The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-11-24
INCONSISTENCY REGARDING PENSIONS.

The assault which the Eastern Demo-
cratic papers have begun upon the pen
sion system is based upon the assump-
ton that the rolls are filed with the
names of persons who have no right to
the bounty of the government because
they arc not suffering from disease or
disability directly incurred in the late
war; Fortunately for veterans who are
pensioned under the act of June, 1890.
such objection comes too late from Mr..
Cleveland and his organs if they care to
be consistent The Mexican pension
bill wns passed in January, 1887, and
was made a law by the signature of Mr..
Cleveland without delay. That law
provides:
First--That every man whose name was
npon the rolls for service in the war against
Mexico eIxty days even il he never left tho
State in which he enlisted. shall receive 50
per month on reaching the age OF sixty
two years. whether he has suffered disabil-
ity or not
SEQ 'nd-Tbat any man whose name had
been OH the rolls of the Mexican war sixty
days, having any degree OF disability. no
matter how incurred: and any degree OF
ious habits. shall receive pension at the
rate of IS per month.
Third That subsequent service in the
rebel army shall not bar pension under
this act If the applicants political disable
tiles have been removed.
The law embracing the above features
received the votes of every Democrat
Congress and the approval of MIR. Cleve-
land. In point of liberaliry there is no
law on the statute hooks regarding PEN
sions which approaches it. 1t contains
all the features of the disability act of
1890 and an unequivocal pensioning of
all when they reach the age of sixty-two
years. The frat man to receive PEN
sion under the act was an ex-confeder-
ate general.
1t has been said that such pension
act for Mexican veterans was warranted
by the remoteness of the Mexican war
from the time of the passage of the bill.
Tho first Mexican pension bill was taken
up by a Democratic House Feb. %, 1878
long before a dependent pension bill
was thought of-thirty years after the
close of the Mexican war. During the
period that the Senate was Democratic
that body passed, Feb. %. 1879, bill
giving every man who had served sixty
days in the Mexican war a serv-
ice pension of S. per month. re-
CARELESS of age or disability. all
the Democrats present except two
voting for the measure, while the Re-
publicans voted nearly solidIy against
| it. The next day it was reconsidered
and q proposition to exclude ex
confederates from the benefits of the
proposed law was lost. Subse quently, a
proposition to exclude jeff Davis was
added, whereupon the Democrats voted
down the bill thus amended. preferring
| to exclude all Mexican veterans if Davis
should be left out. This was thirty-on
years after the close of the Mexican
| war.
The disability act of 1890, for the
Union veterans, was not passed until
more than twenty-five years after the
| close of the war of the rebellion, and
now the men and the organs of the
party which enacted the Mexican pen
sion law are fighting the disability law
| when the war in which the beneficiaries
served is nearly twenty-eight years
away. 1t is, therefore, very evident
that the party which practically passed
| Mexican pension bill in February,
1878. pensioning all Mexican veterans.
hold that they are more deserving OF
| pensions than the veterans who fought
| to save the Union.