The Indianapolis sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1880-1904, 1885-02-19
THE GRANT PENSION BILL


There are those who pretend TO think the
Republic disgrsced. justice outraged, and
all sense Of gratitude frozen out of the public
heart merely because the National House of
Represents tives did not retire General Grant
on pension o.. $l5 600 q year during life.
We do not see that the country is compro-
missed. We are net aware of any legal or
moral obligation that has been strained. We
are sure that the peop e recognize in General
Grant a commander who did much to force
the restoration of the Union. We are sure,
too, that if ever appreciation Of favorte
soldier was demOnstrs ted by Republic that
demonstration has been at the hands OF the
people of the United States and Ulysses S.
Grant the recipient of it. All OF henors the
Nation has had to hestow have been bestowed
on him. Eight years of the Presidency and
$500 600 salary was handsome triouts. All
that legislative ana popular expresio1 could
offer added luster to his fame. No American
citizen ever received such wealth Of valuable
personal gifts. All these were supplemented
By the gratuity Of purse Of $3.50, 900, which
was invested by the trustees OF the fund so
that yearly interest OF Sl5. 900 for ten years
was guaranteed.
Is General Grant an INDECENT? Does he
require the additional $4,000 year the re-
tirement bill contemplated to enable him to
live comfortably? What manner of Amer
lean is he who can not live sumptuously on an
interest income of SO 900 per annum? With
nome of bis own should not S4l per day,
the year round, feed bountifully clothe
handsomely and provide considerable pleas
ure besides for an American citizen ana his
family?
With Difference to the views of those in
fected with the idea that nothing less than 3
princely endowment of General Grant
through life will be doing justice by MIN,
we cite the fact that ours is Republic, and
not a Government OF Royalty. Oars is a
people whose boast is that all men are equals
before the law. II General Grant had greater
responsibilities as a soldier than the private
soldier who fought and won the battle,
lost limb or otherwise suffered IL Jury for
life, he also enjoyed the commensurately
greater compensation and higher honor. Ad-
mitted that Grant was hero, but there were
million more who fought in the same
struggle. There are thousands living to-day,
aud many of them in Indiana. who were no
less gallant and suffered far more than did
''the hero Of Appomattox." We incline to-
ward the latter heroes. The Union could
have been preserved without General Grant,
but it could not have been preserved with
out the soldieTy to which we refer.
We are opposed to any tendency to aping
monarchicsl decorations and enriching COM
handing Generals while neglecting the he
roes of the file. General Grant, himself, while
President indicated bearing to military
caste when ve,oing the bill for equalizing the
bounty Of soldiers. Grant was great Cen
eral; be also received great rewards. And
We do not see that with an income of $4,000
year he Is in need OF any further gTatuities
from the Government. II the country has
SO extra sum of that size to distribute yearly,
there are ene-armed and one legged heroes,
with large families, in any Northern State,
who need it worse