f his rate, alleging that in 1884
his eyes became affected in consequence of his previous ailments and the
debility consequent thereupon.

The ingenuity developed in the constant and persistent attacks upon
the public Treasury by those claiming pensions, and the increase of those
already granted, is exhibited in bold relief by this attempt to include
sore eyes among the results of diarrhea.

I am entirely satisfied with the opinion of the medical referee, who,
after examining this case in October, 1885, reported that "the disease
of the eyes can not be admitted to be a result of chronic diarrhea."

On all grounds it seems to me that this claimant should be contented
with the pension which has been already allowed him.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 1707, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elijah P. Hensley."

The records of the War Department show that this claimant was mustered
into the Third North Carolina Regiment, but on the muster-out roll of
his company he is reported to have deserted April 3, 1865, and there is
no record of any discharge or disability.

In September, 1866, an order was issued from his department headquarters
removing the charge of desertion against him. Thirteen days afterwards,
and on the 25th day of September, 1866, he filed an application for
pension, which in 1868 was granted. He drew such pension dating from
1865 until 1877, when, upon evidence that the injury for which he was
pensioned was not received in the line of duty, his name was dropped
from the rolls.

The pensioner appealed from this determination of the Pension Bureau to
the Secretary of the Interior, who, as lately as May, 1885, rendered a
decision sustaining the action of the Bureau.

I find nothing in the facts presented to me which, in my opinion,
justifies the reversal of the judgment of the Bureau and the Secretary
of the Interior.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 2223, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elizabeth S. De Krafft."

My objection to this bill is that it is of no possible advantage to the
beneficiary therein mentioned. It directs that her name be placed upon
the pension roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the
pension laws. The effect of such legislation would be to permit