are not entitled to any of the benefits of the War Risk Insurance Act of October 6, 1917 (40 Stat. 398). Such crews are covered by the provisions of the act of September 7, 1916 (39 Stat. 742). (Opinion of United States Employees' Compensation Commission, R. M. White, chairman, November 23, 1917.) 004.6, Mar. 5, 1918. PAY AND ALLOWANCES 2180. Section 11, act of March 4, 1915 (38 Stat. 1168), provides that "it shall be lawful for any seaman to stipulate in his shipping agreement for an allotment of any portion of the wages he may earn to his grandparents, parents, |