New-York tribune., 1867-05-02
THE EQUALIzATION or BOUNTIES IN
MdSS1CHU USETTS.


Gratitude to the soldiers who defended the
Union ia the natural feeling of the American
people, and that they have wOrthily expressed 1t
in deeds is part of the glory OF the war NO
Government did more for the comfort of its sol
ders in the field and for their families, than ours
has DONE and in this the Government
acted as the agent of the people. Bat the
people, independently of the Government,
followed their armies with unceasing love and
care; the ambulances and provision wagons OF
the Sanitary and Christian Commissions attended
every cOrps their nurses were found in every
hospital; il was held solemn duty to provide
for the wives and children of those who were
fighting in the front. Gratitude too often
ends when the service is performed,
being, as some one wittily said
a lively sense of favors tO-cOme but the graft
tude of the people survived the war. After
peace was declared, some OF the States, Penn
sylvania the first we think, formally adopted
the orphans of their soldiers, and provided for
their maintenance and education National and
State pensions were voted to the manned. To-
day the soldier, lJy the mere fact OF his being
soldier has an advantage over the CIVILIAN
in most of the paths of life. An honorable
discharge is a diploma. The appointment OF
soldiers TO civil Offices is preferred, and at the
polls the candidate who has served i'll the
army has the odds in his favor. We hear much
of the soldiers vote, but the vote for the soldier
il more powerful in politics. This gratitude,
these acts it has inspired, are right, but there Is
a tendency to make gratitude an excuse for IN
Justice. more unjust act than that to equal
ize bounties was scarcely brought before the
XXXIXth Congress; had it become law
S5OO,OOO,OOO would probably have been added
10 the National debt TO increase the burdens
of the people is not to be generous or just to
the soldiers.
This question is now before the Legislature
of Massachusetts,, introduced in bill to equal
izc the bounties of the soldiers of that Com
monwealth, and we find it ably treated III n
speech lately delivered by the Hon Richard H.
Dana, .jr., in the House Of Representatives.
The bill does not pretend to redlstnbute
bounties, but to raise the lowest to the
highest 1t is retrospective legislation, and
takes no account, or imperfect account, OF the
differences that existed in respect to dates of
enlistment, times of service, values of currency
and all the other matters which affected the
values of bounties. Local bOunties were high
when gold was high, and where volunteers
were scarce when gold was low, and where
men were plenty, the bOunties were low. Men
who left the service when their terms expired
are to receive the bounties obtained by
those who reenlisted We agree with Mr.
Dana that such a bill does not cquallzc, but
increases inequality; there can be no true
equalization where the discrimination is unjust,
and no absolute standard of adjustment can by
any possibility be fixed.
We wish this bill, and all bills of the kind
to be perfectly understood. 1t, in fact, pro-
poses to give from the State Treasury GER
tain sum of money to the soldiers of Massa-
chusctts as additional reward. The lowest es-
innate of the bounties to paid under it
amounts to S5,0O0,OO0. II may he double that
sum. Nor is the appropriation likely to end
with five millions; five millions more will
be needed to "eQualiZe" again, and
perhaps five afterward. Massachusetts,, with
debt of S2s,000,000, and n debt of the towns OF
s97, 100000 is in no condition to burden her tax
payers with generosity which, after all, will
be, to a great extent, msdirecteG; for agents
and brokers have already, for small sums,
bought up many of the claims which this bill,
if passed, would legalize. The principle is Il
bad one and for that reason alone the bril-
should be defeated.
VVpsr VpctNI,-A latter from Weston Lewis Co.