o
the Pension Bureau, and rejected in 1881, was reopened upon further
proof in January, 1887, and the claimant was ordered before a board of
examining surgeons, upon which a report has not yet been made.

Inasmuch as the only ground for the rejection of his claim was the
nonexistence of pensionable disability from the cause he alleged, and in
view of the fact that he now alleges a different disability, which the
new evidence seems to support, there is no doubt that justice will be
done the claimant under the general law.

This bill if passed would only place the name of the beneficiary upon
the pension roll, "subject to the restrictions and limitations of the
pension laws." Whether any sum was allowed him or not would still depend
upon the existence of a disability; and if this is found upon the
examination lately ordered, he will undoubtedly be put upon the pension
roll, under existing law, in accordance with his supplementary claim.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 6832, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mrs. Catharine Sattler."

The beneficiary named in this bill claims a pension as the surviving
widow of Julius Sattler, who enlisted in Company A, Seventh New York
Volunteers, and was in the service from March 10, 1864, to March 22,
1865, when he was discharged because of the amputation of his left
forearm in consequence of a wound received in the battle of Deep Bottom,
Virginia, on the 14th day of August, 1864. He was pensioned in 1865 at
the rate of $8 per month, which was afterwards increased to $15 per
month, dating from June 6, 1866.

In October, 1867, he was employed as a watchman in the United States
bonded warehouse in the city of New York, and on the 31st day of that
month he received his monthly pay of $50. He disappeared on that day,
and on the 13th day of November, 1867, his body was found in the North
River, at the foot of West Thirteenth street, in the city of New York
without his hat, coat, watch, or money.

These facts, with the further statement that he was a strong and healthy
man at the time of his death, constitute the case on the part of the
widow, who filed her application for a pension July 8, 1884, nearly
seventeen years after her husband's death, alleging that she was married
to the deceased in 1865, after the amputation of his arm.

Her claim was rejected in Nove