enter name and hit return
VETO OF THE CIVIL WAR WIDOW PENSION
MESSAGES AND PAPERS OF THE PRESIDENTS 1789-1897
During the terms of Grover Cleveland while in Office as President, March 4,
1885, to March 4, 1889 and March 4,
1893 to March 4, 1897.
(There are 2 divisions)
* * * * * *
A
ALLABACH, NANCY G. (Widow of Peter H. Allabach)
Executive Mansion, April 21, 1896
To the Senate:
I herewith return without my approval Senate bill No. 894, entitled
"An act greanting a pension to Nancy G. Allabach."
This bill provides for the payment of a pension of $30 a month to the
beneficiary named as the widow of Peter H. Allabach.
This soldier served for nine months in the Army during the War of the
Rebellion, having also served in the war with Mexico.
He was mustered out of his last service on the 23d day of May, 1863,
and died on the 11th of February, 1892.
During his life he made no application for pension on account of
disabilities. It is not now claimed that he was in the least disabled as an
incident of his military service, nor is it alleged that his death, which
occurred nearly twenty-nine years after his discharge from the Army, was in
any degree related to such service.
His widow was pensioned after his death under the statute allowing
pensions to widows of soldiers of the Mexican War without reference to the
cause of the death of their husbands. Her case is also, indirectly, one of
those provided for by the general act passed in 1890, commonly called the
dependent-pension law.
It is proposed, however, by the special act under consideration to
give this widow a pension of $30 a month without the least suggestion of the
death or disability of her husband having been caused by his military
service, and solely, as far as is discoverable, upon the ground that she is
poor and needs the money.
This condition is precisely covered by existing general laws; and if a
precedent is to be established by the special legislation proposed, I do not
see how the same relief as is contained in this bill can be denied to the
many thousand widows who in a similar situation are now on the pension rolls
under general laws.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
.
ANDERSON, MARY (Widow of Richard Anderson)
Executive Mansion, June 23, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 7436, entitled "An
act to grant a pension to Mary Anderson."
This claimant is the widow of Richard Anderson, who at the time of
his death was receiving a pension on account of chronic diarrhea contracted
in the service.
On the 7th day of February, 1882, the deceased pensioner went to
Sparta, in the State of Wisconsin, to be examined for an increase of his
pension. He called on the surgeon and was examined, and the next morning was
found beheaded on the railroad track under such circumstances as indicated
suicide.
The claim of the widow was rejected by the Pension Bureau on the
ground that the cause of the death of her husband was in no way connected
with his military service.
His wife and family present pitiable objects for sympathy, but I am
unable to see how they have any claim to a pension.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
ANDERSON, SARAH C. (widow of William H. Anderson)
Executive Mansion, August 22, 1888
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 2370, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Sarah C. Anderson and children under 16 years of age."
William H. Anderson, the husband and the father of the beneficiaries
named in this bill, enlisted on the 27th day of August, 1862, and is
reported as sick or absent a large part of his short term of service. He was
discharged April 23, 1863, to date Nobember 5, 1862, on a surgeon's
certificate of disability for "tertiary syphilis, with ulcerated throat and
extensive nodes on the tibia of both legs.
He never filed an application for pension. He was admitted to an
insane asylum in September, 1883, suffering with epilepsy, chronic diarrhea,
and dementia, and died of pneumonia on the 26th day of February, 1884.
His symptoms and troubles after his discharge, so far as they are
stated, are entirely consistent with the surgeon's certificate of disability
given at the time of his discharge, and there seems to be an entire lack of
testimony connecting in any reasonable way his death with any incident of
his military service.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
B
BANGHAM, ELEANOR C (widow of John S. Bangham)
Executive Mansion, May 28, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I hereby return without approval a bill which originated in the House
of Representatives, numbered 1582, and entitled "An act for the relief of
Eleanor C. Bangham."
The claimant in this case is the widow of John S. Bangham, who was
mustered into the service of the United States as a private on the 26th day
of March, 1864, and was discharged by general order June 23, 1865.
It appears that during his fifteen months of service he was sick a
considerable part of the time, and the records in two of the hospitals to
which he was admitted show that his sickness was epilepsy. There are no
records showing the character of his illness in other hospitals.
His widow, the present claimant, filed an application for pension
March 12, 1878, alleging that her husband committed suicide September 10,
1873, from the effects of chronic diarrhea and general debility contracted
in the service. Upon the evidence then produced her claim was allowed at the
rate of $8 a month. She remained upon the rolls until July, 1885, when a
special examination of the case was made, upon which it was developed and
admitted by the pensioner that the deceased soldier had suffered from
epilepsy from early childhood, and that during a despondent mood following
an epileptic fit he committed suicide.
Upon these facts it was determined by the Pension Bureau that the
pension should not have been granted, and it was withdrawn. It was so
satisfactorily proven that the disease which indirectly caused the death of
the claimant's husband was not contracted in the service that, in my
opinion, the conclusion arrived at on such examination should stand.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
BARNES, RACHEL (widow of William Barnes)
Executive Mansion, July 31, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 9106, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Rachel Barnes."
William Barnes, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted in the United States infantry in February, 1838, and was discharged
February 24, 1841.
In 1880 he applied for a pension, alleging that while serving in
Florida in 1840 and 1841 he contracted disease of the eyes. He procured
considerable evidence in support of his claim, but in 1882, and while still
endeavoring to furnish further proof, he committed suicide by hanging.
The inference that his death thus occasioned was the result of
despondency and despair brought on by his failure to procure a pension,
while it adds a sad feature to the case, does not aid in connecting his
death with his military service.
That this was the view of the committee of the House to whom the bill
was referred is evidenced by the conclusion of their report in these words:
" And while your committee do not feel justified under the law as at present
existing in recommending that the name of the widow be placed upon the
pension roll for the purpose of a pension in her own right as widow of the
deceased soldier and by reason of the soldier's death, they do think that
she should be allowed such pension as, had her husband's claim been
favorably determined on the day of his decease, he would have received."
And yet the bill under consideration directs the Secretary of the
Interior to place this widow's name on the pension roll and to "pay her a
pension as such widow from and after the passage of this act, subject to the
provisions and limitations of the pension laws."
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
BARNES, RACHEL (continue veto of pension)
Executive Mansion, August 10, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 149, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Rachael Barnes."
The husband of this beneficiary served in the Regular Army of the
United States from February 24, 1838, to February 24, 1841.
In 1880 he applied for a pension, alleging that he contracted disease
of the eyes during the year 1840 while serving in Florida.
Pending the examination of his application, and on the 24th day of
March, 1882, he committed suicide by hanging. His widow filed a claim for
pension, alleging that he died of insanity, the result of disease of the
head and eyes. Her claim was rejected on the ground that his insanity,
forty-one years after discharge from the service, had no connection with his
military service.
In July, 1886, a special act was passed granting a pension to the
widow, which met with Executive disapproval.
At the time the soldier committed suicide he was 68 years old. Upon
the facts I hardly think insanity is claimed. At least there does not appear
to be the least evidence of it, unless it be the suicide itself. It is
claimed, however, and with good reason, that he had become despondent on
account of the delay in determining his application for a pension and
because he supposed that important evidence to establish his claim which he
expected would not be forthcoming. It is very likely that this despondency
existed and that it so affected the mind of this old soldier that it led to
his suicide. But the fact remains that he took his own life in a deliberate
manner, and that the affection of his eyes, which was the disability
claimed, was not in a proper sense even the remote cause of his death.
I confess that I have endeavored to relieve myself from again
interposing objections to the granting of a pension to this poor and aged
widow. But I can not forget that age and poverty do not themselves justify
gifts of public money, and it seems to me that the according of pensions is
a serious business which ought to be regulated by principle and reason,
though these may well be tempered with much liberality.
I can find no principle or plausible pretext in this case which would
not lead to granting a pension in any case of alleged disability arising
from military service followed by suicide. It would be an unfair
discrimination against many who, though in sad plight, have been refused
relief in similar circumstances, and would establish an exceedingly
troublesome and dangerous precedent.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
BEEZELEY, LOUISA C. (widow of Nathaniel Beezeley)
Executive Mansion, June 23, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I hereby return without approval House bill 576, entitled "An act for
the relief of Louisa C. Beezeley."
By this bill it is proposed to grant a pension to the beneficiary
named, as the widow of Nathaniel Beezeley, who was enrolled in an Indiana
regiment as a farrier in September, 1861. He was discharged July 17, 1862,
after having been in the hospital considerable of the short time he was
connected with the Army. The surgeon's certificate on his discharge stated
that it was granted by reason of "old age", he then being 60 years old.
He never made any claim for pension, but in 1877 his widow filed her
declaration, stating that her husband died in 1875 from disease contracted
in the service.
I am convinced that the Pension Bureau acted upon entirely
satisfactory evidence when this claim was rejected upon the ground that the
cause of death originated subsequent to the soldier's discharge.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
BLAZER, DOLLY (widow )
Executive Mansion, June 18, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 3959, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Dolly Blazer."
The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill was apparently a
good soldier and was confined for a time in a Confederate prison. He was
mustered out of the service in June, 1865, and never applied for a pension.
He died in 1878, leaving as survivors his widow and several children,
two of whom are alleged to be still under 16 years of age.
The cause of the soldier's death was yellow fever. There is in my mind
no doubt of this fact, and the attempt to establish any other cause of
death, if successful, would go far toward fixing a precedent for the
rejection of all evidence which stood in the way of a claim for pension.
The bill herewith returned is disapproved for the reason that the
death of the soldier had no relation to his military service, and I do not
think there should be a discrimination in favor of this applicant and
against many thousands of widows fully as well entitled.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
BRADLEY, SALLIE ANN (widow of Bradley)
Executive Mansion, July 6, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 5394, entitled "
An act granting a pension to Sallie Ann Bradley."
The husband of this proposed beneficiary was discharged from the
military service in 1865, after a long service, and was afterwards pensioned
for gunshot wound.
He died in 1882. The widow appears to have never filed a claim for
pension in her own right.
No cause is given of the soldier's death, but it is not claimed that
it resulted from his military service, her pension being asked for entirely
because of her needs and the faithful service of her husband and her sons.
This presents the question whether a gift in such a case is a proper
disposition of money appropriated for the purpose of paying pensions.
The passage of this law would, in my opinion, establish a precedent so
far-reaching and open the door to such a vast multitude of claims not on
principle within our present pension laws that I am constrained to
disapprove the bill under consideration.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
BURR, ELIZABETH (widow of William Burr)
Executive Mansion, June 19, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 488, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elizabeth Burr.
It is proposed by this bill to grant a pension to the beneficiary
therein named as the widow of William Burr, who enlisted for one hundred
days in 1864 and was discharged on the 3d day of September in that year.
He is reported as present on all roll calls during his service. He
died April 7, 1867, of dropsy, never having made any application for a
pension.
His widow filed an application for pension in 1880, thirteen years
after the soldier's death, alleging that the disease of which he died,
claimed to be dropsy, was contracted in the service.
The claim was rejected by the Pension Bureau on the ground that the
dropsy causing his death was not due to his military service, but that he
was subject to the same before his enlistment.
