The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1898-01-06
PENSION DECISIONS.
Cases Of Interest Disposed Of
by Mr.. Davis.

Mr. Davis handed down a decision in the
case OF Anton Hawaii, Co. X, 9Th u. S. Art,
whe claimed pension on account of gun
shot wound Of left foot received July II,
1871. The records OF The War Department
state that the appellant was discharged
sept. ], 1888 on account OF the injury. The
battery Captain states in the certificate Of
disability for discharge that claimant was
on fiat car cleaning his gun. The muzzle
was resting on his inStep and he pulled the
trigger to see if it was all right, and the
bullet passed through his foot. And the
Post Surgeon also stated in his certificate
the cause of the disability is as described
In the battery commanders certificate and
the injury was evidently due to careless
ness.
Assistant Secretary Davis says that the
claimant has filed no evidence in rebuttal
OF the aforesaid record, therefore the in Jury
in this case was Inanifestly due to claim
ants gross carele&SnesS in the use Of his
gun, and the disability therefrom is, there
fore, not reasonable, and his claim is re-
iected."
In the case OF Nancy, widow of Jacob
Rathton, unassigned substitute docket
No. -, 500, involving question OF length
OF service, the n5sl enlisted Oct. Ia. 1854,
was accepted by he Board Of Enrolment
of the Eighth Congressional District Of
Ind on The same day as substitute.
| lie was examined by Board of Inspectors
Nov. 7, 1864, and rejected. He was fur
loughed to await discharge, and was dis
charged April /, 1865, on a Surgeons Ger
| tiiicate because of " deficient amplitude
and expansive mobility of chest; said dis
qualification existed at date OF enlistment"
He was never assigned to any military
organization, nor ordered on detached serv-
ice, nor IS it shown that he ever performed
any active military service.
Mr.. Davis says: In the case of George
he'll hat WI col
der only service was compulsory, in com
p,iance with sentence of a colIrt-martial
and consisted of confinement at hard labor
with forfeiture of pay and allowances due
or to become due, the term OF his military
| service being postponed by the terms of
| the sentence, he could not he regarded IS
having served in the military Or naval
! service OF the United States during the
war OF the rebellion within the mean
| ing OF the act of June 81, $780, Webster
defines the word service to mean to
| work for; TO labor ia behalf OF; TO exert
| ones self continuously or stately for the
| benefit of, and the word is used in said
act to Indicate the performance Of active
military or naval duties on the part of the
| soldier or sailor
II appears 10 have been conceded in
the case Of Elizabeth II. Poland, that be-
| cause the War Department held that the
| soldier in thu case was in the service of
| the United States from Sept. 20 1854, to
Jan. 70, 1866, that he served in or during
the war OF the rebellion 80 days, notwith-
standing the fact that the Surgeon's, Ger
| tl!lcate of disability showed that his dis
ability existed at date OF enlistment, and as
| a matter OF fact he performed no active duty
while waiting for his discharge.
am OF the opinion" continues Mr.
Davis, that it is a strained and forced
construction OF the act OF June u, 1890, to
hold that such a man served 80 days or
more IN the military or naval service Of
the United States during the late war of
the rebellion, as provided in section 9 of
the act OF June u, 1890, or that he served
80 days or more in the army or navy If
the United States during the late war of
the rebellion as provided in section ) of
said act.
: Congress in this act provides for those
who served, and the man who was sent
home to await discharge on account of dis
abilities which disa blcd him from serving
as o soldier, and which disabilities had ex-
listed at the time he enlisted as substitute
for a drafted man, who was presumably
able to perform service, did not in my
opinion, serve within the plain meaning
OF that word as used in said act.
" Without, therefore, in any manner con
ficting with the rule announced in the
Poland decision, regarding the weight given
the records of the War Department and
conceding that said soldier in that case
was IN the military service of the United
.otsAb'o uRiiHB tilH wal VI tiic !GDSlitDD Tor
more than 80 days, it would not necessarily
or legally follow that he served 80 days, or
that his widow was entitled to a pension
. So much of said decision, therefore, in
the case OF Elizabeth H. Poland as inn
piled that claimant was entitled to a pen
sion under section of the act of June q.
1850, on account of her husbands said
alleged service, is overruled.
" am OF the opinion that soldier did not
serve 80 days in the war OF the rebellion,
or in the army Of the United States, within
the meaning OF sections , and of the act
of June ~ 1890, and the action appealed
from is accordingly affirmed
The question whether men who acted in
the capacity of scouts during the war of the
rebellion are pensionable was passed upon
last week by Assistant Secretary Davis.
The case was that of Joseph X. Boone,
scout. On Jan. 49, 1880, claimant filed
declaration for pension, alleging that he
was employed in the military service OF the
United States in the capacity of a scout in
the war of the rebellion; that he was en-
ployed and sworn into such service about |
Sept II, 1851, at Broolkfield Mo-, and re-
manned continuously in the military serv-
ice as such scout thereafter until the close
OF the war, in the year 1865. The disability
sileEea IS uass i1s paasi n was disease
81 ti1o 2, incurred {0 hi vice and line |
~ Iu3y.
IN hss decision M IaaYs says:
This matter acsiYa e ed to the War |
Gepaf n1eat, set. astisg uag ,atlon touch |
iIlE tao seFe.cs Of ne etaInlant, and the !