The National tribune., 1882-02-18
Where Ignorance is Not Bliss.

Where Ignorance is Not Bliss.
Senator Vance, of North Carolina, is another
statesman who ought to acquaint himself with
the practical working of the pension laws before
discussing them. In the Senate, last week, dur
ing the debate on the resolution declaring that
the Arrears of Pensions Act ought not to be re-
pealed, Mr. Vance called the attention of Mr.
Ingalls, to the statement in the Commissioners
report that during the current year 81 19 invalid
claims and 23,O14 widows and orphans claims
it as proof that large percentage of claims were
fraudulent. The insinuation that these claims
were rejected on the ground Of fraud or that be-
cause they were rejected the applicant was guilty
of making fraudulent claim would be laughed
out of the Pension Office as simply proof of the
authors monumental ignorance, but there are
thousands of people quite as ignorant (theugh
with more excuse) as Senator Vance, and for
that reason the assertion should not be passed
by unnoticed. For the benefit therefore, of
Senator Vance and the public generally we take
occasion to say that these fifty odd thousand
claims were not rejected and abandoned on the
ground of fraud, but partly because of ignorance
on the part of the claimant of the precise proof
required by law and partly because of the i'm
possibility, by reason of the death or inaccessi-
bility of necessary witnesses, or like cause, of
completing in prope- legal form the evidence
requisite to the establishment of the claim Not one
person in thousand has any idea of the obstacles
which exist to the proving of claim, no matter
what its merits. The regulations of the Pension
Office are all framed on the theory that the
claimant is not entitled to pension. Nothing is
taken for granted and he is not only required
to prove every point in his declaration by credible
witnesses, but by such class Of witnesses as the
Government may select. In the law courts he
would be permitted to choose any one of many
persons who might have knowledge of the facts
to prove his case, but the Pension Office rules
accord him no such right. He must prove his
case by the particular officer or officers which
they specify or his claim will be disallowed.
The officers may be dead or their whereabouts
unknown to the applicant, how can the poor
soldier be expected to keep track of his regi-
mental officers for fifteen years after the termina-
ton of the war?] but that is his lookout! The
Pension Office will reject his claim just the same,
and ignoramuses like Senator Beck will crane
their necks and gobble Fraud! FraudM Fraud II"
We cannot spare the space to print, as we should
like to do in this connection, the requirements
of the Pension Office as to the personal testimony
with which claim must be supported, but we
venture to say there isn't court in Christendom
where such hard conditions are placed upon the
sutton, or where indeed they would be tolerated
The wonder is not that so many pension claims
are rejected, hut that any are allowed at all and
it may be said right here that but for the assist
ance which the much-abused claim agents are
able to render applicants in the way of in
structing them as TO what sort of evidence the
Pension Office requires, and ascertaining for them
thousands of our disabled veterans would be
still without their PENSIONS.
1t is true that now and then cases of actual
fraud are brought to light, but how few these are,
as compared with the number of bona; tide claims,
is shown by the statistics of the Pension Office
itself, according to which but 1856 pensions were
dropped for fraud, as against 1886 allowed dur
ing the past year. Another point on which it
may be well to enlighten Mr. Vance, concerns
the subsequent fate of these rejected and aban-
doned claims. 1t is his impression-for evident
" he has no actual information whatever on this
subiect-that the refusal of the Pension Office to
allow them disposes of them finally and forever,
whereas they can always be revived when the
evidence is at hand to satisfy the legal FORMS Or
if the Commissioner refuses to reconsider them,
an appeal can be taken to Congress. Commits
sioner Bentley gloried in the number of claims
that were rejected during his administration but
even he was frequently forced to reopen cases
and reverse his own arbitrary rulings. Could he
have had his way, doubtless he would have COM
PEELED the claimant to produce in evidence the
bullet that wounded him Nothing less, we are
sure, would satisfy Mr.. Beck that he was not
swindler, or what he appears to think even
worse-a claim agent in disguise! Thank heaven,
Commissioner Dudley believes in fair play all
round and has brought about many important
Ill IL 10