Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1894-01-11
IN THE LINE OF DUTY.
Important Pension Decision Assistant
Secretary Bussey's RuIing Reversed -
What Constitutes the "Line of Duty"


Important Pension observation-disclosures
Secretary Bussey's Ruting Reversed -
What Constitutes the "Line of Duty"
WASHINGTON, Jan. Assistant Sec
retary Reynolds. of the interior depart
ment, has rendered one of the most inn
portant decisions that has been made
by this administration. The case un-
der consideration was that of James E.
Harrison. late of Company NJ. Third
Iowa cavalry, who claimed a pension
for gunshot wound in the arm. The
principal question involved is that of
Zine of duty" and the effect of the
decision will be to reverse lar9e num-
ber of decisions made during the last
administration in which this question
was at issue.
Harrison alleged that he incurred an
accidental gun-shot wound in the left
forearm while changing the position
of his gun while on picket duty. He
was pensioned for this disa bility, but
in 1877 his name was dropped from the
rolls on the ground that the disability
alleged, and for which pension was
granted, was not incurred in the line
of duty.
Four applications for reinstatement
were rejected, the department stating
in 1890: As the evidence esta blishes
beyond all doubt that appellant was in
pursuit of pleasure and not in the line
of duty when injured. the rejection is
affirmed
On June 90, 1891. Harrison was grant
ed a pension under the act of June 27,
1890, at si2 per annum. but payment
was withheld to make good the money
wrongfully received under the Old law.
The case was withdrawn from the files
in a way that is not clear from the
record or papers AMI the former de-
cisions were reordered by Assistant Sec
retary Bussey, July 27, 1892, and over
ruled, and the commissioner was or
dered to restore his name to the roll,
which was accordingly done. and he
received on the first payment 81, S61. so.
In November. 1893. Commissioner
Lochren submitted the case for the
consideration of the department to de-
terInine whether uarrisons name
should still lie retained on the roll
On examining the papers Assistant
Secretary Reynolds sound from the
claimants own testimony before the
special examiner that al the time of be-
ing injured he was not on duty or act
ing in pursuance of orders from his SUI
particular instance on his own voli-
ton.
In the opinion rendered by Gen Bus
sey in which Harrison's name was or
dered to lee restored to the rolls, 1t was
stated that an error had been discovered
on an app1ica ton Of the law regarding
''the line of duty" 1t was stated in
this opinion that sit appears that be-
;nr Iat InI 70 -
his comrades on their arms. he (Har-
rison) obtained from his commanding
officer permission to GO short distance
out of camp in to the surrounding forest
for the purpose of killing deer to be
used of course as food for his comrades.
1t is doubtless true there was no actual
need for the deer. This constituted the
general order upon which the former
decision was over-ruled, and the claim
ants name was restored to the rolls
with back payment of S4,6315O.
This craving for venison," under
the circumstances in the case. would
not be considered worthy of discussion,
says Assistant Secretary Reynolds,
even if sustained by the facts, which
are that the claimant was one of
squad sent to Centerville, Mo-, to do
picket duty, or act as an outpost,
watching the roads to notify the feder-
al forces of the approach of the enemy.
While there they occupied the court
house. No severe duty was performed
and no picket line was maintained, ex-
cept about the courthouse yard. The
claimant was detailed to cook and per-
formed no other duty. One of the
company had repaired a rife to be used
for the purpose of hunting, and after
the claimant had discharged his duties
as cook. he borrowed this rifle, went into
the adjacent forest and was shot
There is nothing in the case to show
that at the time he was so injured he
was acting other than for his own
pleasure and benefit, and upon this
state of facts the secretary overrufed
the decision by which the claimants
name was restored, and directed that
the commissioner take the necessary
steps to drop his name from the rolls.
1t is learned that the claimant ia
this case was member of the regi-
ment of which Assistant Secretary
BuSsev was colonel