The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1888-02-04

obtained their full rights. MANY OF
the slower and ill-informed held
back. and others have, for a time,
felt too proud or well-to-do to ask of
the government, especially in its
straights, for their just dues.
Some years after the close of the
war Congress passed one or more
laws limiting the payment of pen
sions from the time the claims should
be filed in the Pension Office, in lieu
of the time when the right of pen
sion first accrued-that is to say from
the discharge or death of the soldier.
In 1879, per chap. 1877. Congress saw
the wrong of these limitations or re-
strictions, and passed what was
known as the arrearages act, carry
ing the pay back to the beginning OF
the right, thus equalizing and put
ting all pensioners on the same foot
ing up to July l, 1880. But this act,
by its own provisions, ceased to have
effect after that date, so all claims
filed since then only carry pay from
the date of application.
Had not these meritorious benefi-
Charles a right to trust in the faith
and stipulations of their government
which, by their valor they saved,
and withhold their claims if they
saw proper, and present them at such
times as suited them, without the
risk of forfeiture? The truth is these
acts of Congress taking away from
the disabled soldiers large parts of
their legal rights, are simply acts of
confiscation, not against the enemies
of our country, but its benefactors,
the very ones Congress by solemn
laws promised to protect and reward.
COnfiscation laws were passed during
the war against those in armed hos
tilities against their country and its
laws, but even these were very ten
derby and mildly extraordinarily at
all. More than fifteen years of the
first pay of pensioners who filed their
claims since July |, 1880, stands to-
day forfeited, and it might be said
repudiated by acts of Congress. 1t is
not doubtful whether the Supreme
Court would hold such legislation
unconstitutional?
The pension laws in reference to
the late war rest upon quite different
principles from those of any former
wars. Such laws were enacted by
Congress, pensioning the old soldiers
of the Revolutionary war, also that
of 1912 and the Mexican, but these
laws were acts of gratitude, long after
the wars to which they applied were
over, and there was no congressional
promises or contracts at or before en-
listment-no plighted faith with the
soldiers in those days, who took their
lives in hand to make or save a coun-
try. is it right or fair to give PEN
sions to some since 1862, '63 or '64,
and to Others only since 1880. with
the same merit? What more than
mere statement of the facts could be
wanted by those who have it in their
power, and whose duty it is, to render
complete justice to those who have
only received partial justice. A few
millions of your troublesome surplus
can be gracefully and wisely parted
with for this purpose.
But we are in the habit of hearing
much about pension frauds. No doubt
occasionally a fraudulent claim does
pass through the Pension Office. and
still more frequently cases without
sufficient merit, but nearly all have
some merit. But on the other hand
a great many more worthy claims
are rejected for the want of the tech
nical and strict proof, required by
the Pension Office. The government
through all its Departments are con
stantly paying improper claims un-
knowingly, and the same thing takes
place in all relations of life. Are we
for these reasons to ignore justice, dis
troy government and disorganize
society? l rather think not. Let
justice and fairness be aimed at. and
if errors now and then occur on the
side of generosity, let it be so.
1t is proper to state that Senator
Ingalls, has introduced a bill in the
Senate for the purpose of removing
the restrictions referred to. 1t is to be
hoped it will be passed into law,
and thus equalize the intended bene-
fits of the original pension laws.
DEFENDER OF THE RIGHT.