The National tribune., 1882-05-27
FLYING in the Face of History.

Pension Appropriation bill, the New York
tSua takes occasion to denounce the Arrears
of Pensions act, and declare that this and |
"other acts, involving hundreds of millions,
would have received no liberation whatever
when the wounds of the civil strife were |
fresh. and the services Of those who had |
fought for the Union, were familiar to the !
country" adding that "the soldiers them |
selves never asked for these exorbitant
allowances The animus of this statement
is evident and it carries with it its own
condemnation. If the same spirit governed
the action OF Congress the Arrears act would
he repealed at once, the force in the Pension
Office reduced instead of augmented, and
the committees be discharged from the fur
ther consideration of the various relief bills
now before them. Happily no such sent-
ment actuates the members Of the present
Congress, and there is not the slightest
probability that they will be Influenced by
such contemplate insinuatiOns as that
which the San has ventured to put forth;
but we do not propose, nevertheless, that
these insiuuations shall pass unnoticed. 1t
is hard enough to have to bear the hardships
resulting from the failure of the Government
to make good its promises, without being
accused OF never having asked for their full
fillment.
Let us see how the Suns assertions
will stand the light of history. 1t declares
that the Arrears act, among other pension
measures, would have received no tolera-
ton whatever when the wounds of the civil
strife were fresh, and the services Of those
who had fought for the Union, were familiar
to the country" So far from this being the
case, it is fact, as any one can see by refer
ring to the laws of Congress,
tinct arrears acts were passeC
during the very period when
the civil strife were fresh, ett 81
was only when they were beg
! over that this federation "-aS
! it-ceased. Twice, as we ha
were passed to permit apple
sons to draw their allowance
| of discharge from the service /
filing of their claims; and the only mistake
that was then made was in limiting this
right to those who sent in their applications
within q certain period. 1t was the injustice
of making any such discrimination that
when the last arrears bill came up for con-
sideration-became an unanswerable argu-
ment in favor of its passage We can forgive
the sam its ignorance of the history of pen
sion legislation much more easily, however,
than we can the baseness Of its reasoning,
for even were it true that an arrears bill
would have received 10 toleration when the
wounds Of the civil strife were fresh, etc, ii
does not follow that it ought not TO have
received that federation. The question is
simply, whether the principle involved in
the payment Of arrears is sound or not? Il
it is, then it ought to be tolerated always
and if not, il should never receive consid,
Grafton. Now, as we understand it, the
Justice of claim for pension is based upor
the fact whether or not the disability of the
applicant was incurred in the service, ant
all persons so disabled are entitled to Gov
ernment support.
Let us take two cases of such disability
John Smith and John Jones, we will sup
pose, are both wounded at the battle o
Fredericksburg and both honorably dis
charged the service on account of disability
Let us go further and suppose that th
degree of disability is the same in eacl
case Both are entitled TO a pension, and
, under the law then existing, to draw it from
the date Of discharge John Smith apple
for pension before that law expires and i
paid accordingly. John Jones, however 70
various reascns-it makes no ditfercnc
what, so far as the obligation Of the Govern
nlcut Is COnceFncu- Hob Apply iUr
pension until the day after the law has ex
. pired and is paid only from the date of film
. his application. Is this just or equitable
John Jones rendered the same service to tn
, Government as John Smith and sustaine
the same injury. Why then should lie no
receive the same compensation? That
! the sole and only issue involved in the queS
ton of arrears, and we put it to the Su
whether it is not founded on justice an
b equity.
But the Sun goes further. 1t declares tha
+ "the soldiers themselves never ask ID tt
: these allowances meaning arrears Of per
: sions. That is downright falsehood. Th
soldiers have always maintained that the
8 were entitled to draw their pensions frol
n the date when the Government discharge
G them because their wounds incapactate
# them from military service, and 1t IS NJ
= their fault that Congress, after recognizin
d the reasonableness Of their claim during an
e for some time after the war, barred it OF
l. by legal statute for so long period. NJ
i ask for these allowances? There was nt