The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1897-10-28
PENSION DECISIONS.
Cases of Interest Disposed OF
by Mr.. Davis.

In the claim of Elias Snyder. Co ], 149sh
Pa. docket No. 81, 1851, the former rejection
decision was adhered to. An important state
ment of principles was made. Snydsrs claim
under the disability act WAS originally rejected
OH the ground that he did not serve 80 days.
Records confiieted as to the date Of enroll ment,
bis allegation being March 81 1865 but the
original enlistment paper gave the date as
March 81, 1865. He was mustered out June
"a. 1865.
After reviewing the evidence and several de-
cisions touching on this subject, the decision
says:
1T has never been held that the period for
which pay was allowed" The Auditors re-
port was II record in this case should. IN all
cases, be accepted as determining the length OF
service If such rule were 10 obtain calls
for record evidence Of service would have to
he made upon the Auditor of the Treasury
Department having custody OF the pay
accounts, instead o: upon the War Department,
where the enlistment papers, muster-roils. ana
other primary evidence of service are kept
Such a practice would violate fundamental
rule of evidence by substituting secondary for
primary evidence.
" In the case now under consideration, it is
not disputed that the original enlistment paper
Of the soldier Is the primary record OF MS en-
rolment. As such. it constitutes the best evil
dence of the date of his enlistment. This
paper, the Chief of the Record and PENSION
Division Of the War Department says, shows
conclusively that the soldier WAS enrolled and
mustered into service March 81, 1863. There
is no authority of law for allowing either pay
or pension on account of anything he may
have done prior to enlistment.
The right to pay begins and ends with
the period Of legal service. Except by special
authority of Congress- an officer or soldier can
not be paid for military service rendered be-
fore appointment, enlistment, or muster-In.
Opinions Of the Judge Advocate-Generai OF the
Army, xxXviii, 100.
''If these propositions are correct" continues
the decision, Z" it follows that the allowance of
pay to this soldier from March II, 1860. was an
error. To accept the record of such allowance
as termination of the length of service In
the adjudication of his claim for pension,
would therefore be to make one error serve
the basis for another
II can readily see that in case where the
original enlistment and discharge records are
missing or incomplete, the period for which
pay was allowed might we'll be accepted as
determining the length of the soldiers service,
tho record of payment being, IN SUCH case,
the best evidence obtainable. So might 1t In
eases like those of HunGlcy and Ransom where
the question is as TO the length of actual service
rendered to the United States by Il State milf
tia!nan. But to apply such rule to all cases
would be nanifestly unsafe. l am led to the
following conclusions:
The service necessary to give title to pom
sion under the act OF juno 81 1890, cannot, in
any case be considered as having commenced
prior to the date OF the soldiers enlistment.
The date OF enlistment is to be determined
by the War Department from its records. 1T
the records erroneous, application should be
made to that Department to have them cor
rectcd.
Section 47O1, r. s., fixes the rulo to be OBJ
served in pension cases in determining the
date of termination of service, and no other
rule should be followed in any case in which
the date of his actual discharge for other cause
than the expiration of she service OF such Or
ganiZation be ascertaned
Where the original records are missing or
Incomplete so that the dates of enlistment and
discharge or disarmament cannot be ascer-
tanned, and also in the of State militia
men called into the service of the United States,
the period for which pay was allowed may be
accepted as determining the length OF service"
The claim of Paul Noah, Co. C, 41st Ohio,
alleging two diseases, was rejected on the
ground of no pensionaDle disability since filing
of the claim; this was in March, 1895, the
claim having been fled April 2. 1883. Assist
ant Secretary Reynolds affirmed the decision,
Feb 20, 1897, appeal having been entered Dec.
IA, 1895. Motion for reconsideration was filed
only in June last Il marked difference of time
being shown in the passing upon the case.
The matter was referred to the Medical Referee
for opinion as to ratabe disability from four
causes.
The decision notes that the soldiers first
medical examination showed disability from
the two diseases alleged, the rate reported for
eaeh disabling cause being one-half OF total.
The subsequent examination. showed disability
from the same causes. although not always re-
ported under the same names, other terms hav
ing been substituted.
The explanation OF the facts of the case by
the Medical Referees statement is taken in
disposng of the matter. This statement
showed that layman should not be expected
to diagnose his condition accurately, and that
while what he called the alleged diseases were
not what were usually accepted those
diseases, but two similar diseases were shown,
ami in n ratabe degree Hence. the Medical
Referee thought the diseases shown upon medi-
cal examination could be covered by the claim.
The rejection is reversed.