This record was transcribed by Penny Bennett Casey from the "Pensions and Increase of Pensions", which pertained to the Bill that was approved in 1917 for pension benefits for the Indian War Veterans.

Pension Committee – February 13, 1919

Calendar No. 652, 65^th Congress, 3^rd Session, Senate Report No. 715

H.R. 12716

Thomas B. Thompson, Grangeville, Idaho, served in the Regular Establishment, Eight Battery, United States Field Artillery, and Battery D, Fifth United States Field Artillery, from July 1, 1904, to January 15, 1909, when honorably discharged.

  The records of the War Department show that he received treatment during service for tonsillitis of both sides, malarial fever of a malignant character, prolonged and serious, slight injury to left heel while drilling, all in line of duty, a slight venereal disease of record, also a blow over one of his eyes while fighting with a comrade, not in line of duty.

  The bureau waived the slight venereal disease of record as a factor in the claim.  He filed a claim for pension in October, 1913, claiming that he was thrown from his horse and injured in both legs while in line of duty, and that he also contracted dhobie itch, dysentery, and rupture in service and line of duty.

The claim was rejected as to rupture and injury of leg on the ground of no record, and all other disabilities were rejected on the ground of no rateable disability therefrom.

The company records, according to a statement from the commanding officer, show that this soldier was repeatedly treated in quarters, nature of illness not given, but much of the time held due to line of duty.  In two instances, for three days each, the soldier was treated, illness held not due to line of duty.

Comrades testify that while attempting to mount his horse in drilling in line of duty the horse became unmanageable and threw him, and he very seriously injured one of his ankles and heel and was treated in the hospital, as shown by records for treatment to injured heel.

He claims at the same time that he received this injury he also received the rupture from the same cause, being thrown from his horse.  These comrades do not testify as to rupture.

Other comrades testify, however, that they saw him thrown from his horse, which was wild and untrained, and that he injured both legs, the left one very seriously, and it had to be treated, and he was in the hospital for said treatment.  He also contracted dhobie itch, from which he suffered very much, and that he complained of bowel trouble with much soreness in the groin, and that while he was suffering from this injury a rupture appeared which these comrades testified they saw and from which he never recovered.

Lay witnesses testify that when he returned home he was ruptured, and that his leg and ankle were injured, and that these disabilities were permanent ever since, and that in addition to this he suffered from dhobie itch and bowel trouble from time to time, all of which incapacitated him for performance of manual labor.

There is medical testimony showing left leg or ankle was injured and the motion thereof was very much limited, the joins split, and there was much pain.   Also that he suffered from disease of heart.  They rated $6 for injury and $8 for disease of heart.

In 1916 the next board reports practically the same thing, except that this board reported a bad hernia, for which they rated $10.  Both boards state there is no evidence of venereal disease or results thereof.

With the bill the petitioner files an affidavit in which he states he is unable to perform labor on account of injury of left leg, rupture of the left side and bowel trouble, and that he owns no property other than a small stock of jewelry worth $900 and mortgaged for $800.  Lay witnesses sustain his allegations as to physical and financial condition.

Medical testimony shows that the soldier suffers from a serious injury to left ankle and state that he suffers from constant recurrent attacks of bowel trouble and is unable to perform labor.

After a careful consideration of all the evidence in this case your committee concludes that it is safe to accept the disabilities as due to service and justify a pension of $12 a month, and it is so recommended.