The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1896-01-23

1t II intended to make Il possible for claim n q
or for those who prosecute claims before that
Bureau to know what evidence is filed against
them. The Bureau, by rule or practice OF Its
own, not only writes to parties who gave sworn
testimony four or i've years ago, asking whether
they told the truth at that time but also assures
them that whatever they may write now in re-
ply to the inquiries of the Bureau shall be
treated rs confidential.
This amendment simply provides that what
| ever evidence is filed in any case must be sub
ject to inspection by the claimants or their
attorneys, so that they may know what they
are called upon to combat. It requires the PEN
| sion Bureau to fix some rule of evidence such as
is observed in the courts, and to adhere to it,
In the hope of getting the amendment through
Mr.. Steele modified it, but it didn't suit Mr..
| Bartlett.
Mr. Bartlett. Are changes Of existing law to
be tolerated under some plausible or specious OK
| cuseP claim that it appears on the very face
of this amendment or substitute agreed to in
the conference just heard on this floor between
| the distinguished gentleman from Pennsyl-
| vania Mr.. William A. Stonel and the gentle
| man from some other State. What broad,
what monstrous propostion-that is, that the
rulings OF the courts of the District OF Colum bia
| as TO pension attorneys and as to the rights OF
| the claimants shall control this whole great
Department of the Federal Government The
rule now enforced by the Commissioners of PEN
sions is that the law OF evidence of the State In
which the particular claimant resides is the
law of evidence applicable to the case in other
| words. that in reference to marriage the lex
! loci contractus, or the law of the place where
the ceremony was performed, shall govern.
Mr.. William A. Stone. do not understand,
Mr.. Chairman. that there is any other point
| made. The amendment provides simply, as
understand
Tha. 1t shall be competent for the Commissioner
of Pensions, under the direction of the Secretary
of the Interior, 10 establish such rules and regula
tons for the presentation and prosecution OF PEN
sion claims as shall be necessary to facilitate the
transaction OF business.
As to that part of the amendment there can
be no question that it does not change existing
law because, under the authority contained in
various acts Of Congress establishing the PEN
sion Bureau, the Commissioner of Pensions
with the approval of the Secretary of the In
terror, has from time to time adopted rules and
regulations. | hold in my hand book in
which those rules and regulations have been
collected and set forth for public distribution
and use. Then the amendment continues:
Prorided, That all such rules and regulations
shall be made public aud shall conform 10 the
laws Of the United States
Certainly, an amendment which directs that
the Jules and regulations adopted by the Com
missioner of Pensions shall conform to the
isting law. Ii directly reatlirms the existing
law by providing that these rules and regula-
tiOns shall conform to that law, the rules of
evidence recognized by courts of justice in the
District of Columbia"
After further discussion, Chairman Dingley
said: The Chair has examined the proposed
amendment, and it appears that ono provision
of it will work not only AS n change of existing
law, but will work somewhat disastrously to
applicants for pensions, and therefore the Chair
sustains the point of order"
Mr.. Hermann offered an amendment provid- |
ing for the placing on the rolls of all honor |
ably-discharged men who served so days after
March a, 1861, and prior to Aug. 90 1866, at
the rate OF cent day, payable from date of
approval of the act. Also, Mr. Bartlett made
point of order against this. The Chair sus-
tanned it.
Mr.. Mahon offered an amendment declaring
a pension to be a vested right, not to be sus-
pended on charges of fraud until such charges
have been proven in n court of law a point
Of order was reserved against this amendment
which was temporarily passed over to allow Mr. |
Bartlett to raise his point of order against the
provision in the bill requiring widow to prove
that her met income" does not exceed $500 |
before she can receive Is pension under the act |
of 1890. The present law requires that a |
widow, under tho act of 1890, shall prove that |
she is dependent on her daily labor for her
which Mr.. Bartlett had been directing his as
saults throughout the week. His point of
order was that it changed existing law. The |
poiDt was sharply contested by several Repub- |
licans.
Mr.. w. A. Stone. The proviso in the Lill is |
that widow seeking pension shall not be re-
CURED during the currest fiscal year to prove
that she has no other means of support than
her daily labor. This proviso does not repeal
or change the existing law but simply provides
that during this fiscal year while the expendi-
tnre OF this money is going on the widow seek
ing pension need not make proof that she has
no other means Of support than her daily labor
We come, then, to the first question Is an act
of Congress appropriating money aud provid-
ing how that money shall be expended, which
only limits the operation of q provision Of a
law on the statute book during the period for
which the money is appropriated-is that
necessarily q change of existing law? / hold
that 1T is not. 1t is, at the most, only sus-
pension of the law for brief period. 1t does
not change the law; it does not repeal it. it
simply provides that for brief welLdefined
period the law shall be suspended
Mr.. Stone cited authorities for his position.
md after further argument Mr.. Stone said
We say that during the expenditure of this
money she need not do what the Commissioner
II Pensions has heretofore required her to do
namely, to prove that she is panper."
Mr.. Miles. If the gentleman will allow me-
hen, it is change of test during the cxpendi-
urc OF this appropriation, is it?
Mr.. William A. Stone. No; we say that the
of Pensions has always erred in
he construction of this law; that he had no
business TO require that widow should prove
erself to be a pauper in order to get a pen.
ion.
Mr. Curtis of Kansas Your contention is
hat this is only construction.
Mr. William A. Stone. This is only construc.
ion. 1t only declares how Congress has defined
kissing law. 1t does not change or modify it.
+ suspend it, anything of the kind:
widow without other means of support than
err daily labor"
If that was TO be technically construed. if
be Chairman believes that the construction
Thich the Commissioner of Pensions has put
pom that phrase is correct then | undertake.
say that it is utterly impossible for any
'ijow on earth to get pension, technically
peaking.
"otler means Of support than her daily labor"
She might be paralyzed, utterly incapable of
daily labor. That is not the test,
nd the Commissioner Of Pensions in constru-
* that law has erred, and we propose 10 con.
rue it in this bill. that is all.
Other members spoke, and then the Chair
Iade his ruling:
Mr.. Dingley. 1t has been contended that
ie pending paragraph is merely a construc-
on Of existing law. and that construction of
10 meaning and intent of a law which has
cen heretofore enacted is not the new legis-
tion" prohibited by the rule. Everyone