The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1891-07-26
q PENSION RIJIING


WASHINGTON, July 25-Assistant Secre-
tary Bussey, of the interior department,
has requested the commissioner of pen
siOnS to reopen the case of the application
OF the mother of William H. Group for a
pension, and to settle it on its merits.
The soldier died in Andersonville prison
in August, 1854, and the mothers claim
for pension was rejected by the pension
office on the ground that the soldier was
not in line of duty when captured. From
the record in the case it appears that
Group, while stationed at Plymouth, n
C., went with mum Der of comrades on q
fishing trip some distance away from
camp When at the fishing place Group
rowed up small stream, emptying into
the river, on an errand.
During his subsequent absence from the
boat it was stolen. Owing to the swampy
condition of the ground lie was unable TO
reach his companions again, and stayed
around the place until found by the sol
diers He was afterwards tried for deser-
ton, found guilty and sentenced to be
confined at hard labor at Fort Williams
during the remainder of his term.
1t is not recorded, Assistant Secretary
Bussey says in his letter TO the commis-
siOner, whether the confinement was in
Fort Williams, or whether he was con-
fined at all, but it was evident that he re-
mained, as did his command, at Ply
mouth, and 1t IS presumed that the SEN
tence was carried out until the place and
all the Union soldiers within it were cap
tured by Gen. Hoke. The testimony be-
fore the court, the assistant secretary SAYS,
was singularly meagre and iuconclusive
1t contains no evidence that the soldier
was guilty of any other crime-that he
intended anything eIse-than going fishing
without leave.
But, continues. the assistant secretary.
whether or not his misconduct on this oc-
caSlOn was taken advantage of to get him
out OF the way on general principles
during the rest of his term of service, the
question of line of duty falls outside of all
this. Assume, he says, that the action of
the court settles for US that part of the
case and that the finding of the tribunal is
not to be questioned, yet his capture by
the enemy and therefore his death at An
dersonvil!e was not by reason Of miscon-
duct of the soldier, nor by reason of the
sentence which so severely punished him.
He was not captured by reason of his 60
ing up TO the river to fish or desert, nor in
consequence of the punishment he received
for that act. His capture is not traceable
TO his misconduct, was not a sequence Of
1t, was not caused by it. He then argues
that the department, whatever the Justice
of the mans sentence, can hold that his
death at AndersOnyille was in the line of
duty
It was in the line of duty, he says, be-
cause his capture was not due to his de
parture from the line of duty. He died
because he went to Andersonyille. His
cOmmandant, who was responsible for the
execution of his sentence by that act of
surrender released him, ended his punish
ment, placed him on the same footing as
his comrades, and transferred him from
convict 10 a prisoner of war. This may
have been done unwillingly, as many
things IN war; but it was done. He was no
longer under arrest, no longer undergoing
Imprisonment, and no longer under con-
troll of those charged with the execution
of his sentence. 1t was their act, not his
own, that released him.