The National tribune., 1888-05-17
PER DIEM SERVICE.


In answer to an interrogation from Chair
man Matson he frankly conceded that if
service-pension bill was to be granted that
the per diem feature was just and equitable
one, and proceeded to argue that on line of a
service pension, the bill introduced by the Hon.
j. c. Burrows, Of Michigan, THE NATIONAL
TRIBUNE Bill, met that idea much better than
any heretofore preached, inasmuch as it made
the minimum service carry with it pension
of 50 a month as a basis, the length of service
above 800 days to carry additional pension pro
rata.
Chairman Matson called Corpl Tanners at
tentou to the fact that while indorsing the
idea of So per month anyway, under the bill
introduced by Mr.. Burrows he still had OPP
posed that idea in the Lowering bill.
Corp'l Tanner conceded that fact, but claim
ed not to be inconsistent, because the bill in
troduCed by Mr.. Burrows made q difference
between 800 days and during the-War serv-
ice and that So a month was low enough
pension to pay, if the Government conceded
the right to any pension whatever He also
claimed that where the ground for pension
rested upon physical or mental incapacity,
there was no justice in considering term of
service in connection Herewith; that if vet
eran was incapable of earning Livelihood, the
livelihood was nevertheless necessary, whether
he served six months or four years, and that it
would be much more considerate on the part of
the Government to take man out and shoot
him than to sentence him to slow starvation on
$3.50 month pension.
Abiding to a paragraph in the majority re-
port from the Committee on Invalid Pensions,
submitted by Chairman MatsOn on the 14th of
last month, and reading therefrom as follows:
And if one receives not enough it is because
he did not serve long enough, and can he be
heard to complain if he gets just right equal
to his fellow soldlers, and for the remainder of
the relief necessary to his support he shall be al
lowed, as other citizens must, to accept the
charity of the local authorities" Corp'l Tan
ner claimed that there was an obligation rest
ing upon the Government these needy COM
rade helped to save that they should not be
obliged to apply to the poorhouse authorities,
and that it was the best policy on the part of
the Government, having in view its own honor,
the effect on rising generations, and III c0ntem-
platon of the eXigencies of the future, that the
Government should see to it that no honorably-
discharged veteran should have upon him the
stigma and stain of pauperism.
WHY THIS DISCRIMINATION?
He also asked for information from the Com
mttee how it was that they could bring them,
selves to the position of holding the surviving
Union veteran down to strict per diem COM
pensation or recognition, while the survivors
of the Mexican war and other wars had not
| been dealt with in the same way, but had had
their pension fixed at s. month at least
Chairman Matson, in response to that in
| quiry, stated that that was done when the sur
vivors of these other wars had reached a GER
tain age to which Corpl Tanner responded that
any veteran who at 80 was in absolute need of
| help should not be condemned to wait until he
was IL years older before the helping hand
could be extended to him.
In response to Corp1 Tanners insisteuce
upon the propriety of a proper service pension
| to all veterans Chairman Matson replied that
good many of them did not need it. Corp'I
Tanner said that yes, good many of them had
| gone to their graves.
ORPHANS PENSIONS.
| Corpl Tanner asked, for information, how it
was that this Committee had felt impelled to
| leave entirely out Of consideration the ques-