A \ B \ C \ D \ E \ F \ G \ H \ I \ J \ K \ L \ M \ N \ O \ P \ R \ S \ T \ U \ V \ W \Z

A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents by Grover Cleveland

G >> Grover Cleveland >> A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents




In February, 1888, a medical examination was made under direction of
the Pension Bureau, when it was found that the claimant had the general
appearance of being healthy and well nourished, but that he had a small
uncomplicated inguinal hernia on the right side, which was easily
retained.

I can not believe upon the facts presented that an injury of the
character alleged could have been sustained in the service and still
permitted the performance of all the duties of wagon master for months
thereafter, remaining undeveloped for so many years, and that there
should now be such a lack of testimony connecting it with any incident
of military service.

I believe the rejection of this claim was right and just upon its
merits.

GROVER CLEVELAND.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 24, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill 6908, entitled "An act granting a
pension to William P. Witt."

The beneficiary named in the bill was enrolled for one hundred days'
service on the 13th day of July, 1864, and was mustered out on the 16th
day of November, in the same year. The record shows that he was reported
present on all rolls until he was mustered out.

He filed a claim for pension in 1884, alleging that he incurred chronic
diarrhea, liver disease, rheumatism, and a disease of the head affecting
his hearing during his military service. Two comrades testify to his
being sick and being in the hospital to such an extent as to wholly
discredit his presence with his company. A physician testifies that he
prescribed for him some time in the month of November, 1864, for liver
disease and jaundice, to which rheumatism supervened, confining him six
weeks or more.

There seems to be a complete hiatus of any medical or other evidence
concerning his physical condition from that time until nearly twenty
years thereafter, in July, 1884, when he was examined, and it was found
that he had impaired hearing in both ears, but no symptoms of
rheumatism, and that his liver was normal.

Without further detailing particulars, the entire complexion of this
case satisfies me that the claimant contracted no pensionable disability
during his one hundred days of service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 24, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 4550, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Chloe Quiggle, widow of Phillip Quiggle."

The husband of the beneficiary named enlisted February 11, 1865, and was
discharged September 27, 1865. The records show that he was reported
August 31, 1865, as "absent, confined in post prison at Chattanooga
since August 18, 1865."

He filed a claim for pension June 25, 1880, alleging that after a march
from Chattanooga to a point 1-1/2 miles distant and back he upon his
return drank some water, which produced diarrhea, since which time he
had been troubled also with disease of kidneys and rheumatism.

He died in September, 1882, and the claim then pending on his behalf
was completed by his widow. After a special examination the claim for
diarrhea was, on the 21st day of April, 1887, allowed from September 28,
1865, to January 1, 1870, when it was shown that any disability from
this cause ceased. The claim for disease of kidneys and rheumatism was
rejected upon the ground that no such disabilities were shown to be due
to military service.

The widow filed a claim on her own behalf August 27, 1883, alleging the
death of the soldier from the results of prostration by heat while
marching near Nashville, Tenn., and also from disease of kidneys,
rheumatism, and chronic diarrhea.

It is reported to me that the evidence taken during a special
examination of this case established that before and after enlistment
the soldier was addicted to the excessive use of intoxicating liquors.

One physician stated to the examiner that shortly after the soldier's
discharge he found him suffering from disease of kidneys and from
rheumatism and diarrhea, but that he concluded the disease of the
kidneys had been coming on for a year; that it could not have been
caused by a sunstroke a few weeks previously, and that the diseases were
of longer standing than that.

Another physician who attended the soldier during his last illness
testified that he did not know that he suffered from any disease until
the summer of 1882; that he found him suffering from retention of urine,
and that the difficulty rapidly developed into an acute attack of
Bright's disease; that no indications of rheumatism were found, but that
the disease progressed steadily and was a well-marked case of Bright's
disease of the kidneys. He also testified that the origin of the disease
was no doubt recent, though possibly it might have existed in a low form
for some years.

A medical examination in May, 1882, developed no disease of the kidneys.

It seems to me that all the reliable testimony in the case tends to show
beyond a doubt that the soldier's death was not due to any incident of
his military service. I do not find that the medical testimony given by
his neighbors makes a suggestion that it was, and upon all the facts I
am of the opinion that the pension which has been already allowed was a
liberal disposition of the case.

The beneficiary named in this bill is aged, and it would certainly be a
gratification to grant her relief; but the question is whether we do
well to establish a precedent for the allowance of claims of this
character in the distribution of pension funds.

GROVER CLEVELAND.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 30, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 465, entitled "An act granting
a pension to William Sackman, sr."

