Dependents 31. Dependents. A woman living as the illegitimate wife of an employé in the Canal Zone, does not become, upon his death, his widow within the meaning of the Act. Re Stanley Howell, Op. Sol. Dep. C. & L., p. 442. A woman who has lived with a man for several years as his "reputed" wife is not his widow within the meaning of the Federal Act, upon the employé's death. Re Fitz Agard, Id., p. 443. The word "child" or "children" as used in the Act is not restricted to child or children born in wedlock, but includes illegitimate children as well. Re J. F. Harding, Id., p. 446. Where a deceased workman left two illegitimate children and a father who lived in the same town, and there was an inference that the father cared for the children, it was held that while compensation should be denied to the father as not being a dependent, it should be paid to him for the benefit of the two illegitimate children and that he would become a trustee for the children to apply the compensation for their benefit. Re R. W. Baugh, Id., p. 482. The word "parent" does not include a foster parent where there has been no legal adoption. Re Charles Perkins, Id., p. 470. A foster parent by legal adoption may be a dependent parent within the meaning of the Act. Re F. J. Huff, Id., p. 458. The word "parent" does not include a stepfather or stepmother. Re Alexander McMurray, Id., p. 462. A woman who has been divorced from an employé and to whom has been given the custody of his children, is not entitled to compensation on account of his death, although compensation may be paid to her as guardian for the children. Re Edward Niemeier (alias W. J. Niemeir), Id., p. 444. Where payment, by reason of the death of an employé, has been awarded to a widow and she re-marries during the term for which compensation is to be paid, the payments are to be continued to her notwithstanding her re-marriage, Dependents as there is nothing in the Act which requires them to be discontinued under such circumstances. Letter of Comptroller Tracewell to the Isthmian Canal Commission April 20, 1909, Id., p. 629; also 15 Compt. Dec. 646. The filing of an affidavit of claim by any one or more of the beneficiaries named in Section 2 and referred to in Section 4 is sufficient to protect the rights of a minor child if filed within the period of ninety days. Re A. G. Rodriguez, Id., p. 444. Where an employé dies, leaving no parent or widow, but leaving a child entitled to the benefits of the Act and the acting Spanish consul files an affidavit of claim on behalf of such child, such acting consul may be regarded as acting in loco parentis and his affidavit as the affidavit of the child. Re J. G. Redondo, Id., p. 456. Where, on account of the death of an employé compensation had been allowed to the widow and child and the widow dies within the compensation period and the care of the child devolves upon the child's maternal grandmother, the remainder of the year's compensation may be paid to such maternal grandmother for the use and benefit of the child Re J. E. Jefferson, Id., p. 457. A parent is not dependent who did not in fact depend in some measure for the means of living upon the deceased; but if the parent is in actual need the fact of dependence is sufficiently shown if it further appears that the deceased attempted to supply such need even to a slight extent, or that but for the death, the parent was reasonably assured that such need would be supplied in some substantial measure. Re G. W. Branch, Id., p. 467. The question of dependence is one of fact and the fact of dependence sufficiently appears if a condition of partial dependence is shown. Contributions by the deceased tend to establish a condition of dependence, but is not the only criterion. The natural and equitable claim for support which parents have upon their children make it proper to Dependents consider the actual needs of parents and in ascertaining such needs, it is necessary to look to their age, circumstances, position in life and earning capacity. Re Theodore Rock, Id., p. 464. Where it appeared that for two years and five months prior to the death of the employé he contributed $100 to the support of his father and mother, and it further appeared that the father's earnings were 50 cents a week, and the mother's earnings 24 cents per week, and that they were 55 and 45 years old respectively, and that the value of the property owned by them was $12, it was held that they were dependent on the employé and compensation was awarded. Re Levi Belgrave, Id., p. 471. Where it appeared that the deceased employé who did not live with his parents and was not on very good terms with his father, but who sent to his mother amounts from time to time, but did not give his father anything, it was held that the mother's claim for compensation should be granted and that of the father denied. Re Leon Esselman, Id., p. 472. The deceased was a negro boy, nineteen years of