The Bennington banner. [volume] (Bennington, Vt.) 1858-1894, 1888-07-19
SPECIMEN PENSION oAsrs

Not long since the President vetoed q
special act Of Congress granting a nan.
sion TO the widow OF DR.. Lanpdon =
Vermont surgeon. who died of co6sumn.
lion resulting from chronich diarrhoea !
Tor which the doctor had been pensioned,
The veto was based upon the ground
that the disease from which he died was
not contracted in the service. In com.
menting upon this in b nate, Mr.. Ed.
munds expressed hope that the Presi-
dent might review the case and recall
his veto; because the immediate cause
Of death was superinduCed by the cause
Tor which pension was granted. This
was reasons bic, but we have heard of no
such recall, and from the Presidents
record in pension cases we do not expect
to hear of it.
Now another and similar case has
come TO light. ard this is also from Ver-
mont. The Boston Journal, which was
furnished with the facts, states them
sditorially. The application was by
Sarah D., widow OF Richard Lewis, Com
pany F, Fourteenth Vermont Volun-
teers Lewis enlisted in September,
1868, and was discharged in July, 1868.
he filed an application for pension
April 2, 1879, alleging that in June, 1868,
ne contracted chronic diarrhes, and
that his system was so debilitated by
this disease that a slight attack OF
pleurisy brought on hydrothorax, from
which he had not recovered. He was
given pension at 81 per month from
the date OF discharge for chronic
diarrbpI. This pension was increased
TO IS per month from Feb. 10, 1885, the
official medical examination made at
that time resulting in a report that the
debility and pulmonary difficulty from
which the pensioner was then suffering,
md which made him incapable OF any
manual labor, were the results of chronic
liaI RI Goa. and that lac WAS entItled TO
total rating" April 49, 1885, he died
Of phthisis pulmOnaris. His widow ap-
piled for pension, and her application
was rejected on the ground that her
HUSBAND died OF a disease not contracted
in the military service.
1t appears that the Medical Referee,
resoning on general principles, con-
cludei that the pulmonary troubles Of
which the man died had no connection
with the chronic diarrhoel for which he
was pensloned. Against this view were
the statements of the physician who at
tended Lewis and had been his doctor
for twenty-five years, the affidavits of
neighbors, and the records OF the official
examination of the pension Office itself,
all of which went to establish a direct
connection between the chronic diar-
rhoeI and the pulmonary trouble. These
dffidavits and declarations were before
the Medical R"ferec, but he preferred to
be guided by his own inner conscious
ness, and ruled, accordingly, that the
diseases were distinct.
Now appears the marvellous system
OF the pension office, un1er which the
widow took an appeal Il ON the Referee
to the Department of the Interior, only
to have the case decided over again by
the Referee. The practice, it is suggest
ed, is not unlike that of party beaten
by backwoods justice appealing to a
higher court, and when his Iase is heard
by the appellate court it calls for the
Judgment Of the Justice who first de-
clared it, and if he still thinks his
opinion correct it is unceremoniously
affirmed The decision of the SECRETARY
of the Interior reviews the evidence, and
closes in this rather remarkable way:
"The evidence upon the whole, to an
unprofessional mind, would seem to pre-
sent a strong case for the claimant and
has left the department in doubt upon
the medical question involved, But it
is The peculiar province of the Medical
Ref rec in such cases to make the pro-
per deduction from the facts presented.
He has doubtless noted that the pension
er's army disability, at first rated az one
half, was afterward rated and allowed
for total; alsD that there is some evi-
dence of a recovery from the hydro
thorax some seven or eight years before
the soldiers death, and of continuance
of the effects of the chronic diarrhRa,.
to which both the official and medical
evidence would seem to ascribe the most
serious condition Of the decedent preced-
ing his death.
Such being the case and the depart
ment having no higher expert auth ority
to whom the matter Can now be referred,
his opinion is held conclusive.
Your rejection is therefore affirmed"
That is to say, the claimant seems
to have strong case, but the depart
ment cannot go back of the Medical
Referee. but must accept his ipse dirit,
no matter what the evidence may be.
The unfortunate soldiers widow there
EOtb WlbnOhe pNhohOhs oNet
says the Journal. the power of the Medi-
cal Referee does not end here. Suppose
that in view of the manifest justice OF
her claim the poor widow procures the
passage of private pension bill for her
self. The bill goes to the President; he
discovers the point on which the decis
ion of the Medical Referee turned, and
forthwith makes it the text of a veto
message to Congress, declaring 1t i'm
possible that chronic diarrhHa should
have anything to do with pulmonary
trouble, and lecturing the peoples re-
presentatives upon their improvidence
with the public money. Thus Presi-
dent who draws $40 day from the
National Treasury for his own valuable
services stops the prohigate largess Of
$S month to a soldiers widow, and the
administration organs break out in
chorus of delight. But the average
citizen does not approve of this method
of dealing with veterans and their
widows.-[ Herald.