Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1884-09-18

Again, on page 2465, he defeated the sam
bill by calling for the regular order.
Page 234: A bill being under considers
tion granting a pension to VIM. Z. Parker
who was railroad enploye, and injured in
collision while transporting troops, a
Wheeling, w. Va. Gen. Warner said: 4"
think that such cases as THESE are really TIL
ONLY cases that ought to be made the subjec
of special acts"
Page 237: Warner opposed granting
pension to VIM. II. ScriDner, whose CLAIM
was rejected at the Pension Office through
the merest technicality, saying, al believe
we should abide by the decision Of the Com
missioner" This bill was reported favora
blv from the Committee on Invalid Pensions
Same page, in the bill granting increase o.
pension to VIM. Hamill, he said, "If the
provision of the bill giving arrears is stricken
Ola, and the proposed increase made to date
from the passage of the till, ucu not object u
Page 1859: When H. r. 2702, granting a
pension to Mrs. Ellida J. Middleton was be-
fore the House. and Mr.. Warner was oppos-
ing it, Mr.. G. w Hewitt, of Alabama.
asked Mr.. Warner " Whether he came here
to pass bills or to oppose them" And, dur
ing the consideration of the bill, when it was
stated in the House that this officer had left
his widow and children in need Mr.. Warner
said: 4" 1hat lrds his fault. He should not hare
left them IN that conaltiln." There were only
five votes against the bill, and Mr. Warner
defeated lis passage at that time by demanding u
quorum of the House.
Page 247l: For the third time the bill
for the relief of Charles II. Frank was
brought up Tor consideration, and again Gen.
Warner antd9onized IT, COn9er, of Michigan,
said: 81 hope the gentleman ,rH not deUot the
LAST MOMENTS o. his time here IN fliibusterinq
against pension BILL" Gen. Warner sue
ceeded by his methods in preventing the pas
sage of the bill.
FoRTY-EIGHTH CoNGREss-Daily Record,
page 1915: Warner opposed granting PEN
sion to W. H. Blake, private Goth Ills. Vols.
Page 1849: Opposed pension to widow of
Surgeon General Barnes Randolph Tucker,
of Virginia appealed to both sides of the
House not to deny this aid to the widow of
a man who had spent over 40 years in the
service sof his country, and who had rem
dered valuable service to the dying Lincoln
and the dying Garfield, for which he had
never received any compensation
Pages 2S41 and 2S42: Gen. Warner op-
posed increase of pension to Julia A. Cham
bers. This was the case of a poor woman,
the widow OF a man who had served as an
enlisted man nearly so years in the regular
army, and the daughter of a man who was,
for Is years in the military service and she
herself was with her father anu husband
nearly all her life, sharing their hardships,
and was now infirm and old, and asked that
her pension be increased from IS 90 to $1,000
per month. Gen. Warner said: 1t seems
to me that the grounds upon which it is pro-
posed to grant this increase of pension are
all wrong. Inquiries are made as to the
pecuRiary circumstances Of this widow.
Why, sir, half the aCOrld, was about to say,
is half the time on the ragged edge Of rant.
The question of destitutiOR is not question
by which to determine whether a pension
should be granted in any particular case If
this increase Of pension is to be granted on
the ground Of service, that reason fails. l
hold that pensions should be granted FOR
DISABILITY oNLY-not for service, not for
destitution. The husband in this case,
would have been entitled to $500 per month.
The widow, though she may be, like thousands
and tens of thousands of others, aged ond
destitute, should receive no more than SS 90
a month"
And, again, But there has been no sub
stantial reason given for the passage of this
special act, except pityitl story, such as can
be told with equal truth in hundreds and
thousands of other cases"
FoRTY-sIxTH CONGRESS page 2468: Gen.
Warner endeayored to create a sensation in
the House by making a great ado over the
placing of armed police at the entrances of
the Capitol on the 4th of March, at the in
auguration of President Garfield, composed
of independent militia, under orders of the
Sergeant-at-Arms - although it was ex-
planned that it was simply to prevent the in
trusion of the crowd, and protect the mem
bers of Congress from interruption. He said:
1t is precedent fraught with danger" 81
should like even TO see a civic procession on
an occasion like this unmarried by single
bayonet" MIR. Carlisle (present Speakerl,
said: l have no doubt that these armed
men (whether they be militia or soldiers OF
the regular army, do not know, have been
placed here to preserve order to-day. Ii any
harm has been done, let this House, in a
calm and dispassionate way, as becomes MS,
express our opinion concerning it; but let
us not make great sensation over the coun-
try about small matter, which doubtless
was not intended to do any harm TO any
body"
FoURTY- EIGHTH CONGRESS, p. 1S47: Gen.
Warner opposed granting continuance of
pension to Irene Baker, imbecile child OF
james II. Baker, who served faithfully for
three years as private in Company II, 9th
Indiana Volunteers, and died of disease con-
tracted in the army. His widow was PEN
stoned and afterward remarked, and the
pensions to his children ceased when they
were sixteen years of age, and Irene, being
totally incapable of caring for herself, be-
came an object of charity. The committee
held that she was as helpless, and as much
of child after she was sixteen years of age,
as before, and recommended that her name
be placed on the pension roll, and apension
of $3.50 a month be paid her.
Gen. Warner opposed the bill upon the
ground that the principle was wrong-we
could not pension for destitution.
Gen. Goff, of w. Va, said: "The ques-
tion wish to ask the gentleman from Ohio,
is this: if he does not think it ground suffi-
cient for granting the pension in case like
this, where the natural protector of the
child is shown to have lost his life in the
military service of his country? If he were
living to-day, he would himself protect and
support this helpless child. But having
given his life to the service of his country,
ask him if he does not think it incumbent
upon the Government to stand in his place"
Gen. Warner: ain the case that the gen.
tleman from West Virginia suggests, there
would be pension under the law of but
$500 a month, and the law is limited to mi
nors in such cases.S
Gen. Goff: 81 did not understand the gen.
tleman from Ohio, as questioning the amount
of this pension, but the principle"
Gen. Warner: Generally the principle,
ETC."
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, FoRTY-EIGHTH
CONGRESS, p 1S4S. Mr. Goff: g think we
ought TO do it in all such cases; but the gen.
tleman seems to argue to the contrary"
Mr.. Warner of Ohio: Because think
pensions should be limited strictly to disa-
bility.
Gen. Goff: disability ?"
Mr.. Warner of Ohio: "Io disability alone.
We have never departed from that principle
but twice in this country, and they were two
uery bad precedents in my judgment. If
we depart from that principle now, and open
up the doors to granting pensions for service,
or for destitution in all cases of need, where
there is any connection with the army, then
We may expect to see our pension rolls not
limited to one hundred millions of dollars
annually, but extending to one hundred and
fifty millions or over"
Page 9151. He opposed granting a pen
sion to Amanda ]. Cutter, dependent
mother, reported favorably from the COM
mittee. This woman was II years of age,