f the proposed route through the Cherokee lands
appears to be considerably over 100 miles, and it is plain that there is
no sufficient guaranty in the bill that the entire road will be built
within any particular time. There is no forfeiture and no limitation for
the completion of the road if 50 miles is built within three years, and
there may be some doubt how far the forfeiture would extend in case of
a failure to finish the 50 miles within the time specified.
I believe these grants to railroads should be sparingly made; that
when made they should present better reasons for their necessity and
usefulness than are apparent in this case, and that they should be
guarded and limited by provisions which are not found in the bill
herewith returned.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 3, 1888_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return without approval House bill No. 3008, entitled "An act for the
relief of P.A. Leatherbury."
This bill provides that the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay to the
person above named the sum of $601.27, being the amount paid by him to
Lucy Roberts on two pension checks which were afterwards recalled and
canceled.
The committee of the House to whom this bill was referred report that--
The Department discovered, after the issuing of the checks, that the
claim for pension was fraudulent, but not until after the purchase,
in the ordinary course of business, by Mr. Leatherbury paying $601.27
therefor and giving his due bill for the balance, which balance he
refused to pay after ascertaining that the check was repudiated by
the Government.
Lucy Roberts, a colored woman, filed a claim for pension in 1868,
alleging that she was the widow of Nelson Roberts, who died in the
military service in 1865.
Her claim was allowed in 1876, and two checks, numbered 6863 and 6864,
aggregating $1,301.27, were issued on account of said pension. Before
payment of the checks information was received which caused an
investigation by the Pension Bureau as to the honesty of the claim
for pension. This investigation established its utterly fraudulent
character, and thereupon the checks were canceled and the woman's name
was dropped from the pension rolls.
Certain important facts are reported to me from the Pension Bureau as
having been developed upon the investigation.
It appears that one Thomas had undertaken to act for the claimant in
procuring her pension under an
|