The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1889-10-19


rating of ten employees of the Pension
Office. and reminding him that he. as secrc-
tary of the interior. had jurisdiction over
and management of tho Pension Office. Is
but the first installment of what is TO be a
vigorous defense of the position of the
administration taken in relation to the
management of the Pension Office under
Tanner. 1t has been decided that the adj
ministration side of the case shall be given
to the public in full.
Substance of the Letter.
To the Western Associated Press.
WASHINGTON. Oct. 1s-The following is
the substance of Secretary Mobiles first let
ter to Commissioner Tanner upon the sub
ject of re-rating of pensions:
DEPARTMENT OF THE IyTERToR,1
WASHINGTON, July "a.
To the Commissioner of Pensions:
Sir have heretofore acknowledged yours Of
the 11th inst, marked unofficial" bnt which.
owing to the very important matters therein dis
cussed. / could not receive as such. and. there
fore, acknowledged as an official paper. The pa
per was official in the highest sense OF the term.
raising question OF authority as between tho
Commissioner and Secretary, and asserting that
of the Commissioner 10 be superior as 10 the
matter discussed. / have since, amid my many
other duties, found time 10 consider the ques-
my reply in full.
Your position, in your own language, is that
"while the Secretary of the Interior hasthe
power to reverse the decision of the Commits
sioner Of Pensions on appeal by claimant
against whom the Commissioner has decided, on
the other hand If for any reason IL be held that
the claimant has been granted too mach pen
sion, the Commissioner himself Is the only per-
son who has the power to call a halt and reduce
the pension" This is your own statement You
base this conclusion on Sec. 4. act OF June 2I,
1879, which reads follows:
THAT Sections 477I, 4772 and 4773 of the He-
yised Statutes of the United states, providing
for biennial examinations of pensioners, are
hereby repealed; provided. that the Commits
siOner of Pensions shall have the same power as
heretofore to order special examinations when
ever, in his judgment, the same may he Deces-
sary, and TO increase or reduce pensions accord
ing 10 right and justice; but in no case shall
I notice. TO 20 the nensioner and hearihs upon upa
sworn testimony, except as to the eertihcafe OF
the examining surgeons"
The power granted TO the Commissioner of
Pensions by this section is expressly no greater
than heretofore, and it is To increase or reduce
pensions according to right and justice. IL
gruity" IL the Secretary, Who is responsible for
your bureau. had no power TO correct obvious
feriOr officer did not act nothing could be done.
You remark yourself, This incongruity should
be remedied at the next session OF Congress.
The Commissioner is laboring under
relations to the Secretary In this
business Congress has not committed this in
congruity, and it VIII not be necessary for 1t tn
remedy anything that now exists. The Secretary
has the control to correct any abuses in the Bu-
reau OF Pensions or any other bureau in the de-
partmeDt. i might Eassert my conclusions on so
plain and well settled question and so leave it,
but dne consideration for your office leads me
to explain the ground on which this long
established rule rests.
The Secretary, in support of his position,
quotes Sections 4S7, 161, AL, 40 and AL of
the Revised Statutes. and declares that the
Commissioner of Pensions has no more
in ha lad in nj
sioner Tanners letter than he had previous
ly under the direction OF the Secretary of
the Interior, who is charged by law with
the supervision of public business relating
to pensions. He then says:
1t will not do TO say that the Secretary may cot
interfere and stop by his own power the execI-
ton of any orders obviously illegal and arbf-
trary If it were attempted by Commissioners
OF Pensions, i'm other than cases of permanent
specific disabilities. 10 increase pensions and To
allow the accumulated increase of ten or fifteen
years to be paid over ~ once and In ross sum
to the applicant, 1t would not do TO say that the
Secretary could only refer this back TO the Com
missioner with word Of advice, and call his at
tention to tho law, and take no steps either TO
recover the money thus improperly paid out or
correct the evil thus attempted to be done; that
he could not even call halt. The Secretary il
responsible for the conduct OF the Commissioner.
is bound to that the law Is enforced; that the
public Treasury is not unlawfGlly invaded, and
that one citizen, entitled to right, whether OF
pension or land. or anything else, il not unduly
preferred, either in time OF hearing or allowance
OF money.
The Secretary lays down the proposition
that be has the same jurisdiction over the
Commissioners of Pensions over other
bureaus of his department, argues at some
length in support of il, and says that Su-
preme Court decisions sustain him. The
Secretary then takes up the 're-rating"
cases, which, he says, seem TO be largely
mere increases of pensions allowed for long
periods prior to the date of the examining
surgeons certificate establishing the same
under the pending claim for increase; I'm
fact. he SAYS, the Commissioner himself ac-
knowledged them to be cases of increase of
pensions. The Secretary continues:
These cases referred 10 were ten I'm number
In each one of these the claimant was
ploye, clerk or other, in the Pension Bureau, re-
ceiying salary sufficient fct his comfortable sub
sistence. and at his work daily. They were
ciated together. Most of them had been in their
places under the former administration. hut
they did not prefer their claims; they made the IN
soon after the advent OF the present admiuistra-
ton. There was no reason under the existing
rules that their cases should be made special or
rushed through in advance OF all others. On the
| contrary, there was then. and had been
for some years, printed rnie In full force
| that no cases should be made special except
in cases of destitution when the applicant
was at the point of death. Yet these eases were
1 all hurried through by yOur order, while hun
| dreds of thousands of other pensioners were
awaiting throughout the land the allowance for
| the first time OF the bounty the government has
| promised .hem. These other pension claimants =
were, many OF them, supported by no sucn
salaries as tnese particular men were receiving.
| and the association together of these men
| whereby this preference in time seemed 10 have
been secured and the subsequent allowances
obtained. is in itself fact that their purpose
was TO impose upon the Commissioner. The
further fact In each case is that the increase was
allowed prior to the surgeons certificate IN the
pending claim. and that the sums allowed az
gregated over $4,000 The following is the
| list: -
Frank ID. Butts. allowed and paid s2. le6;
| James +. Smith. allowed and paid 81 $50: Alyan
n Doan. allowed and paid 5000; VIM. p.
Davis, allowed and paid MAY 27). 81 .O6I; Wm.
I. Davis, allowed and paid June Ia. S737; Vim.
!. Hiiieoss, allowed and paid $ls4: sias Col
] grove, allowed ana paid II ,s22; Joseph Diekin-
son, son. allowed aad paid S715; John Z. Carpenter.
allowed and paid 81 500: Joseph G.. squires al
lowed and paid 81 .564; John L. Paine. allowed
| and paid 81 .397; total. SlG.7S5
| III Is IN regard 10 such cases as these that you
nave Thought the Commissioner alone can call a
halt. and. In regard 20 which. the secretary
tninks otherwise, and proposes 10 cali halt long
enough. at least. for inspection. I do not rerel
the expression on your part that you would ac-
cent my construction OF the statute quoted by
you Is Loyalty as you would the official opinion
OF the Attorney general But neither you nor