The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1891-07-08
The outcry Against Pensions.

In the course of rather notable Fourth of
July Grafton in Boston, on Saturday, Mr..
Josiah Quincy, Jr., said some things in re-
gard to our pension system which deserve
consideration:
Even our own recent experience in the United
States has shown that the wagng of war under a
uemocratlc government seems to involve through
tue payment of pensions new and unfor seen ex-
pense OF vast proportions, continuing for half a
century century or more after peace has been reestab-
lshedi our penslon-r0ll today amounts to more
than the annual cost of the largest army in
Europe, and 1.-THE number OF our pensioners is
equal 10 That OF the soldiers In any army but that
OF Russia. Through pensions and interest on
war dept we are today making an annual pay
ment Of over Sl5,o0o00o for conflict which
closed more than quarter of a century ago. Ex-
pensive as is the conduct of war under mon-'
archy, our experience has shown that its ccst IS
greater yet under democracy.
Mr.. Quincy voices q SENTIMENT which has
for some tsscc5 met the approval of large
prnber of American citizens, though not
the majority, we believe. Although the first
efforts at more liberal pension expenditures
began In Congress under Democratic aus
pices, that party has most generally approved
such sentiments as Mr.. Quincy has uttered.
Nevertheless there are many leading Demo-
Gratis who have approved all our pension
legislation, and considerable number of
Republicans who have had doubts about ii.
The facts which Mr.. Quincy states are GER
tainly startling; and the reader will be apt
to declare hastily that war in democratic
country certainly should not cost as much as
under monarchy. The fact that it costs
more to support our pensioners than it does
to support the Russian army is impressive,
and hasty inference from it is liable to be
very unfavorable to to the pension system.
But we think more careful examination
will lead to modification Of this inference.
Why should it not cost democracy more to
sustain war than it costs a monarchy? In
a monarchy the state assumes and enforces
more authority over the bodies and lives Of
its subjects than In a republic. A mon
archy might carry on for years war that
the majority of its subjects should distp-
prove Of; republic never could. A repub-
lie can wage war only with the hearty con-
sent and cooperation of its citizens. There
fore it is more necessary that the citizens OF
republic should be made to feel well dis.
posed towards making such sacrifices as may
be necessary in war for the republic. This
truth is so self evident that it needs no argu-
ment Now the question arises as to how
far the government of republic should 60
in efforts to make its citizens well disposed
towards making sacrifices. Many men,
those like Mr. Quincy especially, hold that
the citizen should always be disposed TO
make the sacrifices necessary to preserve the
republic, since 1t is one OF his primary duties
as citizen and subject; and that it is un-
manly and unpatiiotic for him to expect
reward for 1t In the shape of pension.
There is certain force in this If the pension
is considered simply as reward, or donation.
But we do not think that this is the proper
way to look at it. The pension is not re-
ward or donation. 1t is Itcompense al
lowed in equity to one citiz "a who has taken
extraordinary risks for the republic while
other citizens have been allowed to enjoy the
fruits of his risks without participating in
them. This principle has been recognized
from the very first day of the republic.
When the town of New Gloucester started
her company on the road to Massachusetts
after receipt of the news of Lexington, the
town voted to assume the support of the
families of those who went. The democracy
of New Gloucester said, "these smen risk
their lives for our liberties; we should ;make
sacrifices in compensation" Under similar
conditions monarchy would have taken the
citizens and left their families to get along
by the labor of the women at home, or to
starye. The democratic method is more
costly. of course. but who would think for a
moment of substituting the monarchical. 1t
may be urged that this is not parallel to the
case of present pension allowances. But
why nots The great mass Of the veterans of
the war volunteered. They took extraor-
binary risks both on their lives and on the
future prosperity of their families. With
out any lowering of their patriotism they
had right to say then, "We are taking ex-
traordinary risks and hardships for the good
of you who stay at home and for succeeding
generations. We shall expect Of you who do
not take these risks, in this generation and
the next, compensatory sacrifices so that the
whole weight Of this may not fall upon us
and our families" 1t is all very well to talk
of heroic sacrifices for the country being the
proper tribute OF sons of republic; but 1t
is a mockery unless the tax Is assessed upon
an. The mice were very patriotic about put
ting the bell on the cat until each mouse
found that the others expected him to take
all the risks. The citizen of a republic will
be loyal and self sacrificing when he feels
that other citizens are as ready to make sac
rifces as himself. If he feels that he is to
be used to bell the cat for the safetyand com
fort of others the effect will be likely to be
depressing on his loyalty. A monarchy can
stand such depressing Influences, because it
commands the services of its subjects. A
republic cannot, for it must depend upon the
tree-will of its citizens. 1t sounds fine to
say that the citizen owes it as duty to go
Iorth 10 battle at the call of his country, and
1t Is true In certain sense. If every man
were to respond to the cali to arms and all
undergo the same perils, pensions would be
preposterous. But when Mr.. Quincy and
others apply their motto to existing condi-
tions it is simply this, "some citizens, select
ed by chance or ardor of temperament nr
generosity, owe 1t as duty to go forth 70
extraordinary dangers, while other citizens