age, employed as a trainman in the Canal Zone, earning at the time of his death 13 cents an hour. The mother was 39 years of age and lived with the father in the British West Indies. The father earned nothing and the mother's total income, aside from what she received from the deceased, consisted of what she earned from washing, which amounted to 48 cents per week. In the year preceding his death the deceased contributed $7.68 toward the mother's support. Neither parent owned any property. It was held that under the circumstances the mother was entitled to compensation. Re Thomas Allaway, Id., p. 473. The deceased, a boy of nineteen years of age, left his home in Spain and emigrated to Panama, reaching there about March 15, 1910, and on April 10, 1910 he met his death. Prior to leaving home he had been employed and contributed his earnings to the support of his father and mother and the Dependents other children. He was killed before receiving any pay from the Canal Commission, and therefore he had sent nothing home. The claim was considered in three separate opinions by the solicitor, in the last of which, upon the taking of further evidence, the foregoing facts were practically established, and it was held that the parents were dependent within the meaning of the act and entitled to compensation. Re M. T. Gonzalez, Id., pp. 474, 475 and 476. The claimant, who was the mother of the deceased, lived in Spain and was entirely destitute, having no income or property, and subsisted altogether upon public charity. It appeared that the deceased had not contributed anything to his mother's support during the period of his employment upon the Panama Canal. The solicitor, in deciding that the mother was entitled to compensation said: "In construing the former act we are hence at liberty to give to the word dependent the meaning which attaches to it in ordinary speech, in other words, its usual and popular significance. So construed, I am of the opinion that a parent who is shown to be utterly destitute, altogether lacking in property and income, unable to sustain himself or herself, and depending on public charity for the means of living, is a dependent parent within the meaning of the act. A person so circumstanced is certainly in a condition of actual dependence and the fact, as in the present case, that the claimant's son, an ordinary laborer earning 20 cents per hour, working over seas in a foreign country, had not, while so employed, contributed anything to her support, does not, in my judgment, suffice to show that she was not dependent." The solicitor calls attention to the different meaning of the word "dependent" as used in the British Compensation Act and the Federal statute. In the British Act it means such members of the workman's family "as are wholly or in part dependent upon the earnings of the workman." Re Leon Garcia, Id., p. 477. The deceased, twenty-one years of age, had come to Dependents America in 1907 from Austria, his parents advancing him the money for his passage to the United States. His parents stated that they had received no money from the deceased during the twelve months prior to his death, although two months prior thereto he had written to them promising to send them about $200, "in order to pay off his and their debts." The Austrian-Hungarian Consul, who filed the claim on behalf of the parents, stated that they were "very poor and have been hoping all days to receive a support from their child." It was held, under these circumstances, that the parents were dependent and entitled to compensation. Re John Zupa, Id., 479. The father and mother who were the claimants for compensation by reason of the death of an employé in the Canal Zone stated that the father's weekly earnings during the twelve months prior to the death of the son were $3; that those of the mother during the same period were nothing; that during this same period the deceased did not contribute to the support of either, but that for four years prior to his employment in the Canal Commission he contributed regularly to the support of the mother 72 cents a week. The father was 45 years of age and the mother 48. It appeared that the deceased had been employed in the Canal Zone for more than a year prior to his death and that he did not contribute to the support of either parent during that time. Under the circumstances it was held that the parents were not dependent and compensation was refused. Re J. W. D. Mason, Id., p. 480. Where the affidavit of the parents of a deceased employé stated that the amount of necessary support customarily received by the parents from deceased prior to his death was nothing, that during the twelve months prior to the death the amount received from him was nothing, that the amount of support from other persons was nothing, that the total income from all sources was nothing, that the average earnings of each was nothing and that the value of property |