In these circumstances the proof of disability, such as it is, is as consistent with its incurrence during desertion as it is with the theory that the beneficiary suffered therefrom as the result of honorable military service.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 16, 1889.
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 2236, entitled “An act granting a pension to Eli. J. Yamgheim.”
The beneficiary named in this bill filed an application for pension in the Pension Bureau April 15, 1875, basing his claim upon an alleged wound of his left leg from a spent ball about October 15, 1861.
There is no record of his incurring any wound or injury during his service, and it does not appear that the company to which he belonged was in action nearer to the date he specifies than September 17, 1861, and his captain testifies that the beneficiary was not injured in the engagement of that day, which lasted only about fifteen minutes.
The proof taken in the case establishes that before enlistment the beneficiary had a sore on his leg which was quite troublesome, which suppurated, and after healing would break out again.
In the medical examinations made during the pendency of the claim the diseased leg was always found, but no mention is made of any other injury and no other injury seems to have been discoverable.
I can not avoid the conviction upon the facts presented that whatever disability has existed since the discharge of the beneficiary arose from causes which were present before enlistment, and that the same is not chargeable to his military service.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 16, 1889.
To the House of Representatives:
I return without approval House bill No. 4887, entitled “An act granting a pension to Charles E. Scott.”
This beneficiary entered the volunteer service, nearly at the close of the War of the Rebellion and served from the 8th day of March, 1865, to July 24, in the same year, a period of four months and sixteen days.
He filed a claim for pension in 1884, alleging that he incurred camp itch in July, 1865, which resulted in partial blindness.
Upon the proof presented, and after examination, the claim was rejected upon the ground that it did not appear that the impairment of his vision was the result of any incident of his army service.
I am entirely satisfied that this was a correct disposition of the case, and that upon the same ground the bill herewith returned should not be approved.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 17, 1889.
To The Senate:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 3646, entitled “An act for the relief of William R. Wheaton and Charles H. Chamberlain, of California.”