19 Syllabus we apply the special provision of the statute relating to such persons, it does not help the plaintiff, since that adjudication of guardianship was revoked on September 16, 1937, hence the three-year period permitted after the disability ceased would have expired before the normal sixyear period had run. The plaintiff is, therefore, barred by lapse of time from maintaining his suit. The Government asserts additional grounds for its demurrer, but it is not necessary to consider them because of the plain provisions of the statute of limitations. The defendant's demurrer will be sustained, and the plaintiff's petition dismissed. It is so ordered. WHITAKER, Judge; LITTLETON, Judge; and WHALEY, Chief Justice, concur. JONES, Judge, took no part in the decision of this case. GLOBE INDEMNITY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, v. THE UNITED STATES [No. 44900. Decided May 1, 1944. Plaintiff's motion for new trial overruled October 2, 1944]* On the Proofs Government contract; changes ordered by the contracting officer not approved by the head of department as required by articles 3 and 4 of the standard construction contract.-Where, in connection with a Government construction contract, the contractor did additional work such as was contemplated by article 4 of the standard Government construction contract, providing for changes in the plans and specifications when the subsurface conditions encountered differed from conditions indicated by the specifications; and where the change in question was one ordered by the "contracting officer," as that term is defined in the contract, but was not approved in writing by the head of the department, or his representative, as required by article 3 and article 4 of the contract; plaintiff is not entitled to recover. See Plumley v. United States, 226 U. S. 545, 547; United States v. McShain, 308 U. S. 512, 620; Wisconsin Bridge & Iron Co. v. United States, 97 C. Cls. 165; Arnold M. Diamond v. United States, 98 C. Cls. 428. *Plaintiff's petition for writ of certiorari denied March 5, 1945. 634120-45 4 Reporter's Statement of the Case 102 C. Cls. Same; surety may not recover where there is no indebtedness to contractor by the Government.-Where it is held that the defendant is not indebted to the contractor; the contractor's surety is not entitled to recover. The Reporter's statement of the case: Mr. P. J. J. Nicolaides for the plaintiff. Mr. William F. Kelly was on the briefs. Mr. Assistant Attorney General Francis M. Shea for the defendant. Messrs. S. R. Gamer and L. R. Mehlinger were on the briefs. The court made special findings of fact as follows: 1. The plaintiff, Globe Indemnity Company, is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, and engaged in the bonding and insurance business, with its principal office in New York City. 2. On May 12, 1933, Peter and A. J. Ellis, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as the contractor, entered into a contract with the United States to furnish all labor and materials and perform all work required for the construction of the west extension to the steam distribution system of the central heating plant for public buildings in Washington, D. C., within 275 calendar days after the date of receipt of notice to proceed, for the consideration of $299,400 plus the sum of $44,289.71 for certain agreed extra work, in strict accordance with specifications and drawings, which were made a part of the contract. 3. On May 16, 1933, the contractor, as principal, and the Globe Indemnity Company, as surety, executed a standard Government form of performance bond to the United States in the penal sum of $150,000, whereby they jointly and severally bound themselves to secure the performance of the contract and also to secure payment of labor and materials. The bond was accepted and approved by the defendant on April 16, 1935. 4. The contract was executed on behalf of the Government by L. W. Robert, Jr., Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. 21 Reporter's Statement of the Case Article 18 of the contract read as follows: Definitions. (a) The term "head of department" as used herein shall mean the head of the executive department or independent establishment involved, and "his representative" means any person authorized to act for him. (b) The term "contracting officer" as used herein shall include his duly appointed successor or his duly authorized representative. Paragraph 3 of the specifications read as follows: The term "construction engineer" shall be understood to refer to the authorized representative of the supervising architect of the Treasury Department. Article 36 of the specifications read as follows: The supervising architect's representative, under whose direction the work will be installed, shall be consulted relative to the time and manner of performing the work so as to cause the least interference with other contracts, and the contractor shall keep a sufficient quantity and force of labor at the job to perform the work expeditiously and insure its completion by the date named. Neal A. Melick was the Government Construction Field Engineer in charge of the