Evening star., 1898-04-23
NOT REASONABLE SERVICE.
Claim Rejected of Recruit Who
Worked In the Nnxx Ynrd

Webster Davis, assistant secretary of the
Interior has just rendered very import
ant decision in pension case. wherein he
athrms the action of the commissioner of
pensions i'll the rejected claim of Basil r.
RIdgeway. late unassigned drafted recruit
Maryland Volunteers. The claim was one
Tor pension under sections 1862 and 1863,
Revised Statutes of the United States, and
section of the act of June -, 1880. Claim
ant was drafted and accepted. but not held
to military service under The draft, and de-
tailed and employed as a mechanic in the
Washington navy yard at regular wages
during the whole time of his service. He is
held by the authorities of the War De-
partment not to have been in the military
service of the United States, and not en-
titled to pension under any existing law
The records OF the War Department show
that he was drafted on the 9th day of
July, 1854. in the fifth district of Maryland
and was discharged on detachment mus
ter-out roll, December II. 1863. in this city
AS soon as he reported to provost marshal
here under the draft. he was detailed to
work in the Washington navy yard and
was employed there mechanic at
regular wages continuously until he was
discharged
Assistant Secretary Davis in his decision
says:
1T has long been held by this depart
ment that the holdings and rulings Of the
War Department should govern and control
all questions to the military status and
service of applicants for pension. The Of
fcial military records of that department
are held to be conclusive as to all matters
of enlistment, kind and character of SER
vice, and discharge therefrom, and kin
dred subjects, and the holdings and rul-
ings of its officials to whether or not a
particular individual was in the military
service of the United States, or as to what
constituted military service in the army Of
the United States in any given case are
entitled to and have always been given the
greatest weight and consideration by this
department In the adjudication Of pension
cases. The foregoing ruling of the War
Department relative to the status of men
whose enrolment, service and employment
were similar to this appellants is in en-
tire consonance and accord with the we'll
settled holding of this department that ser
vice by enlistment OF drafted men in the
general military service of the United
States, as clerks In the executive depart
ment of the government or in other capacf-
ties or employments not military In their
nature. was not a military or pensiona BILE
service within the meaning Of the law
ut Is also held by this department that
pension under section of the act of June
n. 1890. Is limited to persons regularly en-
listed or mustered into the military or
naval service OF the United States, who
served therein for ninety days or more
during the war of the rebellion anu were
honorably discharged therefrom.
1T Is clear from the foregoing that the
service OF this claimant cannot be held to
have been pensiOnable service under either
provisions of sections 1852 and 1893, Re-
June p, 1890, and that the rejection of both
Of said claims for the reasons given was
not error. and said action Is affirmed ac-
cordfngly."