The National tribune., 1900-09-06

Adams and Daniel Il. Sickles was appoint
ed by the Encampment to carry these
resolutions into effect. Early in Decem-
ber following the committee, accompanied
by the Commander-in-C Chief and Past De
partment Commander Geo. Ii. Patrick, of
Alabama, appointed a special Aid on the
Staf of the Commander Chief on Pension
matters, called on Hon. William MclIin-
ley, President of the United States and a
comiade OF the Grand Army, and present
ed Il duly certified copy of the report of the
action of the Philadelphia Encampment.
The President received the committee
most cordially, and in conference of
nearly two hours duration the whole ques-
ton of pension laws and administration,
SO far as cOered by the action of the SD
Encampment, was gone over. The Presi-
dent stated that he would take up the
questions involved at the earliest possible
moment. In his annual message to Con-
greSs, December, 1899, the President thus
referred TO the request of the Encampment
and the National Pension Committee:
WIDOWS PENSIONS.
The Grand Army of the Republic at
its recent National Encampment held in
Philadelphia has brought to my attention
and TO that of the Congress the wisdom
and justice of a modification of the third
section OF the act of June u, 1900, which
provides for the widows of officers and
enlisted men who served 80 days or more
during the war of the rebellion and were
honorabiy discharged, provided that such
widows are without other means of sup
port than their daily labor and were mar
ried to the soldier, sailor or marine on
account of whose services they claim pen
sion prior to the date of the act.
The present holding of the Department
is that if the widows income aside from
her daily labor does not exceed in amount
what her pension would be, to wit, $J6
per annum, she would be deemed to be
without ether means of support than her
daily labor, and would be entitled to a
pension under this act; while if the wild
owS income Independent of the amount re-
celved by her as the result of her daily
labor exceeds $50, she would not be pen
sionable under the act. | am advised by
the Commissioner of Pensions that the
amount of the income allowed before title
to pension would be barred has varied
widely under different administrations of
| the Pension Office, as well as during diff
ferent periods of the same administration,
| and has been the cause of just complaint
| and criticism.
With the approval of the Secretary OF
the Interior the Commissioner of Pen
sIons recommends that, in order to make
| the practice at all times uniform and to
do justice to the dependent widow, the
amount of income allowed independent OF
| the proceeds of her daily labor should not
be less than $50 per annum. and he urges
| that the Congress shall so amend the act
as to permit the Pension Office to grant
pensionable status to widows under the
/ terms of the third section of the act of
june q, 1890, whose income aside from
the proceeds of daily labor is not in ex.
! cess of 500 per annum. / believe this
to be simple act of justice and heartily
recommend it,
ORDERS 16I AND 22J.
Nothing was said in the message as to
the amendment of the second section-the
re-estabishment of order 1Gi and annul,
ment of order No. 225. The Commits
| si0ner Of Pensions maintained that the
! Pension Bureau was combining disabili-
ties" and that the ratings were based
upon the effect of the combined disabili-
ties upon the capacity Of the claimant to
earn living by manual labor" Upon
| this pOint-purely technical, it was con.
tended-there was much difference of
opinion. Under the General Law of July
| 1867, and subsequent acts each separate
disability is considered and rated. Sec
| ton 1862 reads:
Sec. 1862. Every person specified in
the several classes enumerated in the fol
lowing section, who has been, since the
| fourth day of March, eighteen hundred
!
bled under the conditions therein stated
| shall, upon making due proof of the fact
according to such forms and regulations
as are or may be provided in pursuance
of law, be placed on the list of invalid
pensioners of the United States, and be
entitled to receive, for total disability,
| or a permanent specific disability such
pension as is hereafter provided in such
cases; and for an inferior disability, ex-
| cept in cases Of permanent specific dis
ability, for which the rate Of pension is
expressly provided, an amount proportion.
ate to that provided for total disability;
and such pension shall commence as here.
matter provided, and continue during the
existence of the disability
| 1t will be observed that under this law
IAN inferior disability" except in cases
of specific disability, is to be rated in an
amount proportionate to that provided
for total disability" The practice is to
rate each disability, however slight, and
the Congress clearly intended TO apply this
same principle in the act of June ~, 1890
IN cases where disability affected or re.
strictcd the claimants ability TO earn a
livelihood by manual labor. Order 164
| recognized this principle and gave it vi
talic effect; order 22J disregarded and
nulliied the principle of the aggregation
of minor disabilities. Decisions of the De.
partment ingeniously constructed, in the
| i'thHttt anu w tiht tdstS, nave Dttn iIlHuG
to play prominent part in the discussion
of this decision so sharply raised: but de
cisions' are not law, unless they rest upon
fact. Thiny-veiied attempts to obscure
and nullify the acts of the Congress have
not been confined to the administration OF
pension legislation, nor have they eener
ally long endured under the merciless
searchlight of candid discussion and crit
icism. The plain intent of the law-makinl
power, if that can be fairly determined
ought TO control in matters involving the
rights of the cx-soldier and sailor and theil
dependent ones. This is so obvious us tC
| render discussion unnecessary in thi.
presence, or any other presence. What
then, was the true intent of Congress il
the act of June 81, 1890? Did the Presi
dent of the United States, the Secretary
of the Interior, the Assistant Secretary
OF the Interior and the Commissioner OF
Pensions at the time the law became eff
fective and for some years thereafter. give
true expression as to its terms? Did these
eminent lawyers and statesmen rightly
cOnstrue the statute and was their admin
istratiye action approved by the Congress,
and the people? Who better than they
were qualified to interpret this law, es
pecially framed, as it is conceded ON every
hand, to correct grave wrongs and to make
possible even-handcd justice TO a highly
respected class of citizens, especially de
Hoo. ..f f..... IL.