The National tribune., 1885-07-09
GA CHANGE NEEDED"
An Argument in Support Of The National Tribune
Position.

An Argument in Support Of The National Tribuns's
Position.
. To THE EDITOR: Will you allow me, on be-
half of the old soldiers, to express to you the
gratitude which i, in common with them, feel
because of the noble stand which YOU have
taken, as reflected in your able editorial enti-
titled "a Change Needed" published in your
issue Of the 18th ult. To the sentiment ther>iu
expressed We with one accord, respond heartily,
Amen Under our present pension laws, am
most decidedly opposed to any ex-soldier apply
ing for or procuring pension, unless he be to-
tally or partially disabled by reason of wounds
received, or by reason of physical disability con-
tracted in the service. To defeat unworthy
claimants, we have sometimes exerted our
utmost influence, and will continue to do so.
And that the efforts of the Pension Department.
in this behalf are to be commended will not
admit of argument or contradiction. But
whilst this is true, it may be also said that
some of the conditions made essential to
claimants success by the system adopted by
the Department would be too trifiing to merit
serious consideration, were it not that failure
to comply Herewith might be, in effect the
jeopardizing of an otherwise meritorious claim.
To the writer it has become somewhat pleas
ant duty to voluntarily aid claimants to pro-
cure and arrange the evidence necessary to
support the claim of an applicant, and by rea-
SON of such service we have become, to some
In the main, though exceedingly exscting,
they are right, and we think for that reason
are not to be animadverted upon, or subject TO
adverse and unjust criticism. But are there not
exceptions which may become the legitimate
subjects Of opposition and CONTROVERSY Are
not some of the requirements too fimsy for
serious discussion2 To every just man, are
they not fit subjects for ridiculef An illustra-
tion if you will permit: We have been for
months engaged in working up claim in be-
half of an aged, needy and deserving claimant,
not, it is true, soldier, but the father of SON
killed in the army, and after hope deferred
had we'll nigh made the heart sick" in our
almost futile attempt to complete our evidence
by ransacking most of the United States and
the whole of Canada. We finally exclaim
Eureka!" and congratulate ourselves that we
have made out our satisfactorily answered
all demands and eOnfOrmed to all requirements
and forward the latest returns" to the Pension
Bureau. From that time on we are in a most
tranquil frame of mind touching that claim,
and continue so, until we become the recipient
of another "oficial communication" which
informs us: You must prove by evidence
other than that of the claimant what his
income was in 1862" We throw the afore-
said official communication down In su-
preme disgust and involuntsrily exclaim
Damn such system" Here is the case of an
old, decrepit man, poor and needy, who but for
the death Of that son prompted by a noble i'm
pulse and patriotic spirit to self-immolation
upon the altar of his country that our liberties
might be preserved) might be enjoying peace
and plenty in his declining years. and his path
way to the tomb freed from terrors of eorrod-
ing care and mental anguish by the kind in
fuences which flial affection performs and
whose demands for relief from daily and ever
increasing, cruel necessity, is met with the ques-
ton and requirement to know what was mis-
income in 1862" and to show the fact by evil
dence other than his own" Now the fact is,
that during the year 1862 the claimant in this
case lived not only part of the year in Calls
fornia, part in Illinois, but the remaining
part in Canada, his former home. More than
that, he was but day laborer, only making such
aprecarious living as day laborer is enabled to
make, subject to the contingencies of consider
able sickness, lack of work, etc. Now, how is
it possible for him, under the circumstances, to
show, after lapse of more than p years, by
evidence other than his own" what his income
was during that year2 A kind of evidence
which could only, outside of himself, be sup
ported by proof of his several employers, whose
very names are in many instances forgotten,
and whose present whereabouts, if living at al,
are absolutely unknown.
Again, let US ask, do equity and good cons
science demand the rejection of claim otherf-
wise fairly made out, simply because his In.
come for the year 1862 by evidence other thar
his own" cannot be established? Would not
substantial justice be done, equity and good
conscience subserved, and the most reasonable
requirements of an exacting and rigorous "sys.
tenn be sufficiently complied with in this and
similar cases by satisfactory proof that the
claimant had not any source of permanent inc
come at all during such period 1t seems to
us that the condition imposed in the requirement.
above cited is about as enthusiastically MOI
more so-as that, now happily exploded We be-
lieve, of compelling an old soldier claimant to
prove that the disability under which he seekt
to claim did not exist anterior to his enlistment
in the service of his country. Such q requires
ment was preposterous, in view of the fact that
his enlistment, and especially his subsequent
acceptance as recruit and muster-in, was pred,
icated upon an inspection as to his physical
condition, with a return by the proper offceS
certifying to such fact, as well to the "sound.
ness" of the recruit. We trust that our hone
ored Government, unexampled in its benei<
cence toward the Nations defenders, viii guard
with constant and increasing care, with an
ever-watchful and tender solicitude, those
whose increasing infrmities, whose bowed
forms, broken down phi sical frames. oecasioned
by meritorious service in the army, or as in
cidents resulting from the contingency of the
death of loved ones upon whom they relied for
support, constitute their highest claims to the
Nations liberal support. w. MCDOWELL.
chryrx