The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1894-07-06
present board makes precisely the

board at all? DIR. Flynn knows ths
n if his board should make precisely til
n same report on Mr.. Crabb that tn
Is former board made, his pension woul
be reduced or cut off entirely. DI
!. Flynn knows that in order that MI
y Crabb's pension may not be reduced
e his board must make stronger repor
on him than the former board made
In other words, in order to save hi
pension, Mr.. Crabb must produce ad
ditional eridesace of disability,-whicl
is precisely what the REGISTER said
. Having said above that DIR. Flynn
knows that in order that Mr.. Crabb'
pension may not be reduced the pres
ent board must make a stronger re
port on him than the former boarC
made, it may not be out of place t.
explain to our readers how and why
he knows it.
Under the practice of the Pension
office under the Harrison administla
ton, claims under the new law were
settled by allowing the same rate o.
pension up to $l2 a month for disabili.
ties not traced to the service as were
allowed under the old law for disabil.
tiles proven to be of service origin.
The present Administration does not
agree with this Interpretation of the
law, but holds that in order to entitle
a soldier to the rate of s12 under the
new law, he must be suffering from a
d stability that renders him soholiy
unable to perform manual labor. In
other words, in order to receive pen
sien of $l2 under the new law. q SOL
der must now pass an examination
which would have entitled him to $50
month under the old law, instead Of
one which under Republican rulings
would have entitled him to but $l2.
DR.. Flynn lie of course familiar with
this change in the practice of the De-
partment, and that is why we say he
knows it takes more evidence and .
stronger report now to get soldier
pension of So month than it did I'M
der Republican administration. DR..
Flynn knows also that the result of
the examination of such men as Mr..
Conley and Mr.. Conley and Mr.. Crabb
must result in the reduction at least
and possibly the total loss of their
pensions, because under Hoke Smiths
ruling, in order to have a pension of
$12 soldier must be aoholiy unable to
perform manual labor,-and DR..
Flynn cannot conscientiously make
this report concerning these men, nor
would they ask him to. II is reported
from Washington that a re-examina-
ton has been ordered of all claims
b eretofore adjudicated under this act,
and the ratings of pension will be re-
vised to correspond with the present
ruling. This means that every SOL
dier who was awarded pension I'M
der the new law will be ordered be-
fore an examining board and will
have his pension either reduced or
cut off entirely.
We want to say right here that we
do not hold our local board, of which
DIR. Flynn is distinguished member,
in any degree responsible for the loss
of any mans pension. We have no
doubt that this board makes always |
as friendly report as it can. But |
the point we make is that under the
hostile ruling of the Department at
Washington it takes a very much
stronger report now to keep man on
the rolls than it did formerly. Every
soldier who is ordered before the
board for denomination knows that
unless he can show additional evi-
dence of disability there will be no
show for him.
There is one thing about all this
pension bus mess that we have never
been able to understand. And that
is: By what right does the new Ad-
mini stration undo the work of the
Did? These cases were all passed on
once by competent authority. In Mr..
Crabb's case, for example, the evil
ience submitted was considered by
he then Commissioner to be sufficient
% entitle him to pension, and he
vas placed upon the rolls. What
light has the new commissioner to
,ome in and compel Mr.. Crabb to
prove his case again? What right
would Judge Stillwell have to 60 back
N his own motion and reopen . case I
hat had been passed upon and settled
~ Judge Talcott? If Commissioner
Iochren were able to prove that Mr.. ,
;rabb received his pension in the first ,
by fraud, he would doubtless
" justified in reducing it or setting it
side But it seems to us nothing less
han infamous that he should arbi-
rarily set aside the judgment of his {
predecessor and compel the soldier to
rove his case again. We wonder =
What DIR. Flynn thinks about this?
We had thought to return and re-
ly to our friends rhetorical ranting
bout our "vIrulence" and "strabis- I
nus" and lack of fairness and homes a
y, but on reflection we have conclud-
d to leave that with our readers.
hey will probably be able to Judge \
neither man who owes his job to a =
arty may not be as unfair in his de-
,nse of it as a man who owes it moth