The Portland daily press., 1893-06-01
PENSION REFORM"
Some Misrepresentation of the Boston
Herald shown Out.

To the Editor of the Press:
I have looked in vain for reputation by
the Republican newspapers of Portland
of the numerous, false and misleading
statements which have appeared in the
Boston Herald regarding the recent de-
cision of Secretary Smith constituting the
pension act of June 9th. 1890. By per-
sistent falsehood the Herald is endeavor-
ing to bring reproach upon ex-Commls-
sioner Raum, and the large number of
soldiers who have received pensions
under said act during his administration
of the bureau.
For utter absurdity of statement the
Herald of yesterday outdid itself. 1t
says: s'The old law (act of July IA, 1862,
granted pensions to men who had suffer-
ed disabilities in the service whether
those disabilities untitled them for earn
ing living by manuel labor or not
That law did nothing Of the kind. Ever
since the passage of that act pensions
allowed hereunder have been rated ac-
cording to the degree of the soldiers dis
ability for earning a support by manual
labor This standard of rating was dis
tinctly declared the correct one as early
as June 9, 1875, by Secretary of the In
terror, G. Delano, who, in the case of
Jane Conroy, in an opinion of that date,
declared that pensions are not paid for
the wound or injury received, but for
loss Of physical ability to earn a liveli-
hood.'' So that, under the laws existing
prior to June 9th, 1890, pensions were
not paid regardless OF the ability of the
soldier to earn support by manual
labor, but on the contrary, the rate allow
ed was always proportionate to the de-
gree of his disability to earn such sup
port.
The Herald further says: "a common
disability was that, of partial or total
deafness. This disability did not unfit
a man for earning support by manual
labor, yet, under the old law. a soldier
who could prove that it was incurred in
service and line of duty, was entitled to
eight or ten dollars per month";
AS matter of fact the rate for total
deafness, where it is proven as of service
origin, is fixed by Congress at thirty dol
lars. In passing upon those claims for
total deafness under the act Of June 9th.
1890, Mr.. Raum thought that total deaf.
ness did interfere with mans ability to
earn support by manual labor and
twelve dollars per month, the maximum
rate under the act, was allowed by him.
The Herald further says San old
soldier, for instance, drawing a pension
for loss of an arm in service, but still
able to work, becomes partially deaf
from causes not of service origin. He
applied for pension under the law of
June 9th, 1890, and, because of Raum's
order, No. 1874, was created an increase
for disability not of service origin,
This statement is calculated to induce
the belief that such cases actually &C.
CURED, and it's righteousness will be dis
covered when it is remembered that the
lowest rate-and the rate is fixed by law
for loss of an arm in service is $36 per
month, and that the maximum rate I'm
der the act of June 9th, 1890, is SIP.
The law inllibits the paying of more than
one pension for the same period, and no
application for pension under the act of
June 9th, 1890, was ever allowed by Mr..
Raum where the applicant was receiving
pension of SIP or more under the gem
email law. All such applications were re-
jected on the ground that an allowance
under the law of 1890 would give the ap-
plicant no benefit, but would deprive
him of his pension he was then receiv-
ing.
1t is by such Misrepresentation that
the public, in the name of reform, is be-
ing brought to look upon the pension roll
as fraudulent one. 1t seems to me that
the education Of the public upon the
question of pensions should not be left
entirely to such papers as the Boston
Herald.
Very respectfully,
w. G. WRIGHT.
1897,