The National tribune., 1901-04-18
PENSION RULINGS.

SERVICE = DISCHARGE.-In the
pension case of Martin Collins asst Sec
retary Campbell, Jan. 16, 1901) the Off
cial record of the War Department shows
the soldier discharged on April II, 1864,
on Surgeons certificate, after 20 days
service; but his company records show
him present on light duty" or in camp
sick" until May 81, 1864, when he is noted
as discharged" The decision says: As
long as the records of the soldiers COM
pany, showing that he was actually on
duty, that he was under military control,
and was not released therefrom nor sep
arated from the military service as mat
ter Of fact from April II, 1864, to May
p, 1864, stand unexplained, undisputed,
and are to be considered authoritative,
am constrained to hold that said latter
date must be accepted as the date of his
actual discharge from the service, and un
der the express provisions of section 4T0l,
Revised Statutes, the period of his pen
sionable service will extend to that date,
notwithstanding the fact that the other
records hereinbefore mentioned show his
discharge on april II, 1864" The SOL
der is therefore adjudged to have served
SO days, as required by the act of June
"a, 1890.
DEATH CAUSE-PATHOLOGICAL
SEQUENCES.-In the pension case of
the widow Of Isaac n. Morgan asst
Secretary Campbell, Feb. Z, 190p death
hdo chONA " DS uut " uleIlHBillS.
claimed to have resulted from a gunshot
wound which destroyed right eye and
fractured the bones Of the upper part of
the orbit, and for which the soldier was
pensioned. The decision says: 1T is
further shown by the official records of
that as late as January, 1873, there was
.purulent discharge from the wounded
orbit. In the last declaration
for increase, filed by the late pensi0ner
Nov. 8, 1890, less than four months prior
to his death, he alleged that he suffered
with pain in his head as result Of the
wound. He was not examined under this
claim, but had he been his statement as
to the existence of pain in his head could
not nave been verified by any physical
condition. This allegation, however, has
Islue in determining the merits Of the
claim.
''The entire history of the case indi-
Gates that at no time was the late pen
sioner free from symptoms indicative of
disease in parts in proximity to the wound,
and it has been concluded by the medical
officers of the Bureau that death resulted
frem cerebral meningitis or disease of the
brain. In the absence of any
other more probable cause for infection
than the continued disease in the orbit,
as evidenced by continued pain and dis
charge, it must be concluded the fatal dis
ease was caused primarily by the gunshOt
wound"
MILITARY AGE-ENLISTMENT.-
LIP the pension case of Edward E. Napier
ASST Secretary Campbell, Feb. 10, l90D
the soldier enlisted in June, 1861, desert
ed in August, 1861, and subsequently en-
listed in the Navy, incurred disability.
and was honorably discharged. His pen
Sion case was rejected on the ground of
his desertion, and appeal was entered on
the ground that the soldier was under q
lbeing but 20 years old when he enlisted
In June, 1861, and that his contract of en-
iistment was therefore not binding on him.
Tbs decision says: His attempt to avoid
this contract Of enlistment is equally fu-
tile. BE alleges he was then 20 years of
age. As shown in the decision in the case
OF Jasper NJ. Stine, cited, officers We're
empowered by act OF Congress of Dec.
10, 1914, to enlist persons between the
ages of lS and 80 years, and such enlist
ments were declared by that act TO be
binding upon all persons under the age
OF z years. but, by the act Of Sept 2S.
1850, the Secretary of War was ordered
TO discharge from service any soldier who
was under u years of age at the time he
enlisted upon proof that such enlistment
was without the consent of parent or
guardian.
Under these laws, which were in force
at the time Of this claimants enlistment
In June, 1851, it is clear that such en-
hstment was valid and binding upon him.
fs expressly declared by the act of Dec
10, 1914 He was, at the time of that en-
hstment' OF serTiceabie age under the law,
and the enlistment bound him legally In
the service; and the only legal means of
escape from such enlistment was by
military discharge, whether under the act
Of Sept. %. 1850, upon proof that his en-
hstment was without the consent Of parent
or guardian, under any other law, or for
any other reason" His enlistment in
JUNE, 1861, was therefore not voidable at
bis pleasure, and his disability having
been incurred within ths period OF his
original term Of enlistment, he is not en-
titled to pension under any law.