execution of the contract. At the time of the hearing he was the Supervising Engineer in charge of all buildings and works in the Public Buildings Administration. Herman J. Bounds, his subordinate, was a field engineer in charge of all field construction under the government administration and was the government construction engineer on the job. James A. Wetmore, Supervising Architect of the Treasury Department, was Mr. Melick's superior part of the time, and Admiral J. C. Peoples, head of the Procurement Division, his superior part of the time. Louis A. Simon was Supervising Architect of Public Buildings from 1934, and on February 27, 1936, was Assistant Director of Procurement. The contractor was advised by the Procurement Division to conduct all business and correspondence concerning the contract through Mr. Melick's office, and Mr. Melick informed the contractor that Mr. Bounds was in charge of the work. Reporter's Statement of the Case 102 C. Cls. 5. In general, the west extension to the steam distribution system consisted of three steam lines, each of which was connected to the west end of the main distribution system. The three steam distribution lines ran from 18th and C Streets NW, to the Interior Building and the State, War, and Navy Buildings, via 18th Street and New York Avenue; from 19th and C Streets NW, to the Munitions Building and the Navy Building; and from 19th and C Streets NW., westwardly along C Street to the Naval Hospital. Although some tunnel work was involved in the contract, the major portion of the work, and that which is involved in the present issue, comprised open trench work. Approximately 75% of the construction work was in close proximity to sewers, gas, water, and electric mains, and either adjacent to or under paved streets and sidewalks. 6. Pertinent provisions of the specifications are as follows: 13. EXAMINATION OF ROUTE.-Bidders should fully inform themselves regarding the conditions to be met along the route on which the work will be done, and in the buildings to be served by the system. Failure to take this precaution will not relieve the successful bidder from furnishing all material and labor necessary to complete the contract without additional cost to the Government. 25. Everything necessary for the completion and successful operation of the work, whether or not herein definitely specified or indicated on the drawings, shall be furnished and installed as well and as faithfully as if so specified or so indicated. 67. RISKS OF THE WORK.-The contractor shall carry on the work at his own risk until it is fully completed and is accepted by the Government. The Government will vacate the premises to which it holds title during the life of the contract hereunder. The contractor shall be responsible for the proper care and protection of the premises, and for all damage to persons or property that occurs as a result of his fault or negligence. 104. BRACING AND SHEETING.-The sides of excavations shall be temporarily supported and maintained secure 21 Reporter's Statement of the Case until permanent support is provided. But wherever the removal of temporary sheeting would permit a settlement of the adjacent soil, with the possibility of affecting the stability of existing structures, then the contractor, instead of installing temporary sheeting, shall install sheet steel piling which shall be left in place in the ground, or he shall underpin the existing foundations with masonry. For example, sheet steel piling will be required at 18th and D Streets and at the Munitions Building, and elsewhere if it be so directed or necessary to maintain the safety of the work and the adjoining property. 110. PLACING.-Earth backfill shall be placed in horizontal layers, not over 8 inches in depth, each thoroughly tamped, packed, or puddled, as directed, so that no settlement shall occur. All temporary planking, timbering, sheeting, and other supports shall be removed as the backfill is placed. Great care shall be exercised during the backfilling to avoid disturbance or damage to any concrete or other work. 7. In addition to the sheet steel piling required by section 104 of the specifications at 18th and D Streets and at the Munitions building, the drawings did show at certain other localities where permanent sheet steel piling was required. Except at these places, the drawings and specifications indicated that the soil conditions were such that the temporary planking, timber, sheeting, and other supports were to be removed after the backfill had been placed. 8. Before submitting a bid, the contractor made an examination of the route, which in some places was in the sidewalk and other places in the bed of the street. This inspection was visual. 9. In accordance with Articles 104 and 110 of the specifications quoted above the contractor planned, in connection with the open trench work, to use temporary planking, timbering and sheeting which would be removed as the backfill was placed, and to reuse the planking, timbering, and sheeting as the trench work progressed. 10. Soon after beginning the work under the contract it was discovered that the soil was soft, flowing silt. At the |