Evening star., 1896-03-31

and numerous complications"
ouestionine the Justice Of II.
Said Joseph Trainor. the well-known vet
eran clerk Of the sixth auditors office,
speaking of the Tzyney BILL 1T is not a
voluntary scheme.NNo one would object to
| any number of govanment employees in or
| out of the classiAM service. combining
and putting per cent of their salaries into
a fund to pensioH themselves with after
the manner and condition of this proposed
law But it is proposed by this law to
whether they desire to or not.
"A voluntary scheme would not have
al swered the purposes of those who con-
cocted the scheme-worthy of the ablest
and most unscrupulous financiers-which,
by the way. in one form or other has been
projected for the past three or four years.
though they think the form they have got
it in now is the best that has ever been
proposed: for that would not have COM
PEELED those to go into 1t who they know
must furnish the means to constitute the
fund, though they knew. as well, they
most likely will never receive a cents
worth of benefit. from the very nature Of
things, from such fund. Therefore, it
must be law.
'It seems to me that a constitutional as
we'll as moral wrong Is involved in the
scheme. Has Congress the constitutional
power to take part of a government en-
ploye's wages and apply it to a purpose
against his consent? It is cited on this
point that Congress has, by law, taken or
withheld a portion of the pay of the SOL
diers of the regular army to establish the
Soldiers Home near this city. 1 do not
know how that was done unless the en-
listed soldiers consented to it, nor do 1
know whether the constitutionality of the
law was ever tested. But be that as it
may. there is, perhaps, some difference in
the relations between the government and
the army and the government and it's civil
employees, and 1 do not conceive that the
HTn 00nf hoo hn rrrhf - i
with the latter, If it had to do So by rea-
son of some peculiar relations with the for
mer.
Compulsory Contribution.
ut is certainly wrong to despoil one of
his goods without giving him every COM
pensation or reparation therefor Now, 1
have said 1t is impossible that any large
per cent of those compelled to contribute
to this fund should ever become beneff-
ciaries Of it. This. from the very nature of
things. Many may die before the time
comes when they would become benefi-
ciaries. Notwithstanding the vaunted civil
service REFORM many may be dismissed the
service before them; there is no certainty
OF tenure in the civil service as yet. The
health of many may break down, or for
many other reasons they may be compelled
to leave the service.
Congress is trying to make a pension
once allowed vested right. Is such a pen
sion more OF vested right than salaries
earned by government employees? And If
you take away or withhold any portion of
sucn earned salaries, are you not despoil-
ing said employees Of their goods if 1t be
done without their consent? l think it
may be safely calculated that not 10 per
cent OF the persons who enter the govern
ment service would ever reach the age or
remain sufficiently long in the service to
become beneficiaries Of the scheme-per-
hapS not per cent"
How 1t Would Work.
1T Is proposed" said John R. Weathers,
an Old clerk in the pension Office "by the
| bills now before Congress to retire disabled
and superannuated government employees
and to provide for the continuance of a
greater part of their salaries by a forced
assessment Of all those who continue in
active service: civil pension list to be
met directly from the public treasury is
not proposed, for it is known that such
measure would perish under popular dis
approval. But 1t would be far more just to
meet such an outlay, unpopular and un-
| necessary as 1t may be, directly from the
public Golfers than to wrest it, all from the
pockets of the unwilling employees them
selves.
1T is provided in these charitable (0
| schemes that every employe must surren-
der, willingly or unwillingly, a portion of
the pay that the government has con-
tracted to give him. that his improvident
fellow-employe may retire at the close OF
long term of well-paid service and live in
comfort the rest of his weary life. Shades
OF Washington and Jefferson! What is the
he losing his manhood and responsibility? :?
Can he no longer provide for the vicissi-
tudes of temporal life? Is it necessary
that he shall have guardian to look for
ward and provide for him against the rainy
day? What is there in the natural or incl
dental environments of the employe that
he should become an object of charitable
solicitude on the part of his employer?
Why should he not be held to the same ac-
countability for his stewardship that his
brothers are who toll in the field and work
shop? Why this paternal spirit, this de-
sire to feather the nest Of him who has
been for, 10! these many years, the child
of fortune? Is it the poor pay and suffer-
ing and hazard attaching to such service
that calls for this special recognition after
years Of endurance?
A Case i'm Point.
But, if such scheme were proper or
necessary, the means of meeting it are
both inadequate and unjust.
ITO Illustrate this l will take an actual
case. clerk, forty-nine years of age, is
now serving in his sixth year in govern
ment service. He has family dependent
upon his $1,000 salary. He is temperate
and economical, and is paying little more
than $40 a year on a twenty-payment life
endowment policy. The struggle is rather
sharp, and he has little left for luxuries.
He is daily surrounded by those who are
better paid. NOW, according to House bill
47I4, this clerk must pay into the proposed
| retirement fund $50 year for twenty-four
years before he can voluntarily retire. He
will then have reached the age of seventy
three years and paid into the fund $3.50.
He then retires and receives $50 a year for
seven years, the limit Of expectation, CIV
ing him an aggregate pension of $3.50, or
net profit of $4,77O. Magnificent invest
ment! But who pays this profit? The
scheme is visionary and cruelty unjust
unjust because it proposes to take
from the employe, against his will, the
money he needs now for his own rightful
investment. There is no proper necessity
| for such law, and in self-defense 1 shall
contend for it's defeat"
Would 1t BE Legal3
Il do not believe" said another clerk,
that this proposed law will ever be car
ried into force. 1t will be contested by the
clerks, and cannot believe 1t will be sane
toned by the courts. These members of
Congress better bend their surplus energies
| to pass a law that will protect men and
women in government service, when they
| have by efficiency obtained a salary COM
mensurate with their ability, SO that as
| long as they are competent to do the re-
| quired service they shall not suffer reduc-
| ton or dismissal unless for fragrant abuses
| nf oy,6 iri,