9. Illustrative cases in mothers' claims-Continued.

Claim of mother was properly rejected upon facts presented showing that prior to son's death, and subsequent thereto, the father was regularly employed at a compensation of $2.25 per day, and that he owned a house in which he and claimant lived. Mother of Isaac M. Allen (Sec. Schurz), 6 P. D. (o. s.), 233.

Where at date of claimant's son's death her husband was constantly employed at the maximum wages paid workmen of the class of workmen to which he belonged, she is not deemed dependent on her son for support within the meaning of the pension laws. Ann Tobin (Sec. Schurz), 6 P. D. (o. s.), 362.

Where father received an annual income varying from $600 to $800 prior and subsequent to the death of his son, together with board for himself and wife: Held, That this was not a case of dependence within the meaning of the law, and rejec tion is affirmed. Caroline E. French (Sec. Schurz), 7 P. D. (0. s.), 35.

Two hundred and fifty dollars per annum is not regarded as sufficient for a comfortable maintenance of the husband and the claimant, and they were, therefore, dependent on their son for support within the meaning of the law. Sarah Trimble (Sec. Schurz), 7 P. D. (o. s.), 303.

This claimant's income at the date of her son's death being $315 per year, it is held it was adequate to her support in that condition of life in which she was then living; but as she was, at date of filing her claim, eighteen years later, 82 years of age, without any means of support, and actually dependent upon friends for subsistence, pension should be allowed in accordance with the ruling in case of Mrs. Eastman Pile, March 19, 1874, Sec. Delano, and with the beneficent spirit and intent of the pension laws. Mother of Charles R. Prescott (Sec. Teller), 12 P. D. (o. s.), 477.

It is believed the letter of the law relates more to the wants and necessities of the mother for aid from the son than to the son's physical ability to render such aid; and it being shown herein that the son was, at the time of his death, financially and physically unable to contribute to the support of his mother, and that the father, her husband, was physically unable to do more than light labor, being disabled and nearly 70 years of age, and that the son was, in fact, a charge upon his parents, it is hela the mother's claim should be allowed. Mother of Thomas Cameron (Sec. Teller), 12 P. D. (0. s.), 482.

The fact that the husband misapplied his earnings does not establish dependence of the mother upon the son. Charlotte Letterman (Asst. Sec. Hawkins), 1 P. D., 43.

9. Illustrative cases in mothers' claims-Continued.

A life interest in a farm of 155 acres, the assessed valuation of which, in 1862, was $1,550, with $940 worth of personal property, claimant's admission to special examiner and the testimony all tending to show adequate subsistence, does not constitute a case of dependence. Francis Mattingly (Asst. Sec. Hawkins) 1 P. D., 152.

A support of dependent mother provided in pursuance of a contract, the consideration therefor being the use of a farm and stock in which she had a life interest, is deprived of the character of a contribution, and is not affected or changed by the inadequacy of the consideration, it not appearing that such support fell short of an adequate subsistence. Louisa C. Morrison (Asst. Sec. Hawkins) 1 P. D., 306.

Where the claimant's husband owned, up to soldier's death, an improved farm of 160 acres, and furnished his family, including claimant, an adequate support, she, the claimant, was not dependent upon the soldier under the law, although the latter, prior to his enlistment and while a minor, assisted in his parents' support, and during his service subscribed $10 a month to them, which was paid up to his death in service. Mother of James E. Cushman (Asst. Sec. Hawkins), 2 P. D., 166.

Where a soldier's mother at the time of his death was receiv ing an adequate support from the proceeds of her husband's farm and the income derived by him from his trade as a cooper, she is not dependent. Mother of Abram Switz (Asst. Sec. Hawkins), 2 P. D., 342.

At the time of the soldier's death claimant was residing with her husband upon a well-improved farm, from which they derived an adequate and comfortable support, which farm was then assessed for taxes at nearly $1,400 and was sold a few years later for $4,000: Held, Such a state of affairs necessarily precludes existence of such a condition of dependence upon the soldier for the necessity for pension as an adequate means of subsistence for any period since his death as would entitle to a dependent pension. Mother of Charles Neher (Asst. Sec. Hawkins), 2 P. D., 347.

Claimant's husband being, at the time of the soldier's death, possessed of property assessed at over $5,000, and conducting a retail drug business from which they derived a comfortable support, she was not dependent, although the soldier made contributions, and it is immaterial that such contributions were made. Mother of William Longshaw (Asst. Sec. Hawkins), 2 P. D., 387.

9. Illustrative cases in mothers' claims-Continued.

Where the evidence shows that claimant and her husband owned a farm that yielded "a comfortable support" for the family so long as the husband lived, and that the adequacy of that support was not appreciably affected by the death of the soldier, it is held that pensionable dependence does not exist. Martha Gill (Asst. Sec. Bussey), 3 P. D., 274.

It being proved that claimant was, at the date of her son's death, compelled, in order to secure support for herself and family, to labor incessantly as a tailoress, her husband having been for years sickly and unable to perform ordinary manual labor; that a mutual understanding existed between parents and soldier that he would take care of them, and that he sent money to them while he was in service, it was held that claimant was dependent. Mother of Valentine S. Cumner (Asst. Sec. Bussey), 4 P. D., 25.

On the evidence in this case dependence is considered proved and Ellen Welch, 5 P. D., 394, is overruled, so far as it construes section 4707, Revised Statutes. Mary A. Francks (Asst. Sec. Reynolds), 7 P. D., 43.