I am perfectly satisfied that the rejection upon the ground claimed
was correct.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
BURRITT, LOREN (Widow of Burritt)
Executive Mansion, February 23, 1887
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 8002, entitled "An
act to increase the pension of Loren Burritt."
The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted in October, 1863, and in
December of that year was mustered in as major of the Eighth Regiment United
States Colored Troops; was promoted to lieutenant-colonel and very badly
wounded in February, 1864, and was mustered out with his regiment November
10, 1865.
His condition at the present time is most pitiable, and his
helplessness is such that he needs the constant care and assistance of
others. He was obliged to give up business about the year 1873.
In 1866 he was pensioned for his wound, which was in the right leg;
and such pension has been increased from time to time until he is now in the
receipt of $72 per month, the highest pension allowed under general laws.
This rate was awarded him under a law passed in 1880, increasing from $50 to
$72 per month the pensions of those who were rendered permanently and
totally helpless, so that they required the regular and personal attendance
of another.
On the 30th day of June, 1886, there were 1,009 persons on the rolls
receiving this rate of pension.
This bill was reported upon adversely by the House committee on
Pensions, and they, while fully acknowledging the distressing circumstances
surrounding the case, felt constrained to adverse action on the ground, as
stated in the language of their report, that " there are many cases just as
helpless and requiring as much attention as this one, and were the relief
asked for granted in this instance it might reasonably be looked for in
all."
No man can check, if he would, the feeling of sympathy and pity
aroused by the contemplation of utter helplessness as the result of
patriotic and faithful military service; but in the midst of all this I can
not put out of mind the soldiers in this condition who were privates in the
ranks, who sustained the utmost hardships of war, but who, because they were
privates and in the humble walks of life, are not so apt to share in special
favors of Congressional action. I find no reason why this beneficiary should
be singled out from his class, except it be that he was a lieutenant-colonel
instead of a private.
I am aware of a precedent for the legislation proposed, which is
furnished by an enactment of the last session of Congress, to which I
assented, as I think improvidently; but I am certain that exact equality and
fairness in the treatment of our veterans is, after all, more just,
beneficent, and useful than unfair discrimination in favor of officers or
the special benefit born of sympathy in Individual cases.
I am constrained, therefore, to agree with the House Committee on
Pensions in their views of this bill.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
BUSSEY, CATHARINE (widow of Bussey)
Executive Mansion, September 7, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 333, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Catharine Bussey."
It does not appear that the husband of this beneficiary ever applied
for a pension. He was discharged from the Volunteer Army on the 9th day of
December, 1864, after a service of more than three years.
He was found dead on a railroad track on the 11th day of June, 1870,
apparently having been struck by a passing train.
It is claimed that the deceased suffered a sunstroke while in the
Army, which so affected his mind that he wandered upon the railroad track
and was killed in a fit of temporary insanity.
Though it would be gratifying to aid his widow, I do not think these
facts are proven or can be assumed.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
C
CARR, MARY A. (widow Carr)
Executive Mansion, October 17, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 4102, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary A. Carr."
The husband of this beneficiary serviced in the Army from November 5,
1863, to June 15, 1865. He made a claim for pension for injury to his left
ankle, caused by being thrown from a horse while in the service, and some
time after his death a pension was allowed upon his claim, at the rate of $4
per month, commencing at the date of his discharge and ending at the date
of his death.
He died on the 16th day of March, 1877, of apoplexy, and his widow
filed a claim for pension on her own behalf in March, 1885, based upon the
allegation that the injury for which her husband was pensioned was the cause
of his death.
I can not upon the facts of this case arrive at a conclusion different
from the Pension Bureau, where it was determined that the death of the
soldier could not be accepted as having been caused by the injury to his
ankle.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
CARR, MRS. MARY GOULD (widow) Pocket Veto
[An act granting a pension to Mrs. Mary Gould Carr, widow of the late
Brigadier and Brevet Major General Joseph B. Carr, United States Volunteers,
deceased."] December 30, 1896.
This bill was presented to me on the 16th day of December, 1896.
Congress, pursuant to a concurrent resolution adopted by both Houses of
Congress, adjourned from the 22d day of December, 1896, to January 5, 1897.
I have not approved the bill.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
CONNELLY, JULIA (widow of Thomas Connelly)
Executive Mansion, June 23, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 6257, entitled "An act for
the relief of Julia Connelly."
It is proposed by this bill to grant a pension to the beneficiary
named as the widow of Thomas Connelly.
This man was mustered into the service October 26, 1861. He never did
a day's service so far as his name appears, and the muster-out roll of his
company reports him as having deserted at Camp Cameron, Pa., November 14,
1861.
He visited his family about the 1st day of December, 1861, and was
found December 30, 1861, drowned in a canal about 6 miles from his home.
Those who prosecute claims for pensions have grown very bold when
cases of this description are presented for consideration.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
COOPER, HARRIET E. (widow Cooper)
Executive Mansion, July 6, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 8807, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Harriet E. Cooper."
The husband of this beneficiary served as a major in an Illinois
regiment from September 3, 1862, to April 1, 1863, when his resignation was
accepted, it having been tendered on account of business affairs.
He was pensioned for rheumatism from April, 1863, and died October 1883.
It is admitted on all hands that Major Cooper drank a good deal, but
the committee allege that they can not arrive at the conclusion that death
was attributable to that cause.
There is some medical testimony tending to show that death was caused
from rheumatism, but one physician gives it as his opinion that death
resulted from rheumatism and chronic alcoholism.
The physician who last attended the soldier testifies that the cause
of death was chronic alcoholism. This should be the most reliable of all the
medical testimony, and taken in connection with the conceded intemperate
habits of the deceased and the fact that the brain was involved, it
satisfies me that the rejection of the widow's claim by the Pension Bureau
on the ground that the cause of death was mainly intemperance was correct.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
CORSON, SARAH A. (widow of Joshua Corson)
Executive Mansion, August 9, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 6307, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Sarah A. Corson."
Joshua Corson, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted in August, 1862, for nine months, was wounded by a ball which
passed through the lower part of each buttock, and was discharged June 29,
1863. He was pensioned for his wound, and died December 12, 1885.
The cause of death is stated to have been femoral hernia by a
physician who attended him shortly before his death. The official record of
his death attributes it to a malignant tumor.
The widow filed a claim for pension in 1886, but furnished no evidence
showing when or how the hernia originated. No disability of this description
is shown by any service record, nor was it ever claimed by the soldier. It
is stated in the report of the committee of the House of Representatives to
whom this bill was referred that the hernia first made its appearance about
four years prior to the soldier's death.
The claim of this beneficiary for pension was rejected by the Pension
Bureau upon the ground that there was no possible connection between the
soldier's wounds and the hernia from which he died.
I am forced to the conclusion that the case was properly disposed of,
and base my disapproval of the bill herewith returned upon the same ground.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
CUNNINGHAM, MARIA (widow Cunningham)
Executive Mansion, July 6, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 5414, entitled " An
act granting a pension to Maria Cunningham."
The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill enlisted January 29,
1862, and was discharged January 20, 1865.
He applied for a pension in 1876, alleging a shell wound in the head.
His claim was rejected on the ground that there appeared to be no disability
from that cause. No other injury or disability was ever claimed by him, but
at the time of his examination in 1876 he was found to be sickly, feeble,
and emaciated, and suffering from an advanced stage of saccharine diabetes.
His widow filed an application for a pension in 1879, alleging that
her husband died in December, 1877, of spinal disease and diabetes,
contracted in the service.
Her claim was rejected because evidence was not furnished that the
cause of the soldier's death had its origin in the military service.
There seems to be an entire absence of proof of this important fact.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
CURTIN, MARY (widow Curtin)
Executive Mansion, August 14, 1888
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 2653, entitled "an act
granting a pension to Mary Curtin."
The husband of this beneficiary was mustered into the military service
October 8, 1862, was wounded in the right arm, and was discharged September
3, 1863.
He was pensioned for his wound to the time of his death, September 17,
1880.
The physician attending him in his last illness testified that the
deceased was in the last stages of consumption when pneumonia intervened and
caused his death.
I do not understand that this physician gives the least support to the
theory that the wound for which this soldier was pensioned was in the
slightest degree connected with his death, and there seems to be nothing in
the case to justify the conclusion that such was the fact.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
D
DECK, AMANDA (widow of Deck)
Executive Mansion, July 16, 1888
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 470, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Amanda F. Deck."
The husband of this beneficiary was pensioned for a gunshot wound in
his right shoulder which he received in 1864 in a battle with Indians.
The report of the committee to which the bill was referred states
nothing concerning the death of the soldier and gives no information as to
the date or cause of the same, and the recommendation that a pension should
be given the widow is based upon the service and injury of the soldier and
the circumstances of the beneficiary.
No claim was filed in the Pension Bureau on behalf of the widow. This
perhaps is accounted for by the fact that information is lodged in that
Bureau to the effect that the deceased soldier died on the 21st day of
September, 1883, "from a pistol ball fired by Luther Cultor."
If he was killed in a personal encounter, as the report of his death
would seem to indicate. I am unable to see how his death can be in any way
attributed to his military service or his widow be justly pensioned therefor.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
De KRAFFT, ELIZABETH S. (widow De Krafft)
Executive Mansion, June 21, 1886
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 2223, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elizabeth S. De Krafft."
My objection to this bill is that it is of no possible advantage to
the beneficiary therein mentioned. It directs that her name be placed upon
the pension roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension
laws. The effect of such legislation would be to permit Mrs. De Krafft to
draw a pension at the rate of $30 each month from the date of the approval
of the bill.
On the 26th of February, 1886, under the provisions of the general
pension law, she was allowed a pension of this exact sum, but the payments
were to date from November 10, 1885.
I am so thoroughly tired of disapproving gifts of public money to
individuals who in my view have no right or claim to the same,
notwithstanding apparent Congressional sanction, that I interpose with a
feeling of relief a veto in a case where I find it unnecesary to determine
the merits of the application. In speaking of the promiscuous and
ill-advised grants of pensions which have lately been presented to me for
approval, I have spoken of their "apparent Congressional sanction" in
recognition of the fact that a large proportion of these bills have never
been submitted to a majority of either branch of Congress, but are the
result of nominal sessions held for the express purpose of their
consideration and attended by a small minority of the members of the
respective Houses of the legislative branch of Government.
Thus in considering these bills I have not felt that I was aided by
the deliberate judgment of the Congress; and when I have deemed it my duty
to disapprove many of the bills presented, I have hardly regarded my action
as a dissent from the conclusions of the people's representatives.
