The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1894-01-04
A STRICTLY
LEGAL VIEW
OF the Commissioner of Pensions
Functions and Powers.

same wel-known and familiar rules which
govern all like tribunals.
A pension claim is legal demand against
the United States. The applicant for a pension
Is person who is asserting q legal claim against
the United States. and for that purpose he be-
comes the plaintiff and the Government is the
defendant. The sworn application. the affida-
Wits, and dispositions of witnesses. the records,
ETC., presented the proofs. The Gov
eminent has the right to call to its aid its law
officers, Special Examiners. Medical Boards,
ETC., and when the case is made up, it is the
duty of the court-the CommissioneE-to ex-
anime and decide it. This conrt is not, how
ever, q court of last resort. because the law
allows, or provides. for appeals from the decis-
ions of the Com issioner to the Secretary of the
Interior, whose decision IS final. And If the
decision of the Secretary be against the claim
ant he is cut off from all hope unless Congress
shall, by special bill, come to his relief
judgment for the soldier should be as binding
on the Government. and all its officers as one
against the soldier is upon him. This Is the
only way justice can be done. This is the only
wholesome rule that can be adopted. This rule
is especially forceful when We consider that
this court is organized with all the machinery
to secure the fullest, most complete and search
ing investigation into the facts presented to
support each claim, through the medium of
It's local Medical Boards, composed of three
reputable physicians in almost every County in
the States of the Union. This board is almost
always in sympathy with the court hearing
the case. One Of these local boards makes
special and critical personal examination Of the
applicant and reports the result of such exam
ination to the court for its guidance and in
struction and if the court is not satisfied with
one such examination it may have two or more,
to all of which the applicant must submit.
Then if the court has the slightest reason to
believe that the applicant has not presented all
the facts rplatinv Tn his IL has the RIGHT n
send out its Special Examiners, who personally
examine the applicant and all OF his witnesses,
and cross-examne them on the atfidavits or
dispositions filed ir support of the claim, with
out giving them an opportunity to see their
former statements though they may have been
filed years before and even the fact that they
filed such affidavit may have passed out of
mind. Notwithstanding this unfair manner of
reorganization, the witnesses arc compelled to
submit to it or do the soldier injustice by the
report that surely follows a refusal. When
this re-examination is completed it is returned
to the court with, perhaps, an opinion of the
special Examiners as to the merit of the
claim.
When all of these means of ascertaining the
facts have been exhausted the mass of evidence
is submitted to the court for decision. Careful,
competent, trained and expert Examiners in
the Pension Office then give it the most care
full scrutiny and if found sufficient judgment
pension is granted to the applicant, after years
of weary waiting and the expenditure of much
money and the loss of much time in the pre-
paration Of his claim to enable it to secure the
approval of the court. The soldier believes
that he has at last secured his more than thrice
earned dues and that he will be allowed to en-
Joy the fruits of his service to his country and
his labor and expenditure to prove his claim,
through the remainder of his declining years,
when a change takes place in the personnel OF
the court. The presiding judge who rendered
the judgment in his favor is removed and an
other selected. The incoming officer assumes
that the work OF his predecessor was perme-
ated with fraud; that largo portion of the
judgments rendered by him were procured by
fraud. 1t is true he comes to this conclusion
without particle of legal evidence TO support
him. but having concluded there was fraud he
proceeds to re-examine the work of his prede-
cessor, and the judgments rendered by the lat
ter which do not square with his idea of what
the law is or ought to be are suspended-dsal-
lowed. Is there any law or warrant for these
proceedings?
There is rule of Departmental practice
law. if you please-common to all the Depart
ments of the Government, grown gray with
age, adhered to with the utmost tenacity. and
entitled to the highest respect because of the
business of it, that a succeeding officer charged
with the Interpretation of the law aud evidence,
will not reopen reconsider and re-decide case
passed upon by his predecessor, unless newly
discovered material evidence presented
for his consideration. This rule is founded on
the highest reason. If any other prevailed
there would be 10 safety to any claimant who
had claim against the United States, or the
Government. No claimant could know when
he was through with his matter. and the Gov
ernment'5 representatives would never know
when claim against it was settled. Neither
could be at rest, because of the uncertainty sur
rounding claims against the Government
If claim has been once determined either IN
favor of or against the claimant the only way
a new trial can be procured, under the rules of
Departmental practice, is upon newly discovered
material and competent evidence prepared
under the forms of the law, and presented TO
the proper bureau with a motion for a new
trial-reopening of the case.
This is very familiar rule in the Depart
ments. Every day in the year this rule is de-
clared. announced. and laid down by every
head of bureau who has the consideration
and determination of claims against the Gov
ernment.
There is. likewise, a rule running through
the common law, the statute laws of Con-
gress, and the decisions of the Federal courts,
tho statute law and decisions of the courts of
the several States, that judgment rendered
by a competent tribunal having jurisdiction
of the sulject-matter and the parties to the
controversy, shall put the matter to rest.
Is it possible that claims for pensions stand
upon different footing than those of any
other character presented against the United
States? 1t is unqueStioned that they are
claims; that they are legal claims founded
upon laws of Congress.
If they are legal claims. presented in the |
usual forms of law to a tribunal having Judi |
cial powers, a determination of the claim is a |
Judgment Applying the above rules to PEN |
sion claims, it is difficult to find solid ground |
for the Commissioner to stand upon. In my |
judgment there is nothing supporting his action /
but arbitrary rulings of his own-always I'M
safe for judge to follow.
Itcannot be denied that If sufficient evidence, |
prepared in due form OF law, coming within the /
was presented to the Commissioner. with mo-
tion on behalf of the Government asking a re-
opening and denomination of the claim, q
different state of affairs would exist. If such
evidence established the fact that the Judgment |
allowing pension to q soldier had been pro-
cured by fraud or that the disability for which
the pension was granted had ceased to exist
then under the correct rules of practice it
would be the duty of the Commissioner to re-
open the case, and no wrong would be done the
pensioner if the payment of the pension was
suspended during the Investigation of his case.
The discovery of one or more such cases would
not under any circumstances, authorize the
Commissioner to organize a star chamber court
within his bureau to re-eXamine all claims or
any class of claims but only such as the evil
dence was presented against. When evidence
of the character above indicated was presented
h.. he Hal Id i