The beneficiary named in this bill served from December 24, 1861, to
February 29, 1864, in the Fifth Regiment of the Missouri Militia
Cavalry.

He was discharged on the day last named for disability. His certificate
of discharge states his disability as follows:

Palpitation of the heart and defective lungs, the disability caused by
falling off his horse near Fredericktown, Mo., while intoxicated, on
detached service, in the month of September, 1862. Not having done any
duty since, a discharge would benefit the Government and himself.


It appears that a claim for pension was filed in the year 1881, in which
the claimant alleged that--

At Fredericktown, Mo., about the 10th or 12th of April, 1863, he had
three ribs broken by falling from his horse while surrounded by
guerrillas.


It will be seen that while the certificate of discharge mentions a fall
in September, 1862, no allusion is made to any fracture of ribs, while
the claimant alleges such an injury occurred in April, 1863.

In 1885 the surgeon who made the medical certificate attached to the
discharge, in answer to an inquiry made by the Commissioner of Pensions,
says:

I have to state that I remember the case very distinctly. I made the
examination in person, and was thoroughly acquainted with the case. I
read the statement on which the application for discharge was based to
the man, and he consented to have the papers forwarded as they read.
The application for pension is fraudulent and should not be allowed.


I have omitted references made to the habits of the soldier by this
medical officer.

Of course much reliance should be placed upon these statements made by
an officer whose business it was to know the exact facts, and who made
his certificate at a time when such facts were fresh in his mind. There
is no intimation that the surgeon who made the statement referred to was
inimical to the soldier or influenced by any unjust motive.

The attempt to impeach the record thus made is based upon affidavits
made by a number of the soldier's comrades, who testify to his character
and habits, and only three of whom speak of an injury to the soldier
caused by falling from his horse. Two of these affiants allege that they
were with the claimant on detached duty when his horse took fright and
ran away with him, injuring him so that he could not rise and get on his
horse without assistance. So far as these affidavits are before me, no
date of this occurrence is given, nothing is said as to the character of
the injuries, and no reference is made to the condition of the soldier
at the time. The third affiant, who speaks of an injury, says that it
occurred while on duty on the march from Pilot Knob to Cape Girardeau,
in the year 1862 or 1863, and that it was caused by the soldier's being
thrown from his horse. He says further that the soldier was not
intoxicated at that time.

No mention is made that I can discover of any fracture of the ribs
except in the claimant's application for pension made in 1881, seventeen
years after his discharge, and in a report of an examining surgeon made
in 1882.

With no denial of the soldier's condition, as stated by the surgeon,
on the part of the only parties who claim to have been present at
the time of the injury, I can not satisfy myself, in view of the other
circumstances surrounding this case, that the allegations contained in
the claimant's discharge are discredited.

GROVER CLEVELAND.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 30, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 838, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Mary Sullivan."

On the 1st day of July, 1886, an act was approved which is an exact copy
of the one herewith returned. In pursuance of that act the beneficiary's
name was placed upon the pension rolls.

A second law for the same purpose is of course unnecessary.

GROVER CLEVELAND.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 1, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 19, entitled "An act for the
relief of H.B. Wilson, administrator of the estate of William Tinder,
deceased."

The purpose of this bill is to refund to the estate of William Tinder
the sum of $5,000, which was paid to the Government by his administrator
in June, 1880, upon the following facts:

In 1876 two indictments were found against one Evans, charging him with
passing counterfeit money. In May, 1878, he was tried upon one of said
indictments and the jury failed to agree. Thereupon the prisoner entered
into two recognizances in the sum of $5,000 each, with W.R. Evans and
William Tinder as sureties, conditioned for the appearance of the
prisoner Evans at the next term of the court, in November, 1878, for
trial upon said indictment. Before that date, however, the prisoner fled
the country and failed to appear according to the condition of his bond.
In the meantime William Tinder died and H.B. Wilson was appointed his
administrator.

Suits were brought upon the two bail bonds, and, the liability of the
sureties not being admitted, the suits were tried in March, 1880,
resulting in two judgments in favor of the United States and against the
surety Evans and the estate of Tinder for $5,000 each and the costs.

Soon thereafter an application was made by the administrator of the
estate of William Tinder for relief, and an offer was made by him to pay
$5,000 and the costs in compromise and settlement of the liability of
said estate upon said two judgments.

These judgments were a preferred claim against the estate, which was
represented to be worth sixteen or eighteen thousand dollars. The other
surety, Evans, was alleged to be worthless, and it was claimed that
neither the administrator of the Tinder estate nor his attorneys had
known the whereabouts of the indicted party since his flight, and that
some time would elapse before certain litigation in which the estate was
involved could be settled and the claims against it paid.

