The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1904-05-05
Classified Advertisements

IS. 1904 OF course, il the soldier has died
before April 49, 1904, the order is OF no
benefit: the widow cannot collect anything
under the order.
J. l., Casey, Ill.-The United States
does not pay funeral expenses for deceased
soldiers. If an invalid pensioner dies leaving
no sufficient assets to cover expenses OF
last illness and burial, and leaving no
widow or child under 16 the expenses OF
last illness and burial may be collected
from his accrued pension by the person de-
fraying or becoming responsible Tor sucn
expenses.
Subscriber, Los Angeles. Cal.-The
Pension Bureau has as yet announced no
practice with reference to proof of age
under the new age order No. Is Of March
Is, 1904 1t is thought that records of the
Pension Bureau or War Department Will
settle the question of age In all cases,
though the claimant is required to make
der the Mexican war service-pensIon act
of 1887, the War Department records have
been generally relied upon in survivors
claims, and in widows claims where the
applicant relies on age, the best obtainable
proof is required to show age, generally
by transcript of some record in which the
claimants age appears.
w. III. b., Wymore, 1ll.-Of course, If
an applicant for pension or increase is for
any good reason unable to comply with an
order for medical examination within the
specified time, he can obtain a new order
upon request.
w. A. c., De Queen, Ark-The age or
der of the Commissioner of Pensions will
apply only to those applications under the
act of 1890 filed on or after April 13, 1904.
1t will not apply to any then pending or
previously rejected. New applications are
required if the benefit Of the order is
sought.
Box 125, Pittsfeld. Vt.-As the widow
had no legal title to pension under the act
of 1890 not having been married to soldier
until after June 26, 1890. nothing can be
collected on her application. The right of
her child to pension under the act is an in
dependent one and could not relate back
to the date of filing of the widows claim,
which, as stated, had no status under the
law.
R. NJ P. Caledonia, N. Y.-If the death
of the soldier can be proven due to disa-
blllty originating in service and line OF
duty, the widow could get pension under
the general law for the period of her wild
owhoOd. and the children under the age of
is at the date of her remarriage could
be pensioned from that date until they
seyerally became 16. Her second husband
being now deceased. the widow could be
EeSlOTeu 10 tie TOll lEOH1 Udte OIL ming dp-
plicatiOn under act of March 3. 1901, pro-
vided she was married to the soldier before
or during his service.
Stanton.-1t is not understood that there
Is any restriction as to the amount of fee
an attorney may properly charge and re-
ceive for services in connection with the
securing of the removal of charge of de-
sertion before the War Department.
III. L., PiketOn, Ohio.-As you are draw
N ion ho lou
order of the Commissioner of Pensions,
approved March Is, 1904. would not in any
event apply to you. The age order does
not provide an additional pension. 1t will
benefit only those receiving no pension and
coming within the terms of the order, or
who are pensioned at less rate than they
are entitled to under the terms of the or
der.
d. c.. H., Lockwood, N. Y.-The fact
that the soldier was dishonorably dis
charged from one of his terms of enlist
ment during the war of the rebellion would
debar him from receiving any pension ex-
cept under the general law, which requires
proof of origin of disa bility in the serv-
ice and line of duty. He can get "de-
serter's release" from his Regular Army
enlistment entered upon after the close of
the war. The only chance to get the dis
honorable discharge cancelled and an hon.
orable discharge issued in its place will be
by special act of Congress.
III. e. NJ, Conway Springs. Kan.-The
case you cite is not clearly understood. The
pension granted under the act of 1890
would relate back only to the date of filing
of application under said act. not back
to date of filing of prior application un-
der the general law.
F. J. NJ, Togus, Me.-You are mistaken
in supposing that pensioners under the act
Of 1890 now receiving $6 on disability will
be entitled to an additional Sc on age if
they are now G2 years of age or when they
| attain that age. The age order of March
10, 1904, does not contemplate the allow
ance of an additional pension for age.
sioners under the act of 1890 who are en-
titled under the age order to higher rate
than they are now receiving will have to
benefit of the order, unless they had an in
crease claim pending in the Pension Bu-
reau on April Is, 1904. Invalid pensioners
drawing under the general law, who by
reason of the age order can now secure
higher rating under act of 1890 than they
are drawing under the general law, will
have to file an application for pension un-
der the act of 1890 subsequent to April
ID, 1904, regardless of what they had pend
ing in the Pension Bureau ON April ID,
1904.
f. NJ L., Lima, Ohio.-If an invalid
pensioner has just cause for leaving his
wife and refusing to live with her, it would
not be necessary for him to offer to re-
turn to her in order to cut off her right to
one-half his pension under the act of
March 3, 1899. On the other hand, if the