The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-06-24

the cases oil all widows, whether oi army navy, of
revenue officers ! to lay the bill upon the table
Mr.. GWlN | hope the senator will Withdraw that
motion for moment as | wish TO have the Senate nn-
dersand the facts in the before the question is put
MIR. SHIELDS / will withdraw the motion.
| Mr. GWlN. Here is the letter OF the Commissioner
of Pensions, which wish 10 read for the information
| OF the Senate:
PEssioS OrroE June Il, 1852.
| SiR, The petition of Mary Woodward widow of Lieut.
Woodward, who engaged in the United States reye
ton suggestions might deem proper to communiea'e,
and the papers accompanying the same, came duly .
the claim is Of character supported by evidence
such as to justify the Commissioned OF Pensions in the
saa a a % Be
Congress The only alteration would suggest as proper
TO be made TO The bill, copy of which have before me-
that the compensation be the OF thirty dollars per
mouth which Is the pension now allowed by law % ,ns
navy and be continued to her during her wdowhoad
shdea un ii they respectively arrive At years
@ r the so n 81 ns sss OF s by M Ho
~ N''0S ), u. HEATH,
! Commissioner Of Pensions.
! Mr.. DAVIS. beg to ask what committee introduced
this bill
MI GwIN. The Committee on Pensions
Mr.. DAVIS lis the Committee Pensions aware
that the revenue service does not belong TO the military
department. Ii is the civil department Of The government
and II the introduction OF new principle TO undertake
TO pension the civil department OF the government Tor
one. think that should seriously consider before we
adopt that principle.
! Mr.. HALE. There has been within the last Con-
gress, this onei do not know whicha single depart
from the rule 10 which the senator from Massachn-
ses has alluded and If this case is similar TO that one
am willing TO go for It. The instance TO which refer
is this: The pension for officer OF the reve
nue. service. We went upon the ground that an otl.
Ger in the revenue service who was employed by
| the government, and who was doing his duty under
the orders of naval officer. came under the same
rule as officers OF the army and navy This was the
state OF the to which REFER and gave pension to
ms widow, Mrs. Wright. He, believe, was Massa-
chusetts officer Further than that Congress has never
gone There was case introduced BY the senator from
Maine, Congress or two since, when had the honor
OF being upon the Committee on Pensions, which was
very severe case oil man very badly mangied while IN
the civil service OF the United States Congress refused
to give pension in this case, and also refused pension
TO widow Wright until new proof was adduccd by which
appeared that that portion OF the revenue service in
which her husband served at that time under the
control Of the navy of the United Staes and then
gave his widow pension, and not until ihen-it being
in fact part OF the naval service II this widow comes
within that exception, am willing TO go for the bill; if
she does not. think il will be establishing very dan
gerous precedent.
Mr. GWlN In answer to that statement will cay,
for the information OF the senator, as the papers IN the
case have not been printed which set forth the crcum
stances under which this gentleman lost bis life, that he
was engaged in surveying expedition-ihe coast
vey, which properly belonged TO the naval service He
engaged in surveying the harbor of Trinidad bay, in
order 10 prevent smuggling. He performed the service
which should have been performed by the officers OF the
navy He received orders from San Francisco 10 survey
Trinidad bay, for the purpose OF preventing smuggling
which was carried on there 10 consicerabe aud while
engaged in that service he was drowned. There were
numerous smuggers in that bay, and he was sent there
TO detect The smuggling vessels, that stop might be
eectualy put 10 the practice was in that service thai
case ..ss WA. I never presented 10 Congress
! Mr. DAVIS. | do not think the statement OF the SEN
ator from California Mr.. GwS varies the question
This is strictly civil service The question here is
whether you will pension who meet with mistor-
tunes in the civil service OF The United States And
hs is s now pending here eeeys lSs IL The form o, o.
ship war who has received some injury by plotting
ship war Well, sir how does this differ from
those who may petition for pension account oi ipu
res received in the erection Of public buildings OF
this buiidngl This revenue service clearly
They surveying for purposes And do you
TO adopt the principle that any receiving harm
while engaged in the coast survey shall be pensioned
am disposed 10 be liberal any gentleman in grant
ing pensions to individuals, bat should like TO see the
limits 10 which we are going and IT really seems TO me
that before adopt principle OF tns kind, should
do we'll to consider the matter carefully.
j Mr. GWlN. We have already adopted the principle
OF pensonng the widows OF persons lost IN the coast
survey; There are those who were lost upon the
"Washington"--
MT UNDERWOOD, lin his seat) They naval
Mr. GWlN. But they were naval officers in the coast
survey Suppose tina, the coast survey engaged in
exploring and surveying Trinidad bay when Of these
officers should be lost, as Lieut. Edwards was lost,
would he not have been pensoned The service not
having been performed by the coast survey and being
indispensable for the that II should be performed,
this officer ordered there to make the exploration
and in performing that service having lost bis life, il ap
pears 10 me that there can be no doubt as TO the merits oil
The case.
Mr. UNDERWOOD am opposed 10 this bill, be.
II does introduce, conceive, principle,
which can be made the precedent for general BILL
for individual legislation in other OF like charac
ter. We have had the question in various shapes before
us, in reference 10 granting pensions and making provs
ion for those injured in the civil service and employment
OF the government of the United States We baye al
ways refused TO do H. rise Tor the purpose OF giving 10
the Senate or two which have come under my
own knowledge during my service IN Congress. We bad
a from North CaIolna, OF individual lost in
featuring cartridges, something Of that Sort for
the government OF the Uaiied States, some military
arms He was blown all 10 pieces but, not belonging
TO the army attached 10 Il as a soldier compensa
ton could be allowed but he put upon the footing
vduas who have fallen 10 the erection OF public bnild
ings in this city They mechanics in the service and
employment OF The government They had their limbs
broken; some oil them were disabled Tor life. They
wanted 10 go upon the pension list but Congress has
heretofore always refused TO make any provision for
them, and have put them upon the ooing OF employees
| OF individuals, in building and working machines. We
have at this moment. both north and south of u.s. hun
dreds OF aborers employed In all probability, before
building shall be erected and finished, there may
be dozens OF accidents, OF which may deprive per-
Of life others may MAIN them for HE. ln this par
ticular officer OF the service has lost his
life Il he more meritorous than those engaged in the
progress Of this building who may lose their lives or
have their limbs fractued am one OF those who think
that the pension system, in all conscience, has been
ried far enough already have looked al IL and opposed
the extension OF il; but have met with 30 little support
sorry TO say, that almost discouraged ever to
open my mouth against any proposition for peDson for
individuals Bu we have gone 20 lar already that does