Norwich bulletin., 1917-12-15
DEATH NOT CONNECTED
 WITH HIS EMPLOYMENT
Compensation comnissioner James J. Denehue DisaIlovs Claim Against U. S. Envelope Company.

U. s. Envelope Company.
 death of Frank E. Dietzel and his employment with the United States Envelope company. of Rockville, Com pcnsation Commissioner James J. Don ohue, in a decision announced Friday afternoon has disalloved the claim for compensation made by the dece- dents widcE. Anna A Dietzel
 The hearing was held at the com rnissiOne-s oIiics ir this city on Dec. sth- From the testimony it is found that the claim of the widow was that on April 18th of the present year the decedent was sitting on a box and while engaged in drawing 2 nail from Inc box, the board on which he was sitting broke and struck the decedent n the back It is found that he con tinued at his work for about two weeks and that he first sought medical attention about a week after the date Of the alleged injury He was treated b. various physicians from this time en until the date of his death, WE1cn was Nov. Ed. 1917.
 The commissioner .disal1ows the claim for compensation for the reasons accompanies the finding and which is as follows:
 This is claim for compensation for disability ard death for an injury all legged to have been received at the plant of the respondent company in Rockville. and to have arisen out of and in the course of GeccdenSs ern- plcyment although formal notice of Ghe injury is diSclain1e0 by the insurer respondent
 The injury is- claimed to have been received while the decedent was sit ting on a box and removing q nail from same the board on which he was sitting gave way and struck him in the back The injury was of no ap parent serious note and he continued to work for some weeks afterwards, r4r1e TIT ai ir1f fr- of any injury or suffering from any immediate disability. He consulted a doctor about a week after the injury Is said to have occurred and subse- quently consulted several different physicians. no one of them giving him any very great amount of relief, and he intimately died on Nov. 2d, 1917.
 The statement of the attending phy- sician- Dr. William B. Gillespie, was to the effect that the decedent was suffering from a foreign growth in the posterior portion of his abdominal cavity. and that it was his ~conclu- sion that this growth was not caused fy any injury as alleged
 An autopsy was performed by Dr. B Boucher and William B. Gillespie, and at that autopsy it was revealed that the decedent had been suffering from a large malignant mass which involved the head Of the pancreas and also the liver, and, this mass had 1o connection or adheSions along the spine and .examinat ton of the verte- brae showed no abnormality or dis ease to any of them
 The statement from Dr.eBoucher was to the effect that he had previously operated on this man and had found his liver studded with cancer, and the autopsy confirmed his previous oper- stive findings.
 The statement of another of the at- tending physicians. pr. OIoughiin, was to the effect that he had treated --l-sr he complained at all times of some pain in his right side but did not complain of any pain in his. back.
 An exanira ton of the patient was ford and there were present also Drs ffilleSpl~ and Wells. Dr. Gillespie had taker m X-ray photograph of the as hack and this showed no dis l- .tion or fracture of any bones of O." mans body. and after a thorough s.- animation. they were all convinced ;iau he was not suffering from tn results of any injury; but the physi- e2gn growth in the posterior portion of the abdominal cavity.
 Dr. Ernest A. Wells, who was also present at the examination of the de- -edent with Drs- Swett and Gillespie. stated that they examined the decedent To ascertain whether he was suffering from an injury or disease, and they found there was growth in the pos-
  tty. and he stated further that he was able to state that this growth was not in any way related to an injury aleged to have been received by this man some time in the spring of 1917.
 The statement from E. H. Woodford, superintendent of the Rockville plant of the U- s. Envelope Co.,. was to the effect that Frank Dietzel had been in the companys employ prior to June 1st, 1917. for a great many years as csrpenter and general wood worker, and that on or about June 1st MT. Diet=ei. did. not show Up at the factory and on inquiry they found he was sick but no accident was mentioned. Two weeks later Mrs. DietzeI called upon the superintendent and stated that her husband was not at all we'll but matter was and that he had called a doctor who was treating him for a cold and that he had gotten over that and complained of illness.
 Later it was intimated that Mir ] Dietzel might have Injured himseIr l some three months before that time l and his wife thought he ought to have compensation, but the employer was l the nature of the alleged injury. On | July 17th Mir. Dietzel sent word to | have the foreman at the factory call | upon him and he then learned that | shtropractdr named Carlson for an 1 alleged injury to the back, but the | employer s5l-> not been able to get l Hnythin=: of a definite nature con- eernins- the matter. i
 The strongest testimony which was iii- rs-s- I.-ed at the hearing in behalf |; tt :'-- GecedeDt was statement by | i--' sos' concerning his father having | '.-~-~ed an injury such as has pre- | -s-:-ls been described, and also the g icis-nent of the chiropractic physi- isln who testified that he found 9 ] lesion of the spinal column with cer- t'-ia phenomena present tending to | support the claim of an injury having been received The effort on the part | 0. this chiropractic to connect this l alleged. injury to the spinal column with a sarcorna of the pancreas fell + far short of establishing anything that i1 had the semblance Of a substantial |. claim. even though the testimony Of + the other physicians were not taken | Into consideration at all His claim