I have not been insensible to the suggestions which should influence
every citizen, either in private station or official place, to exhibit not
only a just but a generous appreciation of the services of our country's
defenders. In reviewing the pension legislation presented to me many bills
have been approved upon the theory that every doubt should be resolved in
favor of the proposed beneficiary. I have not, however, been able to
entirely divest myself of the idea that the public money appropriated for
pensions is the soldiers' fund, which should be devoted to the
indemnification of those who in the defense of the Union and in the nation's
service have worthily suffered, and who in the day of their dependence
resulting from such suffering are entitled to the benefactions of their
Government. This reflection lends to the bestowal of pensions a kind of
sacredness which invites the adoption of such principles and regulations as
will exclude perversion as well as insure a liberal and generous application
of grateful and benevolent designs,. Heedlessness and a disregard of the
principle which underlies the granting of pensions is unfair to the wounded,
crippled soldier who is honored in the just recognition of his Government.
Such a man should never find himself side by side on the pension roll with
those, who have been tempted to attribute the natural ills to which humanity
is heir to service in the Army. Every relaxation of principle in the
granting of pensions invites applications without merit and encourages those
who for gain urge honest men to become dishonest. Thus is the demoralizing
lesson taught the people that as against the public Treasury the most
questionable expedients are allowable.
During the present session of Congress 493 special pension bills have
been submitted to me, and I am advised that 111 more have received the
favorable action of both Houses of Congress and will be presented within a
day or two, making over 600 of these bills which have been passed up to this
time during the present session, nearly three times the number passed at any
entire session since the year 1861. With the Pension Bureau, fully equipped
and regulated by the most liberal rules, in active operation, supplemented
in its work by constant special legislation, it certainly is not
unreasonable to suppose that in all the years that have elapsed since the
close of the war a majority of the meritorious claims for pensions have been
presented and determined.
I have now more than 130 of these bills before me awaiting Executive
action. It will be impossible to bestow upon them the examination they
deserve, and many will probably become operative which should be rejected.
In the meantime I venture to suggest the significance of the startling
increase in this kind of legislation and the consequences involved in its
continuance.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
De WITT, HANNAH C. (widow of De Witt)
Executive Mansion, April 21, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 823, entitled " An act
granting a pension to Hannah C. De Witt."
An act the precise duplicate of this was passed at the present session
of the Congress, and received Executive approval on the 10th day of March,
1888. Pursuant to said act the name of the beneficiary mentioned in the bill
herewith returned has been placed upon the pension rolls. The second
enactment is of course entirely useless, and was evidently passed by mistake.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
DOUGHERTY, MARY ANN (widow of Dougherty)
Executive Mansion, July 5, 1888
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 1547, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary Ann Dougherty."
A large share of the report of the Senate committee to which this bill
was referred, and which report is adopted by the committee of the House, as
is usual in such cases, consists of a petition signed by Mary Ann Dougherty,
addressed to the Congress, in which she states that she resides in
Washington, having removed here with her husband in 1863 from New Jersey;
that shortly after their arrival in this city her husband, Daniel Dougherty,
returned to New Jersey and enlisted in the Thirty-fourth Regiment New Jersey
Volunteers; that she obtained employment in the United States arsenal making
cartridges, and that while so engaged she was injured by an explosion.
She also states that she had a young son killed by machinery in the
navy-yard, and that at the grand review of the Army after the close of the
war another son, 6 years old, was stolen by an officer of the Army and has
not been heard of since. She further says that her husband left his home in
1865 and has not been heard of since, and that she believes he deserted her
on account of her infirmities.
It is alleged in the report that she received a pension as the widow
of Daniel Dougherty until it was discovered that he was alive, when her name
was dropped from the rolls.
The petition of this woman is indorsed by the Admiral and several
other officers of the Navy and a distinguished clergyman of Washington,
certifying that they know Mrs. Dougherty and believe the facts stated to be
true.
There is no pretense made now that this beneficiary is a widow, though
she at one time claimed to be, and was allowed a pension on that allegation.
Her present claim rests entirely upon injuries received by her when she was
concededly not employed in the military service. If the pension now proposed
is allowed her it will be a mere act of charity.
Her husband, Daniel Dougherty, is now living in Philadelphia, and is a
pensioner in his own right for disability alleged to have been incurred
while serving in the Thirty-fourth New Jersey Volunteers. Of this fact this
beneficiary has been repeatedly informed; and yet she states in her petition
that her husband deserted her in 1865 and has not been heard of since.
It is alleged in the Pension Bureau that in 1878 she succeeded in
securing a pension as the widow of Daniel Dougherty through fraudulent
testimony and much false swearing on her part.
The police records of the precinct in which she has lived for years
show that she is a woman of very bad character, and that she has been under
arrest nine times for drunkenness, larceny, creating disturbance, and
misdemeanor of that sort.
It happens that this claimant, by reason of her residence here has
been easily traced and her character and untruthfulness discovered. But
there is much reason to fear that this case will find its parallel in many
that have reached a successful conclusion.
I can not spell out any principle upon which the bounty of the
Government is bestowed through the instrumentality of the flood of private
pension bills that reach me. The theory seems to have been adopted that no
man who served in the Army can be the subject of death or impaired health
except they are chargeable to his service. Medical theories are set at
naught and the most startling relation is claimed between alleged incidents
of military service and disability or death. Fatal apoplexy is admitted as
the result of quite insignificant wounds, heart disease is attributed to
chronic diarrhea, consumption to hernia, and suicide is traced to army
service in a wonderfully devious and curious way.
Adjudications of the Pension Bureau are overruled in the most
peremptory fashion by these special acts of Congress, since nearly all the
beneficiaries named in these bills have unsuccessfully applied to that
Bureau for relief.
This course of special legislation operates very unfairly.
Those with certain influence or friends to push their claims procure
pensions, and those who have neither friends nor influence must be content
with their fate under general laws. It operates unfairly by increasing in
numerous instances the pensions of those already on the rolls, while many
other more deserving cases, from the lack of fortunate advocacy, are obliged
to be content with the sum provided by general laws.
The apprehension may well be entertained that the freedom with which
these private pension bills are passed furnishes an inducement to fraud and
imposition, while it certainly teaches the vicious lesson to our people that
the Treasury of the National Government invites the approach of private need.
None of us should be in the least wanting in regard for the veteran
soldier, and I will yield to no man in a desire to see those who defended
the Government when it needed defenders liberally treated. Unfriendliness to
our veterans is a charge easily and sometimes dishonestly made.
I insist that the true soldier is a good citizen, and that he will be
satisfied with generous, fair, and equal consideration for those who are
worthily entitled to help.
I have considered the pension list of the Republic a roll of honor,
bearing names inscribed by national gratitude, and not by improvident and
indiscriminate almsgiving.
I have conceived the prevention of the complete discredit which must
ensue from the unreasonable, unfair, and reckless granting of pensions by
special acts to be the best service I can render our veterans.
In the discharge of what has seemed to me my duty as related to
legislation, and in the interest of all the veterans of the Union Army, I
have attempted to stem the tide of improvident pension enactments, though I
confess to a full share of responsibility for some of these laws that should
not have been passed.
I am far from denying that there are cases of merit which can not be
reached except by special enactment, but I do not believe there is a member
of either House of Congress who will not admit that this kind of legislation
has been carried too far.
I have now before me more than 100 special pension bills, which can
hardly be examined within the time allowed for that purpose.
My aim has been at all times, in dealing with bills of this character,
to give the applicant for a pension the benefit of any doubt that might
arise, and which balanced the propriety of granting a pension if there
seemed any just foundation for the application; but when it seemed entirely
outside of every rule in its nature or the proof supporting it, I have
supposed I only did my duty in interposing an objection.
It seems to me that it would be well if our general pension laws
should be revised with a view of meeting every meritorious case that can
arise. Our experience and knowledge of any existing deficiencies ought to
make the enactment of a complete pension code possible.
In the absence of such a revision, and if pensions are to be granted
upon equitable grounds and without regard to general laws, the present
methods would be greatly improved by the establishment of some tribunal to
examine the facts in every case and determine upon the merits of the
application.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
DOW, JENNETTE (widow Dow)
Executive Mansion, July 31, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 3363, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Jennette Dow."
The husband of the claimant enlisted August 7, 1862; received a
gunshot wound in his left knee in September, 1863, and was mustered out with
his company June 10, 1865. He was pensioned for his wound in 1878 at the
rate of $4 per month, dating from the time of his discharge, which amount
was increased to $8 per month from June 4, 1880. The pensioned soldier died
December 17, 1882, and in 1883, his widow, the claimant, filed an
application for pension, alleging that her husband's death resulted from his
wound. Her claim was rejected in 1885 upon the ground that death was not
caused by the wound.
The physician who was present at the time of the death certifies that
the same resulted from apoplexy in twelve hours after the deceased was
attacked.
It also appears from the statement of this physician that the deceased
was employed for years after his discharge from the Army as a railroad
conductor, and that at the time of his death he had with difficulty reached
his home. He then describes as following the attack the usual manifestations
of apoplexy, and adds that he regards the case as one of "hemiplegia, the
outgrowth primarily of nerve injury, aggravated by the life's calling, and
eventuating in apoplexy as stated."
Evidence is filed in the Pension Bureau showing that after his
discharge he was more or less troubled with his wound, though one witness
testifies that he railroaded with him for fifteen years after his injury. I
find no medical testimony referred to which with any distinctness charges
death to the wound, and it would be hardly credible if such evidence was
found.
I am sure that in no case except in an application for pension would
an attempt be made in the circumstances here developed to attribute death
from apoplexy to a wound in the knee received nineteen years before the
apoplectic attack.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
DRAKE, MARY J. ( wido of Newton E. Drake)
Executive Mansion, January 18, 1889
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No.9173, entitled " An act
granting a pension to Mary J. Drake."
It is proposed by this bill to pension the beneficiary therein named
as the widow of Newton E. Drake, who served as a soldier fromn August 1,
1863, to January 18, 1865.
The records do not show that he suffered from any disability during
his term of service.
He filed an application for pension September 23, 1879, claiming that
he contracted rheumatism about October, 1864.
He died June 7, 1881, and there does not appear to have been any
evidence produced as to the cause of his death or establishing, except by
the allegations of his own application, that he contracted any disease or
disability in the service.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
E
EATON, LYDIA A. (Widow Eaton)
Executive Mansion, October 17, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 2472, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Lydia A. Eaton."
The husband of this beneficiary was pensioned for chronic rheumatism,
at the rate of $4 a month, up to the date of his death, August 4, 1884.
The beneficiary filed a claim for pension on the 2d day of September,
1884.
The cause of her husband's death was cystitis, which, being
interpreted, is inflammation of the bladder.
The claim of the beneficiary was rejected on the ground that the fatal
disease was not due to army service, and I fail to discover how any other
conclusion can be reached.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
ELDRIDGE, REBECCA (widow of Wilber H. Eldridge)
Executive Mansion, May 28, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval a bill originating in the House of
Representatives, numbered 2145, and entitled "An act for the relief of
Rebecca Eldridge."
This bill provides for the payment of a pension to the claimant as the
widow of Wilber H. Eldridge, who was mustered into the service on the 24th
day of July, 1862, and discharged June 21, 1865. He was pensioned at the
rate of $2 per month for a slight wound in the calf of the left leg,
received on the 25th day of March, 1865. There is no pretense that this
wound was at all serious, and a surgeon who examined it in 1880 reported
that in his opinion the wounded man "was not incapacitated from obtaining
his subsistence by manual labor," that the ball passed "rather superficially
through the muscles," and that the party examined said there was no lameness
"unless after long standing or walking a good deal."
