But the weak features of this application are not alluded to in the
committee's report.
The record of the soldier's death states that he was "killed by one of
his comrades in a difficulty."
The same Lieutenant Houts who in 1872 made oath that the soldier
was wounded while attempting to separate comrades who were fighting
testified in 1864 before the court-martial upon the trial of the man
who did the wounding, and whose name was Capehart, that Dunlap, the
deceased, stated to him "that he was more to blame than Capehart, and
that they had been scuffling, at first good-naturedly, and then both got
angry; that he was rougher with Capehart than he ought to have been."
Another witness testified that the affray took place between Dunlap and
Capehart; that Dunlap handled Capehart very roughly, kicking him, etc.,
and that finally Capehart stabbed Dunlap, upon which the latter
attempted to get his gun, but was prevented from doing so by the
witness.
Of course there can be no pretense of any kind of claim against the
Government arising from these facts.
It is quite evident that the affidavit presented to the Senate committee
was contrived to deceive, and it is to be feared that it is but a sample
of many that are made in support of claims for pensions.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 3, 1887_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return without approval House bill No.
Pages:
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443