The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1889-08-28
pIshonorabIe Discharge.

To the Editor Of the Press:
The decision Of Assistant Secretary Bus
sey is being treated by the press as some
thing new. 1t is neither new nor strange to
those who have been acquainted with the
practice of the pension office for at least 20
years In the claim Of Jane COnrOy, decid-
ed by Secretary Delano. June 8, 1875, it was
held 'that dishonorPble di icharge was not
bar to pension for disabilities incurred in the
line Of duty.
This applied to claims for invalid pension
under sections 1852 and 1888, r. s., u. S.,
1874, and not to Seroice pensions granted on
account of service in the war Of 1872, and
the Mexican war.
Title to pension is legislative grant, and
is founded on the statutes. The Commits
siOner OF Pensions or Secretary of the Inte-
rior have no power to set up any Limitation,
or exception as to title to pension, or excep-
ton, as to title to pension, as all the condi-
lions are enumerated in the statute. To ad-
NIT the authority of the Commissioner of
Pensions to set up any particular form, or
condition, as to such title, would also imply
powers to abrogate those that are plainly
specified by the statute. This would lead to
confusion; and title to pension would rest
upon the Ice or prejudice of one man.
Dishonorable discharge Is not bar to title
to pension because honorable discharge is
not specified as condition in sees. 1892 and
1893 r. S. Secretary Bussey's opinion is
strict accordance Herewith. He could not
have decided otherwise, without going out
side OF the letter OF the law and assuming
las did Gen. Black,) legislative prerogatives.
Ii some OF Secretary Bussey's critics
would stop their pens for awhile and exam
Inc the law they would see that his opinion
is incontrovertibly sound. 1t is also in ac-
cord with that of Secretary Villas In the Eek
erson case, as reported in volume 2, Pension
Decisions. 1883. Eckerson was an officer on
fla ratir rod liot and aloimaf coVpfro ell
on account of service In the Mexican war.
His claim was rejected by Commissioners
Black on the ground that he was in receipt
OF pay as an officer on the retired list. and
which provides "that no person in the army,
navy, or marine corps. shall draw both, a
pension as an invalid, and the pay of his
rank and station In the service.
Eckerson appealed to Assistant Secretary
hawkins. and the appeal was sustained on
the ground that the Inhibition in section
4724, is expressly restricted to the receipt of
pension as an inuGlid." The pension pro-
vided for the survivors Of the Mexican war
was service pension. Secretary Hawkins
as to make the words draw
pension as an invalid applicable to those who
are in receipt Of pension for service merely,
would be to inject into said section some
thing that was not intended by Congress,
nor placed therein by that body. 1t would
be in effect ne,s legislation by this depart
ment and therefore an unwarranted and H.
legal exercise of authority"
Secretary Hawkins ordered Commissioner
Black to issue the certificate to Eckersen,
but with the perversity characteristic of that
gentleman, he filed motion Of review and
took the claim to Secretary Villas, who dis
posed OF Blacks arguments with very few
words. He says:
There is no opportunity to consider the service
pension as an invalid pension. Hence the ones
Tons which mt communication have