On the 28th of January, 1881, while working about a building, he fell
backward from a ladder and fractured his skull, from which he died the same day.
Without a particle of proof and with no fact established which
connects the fatal accident in the remotest degree with the wound referred
to, it is proposed to grant a pension to the widow of $12 per month.
It is not a pleasant thing to interfere in such a case; but we are
dealing with pensions, and not with gratuities.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
EVANS, FANNIE E. (widow of George S. Evans)
Executive Mansion, July 5, 1886.
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 4226, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Fannie E. Evans."
The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of George S. Evans. He
was a soldier in the Mexican War, and entered the Union Army in the War of
the Rebellion, on the 16th day of October, 1861, as major of a California
regiment. He became a colonel in February, 1863, and resigned in April of
that year, to take effect on the 31st of May ensuing. His resignation seems
to have been tendered on account of private matters, and no mention was then
made of any disability. It is stated in the committee's report to the House
that in 1864 he accepted the office of adjutant-general of the State of
California, which he held for nearly four years.
He died in 1883 from cerebral apoplexy.
In March, 1884, his widow filed an application for pension, based upon
the allegation that from active and severe service in a battle with the
Indians at Spanish Fort in 1863 her husband incurred a hernia, which
incapacitated him for active service.
There appears to be evidence to justify this statement,
notwithstanding the fact that the deceased during the twenty years that
followed before his death made no claim for such disability.
But it seems to me that the effort to attribute his death by apoplexy
to the existence of hernia ought not to be successful.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
F
FITZMORRIS, MARY (widow of Edmund Fitzmorris)
Executive Mansion, July 16, 1888
To the House of Representatives::
I return without approval House bill No. 9520, entitled " An act for
the relief of Mary Fitzmorris."
It is proposed by this bill to pension the beneficiary named therein,
as the widow of Edmund Fitzmorris, under the provisions and limitations of
the gneral pension laws. The name of the beneficiary is already upon the
pension roll, and she is now entitled to receive precisely the sum as a
pensioner which is allowed her under this bill.
As her application to the Pension Bureau was quite lately favorably
acted upon, it is supposed this special bill for her relief was passed by
the Congress in ignorance of that fact.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
FOLEY, BRIDGET (widow of Joseph F. Foley)
Executive Mansion, July 26, 1888
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 1447, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Bridget Foley."
Joseph F. Foley, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted on the 22d day of August, 1862, and was discharged February 13,
1863, for disability which was certified to arise from chronic rheumatism
contracted prior to enlistment.
He appears to have been sick with rheumatism a large part of the time
he was in the service, and because of that fact never reached a point nearer
the front than the city of Washington.
He died May 13, 1873, of consumption.
His widow filed in 1884, a declaration executed by the deceased
shortly before his death, in which he alleged that he was first attacked
with rheumatism at Capitol Hill, in the District of Columbia, in October,
1862. The soldier never applied for a pension.
It is strenuously disputed that he had this complaint before
enlistment. However this may be, it is certain that he died of consumption,
and I can find no proof that this disease was contracted in the service or
had any relation thereto.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
FREEMAN, MRS. MARY A. (widow of former husband, soldier Andrew V.Pritchard)
Executive Mansion, February 22, 1897
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without my approval House bill No. 2189, entitled
"An act granting a pension to Mrs. Mary A. Freeman."
A former husband of the beneficiary, named Andrew V. Pritchard, did
service in the Mexican War, and on July 22, 1847, died of disease contracted
in such service. Thereupon the beneficiary named in this bill was pensioned
as his widow. She continued to receive this pension until 1852, when she
married John Freeman, through which she of course lost her pensionable
status. Two minor children of the soldier were, however, placed on the
pension roll in her stead, and their pension was paid to them until the
youngest became 16 years of age, in 1863.
John Freeman died in December, 1871, the beneficiary having been his
wife for almost twenty years. It is now proposed to restore her to the
pension roll as the widow of her former husband, the Mexican soldier, who
died nearly fifty years ago, and notwithstanding the fact that less than
five years after his death she relinquished her right to a pension and
surrendered her widowhood to become the wife of another husband, with whom
she lived for many years.
I am not willing, even by inaction, to be charged with acquiescence in
what appears to be such an entire departure from the principle, as well as
sentiment, connected with reasonable pension legislation.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
G
GAVEN, ESTER (widow of Bernard Gaven)
Executive Mansion, October 17, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 11005, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Ester Gaven."
This act provides that the beneficiary shall be placed upon the
pension roll as the widow of Bernard Gaven, and the report of the committee
to whom this bill was referred throughout speaks of her as bearing that
relation to the soldier.
She filed a claim in the Pension Bureau for a pension on the 31st day
of January, 1881, as the mother of Bernard Gaven.
This claim is still pending, and though evidence that the death of the
soldier had any relation to his military service is entirely lacking and
some other difficulties are apparent, the case may still be made out in the
Pension Bureau. If it is, the beneficiary can be put upon the pension roll
in her true character as mother of the soldier, instead of widow, as
erroneously stated in the bill herewith returned.
Upon the merits as the case now stands, and because of the mistake in
describing the relationship of the beneficiary, this bill, I think, should
not become a law.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
GLASS, ELIZA S. (widow of Glass)
Executive Mansion, October 17, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 11332, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Eliza S. Glass."
The husband of this beneficiary was in the military service from
December 28, 1863, to April 27, 1864, a period of four months. He was
discharged at the last-mentioned date for disability, the surgeon stating in
the certificate his trouble to be "chronic hemorrhoids and rheumatism, both
together producing lameness of back; unfit for Invalid Corps." The captain
of the soldier's company in the same certificate states:
"During the last two months said soldier has been unfit for duty
fifty-four days in consequence of chronic rheumatism, owing to spinal
affections and sprains received before entering the service, and made worse
by drilling in double quick."
He filed a claim for pension December 24, 1879, more than fifteen
years after discharge, in which he claimed that on the 15th day of January,
1864, he received an injury to his back by slipping and falling upon the ground.
After a thorough examination this claim was rejected on the ground
that his disability existed prior to enlistment.
The beneficiary filed a claim for pension December 3, 1885, alleging
the death of the soldier April 26, 1885. This claim was also rejected, on
the ground that the death causes, "nervous prostration and spinal trouble,"
were not due to the service.
Both of these cases were appealed to the Secretary of the Interior,
and in the decision of said appeals it is stated that upon an application
for a discharge from the service the soldier first set up an injury to his
back from a fall while on drill; that the regimental surgeon refused to
entertain this proposition; that the next day the soldier returned, and upon
the representations of himself and his captain that his trouble dated back
of the alleged accident upon drill and was chronic the certificate for
discharge was made out, and pursuant thereto his discharge was granted.
I am of the opinion that, considering the cause of death and all the
facts and circumstances surrounding this case, the certificate of discharge
which the soldier himself procured to be made out should stand as stating
the true origin of his disability; and if the certificate was set aside and
all the facts tending to support it were disregarded, the cause of death
would still, in my opinion, appear to be disconnected with military service.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
H
HAGERMAN, MARY J. (widow Hagerman)
Executive Mansion, July 31, 1886
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 2160, entitled "A bill
granting a pension to Mary J. Hagerman."
The husband of this proposed beneficiary enlisted in 1861 and was
wounded by a gunshot, which seriously injured his left forearm. In 1864 he
was discharged; was afterwards pensioned for his wound, and died in August,1884.
Dr. Hageman, who attended the deceased in his last illness, testifies
that he was called to attend him in August, 1884; that he was sick with
typhomalarial fever, and that upon inquiry he (the physician) found that it
was caused by hard work or overexertion and exposure. He was ill for about
ten days.
The application of his widow for pension was rejected in 1885 on the
ground that the fatal disease was not due to military service.
I am unable to discover how any different determination could have
been reached.
To grant a pension in this case would clearly contravene the present
policy of the Government, and either establish a precedent which, if
followed, would allow a pension to the widow of every soldier wounded or
disabled in the war, without regard to the cause of death, or would unjustly
discriminate in favor of the few thus receiving the bounty of the Government
against many whose cases were equally meritorious.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HAMILTON, SARAH MRS. (widow of Thomas Hamilton)
Executive Mansion, February 26, 1887
To the Senate:
I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 2045, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Mrs. Sarah Hamilton."
Thomas Hamilton, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted September 2, 1862. Upon the records he is reported present to April
30, 1863; deserted May 27, 1863. His name is dropped from subsequent rolls
to February 29, 1864, when he is reported as a deserter in arrest. He is not
borne upon the rolls for March and April, 1864; for May and June, 1864, he
is reported absent in arrest; for July and August, present under arrest; and
for September and October, present for duty. He was mustered out with his
company May 24, 1865.
He applied for a pension in 1872, alleging that he received an injury
to his left leg about February 15, 1863, at St. Louis, by falling from a
ladder, causing varicose veins and stiffening of the leg.
He was granted a pension January 29, 1881, to commence May 25, 1865.
He subsequently applied for an increase of pension, claiming that his
eyes had become affected as a result of his varicose veins. This application
was rejected upon the ground that the disability for which he was pensioned
had not increased and that the disease of his eyes was not a result of such
disability.
The pensioner died April 22, 1883, twenty years after his alleged
injury, of cerebral apoplexy; and a physician states it as his judgment that
the varicosed condition of the venous system was primarily the cause of his
disabilities and death.
His widow filed an application for pension October 31, 1883, which was
rejected upon the ground that the soldier's death was not the result of his
military service.
Notwithstanding the record of the deceased soldier, stained as it is
with the charge of desertion, and the entire absence of any record proof of
sickness and injury, I should consider my self, in favor of his widow, bound
by the act of the Pension Bureau in allowing him a pension, and should
cheerfully aid her attempt to procure a pension for herself in her needy
condition, if I was not thoroughly convinced that her husband's death had no
relation to his military service or any injury for which he was pensioned.
To the ordinary mind it seems impossible that apoplexy could result
from such a varicosed condition as is described in this case. I do not
understand that the physician who gives a contrary opinion bases his
judgment upon actual observation at the time the soldier died. The last
medical examination by the Pension Bureau before the soldier's death was in
October, 1882, and resulted in the following report of the examining surgeon:
"Weight, 180 pounds; age, 69 years; has varicose veins of left leg,
but not to such an extent as to increase the size of the leg or result in
marked disability; he is entirely blind in both eyes from glaucoma, which
does not in any degree, in my opinion, depend upon the pensioned
disability--varicose veins."
It appears that the benefit proposed by this bill can neither be
properly regarded as a gratuity, based upon the honorable service and record
of the soldier, nor predicated on his death resulting from a disability
incurred in such service.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HAND, MRS. ELLEN (widow Hand)
Executive Mansion, January 31, 1889
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 3264, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mrs. Ellen Hand."
The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill enlisted August 22,
1862, and was mustered out with his company July 10, 1865.
He filed a claim for pension in 1881, sixteen years after his
discharge, alleging that he contracted rheumatism about December, 1862.
