The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-11-26
A THEORY OF PENSIONS.

Mr.. w. H. HarrieS presents, in a
communication published elsewhere
some arguments directed against the
position assumed by the G o b that
mo man has any moral right to be a
pensioner who is capable Of self-sup-
port" His letter involves to our mind,
a curious theory Of pensions, exhibit
ing a confusion that is common among
the advocates of a general and broad
cast system of pensioning. When these
people touch one aspect of the case
they assume that the pension is
people out of the largeness of it's boun-
ty, and without reference to services
rendered or to personal necessities. The
nation, they say, can never do enough
to them all wealth beyond the most
eXtravagant expectation, it could never
pay the full measure of its debt.
There is no measure Of patriotism.
Union are not to be fitted to the dollar
mark. When we argue along that line
we meet, finally, the general PROPOSE
ton that, without the defenders Of the
Union, there would have been no gov
eminent today; and that, therefore, the
only logical requital of their services
is to deed over to them the entire
wealth of the nation to be divided
OrSt them On tho nthnI ha nd fba
Theory that the pensions should have
some relation to the condition of the
person pensioned, to his physical needs,
to injuries received in the service and
to his present ability to support him
self, which furnishes the only measure
and limitation of pensions at all, is
earnestly combatted as "pauperizing"
the pensioner, or, as our correspondent
calls it, "class legislation" One side
or the other of this view of the pen
sion theory is brought to the front,
according to the exigencies of the oc
casion.
A single sentence from the commune
cation of Mr.. Harries will show how
impossible it is to deduce any argument
or to lay down any general proposition
whatever on the basis of his theory.
He says: 1.-THE pensions are granted
not only to aid the recipient in his
support, but for the pain and suffering
in the past by reason of his disability"
Who is to estimate either the amount
or the money value of pain and suf-
fering in the past?" Was there ever
a more vague and utterly airy cri
terion by which to gauge recurring and
growing demands upon the public
treasury? The difficulty is that the
pension laws of this country have been
abused, as every one knows, by de-
signing politicians for political pur-
poses, until the rolls have been bur-
dened with unworthy favorites, and the
charge upon the industry Of the coun-
try rivals that of the great standing
armies of the world
To our mind, pension, being a pure
gratuity, not compelled by any form Of
obligation to the recipient, should be
conditioned, not upon his merit, but
upon his needs. If we attempt to re-
ward merit, we attack the impossible,
All the wealth of the world is not an
eXchangeable commodity for patriotism.
and patriotism can be paid for only
by the undying love and gratitude of
those in whose behalf it has been ex
hibited. For country even to offer
to put money value upon nobility Of
soul is an insult and crime. We see
no difference in the status of man
who, having served his country re-
ceiVes graciously the proffer of an an
nual income and adds to his already
ample resources, and the street beggar
who doffs his hat and gives a God
bless your for a copper. Let this line
be kept clearly in view. Devotion to
country is not to be expressed in terms
of money. The defenders of the Union
can never be fully paid in that sense,
and to attempt to pay them is, or
ought to be. as offensive to them as it
is unjust to others.
The enlistment of soldiers in the war
for the Union was not mercenary ar
rangement, by which the veterans were
to have the country as their spoil if
they saved it. and all the attempts to