Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-09-22
REJECTION OF A CLAIM.
The Action of the Pension Bureau
Defended.

To the Editor Of The Evening Star:
In the column in your issue of the 14th
instant devoted to pension matters there
is a communication from "E. b." who is
evidently a pension attorney.
The first paragraph of his communica-
ton is sound sense, but the rest of it is
misleading and just the kind of matter
calculated to foster the irritabilty and dis
satisfaction of the pensioner and confuse
and impose upon the public.
He states, in effect, that Adam Shaun
is pensioner. for he quotes the number
of his certificate, No. 474, 713, but he fails
to mention the rate of pension and the
names of the disabilities for which the
late soldier is pensioned. He states, how
ever. that the claimant Is nearly seventy
five years DID, that he has not done a
stroke of manual labor for years; that he
can hardly get in out of carriage and
that he suffers almost constant pain. All
of this is not surprising in a man seventy
five years old, soldier or no soldier. "E.
B." further states that the claim was re-
jected 0he character of the claim not
mentioned) on the ground that the claim
ant was not disabled.
An expert, much less the casual reader
of The Star could not very well under
stand what &c b. means in the second
paragraph of his communication, but the
rejection to which he refers was undoubt-
eddy righteous in every respect
To illustrate such seemingly paradoxical
reflections, suppose a soldier claims that
while in the army during the war of the
rebellion he contracted disease of lungs.
Now, the governing principle in the adju-
dication of pension claims is the existence
of the disabilities, on account of which the
claims filed, and to determine that fact
a medical examination is necessary. These
examinations are made by boards of sur
geons consisting of three members, pre-
stunned to be the most skllful in the To-
cality. If at such examination no objective
symptoms of the alleged disease of lungs
can be discovered why should the pension
bureau be censured for conforming strictly
to the law by rejecting the claim. although
the claimant may be nearly dead with
other disabilities not claimed for as or
service origin?
And yet where such claimant lives the
sympathes of the people, but more espe-
cially of the ward politicians, are with him,
and he imagines himself to be the most
abused old soldier in the land. He evil
IDENTIFY has little else to do but brood over
his rejected claim, and so he worries his
congressman to take up his case. The lat
ter must, of course, help his constituent,
but even he cannot compel the bureau to
evadc or dsobey the law. Next, he en-
lists a senator in his behalf but still his
claim stands rejected. Then he writes to
the Secretary of the Interior, and. finally,
to the President. but without effect, and
he cannot understand it. There are thous-
andS of just such cases on file in the PEN
sion bureau. and they have cost the gov
eminent millions. Even the death of such
a claimant does not wind up his claim, for
his widow or his children are likely to in
qure about it, and then the services of a
dozen or more clerks are necessary to fur
nish the proper information.
To continue the Illustration, suppose the
claim was rejected IN 1880, and the claim
ant now submits four or five affidavltS
showing that he is almost at deaths door
with rheumatism or kidney disease (neither
of which was claimed fo), but the alleged
disease of lungs is not even limited at.
Would the pension bureau be justified in
reopening the claim on such testimony and
ordering medical examination. even
although one had not been had within five
years? Clearly not. Even 'E. B." would
not justify such action.
Now, word as to pension attorneys.
Much of the work done by these attorneys
is worthless, much of it causes the govern
ment great expense and most of 1t could be
done by the claimants. For instance, why
should a pensioner pay an attorney 81 for
securing an increase of pension, when all
he has to do is to file a claim and be ex-
an attorney in any pension claim. The
claimant furnishes the evidence required, II
he can, and if he cannot, how can the
attorney? The instructions of the bureau
are so clear and explicit that any claimant
of ordinary intelligence could comply with
them, and If he cannot understand them
he surely could find some friend to ex-
plain them to him. When an attorney (as
the majority of pension attorneys do) SIM
ply forwards to the claimant the calls for
evidence made by the bureau and allows
him to do the rest he is of as much use to
claimant as a fifth wheel to wagon.
September 49, 1899 PENSIONER.