He died in February, 1883, the cause of death being, as then
certified, typhoid fever.
His claim for pension on account of rheumatism seems to have been
favorably determined after his death, for it was made payable to his widow
and was allowed from the time of filing his petition to February 25, 1883,
the day of his death.
The facts of the case as now presented appear to me to lead in the
most satisfactory manner to the conclusion that the soldier's death was in
no way related to any incident of his military service.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HARBAUGH, SARAH ( widow Harbaugh)
Executive Mansion, June 23, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 6895, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Sarah Harbaugh."
The husband of this claimant enlisted August 1, 1861, and was
discharged September 7, 1864. He received a gunshot wound in the left ankle
in May, 1863, and died suddenly of disease of the heart October 4, 1881. He
was insane before his death, but in my opinion any connection between his
injury and his service in the Army is next to impossible.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HARKINS, MARY F (widow Harkins)
Executive Mansion, June 22, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 3016, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary F. Harkins,"
The husband of this beneficiary was discharged from the military
service in 1865, and was pensioned for a gunshot wound in the right foot at
the rate of $6 per month.
He died in 1882, seventeen years after his discharge, "from rupture
of the heart, caused by the busting and parting of the fibers of the right
ventricle."
The claim is now made that the death was the result of the wound in
the foot.
An Application to the Pension Bureau was rejected on the ground that
the death cause was not the result of the wound.
I am satisfied that this was a just conclusion.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HECKLER, ELIZABETH (widow Heckler)
Executive Mansion, October 17, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 11222, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elizabeth Heckler."
The husband of this beneficiary was pensioned for asthma, and there is
no doubt of the propriety of such pension, nor is there doubt upon the
evidence that this affection continued up to the time of his death.
But he died of acute inflammation of the bladder and chronic
enlargement of prostate gland. There is no proof that these causes of death
were in the least complicated with the difficulty for which the deceased was
pensioned, or any other trouble which was the result of military service.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HEINY, LYDIA A. (widow Heiny)
Executive Mansion, August 10, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 9034, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Lydia A. Heiny."
The husband of this beneficiary served in an Indiana regiment from
August, 1861, to March, 1864, when he reenlisted as a veteran volunteer and
served as a private and teamster to July 20, 1865, when he was discharged.
There is no record of any disability, and he never applied for a pension.
On the 12th day of December, 1880, in leaving a barber shop at the
place where he resided, he fell downstairs, and died the next day from the
injuries thus received.
His widow filed an application for a pension in the year 1885,
alleging that her husband contracted indigestion, bronchitis, nervous
debility, and throat disease in the Army, which were the cause of his death.
This claim was rejected upon the ground that the death of the soldier
was not due to an injury connected with his military service.
While there has been considerable evidence presented tending to show
that the deceased had a throat difficulty which might have resulted from
army exposure, the allegation or the presumption that it caused his fatal
fall, it seems to me, is entirely unwarranted.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HERBST, THERESA (widow of John Herbst)
Executive Mansion, July 17, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 8078, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Theresa Herbst, widow of John Herbst, late private
Company G, One hundred and fortieth Regiment of New York Volunteers."
John Herbst, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted August 26, 1862. He was wounded in the head at the battle of
Gettysburg, July 2, 1863. He recovered from this wound, and on the 19th day
of August, 1864, was captured by the enemy.
After his capture he joined the Confederate forces, and in 1865 was
captured by General Stoneman while in arms against the United States
Government. He was imprisoned and voluntarily made known the fact that he
formerly belonged to the Union Army. Upon taking the oath of allegiance and
explaining that he deserted to the enemy to escape the hardship and
starvation of prison life, he was released and mustered out of the service
on the 11th day of October, 1865.
He was regularly borne on the Confederate muster rolls for probably
nine or ten months. No record is furnished of the number of battles in which
he fought against the soldiers of the Union, and we shall never know the
death and the wounds which he inflicted upon his former comrades in arms.
He never applied for a pension, though it is claimed now that at the
time of his discharge he was suffering from rheumatism and dropsy, and that
he died in 1868 of heart disease. If such disabilities were incurred in
military service, they were quite likely the result of exposure in the
Confederate army; but it is not improbable that this soldier never asked a
pension because he considered that the generosity of his Government had been
sufficiently taxed when the ful forfeit of his desertion was not exacted.
The greatest possible sympathy and consideration are due to those who
bravely fought, and being captured as bravely languished in rebel prisons.
But I will take no part in putting a name upon our pension roll
which represents a Union soldier found fighting against the cause he swore
he would uphold, nor should it be for a moment admitted that such desertion
and treachery are excused when it avoids the rigors of honorable capture
and confinement.
It would have been a sad condition of affairs if every captured Union
soldier had deemed himself justified in fighting against his Government
rather than to undergo the privations of capture.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HOOPER, MARY (widow Hooper)
Executive Mansion, October 17, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 10504, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary Hooper."
The husband of this beneficiary was first lieutenant in the volunteer
service from December 7, 1861, to February 28, 1862, a little over two
months, when he resigned. His resignation was based upon a medical
certificate in which it is stated that "this officer is unfit for duty on
account of chronic pleuritis and pulmonary consumption, from which he has
suffered for the past four months."
This certificate is dated February 14, 1862.
The soldier filed a claim in 1871 alleging typhoid fever resulting in
paralysis, and that the fever was contracted in the latter part of February,1862.
The soldier died January 17, 1884, of Paralysis.
The beneficiary filed a claim for pension November 17, 1887, claiming
that her husband died of disease contracted in the service.
The claims have been specially and thoroughly examined. The testimony
does not establish any disease or disability in the service other than those
stated in the certificate procured by him when he resigned, but it does tend
to establish that about April 17, 1862, after his resignation, the soldier
was sick with typhoid fever, and that afterwards he suffered from partial
paralysis, which increased and finally caused his death.
I make no reference to the fact stated in the committee's report
suggesting the idea that the courage of the deceased soldier had been
questioned further than to correct the allegation of the report that either
his or his widow's claim for pension has been rejected for cowardice. It
appears from the record furnished to me that they were rejected on the
grounds that the evidence is insufficient to connect the death cause or
disability with the soldier's military service.
I am unable to see what other conclusion could be reached in the face
of the soldier's own statements, as contained in the medical certificate
furnished him and elsewhere made, and upon consideration of the other facts
in the case.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HOUGH, CAROLINE A. (widow of Brigadier-General John Hough)
POCKET VETO
December 31, 1896
"An act to increase the pension of Caroline A. Hough, widow of
Brigadier-General John Hough."
This bill was presented to me on the 16th day of December, 1896.
Congress, pursuant to a concurrent resolution adopted by both Houses of
Congress, adjourned from the 22d day of December, 1896, to January 5, 1897.
I have not approved the bill.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HOXEY, MARY MINOR (widow Hoxey)
Executive Mansion, June 22, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 600, entitled "An act
increasing the pension of Mary Minor Hoxey."
The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill was, while on
military duty, wounded in the left hand and afterwards in the thigh. He was
pensioned in 1871 on account of these wounds, and in 1879 was allowed
arrearages from time of his discharge. He died in December, 1881, of
consumption, being at that time in the receipt of a pension at the rate of
$17 per month.
In 1884 his widow was allowed a pension at the same rate, with $2 a
month each for two minor children. The children have now attained the age of
16 years, but the widow still receives the pension awarded to her, which is
the same as that allowed to all widows of her class.
I discover no reason of any substance why this pension should be
increased, and if it should be done it would only be a manifestation of
unjust favoritism.
I can not forget the thousands of poor widows with claims superior to
this beneficiary, but with no interested friends to push their claims for
increase of pension, who would be discriminated against if this proposed
bill becomes a law.
It seems to me that there is a chance to do injustice by unfair
caprice in fixing the rates of pension, as well as by refusing them
altogether when they should be granted.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
HUNTER, MARIA (widow Hunter)
Executive Mansion, June 23, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I hereby return without approval House bill No. 7167, entitled "An act
for the relief of Mrs. Maria Hunter."
The beneficiary named in this bill, to whom it is therein proposed to
grant a pension at the rate of $50 a month, on the 23d day of March, 1886,
filed her application for a pension in the Pension Bureau, where it is still
pending undetermined.
Although the deceased soldier held a high rank, I have no doubt his
widow will receive ample justice through the instrumentality organized for
the purpose of dispensing the nation's grateful acknowledgment of military
service in its defense.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
I (no Listing)
J
JACOB, HELEN M. (widow of Benjamin Oden West)
Executive Mansion, June 1, 1896
To the Senate:
I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 149, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Helen M. Jacob."
The purpose of this bill is to grant a pension of $12 per month to
"Helen M. Jacob, of Rochester, Ind., widow of Benjamin Oden West."
It appears from the records of the War Department that Benjamin O.
West served in the Mexican War from January to Nobember in the year 1847.
The beneficiary named in this bill was married to him in 1850, and he died
in 1856. She was pensioned as his widow, and received such pension from the
date of her husband's death until April 17, 1861. On that date she was
married to William W. Jacob, whereupon her pension ceased, but two minor
children were awarded pensions and continued in receipt of the same until
January, 1873, when the youngest child became 16 years of age.
The entire absence of any fixed or reasonable principle or rule
regulating private pension legislation at this time suggests the danger of
its near approach in many cases to caprice and favoritism.
Though I have in a number of instances deferred to the judgment of
Congress and refrained from interposing objections to bills of this
character which seemed to me to be of doubtful merit, I am unwilling to
follow such a wide departure from a palpably just pension theory and assent
to the establishment of such an unfortunate precedent as this bill involves.
There is no duty or obligation due from the Government to a soldier's
widow except it be worked out through the deceased soldier. She is pensioned
only because he served his country and because through his death she as his
wife has lost his support. In other words, she becomes a beneficiary of the
Government because she is a soldier's widow. When she marries again , and
thus displaces the memory of her soldier husband and surrenders all that
belongs to soldier widowhood, she certainly ought not on the death of her
second husband to be allowed to claim that she is again the soldier's widow.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
JACOBY, MRS. MARGARET A. (Widow Jacoby)
Executive Mansion, July 5,1886
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 5021, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Mrs. Margaret A. Jacoby."
A pension has been allowed on account of the disability of the
claimant's husband, dating from his discharge in 1864.
The beneficiary named in this bill applied for pension in 1885,
alleging that she married the soldier in 1864; that he incurred deafness and
chronic diarrhea while in the service, from the combined effect of which he
partially lost his mind; that on the 7th day of September, 1875, he
disappeared, and that after diligent search and inquiry she is unable to
learn anything of him since that time.
His disability from army service should be conceded and his death at
some time and in some manner may well be presumed; but the fact that he died
from any cause related to his disability or his service in the Army has no
presumption and not a single particle of proof to rest upon.
With proper diligence something should be discovered to throw a little
light upon this subject.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
JENNINGS, NANCY F. (widow of William Jennings)
Executive Mansion, May 18, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 5545, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Nancy F. Jennings."
William Jennings, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted in October, 1861, and was discharged June 24, 1862, upon a
surgeon's certificate of disability, the cause of disability being therein
stated as "hemorrhoids."
