The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-02-22

NOHUI HOW 0iu ibey UNDERSTAND THIS 1tlf HOW
did they understand this language Why every other
unsophslicated and sensible man would understand H.
They understood il 10 mean what II said-nehng more
and nothing less The language rs plain, direct, and
imperative. The conditions upon which the disabled
soldier was to be placed upon The invalid pension sl
plain and stakebly set forth The claimant must
be AN officer non commissioned officer, musician pr
vate and must have been disabled and that disability
have been inflicted while IN The line o his duty IN
the public service That was all-a the conditions prece-
dent; and | maintain that they concur that his claim
be placed upon the pension roll OF The United States IS
complete II becomes an absolute right, vested night,
and The government cannot absove itself from perform
ing lis part oil the coniIac without gross violation OF the
rules OF justice and plighted faith.
Sir. manlan-and with great confidence before this
body-lhal the only Legitimate Inquiry here is the pro-
visions OF that act Does the claimant within the
description OF persons named in the l4th section OF that
act Was he officer Was he disabled Was he |
disabled while in The lire OF his duty-while In the
public service If have right TO go further than
lhs and place constructions and raise implications upon
aaw nowhere suggested IN the law ITSELF so as TO make
the right to be placed upon the penson-ro dependent
upon employment profession, or occupation IN NE ar
my out OF the army, where will you stop What
limits there 10 all sorts OF constructions and implica
lions which the government may ut TO false III re-
gard to their contracts None, slf--none at all.
Sir. nlainian--it having been established that Gen
Mcneil wounded while in the line Of his duty in the
public servlcethat il is breach OF the plghled faith
Of this government, TO say 10 him. 'Why, your right 10
pension IS MOI secure; il depends upon your proies-
son--w whether II be arms civil life" Sir, whence
did such construction arise 1t has arisen have
suggested frsm the rule in the War Department, de
clarng shat officer, long he remains in The
army shall be placed upon the pension roll of the Uni
ted States" Sir, what is disability, if that is ,est
Why by the provisions OF that act disability nothing
more nor less than this IL Is no matter how severely
officer may be wounded or disabled while fighting the
battles OF his countryno matter II he has lost arm,
leg, eye-no matter, though literally riddled
pension does moi accrue to him. He must resign his
commission IN The army IN order TO make him disabled
man
Now, sir, | am. curious to know by wha, system OF
a N mo
as that, unnatural in It's character, be established
Am toldfor this is the only arg ument upon the other
! slde-am | told that so long man remains in the
army he receives all his pay officer and thereby is
enabled TO obtain livelihood, although disabled, but so
he resigns his commission he is unable to do SO
Sir this is presumption geher-hat officer is not
enabled TO gain livelihood, although disabled and out
of the army.
No doubt, sir that this law did contemplate pension
in the view that disability would detract from the ab
y OF invalid 10 gain livelihood True; but did il
contemplate anything more Is that all that it conem-
plates Are s,itened joints and shattered limbs nothing
Is decrepld and deormed frame nothing Are severe
suherngs and pans nothing Are all the extra expenses
which every officer SO disabled incur from day 10
day, nothing Does the statute contemplate these
things as disabiy' Most surely, sir, in my opinion
bili,y
Sir, disability consists, in my Judgment as much in the
deprivation OF the enloymens OF lie, and the power of
retaining property which officer already has, as does
IN The loss OF physical strength and the power acquire
property. Ii l am right in ihis-and should like 10
have this argument noied-lhen do these disabilities
apply with equal force 10 officer while in the army
II does while out OF Is the policy of this govern
mentwas it its policy,o say the brave and gal
liant soldiers OF your army, SO you wounded,
so you become disabled in consequence OF fight
ing the battles OF your country, however desirable and
important II may be 10 retain your services there, yet
you cannot receive The bonnes provided for the disabled
and wounded soldier until you resign your commission
and retire 10 private liye' Are these brave men, in the
face OF an unconditional statute 10 be thus told hope
not
will ask the attention OF the Senate for to
If 49, ~. 4
the War Department TO which | have alluded has not
been universal rule While il has been enforced in some
cases most rgdy has been dispensed with in others
The first class OF which viii call the attention
OF the Senate is that OF ocers who disabled In the
war OF 1sl2--who were dropped temporarily from the
peace establishment, placed upon the pension roll of the
United States, and afterwards restored 10 the army. The
department say regard TO that class OF officers that
having once been placed upon the pension roll the de-
pameni does not feel at liberty strike them of, and
they have received both their pay and their invalid
pensions. ] do not complain OF that II is all right
They have received, IN my judgment, nothing than
their legal rights Blu, what complain OF As this; that
other officers, equally meriiorous, who have been dsa
bled, and who have not been dropped from the army
ALL have been refused pensions for their disabilities and
wounds, My judgment is, that if this rule any.
thing It should apply equally 10 both classes This
sruction Of the statule-this RULES either legal and
true construction Of that statute, or 1t not II i, is the
true construction, then II is the statute ITSELF and il
not be suspended by the Executive except by violation
both OF law and duty. II is not the true legal con-
suction OF the act then is part OF H. is repugnan
both OF law and duty.
viii call the attention OF the Senate for a moment 10 a
case directly point II IS that OF the gallant Colonel
Preston call the attention OF the Senate to 1t for two
objects first, to show that Congress has nierIeed, and
has granted arrears OF pensions precisely SINH
lar TO this and, secondly refer TO il r the purpose OF
showing that this rule which has been construed way
today and another way tomorrow, which has given
pensions disabled officers while II has refused
hem TO others, claimed by the Executive to be moth
ing nor less than executive regulation, not
cessary 10 The original pension law, but regulation
which the Executive could a, any moment suspend
Colonel Preston officer in the Gen.
eral Mcneil. He wounded in November, 1919
lie continued IN the service nnu the army dsbanded
June 10, 1915. He allowed by the department his
invalid pension from that time, but refused from
the tine he wounded until the time he left the ser
vice. because, in the first place, be officer IN the
service and hs such from the time he was
wounded in November 1919 TO The time OF bis discharge
in June 1915, and in the second place. because be had
made application for pension until alter his dis.
charge He appealed to Congress 10 pay him the invalid
pension for the period intervening between the time he
received his wound and the time he left the service al
though be had received full pay officer during the
period. What did Congress do On the i4th oil
Juy 1892 they parsed act the sixth section OF which
provided for his relief What The decision OF the
War Department thereon fully appears in a correspond
ence which took place between The then Commissioner
OF Pensions and the head OF the War Depament-ihe
latter officer being my distinguished friend the present
senator from Michigan, Mr. CAss,l which viii read
because goes 10 show that what have stated in regard
TO this rule and the whole case is true
War DEPARTMENT,
PENSION OFFICE, January 3. 1888
sR The act OF Ilh July, 1892 chapter $50, section g.
az Tho. of tlr tho Of