The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1882-02-25
PITHY AND TO THE POINT.

One of the most pithy, practical and pointed
arguments that has yet been made in support of the
Ingalls, resolution declaring that the pensions
arrears act ought not to be repealed was that pre-
sented by Senator Call, of Florida, Democrat,
during his speech in the Senate last week. He said
q do not share in the unfriendly criticisms
against claim or pension agents which some
times made. In my service on the Committee on
Pensions in the Senate there was no evidence ever
presented, in my knowledge, showing want OF
fidelity to their clients a wilful participation in
frauds on the Government. Those who came before
the committee were representatives of large num-
bers of these claims and came there with testimo-
malls of good character. They were evidently bust
ness men of intelligence. Neither can l perceive
that the Senators who supported the existing law
are subject to any just cenSure. There can be no
question that the obligation Of the State to take
care of pensoner commenced with the period of
his disability and, in OF widows children, and
dependents with the period Of death in the service
of the State. Whether this could better be done
by arrears of pension by an increase OF pension
for the future is open question: and the respective
economy of the two methods is point which is not
even now aScertaned.
In the whole Of this discussion the subject
of arrears of pension there has been nothing in the
animadversions and unfriendly criticisms upon the
law and those who passed it; nothing of argument
nothing except simply the fact Of the enormous
amount to which the pension laws have settled.
Its perfectly clear to me that the State being
able to do so, the duty and obligation to support
soldiers who had sacrificed their ability 70 support
themselves at the command of the State AMI under
pledge from the whole body Of the people that
they should be provided for cannot be controversial
and this duty and obligation could not be performed
otherwise than by recognizing in some form the
fact that the obligation commenced at the period of
disability or death.
If the friends of the soldier supported him from
the period OF discharge to the time when his pension
was granted then they only did what the Govern
ment bound to do. and did it because of the
Governments default in performing its obligation.
Hence it is evident that no blame can be attached
to those who voted to affirm obligation both in
law, morals and in good policy. The question of
another method of performing this obligation
or is evidently a question of method only; and
there was but one method before Congress or the
country at the time.
whether the method of arrears or the method
of future increase is better for the pensioner is
question of pure argument and reason, which can
not be varied affected by sympathy for the SOL
der or the cause for which he fought, nor by any
consideration Of economy the part of the Gov
eminent. But these considerations do not touch
the resolution it stands; certainly the repeal of
the act now could not be justified without either
showing that the State was unable to paw, and the
burden unreasonable in it's exactions upon the in
dustries of the people, by substituting a better
law for the increase for the future of the pension Of
those who have not received the arrears under the
existing law.
Neither of these things having been done or at
tempted, it would certainly be ungraciOus in this
state of facts for this repeal to be effected by South
votes while the votes of the Northern States are
opposed to its repeal.
"Mr. President, | am opposed to the repeal of a
law founded in public justice, unassaled by argu-
ment, because public camor has been raised as to
the amount which it takes from the Treasury. So
long that amount is not unreasonable burden
upon the industries of the country there is no
ground of argument which should be heard in the
American Senate. When law recognizes an obli-
CATION of the highest and most sacred character
there is no ground upon which its repeal should be
advocated here, because within the limits of the
ability of the people and the Government to pay it
is a large and even ar enormous transaction
:" consider that the system of pensions, the sup.
port of the disabled soldier citizen who has sacri
feed his ability to support himself and his family
at the command of the State and in obedience 10 the
will of the people, is ground of public law and of
public policy which is not only well founded in the
necessities of the country but in the history of all
past legislation and of all former governments"