The sun. [volume] (Morris, Stevens County, Minn.) 1882-1895, 1889-10-24
NOBLE TO TANNER,
Letter From the Secretary of the
Interior to the Commissioner of
Pensions.
His Method of Rerating Pensions
Shown to BE a Disregard of
the Law.

WASHINGTON, Special-The following is
the substance of Secretary Mobiles tirst letter
to Commissioner Tanner upon the subject OF
re-ratlng of pensions, dated July "a:
have heretofore acknowledged yours OF the
18th inst marked "unotticial," but which. owing
TO the very lmportant matters therein d!s1
therefore acknowledged 1t AZ an ohciaI
paper. The paper was official III the
highest sense OF the term, RAISING question
OF authority as between the commissioner ana
the secretary and asserting that of the commits
sloner be superior as TO the matter discussed
have since; amid my many other tee
question raised by your letter, and Will
now give Won my reply IN full. Your position
Ia vCur own language, IS that while the secfe-
tary of the interior has the power 10 reverse the
decision Of the commissioner OF pensions on APP
peal bv n claimant, against whom the commls-
soner has decided, on the other hand, H. Tor any
reason, it be held that the claimant has been
granted too much pension the commissioner
himself is the only person who has the power 10
cali malt and reduce the pension. Inls Is your
own statement. You base this conclusion on
section ), act of June y. 1879. which reads as
follows:
That sections All, 4,77@ and 4,773 of the
Revised Statutes Of the United States, providing
for biennial examinations OF pensioners, are
hereby repealed: Provided: That the commits
eIOuer Of pensions shall have the same power as
heretofore to order special examinations Wheh-
ever III his Judgment, the same may be neces-
s@ry, and to increase or reduce pensions accord
ing to right and Justice; but i'll no case shall Il
pension be Withdrawn or reduced except upon
notice 10 the pensiOner and hearing upon
sworn testimony, except as to the ceruncate OK
the examining surgeons.
WHO Is RESpO NSIRLE?
The power granted the commissioner Of pen
siuns hy this section is expressly no greater
Tran heretofore. and it is to increase or reduce
tensions according 10 riGht and justice. 1t
would be- as you express 1t, "a manifest lnCon-
gruity" II the secretary. who is responsible for
your bureau, had no power 10 correct obvious
abuses, Or even ca matt. ana thaI II MS ihlc-
rlOr officer did not act nothing could be done.
You remark yourself, this 1nCOnCrulty should
be remedied at the next session OF congress.
The commissioner is labOring under great mis-
apprehension as to his relations to the secretary
in this business. Congress has not committed
this irC0uGruity, and 1t will not be necessary
for 1t to remedy anything that now cXlSts. ne
secretary has the control to correct any abuses
in The bureau Of pensions or any other bureau III
the department. might assert my conclusions
on 50 RI in and we'll settled 4 question and so
leave 1t, but q due consideration for your once
leads me u explain the ground on which this
long established rule rests.
The secre; airy, in support of his position,
quotes sections 1871, 161, 40 ard All, OF
the Revised Statutes, and declares that the
commissioner Of pensions has no more power
in the section quoted in Commissioner Tan
ner's letter than re had previously under the
direction Of the secretary of the interior, who
is charged by law with the supervision of
public business relating to pensions
THE sECEETARY'S RIGHTS
It will no. do to say he remarks, that the sec
rctarv may not interfere and stop by his own
power the execution of any orders obviously
ILLEGAL and arbitrary. II it were attempted by a
commissioner OF pensions, in other than cases of
permanent specific disabilities, to increase pen
slouS and to allow the accumulated increase of
ter or nftcen years TO be paid over at once and
in a gross sum to the applicant, 1t would not do
10 say that the SECRETARY could only refer this
back to the commits with word Of advice,
and call his attention TO the law, and take no
steps eiih her to recover the money thus improp-
erIy paid out or correct the evil thus attempted
to be done. that he could not even call halt.
The secretary is responsible for the conduct OF
the commissioner: IS bound to see that the law
is enforced: that the public treasury is not I'M
lawfully invaded, and that one citizen entitled
to a right, whether of pension or land or any
thing else, is not unduly preferred, either in
time of hearing or allowance of mcney.
