The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1906-05-24
PENSION DECISIONS.



DfvOree-Decfee-k1n OF M0rch
3, 1001-RenewaL
A decree OF divorce I'm Kansas con-
tains q provision that said decree shall
not take effect nor become absolute un-
til the expiration of six months from
the date thereof. and payment of costs.
This. however, is merely restriction
upon rights of the parties to remarry.
The relation of husband and wife is
dissolved upon rendition of the decree.
Claimants pension was terminated
upon remarriage to one Fisher. and this
remarriage was dissolved by decree.
upon her own application. Nov. %.
1904. Her application for remarked
widows pension under the act of March
3. 1901. was filed after the rendition
of said decree. Held. That claimant
was not the wife of Fisher at date of
filing declaration. 81. 1896.
Accrued Penslon-Deser tion-Joint Res
oIution Of July I. 1OO2-FaithfuI Serv-
fee-HonOrablc Observation-Disclosures
Burden of Proof.
Pension allowed in accordance with
prevailing construction OF law. and
which was not withdrawn or suspended
prior to the death OF the pensioner in
1903, legally accrued to such pensoner
and is payable to the person entitled
to the accrued pension under the act
of March 2, 1895, notwithstanding that
such construction Of law was. after the
allowance of the claim and before the
pensioners death. held to have been
erroneous.
A record of desertion is prima- acie
evidence that the entire service Of the
soldier, sailor or marine against whom
it stands was not faithful within
the meaning Of the joint resolution of
July l, 1902.
Evidence designed to show that such
record is erroneous must be filed in
and considered by the Department TN
which the record was made.
ss.2-2s-'os.
Servfce-HOnorable Discharxc-Deser-
tiOn-Falthful Servfce-JOlnt Resolu-
tion Of July 4, 10O2-Act Of June -
1890.
Soldiers deserted from one service
and re-enlisted in another regiment
From this last service he deserted. He
was not discharged from either service
until in 1897 the War Department grant
ed him discharge from his last term
Of enlistment. Without information as
to his desertion from his first service,
he was pensioned. Subsequently the
War Department held that the dis
charge was granted in 1887 under a
misrepresentation of the powers of the
military authorities. Soldiers name was
accordingly dropped from the rolls.
Without passing upon the effect OF
the discharge granted in 1887, 1t is held
that claimant has no title to pension
for the reason that his entire service
under the last enlistment was not faith
full within the meaning of the joint res
olution Of July 1, 1902. Hence, even il
honorably discharged from said serv-
s<,o
ably discharged from his first contract
OF enlistment under the terms of said
resolution.
AS general proposition, where a SOL
dier's service was Of character that he
Is obliged to resort. years subsequent
to the close of the war. to an applca-
ton to the War Department under gen.
eral remedial statutes in order to COM
plete his record and to secure a dis
charge, that fact necessarily implies
that his entire service was not faith
full within the meaning of the second
section Of the joint resolution of July
1. 1902. 83.3-s-'OS.
Standardization wsr-Act Of Jan. 20
1SS7-Evidence-Boun War
rant-En Route to Mexico.
The company In which claimant en-
listed never having been ordered to
Mexico. his service at Dayton and Camp
Washington, Ohio, the place of rendez-
vous of the Ohio troops being organ
lied for service in the Mexican war
was not the actual service with the
Army or Navy Of the United States In
Mexico. or on the coasts or frontier
thereof. nor en- route thereto in the war
with that nation contemplated by the
act Of Jan. 20. 1887.
The prima-facie evidence Of claim
ants service and honorable discharge
under section 3 Of act Of Jan. 20. 1887,
by reason of grant to him of bounty
land warrant on account of service in
the war with Mexico. is rebutted by the
records In the Office Of the Auditor for
the War Department, showing that
the members of claimants company
rendered but 13 days actual service.
90.3-S-'05.
Serviee-Indian Wars-Act Of June r.
10O2-Evfdence-Disc Of
the War Experimentation Volunteers.
There is no competent proof that the
claimant rendered such military serv-
ice as conte mplated by the law under
which pension is claimed. The only
record evidence Of service in the Indian
war alleged consists of a statement or
certificate purporting to be based upon
the records found in the office of the
Acknowledgement of Utah A certi-
iiS' i@"oiu pS 'iiS III
his State, showing enlistment and dis
charge, cannot. in the abstract, be ac-
cepted as conclusive proof of United
States service.
While the Department has held that
under the act OF June 81, 1902, War
Department record of service is not alb
solutely essential, 1t has not excused
the absence Of some record of service
or pay in the Government archives.
91.3.9-'06.
bounty Land-Duplicate Warrant-Act
Of June 3, 1S5S-Practice-Evlde
The law authorizes the issuance of
duplicate warrant upon proper ap-
plication, when the original was can
celed because issued after the death Of
the claimant.
Where an application is made for the
issuance of a duplicate warrant under
ho q