It was considered best by the officers of the Government to accept the
proposition of the administrator, which was done in June, 1880. The sum
of $5,099.06, the amount of one of said judgments, with interest and
costs, was paid into the United States Treasury, and the estate of
Tinder was in consideration thereof released and discharged from all
liability upon both of said judgments.

Thus was the transaction closed, in exact accordance with the wishes and
the prayer of the representative of this estate and by the favor and
indulgence of the Government upon his application. There was, so far as
I can learn, no condition attached, and no understanding or agreement
that any future occurrence would affect the finality of the compromise
by which the Government had accepted one-half of its claim in full
settlement.

It appears that in 1881 the party indicted was arrested and brought to
trial, which resulted in his conviction; and apparently for this reason
alone it is proposed by the bill under consideration to open the
settlement made at the request of the administrator and refund to him
the sum which he paid on such settlement pursuant to his own offer.

I can see no fairness or justice to the Government in such a proposition.
I do not find any statement that the administrator delivered the
prisoner to the United States authorities for trial. On the contrary, it
appears from an examination made in the First Comptroller's Office that
he was arrested by the marshal on the 25th day of May, 1881, who charged
and was paid his fees therefor. And if the administrator had surrendered
the prisoner to justice it would not entitle him to the repayment of the
money he has paid to compromise the two judgments against him.

The temptation to relieve from contracts with the Government upon
plausible application is, in my opinion, not sufficiently resisted;
but to refund money paid into the public Treasury upon such a liberal
compromise as is exhibited in this case seems like a departure from all
business principles and an unsafe concession that the interests of the
Government are to be easily surrendered.

GROVER CLEVELAND.



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.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 7, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 1406, entitled "An act to
provide for the sale of certain New York Indian lands in Kansas."

Prior to the year 1838 a number of bands and tribes of New York
Indians had obtained 500,000 acres of land in the State of Wisconsin,
upon which they proposed to reside. In the year above named a treaty was
entered into between the United States and these Indians whereby they
relinquished to the Government these Wisconsin lands. In consideration
thereof, and, as the treaty declares, "in order to manifest the deep
interest of the United States in the future peace and prosperity of
the New York Indians," it was agreed there should be set apart as a
permanent home for all the New York Indians then residing in the State
of New York, or in Wisconsin, or elsewhere in the United States, who
had no permanent home, a tract of land amounting to 1,824,000 acres,
directly west of the State of Missouri, and now included in the State
of Kansas--being 320 acres for each Indian, as their number was then
computed--"to have and to hold the same in fee simple to the said tribes
or nations of Indians by patent from the President of the United
States."

Full power and authority was also given to said Indians "to divide said
lands among the different tribes, nations, or bands in severalty," with
the right to sell and convey to and from each other under such rules and
regulations as should be adopted by said Indians in their respective
tribes or in general council.

The treaty further provided that such of the tribes of these Indians as
did not accept said treaty and agree to remove to the country set apart
for their new homes within five years or such other time as the
President might from time to time appoint should forfeit all interest
in the land so set apart to the United States; and the Government
guaranteed to protect and defend them in the peaceable possession and
enjoyment of their new homes.

I have no positive information that any considerable number of these
Indians removed to the lands provided for them within the five years
limited by the treaty. Their omission to do so may have been owing to
the failure of the Government to appropriate the money to pay the
expense of such removal, as it agreed to do in the treaty.

It is, however, stated in a letter of the Secretary of the Interior
dated April 6, 1878, contained in the report of the Senate committee to
whom the bill under consideration was referred, that in the year 1842
some of these Indians settled upon the lands described in the treaty;
and it is further alleged in said report that in 1846 about two hundred
more of them were removed to said lands.

The letter of the Secretary of the Interior above referred to contains
the following statement concerning these Indian occupants:

From death and the hostility of the settlers, who were drawn in that
direction by the fertility of the soil and other advantages, all of the
Indians gradually relinquished their selections, until of the Indians
who had removed thither from the State of New York only thirty-two
remained in 1860.


And the following further statement is made:

The files of the Indian Office show abundant proof that they did not
voluntarily relinquish their occupation.


The proof thus referred to is indeed abundant, and is found in official
reports and affidavits made as late as the year 1859. By these it
appears that during that year, in repeated instances, Indian men and
widows of deceased Indians were driven from their homes by the threats
of armed men; that in one case at least the habitation of an Indian
woman was burned, and that the kind of outrages were resorted to which
too often follow the cupidity of whites and the possession of fertile
lands by defenseless and unprotected Indians.