A widow mother, 77 years of age, whose only property consists of her home, paid for in part by her dependent mother's pension money, and which, with her personal property, valued on assessment at $1,000, does not yield her a support without her daily labor, is dependent within the meaning of the pension laws. Mary Kille (Asst. Sec. Reynolds), 7 P. D., 550.

10. Illustrative cases in fathers' claims.

As under the laws of Ohio a husband is entitled to the rents and profits of real estate belonging to his wife unless she leases such estate, the husband's pensionable status as a dependent father depends, in this case, upon the fact whether his wife has leased her property. Her property in this claim consisted of a farm of 75 acres, valued at $3,750. If she has not leased it her husband, the father, is not pensionable. Father of Clement Marsh (Actg. Sec. Smith), 2 P. D. (o. s.), 415.

Where a soldier's father was so deaf as to be disabled, to a large extent, from obtaining a subsistence for himself and family, and was retained by his employer only because he had no other means of support, and the son, prior to his enlist. ment, worked in his father's store without salary, and also, prior to enlistment, made cash contributions to his father, it is held the father was dependent within the meaning of the law, and is pensionable. Father of Noah E. Mendell (Actg. Sec. Gorham), 3 P. D. (o. s.), 474.

10. Illustrative cases in fathers' claims-Continued.

Where father, during period of alleged dependence, subsequent to the son's death, received by his earnings on an average $600 per year: Held, That it was not a case of dependence within the meaning of the law. Father of Francis J. Bilhartz (Actg. Sec. Gorham), 4 P. D. (o. s.), 6.

Where the mother of a soldier had, "prior to the breaking out of the rebellion," abandoned her husband and their children (including the soldier), and it appearing from the evidence that the father had the sole care and custody of the children after being abandoned by their mother," and that he "was dependent upon the soldier for support within the meaning of the law granting pensions to dependent parents," it was held, on appeal, that such father was entitled to pension. David Taylor (Sec. Lamar), 16 P. D. (o. s.), 246.

Where a soldier's father was deriving, at the time of the soldier's enlistment, a comfortable support from his farm, and continued thereafter to derive such support therefrom, he is not dependent under the law because deprived of such son's services in managing said farm. Father of Joseph Hyer (Asst. Sec. Hawkins), 2 P. D., 237.

Where a soldier's father at the date of the soldier's death was in fair health, and by working at his trade as blacksmith supported his family in comparative comfort with the proceeds of his labor, and had also the assistance of two minor sons, younger than the soldier, he was not dependent under the law, although the soldier may have contributed to his support, prior to his enlistment, a portion of the proceeds of his own labor. David Rees (Asst. Sec. Muldrow), 2 P. D., 307.

This claimant, being physically so disabled as to be from that cause dependent upon the soldier for support at the date of the latter's death, is pensionable as a dependent father, there being a clear distinction between cases where the father is poor and disabled, unable by reason of his physical disability to procure an adequate support, and cases where, being able-bodied, he neglects or refuses to labor to the extent of his physical ability; and it is immaterial whether a disability was the result of vicious habits. Father of James O'Hare (Asst. Sec. Hawkins), 2 P. D., 370.

Where a father's dependence upon a son for support was due, not to his incapacity for earning a support, but to his habits of intemperance and unwillingness to maintain himself, he is not pensionably dependent. Citing and approving David R. Fuller, November 22, 1879. Father of William Casteel (Asst. Sec. Bussey), 4 P. D., 271.

10. Illustrative cases in fathers' claims-Continued.

Where a father who was in prison serving sentence prior to, at the time of, and subsequent to his son's enlistment, applied for and secured pension as a dependent father, such claim was fraudulent. Mother of Abram Van Alstine (Asst. Sec. Bussey), 4 P. D., 394.

In a case of a father who is unable to labor, the mere possession of an interest in a farm producing an income of $60 per annum, should not exclude him from pension under section 4707, Revised Statutes, or section 1 of the act of June 27, 1890. Joseph K. Smith (Asst. Sec. Reynolds), 8 P. D., 9.

The fact that a father, at the date of his son's death, was also in the service of the United States, receiving the pay and allowances of a private soldier does not bar the allowance of pension upon the ground of nondependence, it being shown that he was, by reason of age and disabilities, placed in the Veteran Reserve Corps. Joseph J. Hicks (Asst. Sec. Reynolds), 8 P. D.,

See also ACCRUED PENSION; COMMENCEMENT; CONSTRUCTION OF LAWS; DECLARATIONS; DESERTION; EVIDENCE (Special act); EXAMINATIONS (Special); FATHERS; INDIGENCE; MARRIAGE; WIDOWS.

DEPUTY PROVOST-MARSHAL.

See SERVICE.

DESCENT.

See ACCRUED PENSION; BOUNTY LAND; CONSTRUCTION OF LAWS; SPECIAL ACT.

DESERTER'S RELEASE.

The act of April 11, 1890, neither requires nor authorizes the Secretary of War to grant a deserter at large a discharge from the military service. It authorizes merely a release from liability to arrest, trial, and punishment by court-martial, for alleged desertion. Frank Wempe (Asst. Sec. Bussey), 5 P. D., 339.

A deserter's release under act of April 11, 1890, is in no sense a discharge or release from the service. William T. Coburn (Asst. Sec. Reynolds), 7 P. D., 182.