I fail to discover how any other conclusion can be reached.

I am of the opinion that, considering the cause of death and all the facts and circumstances surrounding this case, the certificate of discharge which the soldier himself procured to be made out should stand as stating the true origin of…

Upon the merits as the case now stands, and because of the mistake in describing the relationship of the beneficiary, this bill, I think, should not become a law.

I can not upon the facts of this case arrive at a conclusion different from the Pension Bureau.

I make no reference to the fact stated in the committee's report suggesting the idea that the courage of the deceased soldier had been questioned.

I return without approval House bill No. 2472, entitled 'An act granting a pension to Lydia A. Eaton.'

Whatever disability he had at the date of discharge he had when he enlisted.

The cause of rejection is stated to be 'that the death cause (sunstroke) was not the result of the soldier's military service.'

There does not, however, seem to be a particle of evidence establishing that cause of death.

it seems quite clear to me that it would be extending the pension theory to an unwarrantable limit to hold the Government responsible for such an accident.

I can not believe that this is a case in which a pension should be granted.

I therefore venture, notwithstanding the persistent misrepresentations of my action in similar cases, to disapprove this bill.