The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-05-12
any limitation which should operate in matter SO

to any limitation which should operate in matter so
unjust
Mr. COOKE proceeded to address the committee IN
Mr. STANTON begged leave of his colleague 70 call
his attention to the direct question before inc comtee
1t not with reference to the OF pensioners
but the limitation OF time for the presentation oil aPPhca
tons for pensions and he expressed Inc nope that ms
colleague would not lift up his voice in favor OF such
nj. MCKAY (interposng) said the item only applied
TO invalid pensions The gentleman from Tennessee
his left Nir SrASroSl was wholly mistaken as to its
Mr. STANTON remarked that the invalid pensioners
were the most interesting class Of pensioners
Mr. COOKE resumed in support OF the Limitation;
sired to ask his colleague whether he would refuse
pension The first that of individual clearly
Titled to pensions but his circumstances being such that
either he did not need IT, or was too hghmnded to ask
for II, he has neglected it, until after life, he be-
reduced 10 the necessity OF making his application
Mr. desired to know OF the gentleman, his colleague
whether he would refuse pension in such on &C
count Of limitations The other supposed was where
the soldier did not happen to know that he was entitled
pension Though the case might be clear enough 9th
erwise) until after the expiration of the five years mta-
ton. Mr.. 5. desired to know whether his colleague
would refuse pensions in such cases as these
MIR. COOKE said it would be very seldom indeed mat
you would find to refuse pension that Justly be-
longs to him. II the individual was 100 proud 10 re-
ceve pension it was little matter TO hum but me case
hardly supposable for man, ne were really as
abled or reduced in his pecuniay condition, would stand
of and refuse 10 take the bounty which the government
might offer him. Mr. c. still considered that as matter
of general policy the limitation should be adopted and
with reference TO the second supposed-that OF the
Individual Ignorant of his title apensionhe said Con-
gress would always be liberal enough % make special
favor such cases himself He still thought the amend
ment by the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Nc
Mr.. JONES said that disability did not always occur
at the time the soldier receives his wound. The shot
may affect bone, and produce disability long after the
might have bullet lodged in his body SO as not to affect
hun seriously until after lapse OF years Under these
circumstances he asked what construction such pro-
receive at the Pension Oice' Mr. could not see any
necessity for the amendment Besides he SAID, we now
pay our pensioners from the tune the asae aKes ell
pay is not to until the time that the proof of
disability shall be completed.
alluded TO- was so framed that the pay was to 60 back
to the time when the wound received but at the
instance of the gentleman from Kentucky, 1t was mod-
fled as reported from the committee He was himself
willing it should have the construction desired by the
gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr.. JONES resumed He still could not see the ne,
eessty for the section of the amendment to which he had
referred But there another branch OF the amend
ment still more Objectionable. proposed that no por
ton Of the pension Of the widow Of soldier should &c al
lowed prior to the time OF the perfection OF her proof
Mr. MCKAY said that the amendment did not apply
as the gentleman supposed.
Mr. JONES then proposed substitute for the amend
ment by the gentleman from North Carolina, to the effect
that no further proof should be required OF the widow
of revolutionary soldier if it appeared that her husband
received pension during his lfe-t time.
Mr. j. said there were few of widows of revo-
tonary soldiers known to him, who have proved their
marriage prior 1894 but when they come to look for
the further proof which the law requires to ente them to
PENSIONS has been found to be merely adnenary and
80 wholly inadmssibe for the Commissioners requires
them 60 back to the muster rolls with their proof
There had also his knowledge some two three
cases in North Carolina where the man in charge of the
military records had refused to examine them for such
widows without fee.
Mr. STRONG read from the existing pension law to
show that the amendment which the gentleman from
Tennessee desired already in the statute.
Mr. JONES said there proviso which made that
law nullity. lie derived this information from the
Pension Office but the other day.
Mr. McCIELLAND followed in few remarks, de-
clarng himself in favor of liberal pension list, and OPP
posed to all restrictions and limitations He would
make the terms more liberal than they are.
The committee then rose without coming to any fur
Their vote;
And the House adjourned.