EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 18, 1889_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return without approval House bill No. 9791, entitled "An act for the
relief of Charles W. Geddes."
This bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to include the name of
the beneficiary mentioned, late assistant engineer in the United States
Navy, among those who served in the Mexican War, and issue to him a land
warrant for his services as assistant engineer on the United States
steamer _General Taylor_ during said war.
On an application made by this beneficiary for bounty land under general
laws the Secretary of the Navy reported that the vessel to which he was
attached was not considered as having been engaged in the war with
Mexico, and thereupon his application was rejected. Upon appeal to the
Secretary of the Interior he states the settled doctrine of such cases
to be that "service must have been _in_, not simply _during_,
a war to give title to bounty land."
The only claim made by the beneficiary is that the vessel upon which he
was employed was engaged for a time in transporting seamen from New
Orleans, where they were enlisted, to Pensacola, and that he was
informed and believed that they were enlisted to serve on board vessels
composing the Gulf Squadron, then cooperating with the land forces in
the Mexican War.
It seems to me that it is establishing a bad precedent, tending to the
breaking down of all distinctions between civil and military employment
and service, to hold that a man engaged on a vessel transporting
recruits to a rendezvous from which they may be sent to the scene of
hostilities should be allowed the same advantages which are bestowed
upon those actually engaged in or more directly related to the dangers
and chances of military operations.