He never applied for a pension, and died in 1877 of apoplexy.
In the report of the committee which reported this bill the allegation
is made that the deceased came home from the Army with chronic diarrhea and
suffered from the same to the date of his death.
The widow filed a claim for pension in 1878, which was rejected on the
ground that the fatal disease (apoplexy) was not due to military service nor
the result of either of the complaints mentioned.
If we are to adhere to the rule that in order to entitle the widow of
a soldier to a pension the death of her husband must be in some way related
to his military service, there can be no doubt that upon its merits this
case was properly disposed of by the Pension Bureau.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
JONES, MARGARET R. (widow of Jones)
Executive Mansion, February 23, 1887
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 10082, entitled "An
act to increase the pension of Margaret R. Jones."
The beneficiary mentioned in this bill is now receiving the highest
rate of pension allowed in cases such as hers under the general law.
All the information which is available to me fails to furnish any
reason why this pension should be specially increased, except the general
statement in the claimant's petition that she is in necessitous
circumstances and that the rate now allowed her is insufficient for her
support.
The further statement in the petition that her husband's death "was
caused prematurely by his endeavor to comply with unusual, disrespectful,
and indefinite orders " to go to League Island Navy-Yard certainly does not
in all its bearings furnish conclusive proof that his widow's pension should
be increased beyond that furnished others in her situation.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
K
KARSTETTER, MARY (widow of Jacob Karstetter)
Executive Mansion, July 6,1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 2043, entitled " An
act to place Mary Karstetter on the pension roll."
The husband of this beneficiary, Jacob Karstetter, was enrolled June
30, 1864, as a substitute in a Pennsylvania regiment, and was discharged for
disability June 20, 1865, caused by a gunshot wound in the left hand. A
declaration for pension was filed by him in 1865, based upon this wound, and
the same was granted, dating from June in that year, which he drew till the
time of his death, August 21, 1874.
In 1882 his widow filed her application for pension, alleging that he
died of wounds received in battle. The claim was made that he was injured
while in the Army by a horse running over him.
There is little or no evidence of such an injury having been received;
and if this was presented there would be no necessary connection between
that and the cause of the soldier's death, which was certified by the
attending physician to be gastritis and congestion of the kidneys.
I can hardly see how the Pension Bureau could arrive at any conclusion
except that the death of the soldier was not due to his military service,
and the acceptance of this finding, after an examination of the facts, leads
me to disapprove this bill.
KARSTETTER, MARY (second time)
Executive Mansion, January 18, 1889
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 7877, entitled "An act to
place Mary Karstetter on the pension roll."
The beneficiary named in this bilol is the widow of Jacob Karstetter,
who enlisted in June, 1864, and was discharged in June, 1865, on account of
a wound in his left hand received in action. He died in August, 1874, of
gastritis, or inflammation of the stomach, and congestion of the liver. He
was granted a pension for his gunshot wound and was in receipt of such
pension at the time of his death.
I was constrained to return without approval a bill identical with the
one herewith returned, and which was passed by the last Congress, and stated
my objections to the same in a communication addressed to the House of
Representatives, dated July 6, 1886.
It seemed to me at that time that the soldier's death could not be
held to be the result of his wound or any other cause chargeable to his
military service.
Upon reexamination I am still of the same opinion, which leads me to
again return the bill under consideration without approval.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
KELLEY, ELLEN (widow Kelley)
Executive Mansion, October 17, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 4820, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Ellen Kelley."
The husband of this beneficiary was granted a furlough to go home and
vote on the 31st day of October, 1864. On his way there he was severely
injured by a railroad collision, and there does not seem to be a particle of
doubt that the injuries thus sustained caused his death.
Upon these facts this does not seem to be a proper case for the
granting of a pension.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
KINNEY, ANN (widow of Edward Kinney)
Executive Mansion, August 4, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 5389, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Ann Kinney."
This beneficiary applied for a pension in 1877 as the widow of Edward
Kinney, alleging that he died September 54, 1875, from the effects of a
wound received in the Army. He enlisted November 4, 1861, and was discharged
July 28, 1862, on account of a gunshot wound in his left elbow, for which
wound he was pensioned in the year 1865.
A physician testifies that the pensioned soldier's death was, in his
opinion, brought on indirectly by the intemperate use of intoxicating
liquors, and that he died from congestion of the brain.
The marshal of the city where he resided states that on the day of the
soldier's death he was called to remove him from a house in which he was
making a disturbance, and that finding him intoxicated he arrested him and
took him to the lockup and placed him in a cell. In a short time, not
exceeding an hour, thereafter he was found dead. He further states that he
was addicted to periodical sprees.
Another statement is made that the soldier was an intemperate man, and
died very suddenly in the city lockup, where he had been taken by an officer
while on a drunken spree.
This is not a pleasant recital, and as against the widow I should be
glad to avoid its effect. But the most favorable phase of the case does not
aid her, since her claim rests upon the allegation that her husband was
subject to epileptic fits and died from congestion of the brain while in one
of these fits. Even upon this showing the connection between the fits and
the wound in the elbow is not made apparent.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
KNOWLTON, HARRIET M.(widow of Maj. William Knowlton)
Executive Mansion, March 1, 1897
To the Senate:
I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 719, entitled "An
act to restore a pension to Harriet M. Knowlton."
Major William Knowlton, a most worthy volunteer soldier, died of
wounds received in battle on the 20th of September, 1864.
In 1865 his widow, the beneficiary named in this bill, was pensioned
at the rate of $25 a month, commencing on the day of her husband's death,
with an additional allowance for four minor children dating from July, 1866.
She continued to receive this pension and allowance until November,
1867, when she married Albin P. Stinchfield.
Thereupon her name was dropped from the pension roll, she having by her
remarriage lost her pensionable condition , and her children were pensioned
at a small monthly rate from the date of their mother's remarriage until
June 1, 1880, when the youngest became 16 years of age.
The beneficiary, after living with her second husband about twenty-two
years, secured a divorce from him in the year 1889, and it is now proposed
to pension the divorced wife as the widow of her deceased soldier husband at
the rate she received while she was actually his widow, thirty years ago.
Her pensionable relation to the Government terminated with her
remarriage, and her divorce from her second husband could not upon any
ground of principle restore it. A departure from this rule, even in aid of
cases of hardship, can not fail to establish precedents inviting the
abandonment of reasonable and justifiable pension theories.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
L
LANG, MARY ANN (widow Lang)
Executive Mansion, July 5,1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 7907, entitled " An act
granting a pension to Mary Ann Lang."
The husband of this beneficiary was wounded in the nose on the 1st day
of June, 1864, and was mustered out of the service July 8, 1865. He was
pensioned on account of this wound and died February 21, 1881. Prior to his
death he had executed a declaration claiming pension also for rheumatism,
but the application was not filed before he died.
The cause of his death was dropsy. The widow filed her claim for
pension in 1884, which was rejected on the ground that the soldier's fatal
disease was not the result of his military service.
A physician of good repute, who appears to have attended him more than
any other physician for a number of years prior to his death, gives an
account of rheumatic ailments and other troubles and states that about a
year and a half before he died he had a liver trouble which resulted in
dropsy, which caused his death. He adds that the soldier was a man who
drank beer, and at times to excess and that he drank harder toward the last
of his life. He further states that he is unable to connect the liver
trouble with his rheumatism, and could not give any other reason for it
except his long use of beer and liquor, and if that was not the cause it
greatly aggravated it; that he had cautioned him about drinking, and at
times he heeded the advice.
An appeal was taken from the action rejecting the claim and the case
was submitted to the medical referee of the Pension Bureau, who decided upon
all the testimony that the soldier's fatal disease (dropsy) was due to
disease of the liver, which was not a sequence of rheumatism and was the
result of excessive use of alcoholic stimulants.
It will be observed that no claim is made that death in any way
resulted from the wound for which a pension had been allowed, and that even
if rheumatism was connected with the death its incurrence in the Army had
never been established.
I am satisfied that this case was properly disposed of by the Pension
Bureau.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
LANGDON, HANNAH R. (widow Langdon)
Executive Mansion, April 16, 1888
To the Senate:
I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 549, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Hannah R. Langdon."
The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill entered the military
service of the United States as assistant surgeon in a Vermont regiment on
the 7th day of October, 1862, and less than six months thereafter tendered
his resignation, based upon a surgeon's certificate of disability on account
of chronic hepatitis (inflammation of the liver) and diarrhea.
On the 12th day of June, 1880, more than seventeen years after his
discharge, he filed a claim for pension, alleging chronic diarrhea and
resulting piles. He was allowed a pension in January, 1881, and died of
consumption on the 24th day of September, in the same year.
Prior to the allowance of his claim for pension he wrote to the Bureau
of Pensions a full history of his disability as resulting from chronic
diarrhea and piles, and in that letter he made the following statement:
I have had no other disease, except last September (1880) I had
pleurisy and congestion of my left lung.
From other sources the Bureau derived the information that the
deceased had suffered an attack of pleuro-pneumonia on his left side, and
that his recovery had been partial.
In December, 1880, he was examined by two members of the board of
surgeons at Burlington, Vt., of which board he was also a member, and the
following facts were certified:
For the past fifteen years claimant has practiced his profession in
this city, and has up to within a year or a year and a half of this date
shown a vigor and power of endurance quite equal to the labor imposed upon
him by the popular demand for his services. About a year ago he evinced
symptoms of breaking down, cough, emaciation, and debility.
These results___"breaking down, cough, emaciation, and
debility"_____are the natural effects of such an attack as the deceased
himself reported, though not made by him any ground of a claim for pension,
and it seems quite clear that his death in September, 1881, must be
chargeable to the same cause.
His widow, the beneficiary named in this bill, filed her claim for
pension December 5, 1881, based upon the ground that her husband's death
from consumption was due to the chronic diarrhea for which he was pensioned.
Upon such application the testimony of Dr. H.H. Atwater was filed, to the
effect that about 1879 he began to treat the deceased regularly for
pleuro-pneumonia, followed by abscesses and degeneration of lung tissue,
which finally resulted in death, and that these diseased conditions were
complicated with digestive affections, such as diarrhea, dyspepsia, and
indigestion. Another affidavit of Dr. Atwater, made in 1886, will be found
in the report upon this bill made by the House Committee on Invalid
Pensions.
The claimant's application for a pension was rejected by the Pension
Bureau on the ground that the cause of her husband's death was not shown to
have been connected in any degree with the disease on account of which he
was pensioned or with his military service.
I am entirely satisfied that this determination was correct.
I am constrained to disapprove the bill under consideration, because
it is thus far our settled and avowed policy to grant pensions only to
widows whose husbands have died from causes related to military service, and
because the proposed legislation would, in my opinion, result in a
discrimination in favor of this claimant unfair and unjust toward thousands
of poor widows who are equally entitled to our sympathy and benevolence.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
LEARY, MRS. JOHN (widow Leary)
Executive Mansion, August 14, 1888
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 1076 entitled "An act
granting a pension to the widow of John Leary, deceased."
