The National tribune., 1907-01-17
PENSION DECISIONS.
Discharge-Aet OF
June n, 1900.

June n, 1890.
Soldiers company was mustered out
of service at a time when he was un-
dergoing confinement In pursuance of
sentence of court-martial. About six
weeks later he was released from I'M
prfsonment, and sent from Fort Pick
ems. There is no evidence of formal
discharge, and the War Department
holds that he was dishonorably dis
charged by operation" of the sentence
of court-martial Without regard to
the technical nature Of his termination
of service. whether "dishonorable" Or
without honor" appellant has failed
to show that he was discharged under
circumstances honorable" within the
meaning of the act Of June 27. 1890.
and he is therefore without title under
said act. rs. 11-21-'06.
Divorce - Decree - Pennsylvania.
COstn-Rule Of Court.
In Pennsylvania a decree in divorce
having every appearance of final
judgment of the court cannot be at
tackled in a collateral proceeding, be-
cause the decree had been entered be-
fore the costs had been paid. in VIOLA
ton of rule of court providing that
the decree should remain in the hands
of the clerk until the costs were paid.
26. 11-21-06.
Marriage - Divorce - Iowa Impedi-
ment-Presumption OF Capacity-Re-
marriage.
Claimant married soldier In Iowa In
1870. cohabiting with him until his
death in said State in 1897. Soldier
had previously married J., whose death
is shown to have occurred about three
records of the Counties wherein J. and
soldier lived. from 1860 to 1897, fail to
show any divorce. Held:
/. While the courts of Iowa, in order
to sustain the validity of a marriage
where one of the parties thereto has a
former spouse living, will, under certain
circumstances, presume the dissolution
of the prior marriage by divorce; said
presumption is predicated upon the
good faith of the parties to the second
marriage, and. at the most. is q re-
buttable presumption. Where the rec
ords of all the Counties in which the
parties to the prior marriage have lived
fail to show a divorce the presumption
will not attach.
2. Section 1894 Of the Code Of Iowa
{1897) protects from criminal prosecu-
absence for the space of three years of
former spouse who is not known to
be alive within that time, or where
the party remarrying has good reason
to believe such former spouse to be
dead. But said section in no sense. un-
der such circumstances, validates the
remarriage.
8. While a marriage between parties
either of whom has husband or wife
LIVING is Unid in iowa still if the nartieS
continue to live and cOhabit together
after the death or divorce Of the former
husband or wife, such marriage is valid
from the removal of the impediment.
(Code of 1897, Sec. 3151.)
But whether or not this statute oper-
ates to validate marriage de facto
begun in bad faith, Quere.
4. The presumption of divorce be-
tween soldier and J. being rebutted. his
remarriage to claimant was void. Said
remarriage, under no theory Of the law
of Iowa, could have become valid prior
to the death Of j. in 1897. This being
subsequent to the passage Of the act
of June 27, 1890, the claimant has no
title under that act or the act Ct May
9, 1900. 81. 11-21-'06.
Marriage - Tennessee - COmmOn-Law
Marriase-Evidence- and
Repute.
BY a recent decision Of the Supreme
riages are held to be invalid in that
State.
Mere cohabitation and reputation as
husband and wife. without evidence re-
ferring to the fact Of an antecedent
ceremonial ma, riage between the par
ties are not sufficient to establish in a
pension claim a valid marriage in Ten
nessee when the public records of the
place Of the alleged marriage fail to
show IT and are apparently complete
and reliable. 28. 11-21-'06.
Mnrringe-New York-Divorce-IIlin
Decree-Jurisdiction.
Soldier and appellant were married
In New York in 1869. In 1898 he OBJ
tanned a divorce from appellant in ILL.,
nois, on constructive notice to her. still
a resident Of New York. and subse-
quently married M. Returning to New
York. he died in said State in 1897.
The State Of New York is the place of
matrimonial dOmicile, of appellants
domicile, and where the right of pen
sion accrued. Appellant claims to be
soldiers widow. on the ground that the
Illinois divorce is not enforceable in
said State of New York.
Held: While the decree Of the Illinois
court may not be entitled to enforce
ment in New York, 1t is not inherently
void as TO the appellant, unless its ex-
traterritorial effect is denied by a court
| Of competent jurisdiction OF her domi-
cile. The question as to the extent of
faith and credit to be accorded II in
New York is for a court OF said State,
and not for this Department, to deter
mine. Following 16 P. D., 481. 29.
11-30-'06.
Phil Sheridan Garrison.
The officers of Gen. Phil H. Sheridan
| Garrison, 81. Regular Army and Navy
| Union, Of Chicago. ILL.,, were elected
| for the ensuing year at the regular
| meeting in Memorial Hall on Monday