White House Press Release, Message from President Harry S. Truman to the United States Senate

#690 HOLD FOR RELEASE HOLD FOR RELEASE HOLD FOR RELEASE 248 June 12, 1946 CONFIDENTILL: To be held in STRICT CONFIDENCE and no portion, synopsis or intimotion to be given out or published until the READING of the President's Message has begun in the Sonato. Extremo care must therefore be exercised to avoid premature publication. CHARIES G. ROSS Secretary to the President TO THE UNITED STA TES SENATE: I return horewith, without my approval, S. 1563, "An Act For the roliof of Forris Ruggles." This bill would componsate Ferris Ruggles in the amount of $2,167.78 for property damage and loss of earnings sustained and expenses incurred by him as a result of an accident involving an Army vohicle. It appears that on April 18, 1944, at about 7:15 p.m., an Army corry- all oporated by a woman employee of the War Department on official business, was proceeding west on U. S. Highway No. 60 in Texos at a speed of approx- imately 30 miles an hour and approaching the entrance to the English Air Field, about six miles east of Amarillo, Texas. It was still light and the three-lane highway was dry. A tractor with somi-trailer attached, ownred by Forris A. Ruggles and Frank T. Smith, a co-portnorship doing business S.S the Fergas Company, and operated by their employee, J. II. Wheeler, acting within the scope of his employment, was also proceeding west on the same highway at an undetermined speed behind the Army vehicle. The somi-trailer was carrying 2,815 gallons of gasoline. As the Army carrycll neared the ontrance to the English Air Field, situated on the south sido of Highway No. 60, the driver thereof moved the carryall into the centor troffic lane and reduced her speed, proparatory to exocuting a loft turn into the driveway to the airfield. Then, without giving any hand signal, she began to turn left just as the drivor of the civilian vehicle, who sounded no warning with his horn, moved into the extreme loft traffic lane and attempted to pass to the left of the Army vehicle. Whon the drivor of the civilian vehicle saw that the Army carryall was turning to the left he continued to move his vehiclo to the loft until it was entirely off the pavement on the south side of the highway. At tho same time the Army driver sworved her vehicle to the right in an attempt to avoid a collision. Notwithstanding such movements the two vehiclos sideswiped and the civilion truck and trailer went out of con- trol, struck a culvert and overturned in the ditch on the south side of the road. The civilian tractor and trailer were extensively damaged, the entiro load of gasoline was lost, and Mr. Wheeler sustained personal in- juries. While the driver of the Army vehiclo was negligent in failing to indicate by 0 proper hand signal hor intention to make 0 left turn and in failing to ascertain whether such a turn could be executed in safety, the driver of the civilian tractor was also negligent in attempting to pass to the left of the Army vehiclo without indicating such intention by sounding his horn, particularly when the position of the Army vehicle in the contor lane of C three-lane highway noar the point whore & road turned off to the loft to the English Air Field and the reduction in the spood of the Army vehicle should have suggested to him the probability that it was about to turn to the loft. Furthermore, the driver of the civilian vehicle, in view of the combined weight and length of tho tractor and trailer and the inflammable cargo carried in the trailor, was under a duty to oxor- ciso more than ordinary care in handling such vehicle, and it was negli- gonee on his part to persist in his attempt to pass the Army vehiclo when he SOW or should have seen that he could not do so in safety. That the driver of the civilian vehicle was negligent in this respect is also in- dicated by the fact that the civilian vehiclo skidded 200 feet before it came to a stop. Since the driver of the civilian vehicle was acting within the scope of his employment at the timo of the accident and his negligence is there- fore imputod to his employer, Mr. Ruggles, there is no justifiable basis for a claim by the latter against the United States on account of the property damage sustained and losses incurred as a result of this accident. (continued)