An agent, in an official letter dated August 9, 1859, after detailing
the cruel treatment of these occupants of the lands which the Government
had given them, writes:

Since these Indians have been placed under my charge, which was, I
think, in 1855, I have endeavored to protect them; but complaint after
complaint has reached me, and I have reported their situation again and
again; and I hope that it will not be long when the Indians who are
entitled to land under the decision of the Indian Office shall have it
set apart to them.


The same agent, under date of January 18, 1860, referring to these
Indians, declares:

These Indians have been driven off their land and claims upon the New
York tract by the whites, and they are now very much scattered and many
of them are very destitute.


It was found in 1860 that of all the Indians who had prior to that
date selected and occupied part of these lands but thirty-two remained,
and it seems to have been deemed but justice to them to confirm their
selections by some kind of governmental grant or declaration, though
it does not appear that any of them had been able to maintain actual
possession of all their selected lands against white intrusion. Thus
certain special commissioners appointed to examine this subject, under
date of May 29, 1860, make the following statement:

In this connection it may be proper to remark that many of the tracts
so selected were claimed by lawless men who had compelled the Indians
to abandon them under threats of violence; but we are confident that no
serious injury will be done to anyone, as the improvements are of but
little value.


On the 14th day of September, 1860, certificates were issued to the
thirty-two Indians who had made selections of lands and who still
survived, with a view of securing to them such selections and at the
same time granting to them the number of acres which it was provided
they should have by the treaty of 1838. These certificates were made
by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, and declared that in conformity
with the provisions of the treaty of 1838 there had been assigned and
allotted to the person named therein 320 acres of the land designated in
said treaty, which land was particularly described in said certificates,
which concluded as follows:

And the selection of said tract for the exclusive use and benefit of
said reserve, having been approved by the Secretary of the Interior, is
not subject to be alienated in fee, leased, or otherwise disposed of
except to the United States.


In a letter dated September 13, 1860, from the Indian Commissioner to
the agent in the neighborhood of these lands reference is made to the
conduct of white intruders upon the same, and the following instructions
were given to said agent:


In view of these representations and the fact that these white persons
who are in possession of the land are intruders, I have to direct
that you will visit the New York Reserve in Kansas at your earliest
convenience, accompanied by those Indians living among the Osages to
whom said lands have been allotted, with a view to place them in
possession of the lands to which they are entitled; and if you should
meet with any forcible resistance from white settlers you will report
their names to this office, in order that appropriate action may be
taken in the premises, and you will inform them that if they do not
immediately abandon said lands they will be removed by force. When you
shall have given the thirty-two Indians peaceable possession of their
lands, or attempted to do so and have been prevented by forcible
resistance, you will make a report of your action to this Bureau.

The records of the Indian Bureau do not disclose that any report was
ever made by the agent to whom these instructions were given.

In 1861 and 1862 mention was made by the agents of the destitute
condition of these Indians and of their being deprived of their lands,
and in these years petitions were presented in their behalf asking that
justice be done them on account of the failure of the Government to
provide them with homes.

In the meantime, and in December, 1860, the remainder of the reserve not
allotted to the thirty-two survivors was thrown open to settlement by
Executive proclamation. Of course this was followed by increased
conflict between the settlers and the Indians. It is presumed that it
became dangerous for those to whom lands had been allotted to attempt to
gain possession of them. On the 4th day of December, 1865, Agent Snow
returned twenty-seven of the certificates of allotment which had not
been delivered, and wrote as follows to the Indian Bureau:

A few of these Indians were at one time put in possession of their
lands. They were driven off by the whites; one Indian was killed, others
wounded, and their houses burned. White men at this time have possession
of these lands, and have valuable improvements on them. The Indians are
deterred even asking for possession. I would earnestly ask, as agent for
these wronged and destitute people, that some measure be adopted by the
Government to give these Indians their rights.


An official report made to the Secretary of the Interior dated February
16, 1871, gives the history of these lands, and concludes as follows:

These lands are now all or nearly all occupied by white persons who have
driven the Indians from their homes--in some instances with violence.
There is great necessity that some relief should be afforded to them by
legislation of Congress, authorizing the issue of patents to the
allottees or giving them power to sell and convey.

Copyright (c) 2007. bestextbooks.com. All rights reserved.

Various - "Chambers' Edinburgh Journal"

Henry Bibb - "Narrative of the Life and Adventures of Henry Bibb, an American Slave, Written by Himself"

George Washington Cable - "Bylow Hill"

Andrew Lee - "Sermons on Various Important Subjects"