
    Charles M. Blake, appellant, v. The United States, Appellees.
    
      On the claimant’s Appeal.
    
    
      A chaplain suffering from disease and mental prostration resigns and a successor is appointed. Subsequently it appears that he is insane. Later he recovers and is returned to the Army. JECe brings his action to recover pay during the interval, on the ground that his resignation while insane was inoperative.
    
    The court "below decides: (1) That where an Army officer resigns and his commanding officer’s attention is called to his possible insanity, and he transmits the resignation recommending the acceptance, it must he presumed he passed on the question of sanity, and found him sane, and that the court can not re-examine the question and find that he was not; (2) That if the President acts on the resignation and appoints a successor, the loss must fall on the officer who causod it, notwithstanding his insanity.
    The judgment of .the court below is affirmed, on the ground that the appointment of the claimant’s successor operated in law to supersede him, without reference to his mental capacity when he resigned.
   Mr. Justice Haelan

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, March 29, 1881.  