The National tribune., 1898-03-17
PENSION DECISIONS.
Cases Disposed of by Assistant
Secretary Davis.

Assistant Secretary of the Interior Web
Ster Davis rendered Il decision IN the claim
of James McCallan, seaman United States
Navy. In this case the Assistant Secre-
tary holds:
'Desertion from the general service dur
ing the late war OF the rebellion is no bar
To pension account of disability con-
tracted in the United States service while
serving under a contract of enlistment en-
tered into since the close of said war. from
which late service sailor was honOrably
discharged"
The claimant in this case enlisted in the
Regular Army Sept. Is. 1850 was trans
ferred to the general service and deserted
from said service at Governor Island. NY,
July 80 1852 and on the next day enlisted
in the I32d n. Y. in which he served un-
TIL mustered out June 30, 1865, having been
continuously in the service during the
whole war. He subsequently served IN
the Navy from May IL 1856 to April %.
1870, and from August IL 1870, to- June 30,
1871. He claims pension for disability dur
ing his last service in the United States
Navy. Assistant Secretary Davis says.
II hold that sailors desertion from the
general service in 1852 during the war of
the rebellion is no bar To- pension on ac-
count of the disability incurred in the
United States Navy, under an enlistment
in 1870, since the close of the war Of the
rebellion
In a Mexican war case where the APP
pellant IA widow asserts that she was
formally and legally married to the soldier
in the year fSl3, in the City of st. Louis,
Mo. by certain Methodist minister. there
is no proof OF ceremony other than the I'M
supported statement of the appellant. The
Assistant Secretary says
1T appears that at the time OF her
legged marriage to the soldier in st. Louis,
appellant was an orphan about sixteen
years of age. whose home was in the City
of Detroit Mich. with q brother in-law.
who was her guardian but she was then
travelling with some friends. and meeting
the soldier in St. Louis, claims to- have
married him there and to have Immediately
gone with him to the City of Philadelphia,
Pa, where they commenced living together
as man and wife.
1T is unQuestionably established by
credible testimony that from 1888 tn 1881
the appellant and the soldier lived to-
uninterruptedly as man and wife 1t ia
shown that during this long period OF
years the soldier acknowledged and rec
ognized the appellant as his wife, that he
introduced her to his family and friends
and held her out to- the world as such. and
that she was so recognized and aCknOwl-
edged by all who knew them and with
whom they came into association and con-
tact and that she is recognized and con-
sideFed by the family and friends OF the
deceased soldier Us his lawful widow. In
short there does not appear to have ever
been a question or doubt among those
with whom the parties associated during
this period of the legality or validity OF the
marriage OF appellant and the soldier.
Il am clearly of the opinion that the
foregoing facts in this case are amply
sufficient to establish the existence of n
valid marriage between the soldier and
appellant under the laws OF Pennsylvania,
and that she should be accepted such
widow of the soldier for pens iOnable pur-
poses. Therefore the rejection OF this
claim upon the ground stated is held tn
have been error and said action Is hereby
Overruled and set aside