mustered in the service as a captain in another regiment of
volunteers, and on the 17th day of November, 1865, again tendered his
resignation, and was finally discharged.

Upon his application for pension under the general law, fourteen years
thereafter, he admitted that he suffered from hydrocele as early as
1856, but claimed that an operation then performed for the same had
given him permanent relief.

It will be seen that the claimant's term of service was liberally
interspersed with sick leave, detached service, resignations, and
membership in the Invalid Corps. He admits having the trouble which
would naturally result in his alleged disability long before he entered
the service. The surgeon upon whose certificate he was appointed to the
Invalid Corps must have stated to him the character of his difficulty
and that it was chronic. No application for pension was made until
fourteen years after his discharge and just prior to the expiration of
the time within which large arrearages might have been claimed. There is
no hint of any medical testimony at all contradicting the certificate of
the army surgeon made in 1863, but it is stated in the report of the
committee that he can not procure medical testimony as to his soundness
before entering the service because his family physician is dead. If he
had filed his application earlier, it would have appeared in better
faith, and it may be that he could have secured the evidence of his
family physician if it was of the character he desired.

After the Pension Bureau has been in operation for a score of years
since the late civil war, equipped with thousands of employees charged
with no other duty except the ascertainment and adjustment of the claims
of our discharged soldiers and their surviving relatives, it seems
to me that a stronger case than this should be presented to justify
the passage of a special act, twenty-three years after an alleged
disability, granting a pension which has been refused by the Bureau
especially organized for the purpose of allowing the same under just
and liberal laws.

I am by no means insensible to that influence which leads the judgment
toward the allowance of every claim alleged to be founded upon patriotic
service in the nation's cause; and yet I neither believe it to be a duty
nor a kindness to the worthy citizens for whose benefit our scheme of
pensions was provided to permit the diversion of the nation's bounty to
objects not within