This bill does not give the name of the intended beneficiary, but
merely directs that the name of the widow of John Leary, late first Sergeant
in Battery F, Third Artillery, United States Army, be placed upon the
pension roll, and that she be paid the sum of $20 per month.
John Leary first enlisted in the Regular Army July 26, 1854, and
reenlisted in August, 1859. He was slightly wounded July 1, 1862 and appears
to have been discharged March 25, 1863, on account of syphilitic iritis. In
April, 1863, he entered the general service and acted as a clerk in the
Adjutant-General's Office until April 1, 1864, when he was discharged.
Neither he nor his widow ever filed a claim in the pension Bureau, but
an application on behalf of his minor children was filed in 1882.
The soldier died on the 8th day of December, 1872, of pneumonia, and
his widow remarried in 1876.
The application on behalf of the children was denied on the ground
that the death of the soldier was not due to any cause arising from his
military service. The youngest child will reach the age of 16 in September,1888.
It is stated in the report of the Senate committee to whom this bill
was referred that the second husband, to whom this widow was married in
1876, is now dead, and it is proposed to pension her as the widow of John
Leary, her first husband, at the rate of $20 per month.
In the unusual cases when a widow has been pensioned on account of the
death of her first husband, notwithstanding her remarriage, which forfeited
her claim under the general law, it has been well established that she was
again a widow by the death of her second husband, that beyond all
controversy the death of the first husband was due to his military service
and such advanced age or disability has been shown on the part of the widow
as prevented self-support.
In this case the name of the widow is not in the bill: there is hardly
room for the pretense that her first husband's death was due to his military
service, her age is given as over 40 years, and $20 a month is allowed her;
being considerably more than is generally allowed in cases where a widow's
right is clear, with no complications of second marriage, and her
necessities great.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
LOEWINGER, JOHANNA (widow Loewinger)
Executive Mansion, June 5, 1888
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 739, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Johanna Loewinger."
The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill enlisted June 28,
1861, and was discharged May 8, 1862, upon a surgeon's certificate of
disability. He was pensioned for chronic diarrhea. He died July 17, 1876. A
coroner's inquest was held, who found by their verdict that the deceased
came to his death "from suicide by cutting his throat with a razor, caused
by long-continued illness."
This inquest was held immediately after the soldier's death, and it
appears that the case was fully investigated, with full opportunities to
discover the truth. Upon the verdict found, in the absence of insanity
caused by any disability, it can hardly be claimed that his death was caused
by his military service. The attempts afterwards to impeach this verdict and
introduce another cause of death do not seem to be successful.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
LUCE, ELIZABETH (widow of John W. Luce)
Executive Mansion, June 19,1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 5997, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elizabeth Luce."
The claimant named in this bill is the widow of John W. Luce, who
entered the Army in August, 1861, and who was discharged in January, 1864,
for a disability declared at the time in the surgeon's certificate to arise
from "organic stricture of the urethra," which, from his statement, existed
at the time of his enlistment.
Notwithstanding the admission which thus appears to have been made by
him at the time of his discharge, he soon afterwards made an application for
a pension, alleging that his difficulty arose from his being thrown forward
on the pommel of his saddle when in the service.
Upon an examination of this claim by a special examiner, it is stated
that no one could be found who had any knowledge of such an injury, and the
claim was rejected.
In 1883, twenty years after the soldier alleged he was injured in the
manner stated, he died, and the cause of his death was declared to be
"chronic gastritis, complicated with kidney difficulty."
It is alleged that the examinations made by the Pension Bureau
developed the fact that the deceased soldier was a man of quite intemperate
habits.
The theory upon which this widow should be pensioned can only be that
the death of her husband resulted from a disability or injury contracted or
received in the military service. It seems to me that however satisfactorily
the injury which he described may be established, and though every suspicion
as to his habits be dismissed, there can hardly possibly be any connection
between such an injury and the causes to which his death is attributed.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
M
McCALEB, SARAH E. (widow McCaleb)
Executive Mansion, May 19, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 6609, entitled "An act for
the relief of Sarah E. McCaleb."
The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill was wounded in the
head at the battle of fort Donelson on the 15th day of February, 1862. He
served thereafter and was promoted and was discharged June 30, 1865. He died
by suicide in 1878.
He never applied for a pension.
The suggestion is made that the wound in his head predisposed him to
mental unsoundness, but it does not appear to be claimed that he was insane.
I can not believe that his suicide had any connection with his army
service.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
McCARTY, MRS. CATHERINE (widow of John McCarty)
Executive Mansion, July 6,1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 5603, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Mrs. Catherine McCarty."
The beneficiary is the widow of John McCarty, of the First Missouri
Regiment of State Militia Volunteers, who died at Clinton, Mo., April 8,
1864.
The widow filed her claim in 1866, alleging that her husband died
while in the service from an overdose of colchicum.
The evidence shows without dispute that on the day previous to the
death of the soldier a comrade procured some medicine from the regimental
surgeon and asked McCarty to smell and taste it; that he did so, and shortly
afterwards became very sick and died the next morning.
It is quite evident that the deceased soldier did more than taste this
medicine.
Although it would be pleasant to aid the widow in this case, it is
hardly fair to ask the Government to grant a pension for the freak or gross
heedlessness and recklessness of this soldier.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
McIIWAIN, MARTHA (widow of R. J. McIIwain)
Executive Mansion, June 23, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 7162, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Martha McIIwain."
R.J. McIIwain, the husband of the claimant, enlisted in 1861, and was
discharged in 1862 because of the loss of his right leg by a gunshot wound.
He was pensioned for this disability. He died May 15, 1883, from an overdose
of morphia. It is claimed by the widow that her husband was in the habit of
taking morphia to alleviate the pain he endured from his stump, and that he
accidentally took too much.
The case was investigated by a special examiner upon the widow's
application for pension, and his report shows that the deceased had been in
the habit of taking morphia and knew how to use it; that he had been in the
habit of buying 6 grains at a time, and that his death was caused by his
taking one entire purchase of 6 grains while under the influence of liquor.
In any event it is quite clear that the taking of morphia in any
quantity was not the natural result of military service or injury received
therein.
I concur in the judgment of the Pension Bureau, which rejected the
widow's claim for pension on the ground that "the death of the soldier was
not due to his military service."
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
McKAY, ELIZABETH (widow of Rowley S. McKay)
Executive Mansion, July 5, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 4782, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Elizabeth McKay."
The beneficiary named is the widow of Rowley S. McKay, who in 1862
seems to have been employed as pilot on the ram Switzerland. He seems to
have been upon the rolls of two other vessels of the United States, the
"Covington" and "General Price", but was discharged by Admiral Porter in
June, 1864, with loss of all pay and emoluments.
He filed an application for pension in 1870, alleging that while on
duty as pilot and in action with the rebel ram "Arkansas" his hearing became
affected by heavy firing. He also claimed that in February, 1863, while on
the vessel "Queen of the West", she grounded, and to escape capture he got
off and floated down the river on a cotton bale, and being in the water
about three hours, the exposure caused a disease of the urinary organs: and
that a few days after, while coming up the river on a transport, the boat
was fired into and several balls passed through his left thigh. It seems
that this claim was not definitely passed upon, but it is stated that the
records failed to show that McKay was in the service of the United States at
the time he alleged the contraction of disease of the urinary organs and was
wounded in the thigh.
The beneficiary named in this bill never made application for pension
to the Pension Bureau, but it appears that she bases her claims to
consideration by Congress upon the allegation that in 1862, while her
husband was acting as pilot of the ram or gunboat "Switzerland", he
contracted chronic diarrhea, from which he never recovered, and that he died
from the effects of said disease in May, 1874.
It will be observed that among the various causes which the soldier or
sailor himself alleged as the grounds of his application for pension chronic
diarrhea is not mentioned.
There does not appear to be any medical testimony to support the claim
thus made by the widow, and the cause of death is not definitely stated.
Taking all together, it has the appearance of a case, by no means
rare, where chronic diarrhea or rheumatism are appealed to as a basis for a
pension claim in the absence of something more substantial and definite.
The fact that the claim of the beneficiary has never been presented
to the Pension Bureau influences in some degree my action in withholding my
approval of this bill.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
MARCHAND, MARGARET D. ( widow of John Marchand)
Executive Mansion, June 19, 1886
To the Senate:
I return herewith Senate bill No. 226, entitled "An act granting a
pension to Margaret D. Marchand," without approval.
The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of John B. Marchand,
who entered the United States Navy in 1828, who was promoted to the rank of
commodore in 1866, and who was placed upon the retired list in 1870. He died
in August, 1875, of heart disease.
His widow filed an application for pension in 1883, claiming that his
fatal disease was caused by exposure and exertion in the service during the
War of the Rebellion. The application was rejected because of the inability
to furnish evidence to prove that the death had any relation to the naval
service of the deceased.
I am unable to see how any other conclusion could have been reached .
The information furnished by the report of the committee to whom this bill
was referred and derived from other data before me absolutely fails to
connect the death of Commodore Marchand with any incident of his naval
service.
This officer was undoubtedly brave and efficient, rendering his
country valuable service; but it does not appear to have been of so
distinguished a character, nor are the circumstances of his widow alleged to
be such, as to render a gratuity justifiable.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
Reasons for applying pocket veto:
(An act granting a pension to Margaret D. Marchand." Received August 5,
1886.--Memorandum.)
A bill presented to me for approval, granting a pension of $50 per
month to the beneficiary named, was disapproved upon the ground that the
death of her husband did not appear to be in any way related to any incident
of his military service.
This bill differs from the prior one simply in granting a pension
subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws instead of
fixing the rate of pension at a specified sum. I am still unable to see how
the objection to the first bill has been obviated.
MERTZ, ANNA (widow of Charles A. Mertz)
Executive Mansion, May 28, 1888
To the Senate:
I return without approval Senate Bill No. 1237, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Anna Mertz."
The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of Charles A. Mertz,
who served in the Army as captain from April, 1862, to June, 1863, when he
resigned on account of impaired health. It is stated in the committee's
report that after his return from the Army he worked occasionally at his
trade, though subject to attacks of very severe diarrhea, accompanied with
acute catarrhal pains in the head and face, which he constantly attributed
to his army service.
It is alleged that he had several times taken morphine, under medical
advice, to allay pain caused by these attacks.
He did not apply for a pension.
On the 1st day of December, 1884, more than twenty-one years after his
discharge from the Army, he died from an overdose of morphine
self-administered, for the purpose, it is claimed, of alleviating his
suffering.
I do not think that in this case the death of the soldier was so
related to his military service as to entitle his widow to a pension.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
MILLER, MARY ANN (widow of Hamilton Miller)
Executive Mansion, June 23, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 1816, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Mary Ann Miller."
Hamilton Miller, the husband of the claimant, enlisted April 22, 1861,
and was sent with his regiment to Camp Dennison, in the suburbs of
Cincinnati.
While thus in camp, apparently before he had ever been to the front,
and on the 3d of June, 1861, he obtained permission to go to the city of
Cincinnati, and was there killed by a blow received from some person who
appears to be unknown; but undoubtedly the injury occurred in a fight or as
the result of an altercation.
