The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1894-04-12
RANK DISHONESTY.

definite stipulations In the contract it
entered into with the men whom it So
licited to enlist in its service in the war
of the rebellion.
Among those was the promise to pay
pensions if disabled.
This was not only a binding pledge in
a contract, but ii was in strict accord
ance with the invariabIe military policy
of the country, and of all civilized ma
tions.
In every previous war it had pen
sion policy more liberal, all things con-
sidered, than the one it has followed
since the war Of the rebellion.
For ineonceivably less service than
was required in the war of the rebellion
men received pensions and allowances
that, considering the relative value of
money, were higher than the average
rates to-day. Besides, they were given
land warrants.
This policy antedates our National ex-
istence even. The men who marched
with Washington to Braddock's defeat,
and who helped Sir VIM. Pepperell take
Louisburg, were given pensions and land
warrants by special order of King
George.
As to comparative liberality: Tie
men who served only "A days in the war
of 1872, or we're present at any affair
that might be called an engagement,
were given a service pension of IS
month. 1t was substantially the same
with those who served in the Reyolu-
ton. Those who served go days in the
Mexican war received a land warrant,
and have since been given a pension of
IS a month. These were all service
pensions, pure and simple. A man who
served 60 days in the Mexican war need
not have been within 500 miles of the
Mexican boundary, but he gets his pen
sion all the same.
When if is remembered that the pay
of a soldier In the Revolution was but
81 month; that after the war it was
reduced to So; that workingmen re-
ceiyed but shilling day wages; that
the pay of the soldiers up to and through
the Mexican war ranged from 81 to 81,
and that from So to So a month was
considered good wages for farm hands
and laborers, it will be seen that serv-
ice pension of IS a month then was
relatively much more liberal than the
average rate of 81 month, which
those now ON the roll receive.
The point that these facts clearly
establish is that not only was an ade-
quate pension definitely expressed part
Of the contract entered into between the
Government and its soldiers, but that
this had an equally strong basis in the
invariable practice Of this Government,
and all other Governments, from the
time whereof the memory of man run
meth not to the contrary" Thus, in adj
dition to the Governments specific prom
ises the man who enlisted in its service
had the right to expect, from its invari-
able custom in the past, that in his old
age he would be given pension that
would place him on plane with those
with whom he was surrounded. The
honor and good faith Of the Government
were just as much involved in, this as
they were in paying its creditors gold
when they had lent it deprecated green
backs. 1t paid these creditors, too, with
the utmost promptness-with prompt
ness and fairness that astonished and de-
lighted the world.
Now, what exten uation can there be
for the fragrant dishonesty which abso-
lutely violates that promise and crimi-
nally disregards its good faith by deny
ing to hundreds of thousands of men
the pensions which they earned by in
comparably greater and harder service
than was performed by men in any pre-
vious war?
The war of 1912, the Indian wars,
and that with Mexico, were mere picnics
compared to the fighting and marching,
the dangers and hardships that a man
did dared endured ond c,,farad who