The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1896-05-28

was passed without a dissenting vote in either
House or Senate.
In few days back came the bill with the
veto Of the President on tho grounds that the
physicians had declared their inability to trace
the disease to army service, and that he was op-
posed TO sentimental disposition of the peoples
money. The committee took up the bill re-
committed to them, and Mr.. Kirk patrick
brought in the following report, which is given
i'll part:
The President justifcs his veto of this
measure upon the ground that the present
unfortunate condition of this soldier is not due
TO his army service. and that such legislation
ia an unfair discrimination against many thou
sand worthy soldiers similarly situated.
"Your committee, after most patient and
thorough consideration of the reasons urged by
the President for withholding his signature to
this bill are clearly OF the opinion that the
justification urged is wholly untenable,
Legislation of this character is by no means
new. 1t is found in the records of every Con-
gress from the organization OF the Government
to the present time, and since the close of the
war similar acts are quite frequent.
There is constitutional inhibition on
the power of Congress to grant pensions by
special bills, nor is it essential that the dis
ability for which the pension is granted should
be of service origin. We could cite many pre-
cedents where special pensions have been
granted and approved by the Executive with
out reference to the origin of the disability.
The pensions granted to our distinguished
Generals and their widows by special acts of
Congress are not always based upon disabilities
directly traccable to the military service of the
soldier. In many of these cases the disability
death of the soldier cannot be shown to have
resulted from his army service, yet none Of
these measures have encountered the Execu-
tive veto.
Under these circumstances we cannot con-
clnde that the passage of this bill is an unjust
discrimination against thousands of deserving
soldiers. but to refuse to grant relief in this
case. in our opinion, would be an unwarranted
discrimination against the private.
eff we are to follow the rule laid down in
this case by the President Congress must turn
deaf ear to the appeal of every soldier. how
pitiable aud distressing his condition may
be. regard less of the merit of his service or the
privations he endured, unless he show that
his helpless and distressed condition is due to
his army service. We cannot yield our assent
to this proposition; it is manfestly unjust to
thousands of the truest and bravest soldiers in
our army
we cannot but express the hope that the
President, on more thorough consideration of
this matter, will reach the conclusion irre-
sisiby forced upon your committee, that it is
not always essential to trace the disability to
army service as n prerequisite to granting
pension. We also find ourselves unable to
agree with the President that the granting of
pension of $50 month to Mr. Hoover is an
unjust discrimination against many thousand
deserving soldiers similarly situated Cases of
this character must be rare indeed, and we
doubt very much if one can be found equaling
it in all OF its distressing details.
with our knowledge of and intimate rela-
tions with the old soldiers of this country and
their sense of justice we feel warranted in say
ing that when made familiar with the cond-
tions and circumstances surrounding this I'M
fortunate comrade, that not one of them can be
found that will feel that the granting of this
pension is any discrimination against him.
When this bill was presented to US in the first
instance, the testimony offered was directed in
the main to the distressed condition of the SOL
der and his honorable service, aud we did not
deem it essential that the proof should show
his disability due to his army service TO justify
i'll granting relief, nor do we think so now
but inasmuch as the evidence then offered did
not establish to a certainty the connection be-
tween the soldiers service and his disability,
we concluded that we were fully warranted by
many presidents In recommending the passage
of the bill at $50 per month under the circum-
stances of his case. Had this connection been
shown to our satisfaction our recommendation
would have been $12 month.
Since filing our first report much additional
testimony has been submitted and re-exami-
nation of the case cOnyinces US that the SOL
dier's disability is fairly traceable to his army
service, and that he is therefore justly entitled
to $72 per month"
The remainder of the report goes on to dag
nose the case and give the disabilities, which
show that the man is simply existing. Mr..
Kirk patrick, in his splendid presentation of
the case, brought almost continuous applause,
but only few sentences are necessary to quote.
He said in conclusion
I'VE contend that the Congress of the United
States in its power may take up any individual
case of any soldier, whether q General a
private, or of the widow Of q General or a
private, look into the hardships of the case.
into the military service Of the soldier, and
grant such relief as we, in our judgment. think
proper. 1t is not the province of tho Presi-
dent of the United States to place a limitation
upon that power. 1t is not an injustice to hum