The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-01-28
GENERAL HoVEY,s BILL.

An esteemed correspondent, whose COM
munication we print, takes the journal to
task for criticising General Hovey's bill to pay
to soldiers of the late war a sum equal to 40
per cent. of the amount of their original pay,
to make good the difference between the
value of the greenbacks in which they were
paid and the gold coin in which the green
backs were eventually redeemed. The prop
osition is to pay each surviving soldier 40 per
cent. Of his aggregate pay during the time
for which he served, to equalze the difference
between the then value of greenbacks and
gold. The Journal is opposed to that method
of honoring the soldier or paying the govern
ment's debt of gratitude. Our correspondent,
himself an old soldier, supports the PROPOSE
ton with considerable warmth of feeling and
rhetoric The arguments he makes in favor
of it are not new. They have done frequent
service in past years in connection with at
tacks on ''bloated bondholders," ETC., and
they have no more substance merit now
than they had then. The journal thinks
General Hovey's proposition is Objectionable,
because it would recognize false principle
and establish mischievous and, perhaps.
dangerous precedent. It is not half
as meritorious as a proposition to pay
!. every surviving soldier life pension.
That would recognize the governments debt
of gratitude to the soldiers and would
partially liquidate it without dishonoring its
own currency, establishing dangerous prece-
dent or recognizing principle under which
host of other government creditors might
come in. AS matter of business and of con-
tract we repeat that the soldiers shave no
higher nor different claim on the government
than that of others who had dealings with it
during the years of deprecated currency"
Their claim is based on gratitude, and graft
tude and business are two very different
things. We might say this point, millions
for gratitude but not a cent for deprecated
currency. In the article to which our cores
pondent refers, we said Gen. Hoveys bill
would establish precedent 'unGer which
thousands of claims for readjustment would
spring up, morally and inherently as just as
the soldiers claims, and it would only be a
question of time VIXEN they would be recog-
nized." Any person who cannot see that this
might be the case must be very dull of COM
prehension. 1t IS proposed that the govern
ment shall say to the soldiers, ''All our deal
ings from 1861 to 1865 were on false basis;
that which we paid you for dollar was not
dollar and now we will give you forty cents
on the dollar additional to make it
an honest transaction" This would
be dangerous position for the
government to take, and one which
other persons who had dealings with it duri ng
the period of deprecated currency would be
very quick to take advantage of. Moreover,
it would divest the action of the volunteer
soldier of all the element of patriotism, and
put it on a purely mercenary, cent-per cent
basis. No honorable soldier ought to desire
that. He is entitled to all the government
can afford to give him on the score of graft
tude, bat he should not ask it now to do what
it refused to do during the darkest hours of
the war-dishonor its own currency.
Our correspondent is correct in his belief
that the Journal favors the most generous
treatment of those heroes and veterans of the
Union army VINO are disabled The Journal
favors the disability pension act, by which all
disabled soldiers, no matter whether their
disability was incurred in the service or not
shall receive the fostering care of the govern
ment. That bill ought to be passed at once
White House and see whether he would repeat
his veto.