, 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 th