The secretary lays down the proposition
that he Eas the same jurisdiction over the
commissioner of pensions as over other
bureaus of his department, argues at some
length in support of it, and says that the su-
preme court decisions sustain him. The Sec
rotary then takes up the "re-rating" cases
which, he says, seem to be largely mere in
| creases OF pensions allowed for long periods
| prior to the date of the examining surgeons
certificate establishing the same under the
pending claim for increase; in fact, he says
! the commissioner himself acknowledged
| them to be cases of
INCREASE OF PENSIONS
| These cases referred to were ten in number
! In each one of these the claimant was an EN-.
| plOye. clerk or other, in the pension bureau, re-
Ceivng salary sufficient for his comfortable sub
| sistenCe, and at his work daily. They were as
! sOciated tOg"t her: most of them had been ir
| their places under the former administration
| But they did not prefer their claims: they made
boz rlyvo,, +rP Il
! ministratiOn. There was no reason under the
existing rules that their cases should be made
! special or rushed through in advance of all 9TH
ers. On the contrary, there was then and haC
been for some wears printed rule in full force
that no cases should be made special except in
cases Of restitution or when the applicant was
| at the point of death The cases WERE
all hurried through by your order
while hundreds of thousands Of other pension
| ers were awaiting throughout the land the al
! lOWanCe for the first time of the bounty the
| government has promised them. These Other
| pension claimants WERE many of them, sup
| ported by no such salaries as these particular
men were receiving, and the ASSOCIATION to-
| cether Of these men. whereby this preference il
| time seemed to have been secured and the sub
| sequent allowances obtained. is In itself fac
| that their purpose was to impose upon the com
! missioner. The further fact in each case is tina
| the increase was allowed prior to the surgeon
certificate in the pending claim, and that thu
| sums allowed aggregate over SIG. 600. 1t is il
regard to such eases as these that you hav
thought the commissioner alone can call a halt
and in regard to which
THE SECRETARY THINKS OTHERWISE.
and proposes to call halt long enough at leas
| for inspection. | do not repel the expires SION OF
your part that you would accept my construc
ton of the statute quoted by you as Loyalty al
you would the official opinion of the ATTORNEY
| general But neither You nor can afford to &C
upon personal considerations in matters of thi
magnitude. We are each bound by law in al
things, great and small, and it is our duty t.
take the law we find it: to fully exercise tina
power given to either Of us and abstain from
the abuse Of it to any degree whatever. Gu
| loyalty is due alone to the government of Lh
| United States and the people who support 1t.
Lest the commissioner may deem the sec
rotary is Influenced hV desire to magnif,
his Office, Mr.. Noble says that he has brough
to his assistance the services of others in tn
department. and that the opinion of the as
sistaut attorney general OF the department
agrees in the ontlusions reached by the sec
rotary. The secretary then says that Their
is a board OF review in the departing N
which assists him in the decisions of pensio
cases taken up on appeal. These decision
are the law Of the department until reverse
or annulled by some authority higher tina
the secretary, and no one has ever main
tanned to the contrary.
ADJUDICATION OF CLAIMS
| In these decisions It has been announce
MANY times and it is the established and we
known rule that the department will untfOrml
refuse to disturb an adjudication of claims by
former administration, except upon the mos
conclusive evidence that an error has been com
mitted When question as to the propriety
a given rating is one of Judgment merely, dc
pending upon the weight of evidence, it will nc
allow the opinion of to-day to overthrow tn
| opinion of yesterday, But where the incorrect
ness Of the former action is so manifest upon
review of the evidence that is not matter
dispute. the department will not refuse to
justice because the error is Of long standing an
has been sanctioned by subsequent actor
Aud, Furthermore, that old cases will not be n
opened. reconsidered nor readjusted exceI
upon presentation of new and mat erial evident
tending to show the existence of
palpabIe error or a mistake, and which therefor
tends to change the real status of the claimaI
before the department.. Such old cases al
clearly within the rule Of res adjudicata. II
, | to be distinctly observed that l am now speal
ing of cases only where there have been allow
anccs of sums arising from the increase Of per
! sion, back for periods Grea' er or less, prior
| the date of the surgeons certificate under tt
pending claim. l do not say word or ente
tain the least objection to an increase of pei
sion, the increase to commence under the penC
| ing claim as the law directs, and upon evident
to support it. Nor do complain OF these veI