The National tribune., 1899-05-04
AGE DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE

against the veterans of the rebellion a
compared to the men who serv ed in the
Mexican War, in the legislation of few
years ago. This discrimin alton wa:
reduced somewhat by the Interpretation
put upon the act of June 27, 1890, by
the Administration of President Harri
son, but it was intensified by that OF
President Cleveland, and this was con.
tinued by Henry Clay Evans.
For example, the Mexican War
Pension Act gave a pension to every
man who actually served 60 days, or
was in battle. When he should
arrive at the age of 62 this became a
vested right. There were no qualifca-
tiCns whatever to it-no examinations,
no question of origin of disability, no
technicalities of any kind. All that was
necessary was for him to show that he
had served 60 days and been honorably
discharged. He was then entitled to at
least So month, and in some cases to
S12. IF he had died, or should die,
his widow was entitled to a pension.
The act of June 81, 1890, prescribed
that the man should have served not
less than 80 days, or 80 days longer
than the Mexican War soldiers. 1t
made no provision for old age, but the
Interpretation of the law by Assistant
Secretary Bussey and Commissioner
Raum made age alone pensionable dis
ability. A ruling by Secretary Bussey
held:
"Old age or seniIity is legal disability
under the Act of July 81. 1890, and Exa:nin
ing Surgeons should estimate the amount Of
disability arising tferefrom for the perform
ance of manual labor and for earning sup
port by manual labor"
Commissioner Lochren Immediately
began narrowing down the benefits of
this provision, and his Order No. 241,
Sept. 2, 1893, put the age of total dis
ability at 70, or five years above the
Scriptural limit. This was 13 years
higher than the age assigned to the
Mexican soldiers. There was much
derision Of his attempting to raise the
limit on God Almighty" but the order
stood, and still stands, unrevoked. A
man who has to wait until he is rs to
get sl2 month is not likely to burden
the pension roll very long with his
drain upon it. He will
soon save" that amount for the Treas
ury, and the only expense he will be to
will be for tombstone, and
nosegay upon his tomb once a year.
The only correction of this, so far, is
by decision by Assistant Secretary
Davis, July Z, 1897, which reads:
ga claimant who has reached the age of 65
years shall be deemed entitled to at least the
minimum Of rate Of pension, unless the evi-
dence discloses an unusual vigOr and ability
for the performance Of mammal labor in one
Of that age.'
Now there il a discrimination for
for you. A man had to serve so per
cent longer in the rebellion and be
three years older than the Mexican
soldier in order to get a minimum
pension, and his right to this is open to
question, while the others is absolute.
As is to be expected, Commissioner
Evans is not SO liberal-minded as the
Assistant Secretary, and he is finding
an astonishing number of veterans who
at 65 disclose an unusual vigor and
ability for the performance of manual
labor" 1t is singular how hale and
hearty he finds Union veterans at 65,
while all the Mexican volunteers are
utterly broken down at 62.
Now, can anyone give a good reason
for this discrimination against the
Union veterans? The average three
months man in the rebellion saw much
more and harder service than the
average volunteer for Mexico, while
there is absolutely no comparison when
it comes to men who served one, three,
or four years in the war of the rebel
lion. The great mass of the volunteers
for the war with Mexico never got out
of their camps Of instruction, very few
served more than a few months, and
still fewer saw any real fighting. All