It is very clear to me that the Pension Bureau properly rejected the
widow's claim for pension, for the reason that the soldier was not in the
line of duty at the date of his death. It is also impossible to connect the
death with any incident of the soldier's military service.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
MILLS, EMILY G. (widow of Oscar B. Mills)
Executive Mansion, May 3, 1888
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 4534, entitled "An act for
the relief of Emily G. Mills."
The object of this bill is to provide a pension for the beneficiary
named therein as the widow of Oscar B. Mills, late a second assistant
engineer, retired, in the United States Navy. The deceased was appointed an
acting third assistant engineer in October, 1862, and in 1864 he was
promoted to the place of second assistant engineer.
It is supposed that while in active service he did his full duty,
though I am not informed of any distinguished acts of bravery or heroism. In
February, 1871, he was before a naval retiring board, which found that he
was incapacitated for active service on account of malarious fever,
contracted in 1868, and recommended that he be allowed six months' leave of
absence to recover his health.
In December, 1871, he was again examined for retirement, and the board
found that he was not in any way incapacitated from performing the duties of
his office. The next year, in 1872, another retiring board, upon an
examination of his case, found that he was "laboring under general debility,
the effect of intermittent fever acting upon an originally delicate
constitution," and he was thereupon placed upon the retired list of the Navy.
On the 10th day of August, 1873, he was accidentally shot and killed
by a neighbor, who was attempting to shoot an owl.
As long as there is the least pretense of limiting the bestowal of
pensions to disability or death in some way related to the incidents of
military and naval service, claims of this description can not consistently
be allowed.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
MOWATT, CAROLINE D. (widow)
Executive Mansion, May 19, 1896.
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 1139, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Caroline D. Mowatt."
The beneficiary mentioned in this bill was married in 1858 to Alfred
B. Soule, who served as major of a Maine regiment of volunteers in the War
of the Rebellion from September 10, 1862, to July 15, 1863, when he was
mustered out of the service. He died in February, 1864, and in 1866 a
pension was granted to the beneficiary as his widow at the rate of $25 a
month, dating from the time of her husband's death, two years before.
The widow continued to receive the pension allowed her until June 17,
1869, w;hen she was married to Henry T. Mowatt, which under the law
terminated her pensionable right. It appears, however, that a small pension
was allowed two minor children of the soldier at the time of their mother's
remarriage, which continued until 1876, more than seven years after such
remarriage, when the youngest of said children became 16 years of age.
In 1878, nine years after he became the second husband of the
beneficiary, Henry T. Mowatt died.
Though twenty-seven years have passed since the beneficiary ceased to
be the widow of the deceased soldier, and though she has been the widow of
Henry T. Mowatt for eighteen years, it is proposed by the bill under
consideration to again place her name upon the pension roll "as widow of
Alfred B. Soule, late major of the Twenty-third Regiment Maine Volunteers."
Of course the propriety of the law which terminates the pension of a
soldier's widow upon her remarriage will not be questioned. I suppose no one
would suggest the renewal of such pension during the lifetime of her second
husband. Her pensionable relation to the Government as the widow of her
deceased soldier husband, under any reasonable pension theory, absolutely
terminated with her remarriage.
If she is to be again pensioned because her second husband does not
survive her, the transaction has more the complexion of an adjustment of a
governmental insurance on the life of the second husband than the allowance
of a pension on just and reasonable grounds.
Legislation of this description is sure to establish a precedent which
it will be difficult to disclaim, and which if followed can not fail to lead
to abuse.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
N
NORMAN, MARY (widow Norman)
Executive Mansion, June 23, 1886
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 6192, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Mary Norman."
The husband of this claimant was enrolled May 22, 1863, and was
mustered out of the service June 1, 1866.
He was wounded in the head February 20, 1864; was treated for the
same, and returned to duty September 3, 1864
In her declaration for pension, filed in February, 1880, the claimant
claims a pension because of his wound and deafness consequent therefrom, and
that he died after he left the service.
In a letter, however, dated October 13, 1880, she states that her
husband was drowned while trying to cross Roanoke River in December, 1868.
Her claim was rejected in 1881 on the ground that the cause of the
soldier's death was accidental drowning, and was not due to his military
service.
In an attempt to meet this objection it was claimed as lately as 1885,
on behalf of the widow, that her husband's wound caused deafness to such an
extent that at the time he was drowned he was unable to hear the ferryman,
with whom he was crossing the river, call out that the boat was sinking.
How he could have saved his life if he had heard the warning is not
stated.
It seems very clear to me that this is not a proper case for the
granting of a pension.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
NOTTAGE, MARY J. (widow of Thomas Nottage)
Executive Mansion, June 22, 1886
To the Senate:
I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 2005, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Mary J. Nottage."
The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of Thomas Nottage, who
enlisted in August, 1861, and was discharged for disability September 17,
1862. The assistant surgeon of his regiment, upon his discharge, certified
the cause to be "disease of the urinary organs," which had troubled him
several years.
He died of consumption January 8, 1879, nearly seventeen years after
his discharge without ever having made any application for a pension.
In 1880 his widow made an application for pension, alleging that he
contracted in the service "malarial poisoning, causing remittent fever,
piles, general debility, consumption, and death," and that he left two
children, both born after his discharge, one in 1866 and the other in 1874.
The only medical testimony which has been brought to my attention
touching his condition since his discharge is that of a single physician to
the effect that he attended him from the year 1873 to the time of his death
in 1879. He states that the patient had during that time "repeated attacks
of remittent fever and irritability of the bladder, with organic deposits,"
that "in the spring of 1878 he had sore throat and cough, which resulted in
consumption, of which he died."
The claim of the widow was rejected in July, 1885, on the ground that
"the soldier's death was not the result of his service."
I am satisfied that this conclusion of the Pension Bureau was correct.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
O
O'NEAL, CHARLOTTE (widow of Richard O'Neal)
Executive Mansion, February 19, 1887
To the Senate:
I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 859, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Charlotte O'Neal."
This bill proposes to grant a pension to the beneficiary therein named
as the widow of Richard O'Neal, late colonel of the Twenty-sixth Regiment
Indiana Volunteers.
In the report of the committee in the Senate to whom this bill was
referred it is stated that the deceased soldier was the first colonel of the
regiment named; that he resigned from the Army, and was by order of the
governor of Indiana put in charge of the United States camps at
Indianapolis. A military order is made part of the report, announcing that
the funeral of Lieutenant-Colonel Richard O'Neal will take place January 6,
863, and reciting the fact that the deceased had charge of the camps near
Indianapolis for the preceding four months.
It is distinctly alleged in the report that the beneficiary did not
apply to the Pension Bureau for relief because the disease of which her
husband died was incurred after his resignation.
The records of the War Department fail to show that there was a
colonel of the Twenty-sixth Indiana Regiment named Richard O'Neal, but it
does appear that Richard Neal was lieutenant-colonel of said regiment; that
he was mustered in August 31, 1861, and resigned June 30, 1862.
If this is the officer whose widow is named in the bill, the
proposition is to pension a widow of a soldier who, after ten months'
service, resigned, and who seven months after his resignation died of
disease which was in no manner related to his military service.
There is besides such a discrepancy between the name given in the bill
and the name of the officer who served as lieutenant-colonel in the regiment
mentioned that if the merits were with the widow the bill would need further
Congressional consideration.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
OTT, CATHERINE (widow of Joseph Ott)
Executive Mansion, February 27, 1895
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6868, entitled "An
act for the relief of Catherine Ott, widow of Joseph Ott.
An application by the beneficiary named in this bill, under the law of
1890, was rejected on the ground that her husband died in the service, and
therefore had not been honorably discharged, as required by that law.
It appears that after he had served a number of years in a cavalry
regiment, and having been once discharged for reenlistment, he was
transferred to the Veteran Reserve Corps and was in that service at the time
of his death.
In these circumstances the rejection of the beneficiary's claim on the
ground stated is held, under present rulings of the Pension Bureau, to have
been erroneous, and such claim can now be favorably adjudicated upon proof
of continued widowhood of the applicant and the lack of other means of
support than her daily labor.
If such proof is supplied, she would be entitled to a pension dating
from July 14, 1890, which would be much more advantageous than the relief
afforded by the bill herewith returned.
If the beneficiary can justly claim a pension dating from her
application to the Pension Bureau in 1890, the benefits accruing to her
therefrom should not be superseded by this special legislation, which allows
relief only from the date of its enactment.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
OWEN, MRS. ANNIE C. (widow Owen)
Executive Mansion, May 28, 1886
To the Senate:
I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 1850, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Mrs. Annie C. Owen."
The husband of the claimant was mustered into the service as second
lieutenant December 14, 1861, and discharged October 16, 1862. It appears
that he died in 1876 from neuralgia of the heart. In 1883 the president
claimant filed her application for pension, alleging that her husband
received two shell wounds one in the calf of his left leg and one in his
left side, on the 1st day of July, 1862, and claiming that they were in some
way connected with the cause of his death.
On the records of his command there is no mention made of either
wound, but it does appear that on the 8th day of July, seven days after the
date of the alleged wounds, he was granted a leave of absence for thirty
days on account, as stated in a medical certificate, of "remittent fever and
diarrhea." A medical certificate dated August 5, 1862, while absent on
leave, represents him to be at that time suffering fromn "chronic bronchitis
and acute dysentery."
The application made for pension by the widow was rejected by the
Pension Bureau February 1, 1886.
There is nothing before me showing that the husband of the claimant
ever filed an application for pension, though he lived nearly fourteen years
after his discharge, and his widow's claim was not made until twenty-one
years after the alleged wounds and seven years after her husband's death.
If the information furnished concerning this soldier's service is
correct, this claim for pension must be based upon a mistake. It is hardly
possible that wounds such as are alleged should be received in battle by a
second lieutenant and no record made of them; that he should seven days
thereafter receive a leave of absence for other sickness, with no mention of
these wounds, and that a medical certificate should be made (probably with a
view of prolonging his leave) stating still other ailments, but silent as to
wounds. The further facts that he made no claim for pension and that the
claim of his widow was long delayed are worthy of consideration. And if the
wounds were received as described there is certainly no necessary connection
between them and death fourteen years afterwards from neuralgia of the
heart.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
OWEN, CLARA M. (widow Owen)
Executive Mansion, February 12, 1889
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 11052, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Clara M. Owen."
The husband of this beneficiary was pensioned for a gunshot wound in
the left chest and lung, received in action on the 30th day of September,
1864.
He was drowned August 31, 1884.
It appears that he was found in a stream where he frequently bathed,
in a depth of water variously given from 5 to 8 feet. He had undressed and
apparently gone into the water as usual.
Medical opinions are produced tending to show that drowning was not
the cause of death.
No post mortem examination was had, and it seems to me it must be
conceded that a conclusion that death was in any degree the result of wounds
received in military service rests upon the most unsatisfactory conjecture.
GROVER CLEVELAND
_______________________________________________
P
PATTON, RACHEL (widow of John F. Patton)
Executive Mansion, May 21, 1