The new South. [volume] (Port Royal, S.C.) 1862-1867, 1863-08-29
Soldiers Bounty.
To the Editor of The New South,
ST.. AUGUSTINE, FLA. I
August 22d, 1868. I

BY answering in your next edition, you will set
tie an argument and oblige A READER.
AYswER.-He should receive the 5 100 bounty
at the time he receives his back pay, provided he
his been in the service two years and has never
received any part of his bounty. Twenty-Five
dollars of bounty money is due each enlisted man
at the time of his first payment after being muster
ed into the service. Care must be taken to state
the exact facts on his discharge papers.
This rule also applies to those who have Joined
the regular army since the commencement Of the
war and have served two full years.
The following from late number of the Ohio
State Journal is to the point.
Decision of the War Department in Relation to
Bounty.-James Z. Wetmore, Esq, the very faith
full and attentive officer in charge of the Ohio State
Military Agency at Washington City has procured
the opinion of the War Department in relation to
soldier bounty, which will be found of great i'm
nortance to the soldier. Heretofore the decisions
of the officers conn, cted with the paymaster's de-
partment have been against the allowance Of the
SlOO bounty to discharged soldiers. In this Major
Taylor had been guided by former decisions. But
as the decisions did not seem just, Mr.. Wetmore
very properly carried the case of Serst. Edward
S. Ouinton, of the 9Th Ohio regiment, before the
War Department for decision. And there. upon
-crirfcal examination of the ACT OF Congress Of
July, 1861. it was held by Mr. Stanton that Sergt.
Ouinton, sis entitled to bounty for his services as
an enlisted man.
The following is the correspondence with the
Department on the subject and which more fully
sets forth the whole case:
OHIO STATE MILITARY AGENCY,
WASHINGTON, D. G., July Z, 1863.
Cen. j. P. .AndreUs, Paymuster Gen., U. s. H.
SIR.-The undersigned would respectfully repre-
sent to the Paymaster General that Sergt Edward
s. Ouinton, co. K, 5th Ohio, was discharged the
service of the United States for promotion, the
Doth of May last.
On presenting his final discharge and final state
mept papers to Major d. Taylor, Assistant Pay
master for settlement, was refused the bounty of
One Hundred Dollars, for the reason that he had
been discharged for promotion.
II appears to the undersigned that the decision
of Major D. Taylor is not according to the spirit
and letter of the Act Of July 22, 1861, granting
bounty to soldiers who have served two years and
have been honoraUfy discharged.
The act referred to expressly states that any
non-commissored officer or private who has serv-
ed two wears and been honorably discharged shall
receive one hundred dollars. This does not leave
if Optional with the Paymaster to pay or not pay,
because the soldier has been thought by his supe-
,;ors worthy of promotion. On the contrary 1t
appears to the undersigned, that being discharged
for promotion is anfadditional reason why the
bounty should be paid.
The undersigned holds that Sergeant Quintoi
has fulfilled his part of the contract with the Gov
ernment, and is entitled to all the pay and emolu-
ment arising. Trusting that you will so view 1t,
and order that he be paid the One Hundred Dollars
aud referring y1" to ph hs nch a rsspee
Your Ubedient Servant.
JAMES G. WETMoRE, 0. S. NJ. Agent.
PAyMAsrER-GENERAL'sO OFFICE,
WASHINGTON, d. c., July ID, 1868.
&c. Wetmors, o. S. a., Washington, ID. C:EoIr'
your letter, covering papers OF Sergeant +. l..
Ouilton, late 5th Ohio Volunteers, having Deen
reerred to the Secretary of War, has been return,
ee with the decision that said Quinton ''ls enntlef
to bounty for his service as an enlisted man. o.,
The final statements of Quinton are here"ltn
returned. Very respectfully yonr opd,t servt.
4 Pni,nla Stnr-l iGQelal