Ellen W. Dowling

Pension: 688614, 423631 (Special Act)
P.O.: Somerville, Massachusetts
Service: Nurse at Armory Square Hospital
Applied: 1888
Final Status: Accepted...multiple times

I fully expected Dowling's file to be skinny--hers was, after all, a Special Act, so everything should be in the legislative file.  When it turned out to be rather thick, I thought it was because she'd also applied for a widow's pension and the paperwork had been mixed in a la Mrs. Blaisdell.  Half true.  Here's Ellen W. Dowling's story, as far as I can make out from the file:
Ellen White began working as a nurse at Armory Square Hospital, D.C., in 1863.  Some time that year, Isaac A. Dowling, a private in Co. K, 12th Massachusetts, was admitted for chronic diarrhea.  They married in August of '64, had four children, and a happy marriage.  Isaac, however, never recovered from his service in the army.  His chronic diarrhea worsened, and he also began to suffer from heart trouble.  He applied for and received a pension in the early 1870s--and as his condition worsened, and he was forced to quit work, the amount went up.
Isaac passed on July 9, 1888.  I suspect Ellen had her special act already in the works at that point, because the bill was signed into law on February 12, 1889.  In December, Ellen sent a letter to the Pension Bureau, filing the paperwork needed to claim a widow's pension, and asking for the arrears of said pension from the time her husband died to the time her Special Act was passed.
The Pension Bureau did not like this.  Legally, you can only draw on one pension at any given time, and Ellen was, inadvertantly or not, trying to draw on two.  So, they told her, she had a choice: the widow's pension at $16 a month, or her Special Act at $12 a month.  Ellen replied, "I desire to have my name entered on the pension rolls as Ellen White Dowling, Army Nurse.  I prefer this as it is on my own service, and some day Congress may give my children their just due."
Here's where things get a little fuzzy.  It appears that the Bureau ignored Ellen's request to be listed as a nurse and continued to list her as a widow.  Why is beyond me.  Ellen petitioned to be listed as a nurse again in 1897, and a third time in 1902.  Finally, in 1902, someone listened.  Ellen's motives, however, had changed over time.  A note attached to her nurse's pension form reads: "this claim for renewal of pension, as nurse, is submitted for admission for the reason that a substantial benefit amy accrue to claimant, viz: the privilege of remarriage without loss of pension as nurse."  It's hard to say what Ellen's motivation was for the change: was she considering remarrying?  Or was she the kind of woman who preferred to draw on her own service rather than someone else's, as she'd earlier claimed?  It certainly wasn't because she got more money.  Suffice to say though, she wanted her name entered as Ellen White Dowling, Army Nurse.
Oh, and the note wasn't finished yet.  Apparently, the official processing the claim was just as confused as I was.  "A similar claim [to change to her nurse's pension] was filed in 1897, and approved, but that action was cancelled on the ground that "pensioner was not entitled to a second election."  The decision upon which that statement is based is not mentioned.  Aside from the filing of a declaration, the examiner has not been able to find that claimant elected to take a widows pension."
Oops.
Having finally gotten things sorted out, Ellen remained on the pension rolls as a nurse until her death in 1912.  After that, the file has no further information.
Ellen's case has really peaked my interest.  Why exactly did the Bureau keep her listed as a widow rather than a nurse as she wanted?  And Ellen's avowed motivation for being listed as a nurse--was it that she wanted to draw on her own service?  Or was she keeping the way open for her children to draw pensions as dependent minors?  Also, the bit about being able to remarry and not loose her pension answered a question I'd had in the back of my mind.  Women drawing widows' pensions had to remain widows if they wanted to keep drawing their pension (if you're interested in the reasons behind this, read Megan J. McClintock's 'Civil War Pensions and the Reconstruction of Union Families.').  I've been wondering if Congress's policy on widows had extended to my nurses, but Ellen's papers suggest that they didn't.  For answers to my other questions...looks like another legislative file needs to be pulled.