The National tribune., 1895-04-18
service Is a bar to pension under the act Of
juno n, 1890.

service Is a bar to pension under the act OF
juno e. 1890.
As to line Of duty he holds that A soldier
while in performance of those duties which
the law requires of him as a military duty is
in the line of duty. The soldier being engaged
in private business. and not in the performance
of those things which the law required of him
as military duty. cannot be considered in the
line of duty" and holding that in this case
the soldier sustained his injury while engaged
in private matter for his own pleasure or
qualification, was not engaged in the perform
ance Of such an act as was required OF him as
military duty, orders his name stricken from
the pension roll.
In the case Of an applicant for a dependent
widows pension, il is held that In general
where a widow is shown to have, from sources
independent of her labor, an income consider
ably in excess of the amount which the act OF
June %, 1890, provides for widows who have
no income means of support outside OF their
earnings, such widow does not come within tho
class for whose benefit said act was intended"
In disposing of this case the following language
is used: sin the case now under consideration
the evidence furnished by the claimant shows
that she owns real estate to the value OF
$3.50, which she can rent for 1910 year. and
that out of this income about 5000 are avail
able for the procurement OF food, shelter ana
clothing. This is more than twice what the
law gives to the widow who has nothing. For
reasons above stated it is believed that she is
not entitled to benefit under the act of June
OF 1890"
In tho case of q widow under the Indian war
act it is held that the date Of commencement
of the Florida war with the Semnolcs was
Nov i. 1885 and not Dec. 2S, 1886. as was held
by the Commissioner of Pensions, who rejected
this claim on the ground that the soldier did
not serve for the required 30 days after Dec.
%, 1885,
As to enlistment, he holds that the question
as TO whether the claimants husband was an
enlisted man rests with the War Department
and not with the Pension Bureau, and that to
constitute n valid enlistment there must be not
only tender of service on the part of the per-
son desiring to enlist, but thore must be an
acceptance of the same by the Government act
ing through its duly uthorized officer or agent.
In this case the testimony submitted by the
claimant tending to show that her husband
was in the service of the United States was
referred to the War Department.. and by that
Department held TO be insufficient, aud there
fore the claim is denied.
In the case of the widow of person serving
engineer on the u. S. s. Diana. Mississippi
Marine Brigade, in the Spring Of 1864 and from
which he was honorahly discharged by the Off
Ger in command of such organization, it is held
that such discharge not honorable dis
charge as will entitle to pension under the act
of June "a, 1890. and the claim of the widow is
rejected. 1t is held that he was civilian en-
ployee and not an enlisted man or officer in the
army or navy of the United States.
In another case he holds that the language
OF Section 400. K. S. u s.. relating to soldiers
upon veteran furlougb with the organization
to which they belong is held to mean such
soldiers while with their commands when leav-
ing for and returning from veteran furlough,
and not when separated and absent from such
command while at their homes" In this case
the soldier was not with his command when
his disability was incurred, aud the claim is
rejected.
In another case il is held that "In claims
fled under the act of June 81 1890. it must
appear that the disabilities which occasion the
iDcapacity for earning support are not due to
any vicious habits which person, reasonably
careful. would avoid and recognize as liable to
seriously impair his physical condition" In
this case it is denied that pensionable degree
Of disability exists, and. as the Board of Sur
geons had reported among other things, that
an entire disregard of all hygienic rules, with
the excessive use of tobacco. responsible for
the claimants physical condition, it is remarked
that !" the excessive use of tobacco is what is
commonly called bad habit. and bad is in this
sense Synonymous with vicious: and. further,
that claimant has, by his own acts, created a
bar to title under the language of this act"