The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1884-04-24
A DeIusion and a Snare.

IN go q faith, it may be, to facilitate the
adjudication Of pension claims and give i'm
mediate relief to deserving applicants, this
bill Is. nevertheless, in our Judgment, a
delusion and snare and should it become
law in It's present shape will be productive
of the greatest injustice.
In the first place, it makes it condition
that the claimant 10 pension under this act
shall surrender all right to arrears. IF he
has fled 4 claim to pension under the
arrears law and elects to prosecute his claim
under This proposed act, it is provided that
he shall only draw pension from the date of
such election. Dir. Rogers, of Arkansas,
who advocated its passage, openly declared
that q il takes from all, however meriiorious
any pension for any period of time, prior to
making application under the bill" Said
Mr. Warner, Of Ohio, who reported the bill:
They 1.-THE elaimantsl give up their claims
for arrears, and take pensions only from the
date of fling such declaration
1t places the Government in the position
Of trying TO cheat its creditors out of the
money due them. 1t amounts to saying to
The soldier: We know that your claim is
meritorious and ought to be allowed, but
you have not been able as yet to furnish the
proofs required by the Pension Office, and
you are, therefore, at our mercy. If you
viii give up the arrears of pension due you,
We viii abate something of OR require
ments as to proof, and, perhaps, allow your
claim TO pension from present date; other
wise, we viii suspend action on your claim
until you do" Was there ever more
shameful or outrageous proposition!
In the second place. in claims filed since
the expiration of the arrears law, it makes it
a condition that the claimant who elects to
prosecute his claim under this bill shall sur
render his right TO pension from the date of
his original application to the date of fling
this last declaration. What justice is there
in this?
If the claimant in this class OF cases has
any right to pension at all, that right dates
from the filing of his original application,
and 20 refuse TO give him the benefit of this
bill, except upon the condition that he
valves this right, is TO take a shameful adj
vantage of his helplessness Instead of a
bill to expedite the settlement of pension
claims, this onght 10 be entitled IAN act to
scale the Governments debts to the soldierl !"
1t is downright repndiation nothing more,
nothing less.
In the third place, this bills fails to make
any provision whatever for the widows and
minor children of those who may die after
being awarded pensions under it
But we have been proceeding under the
assumption, so far, that the bill really does
afford some relief, and have only set forth
the injustice and unreasonableness of the
conditions under which claimants are allowed
]
really justified by the terms of the bill
Does it really provide for any abatement in
the amount of evidence required to estab-
iish a claim? Let us examine the language
of The bill What is the applicant required
to prove?
LIST that he is now disabled To deter
mine this fact he must 20 before board
of examining surgeons as now.
ID That his disability is not The result o
his own misconduct OF bad habits or ofhea
known cause occurring since ms discharge
and that it probably was incurred in the lin,
of duty. This is in the nature of negatiy,
testimony most dificult of all to furnish
Finally. he is required TO make due proc
of the facts, under such regulations as ma,
be prescribed by the proper authority,
and that proper au;hority-the Commits
soner of Pensions-is to be the judg
: of whether this proof affords probabl
D cause to believe that his disability origi
mated in line of duty. In what respec
e do these requirements differ from those pre-
f scribed by existing law? AS Representative
? Browne justly remarked, the difference
simply that while under the old law til
claimant was entitled TO pension even
a he served but day or week, If he INQUIRE
b disability, under tie proposed law he mu:
have served three monthsi If the propose
law valves anything in favor of the clairnan
2 il is only such requirements as under exis
!. ing law ought not 70 be exacted by the Per
Z sion ofioe. Ii merely gives the soldier til
e benefit Of the doubt, TO which he is entisie
= under the present law, and OF which h
; should never have been deprived.
The eaet is that the only positive merit
thisbiil is contained in the provision of the La
section that the fact thai claimant serve
three months shall be regarded as 9,yisa.
Iacic evidence Of his soananess at date
enlistment and this, not because it is ne
, Legislation, but because ii is deciaratory
20 10 how the Commissioner Of Pensions shoal
le construe the present Law.