as mustered out with his company September 22, 1864.
He was pensioned for the wound which he claimed to have received as his
only injury.
In another declaration, filed in 1872, he alleged that in December,
1862, he was struck in his left eye by some hard substance, which
destroyed the vision of that organ.
In a subsequent declaration, filed in 1878, he claimed that he received
a shell wound in his left knee in November, 1863.
This latter claim has not been finally acted upon by the Pension Bureau,
and I am of the opinion that with the diverse claims for injuries which
have been there presented on behalf of the beneficiary named justice
will be done in the case.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return without approval House bill No. 6718, entitled "An act granting
a pension to William H. Starr."
An application made by this claimant to the Pension Bureau is still
pending there, and additional evidence has been called for, which the
claim is awaiting before final decision.
I am of the opinion that the investigation there should be fully
completed before special legislation is resorted to.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return without approval House bill No. 7109, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Joseph Tuttle."
This man claims a pension as the dependent father of Charles Tuttle, who
enlisted in 1861 and was killed in action May 31, 1862.
The claimant, being, as he says, poor, took his son Charles, at the age
of 9 years, and placed him in charge of an uncle living in Ohio. An
arrangement was afterwards made by which the boy should live with a
stranger named Betts. Upon the death of this gentleman the lad was
transferred to one Captain Hill, with whom he remained until his
enlistment in 1861.
It is stated that during the time he remained with Mr. Hill he sent his
father $5; but the fatherly care and interest of the claimant in his son
is exhibited by his statement that though the son was killed in 1862 his
father was not aware of it until the year 1864.
After the exhibition of heartlessness and abandonment on the part of a
father which is a prominent feature in this case, I should be sorry to
be a party to a scheme permitting him to profit by the death of his
patriotic son. The claimant relinquished the care of his son, and should
be held to have relinqu
|