Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1902-04-01

HE OTTuMWA COURIEl
what, if anything, may be done in the
case. Even members of the Iowa leg
islature have taken up the cudgel IN
behalf of Glass and propose to see
what the possibilities in the case may
be, having written to senators touch
ing that phase of the question.
Discrepancy in Stories.
The most damaging feature of the
case is the discrepancy said to exist
between the story told by himself to
Senator Gear and the story told to
the secretary of the navy. 1t is under
stood that upon this point the Presl-
dent bases largely his conclusions,
denying the right of Glass to be reliev-
ed of the charge OF desertion. Thus
far it has seemed impossible to ascer-
tain just what Glass said to the sec
rotary of the navy The story told
Senator Gear and subsequently reiter-
ated is that having witnessed an cpl
/ sode involving the second officer of
warship upon which he had six weeks
previously enlisted, he was taken
ashore by the said officer, provided
with money and new clothing and told
to return into the country and not
again show up on the ship. This
Glass did and naturally the log OF the
ship shows that he deserted. Upon
the strength of this statement Senator
Gaer secured favorable report from
the committee and the bill passed
both houses of congress. In what
way his story to the secretary of the
/ navy differs from this statement can
not be learned.
| Case Is Ended.
There is no possibility of the case
being again called up. 1t is quite rea-
! sonable to assume that the President
would not rescind his veto, if it were
| possible for him to do so. The senate
committee would not undertake to IA
vorably report again the d.. without
evidence clearly substantiatng Glass
story to Senator Gear, and this evil
dence is unobtainable
Another instance.
! The disposition of the, committee on
4 naval affairs of the senate in this re-
gard is shown in he fact that no ef-
fort will be made to resurreGt the case
of young Hawley, a relative of Senat-
or Hawiey., chairman OF the commit
tee, who W;as also a victim of the
Presidents veto, although the case
was not as aggravated as that OF
Glass. nevertheless the action of the
President was deeply humiliating to
all concerned. The futility OF action
in opposition to veto with evidence OF
the character mentioned is recogniZ
ed and therefore the matters are drop
ped. There is absolutely no hope for
! John Glass unless he can substantlate
his testimony.
Claims Injustice.
The clerk to an Iowa congressman
directs attention to an alleged system
in vogue in the pension office that he
holds is subject to criticism and
, which imposes an injustice upon old
, soldiers. His claim is that the pen
+ sion office gives greater weight to the
, evidence filed in any claim that may
, not be to the advantage of the appll
cant, than to evidence tending to sub
!. stantiate his claim. He cites case
, in point, which is only one of many
S of similar character.
# One of Many Cases.
n A resident, of Iowa. a soldier in tn
II Civil war, made application for pen
e sion His claim is rheumatism
/ Among the papers in the case appears
$ enc stating that the applicant had f;
l. slight touch of rheumatism prior t.
y his enlistment. Among the same pa
y pers are two affidavits from men witt
e knew applicant intimately, one Of then
having hired the applicant as farm
hand and who says that he worked a
> we'll as any hand and never said any
o thing about rheumatism or gave an
o indication that be had it. The othe
= party is equally as positive and tn
9 applicant himself says he never ha
q rheumatism prior to the war. Thu
# it appears that three persons testif
II one way and one person another Th
# pension Office takes the view that it
, justified in rejecting the claim upo
" the statement of the one man VIII
If claimed applicant did have rheum;
If tsm in 1858.
10 Another Point.
81 Another point the congressman
J: clerk makes is this: That in case
or can be proven that applicant for pei
Is sion did have a certain disease pric
Is to enlistment, even though contracte
er in a previous war, that he is ineligib
rs to be pensioned. For example, sc
Id der who was in the civil war apple
s. for pension upon the ground of disabi
VS. ity from rheumatism. The pension O
flee digs back into the war record
and finds that the applicant was in tt
Mexican war and there contracte
III rheumatism. Notwithstanding he VIZ
20 then a young man and that the rhe
AZ matism wore off SO that when he e
te listed in the Civil war he was appa
~ emily in good bodily health, the ia
". that it is proven that at one time pri'
q, to the Civil war he did have rheum
~ tism is sufficient to bar him from 7
- ceiving the pension he otherwi
e. would be entitled to. The pension {
~ flee may have What it believes to
-, grounds for these positions; they a
IN given as matters of fact, only.
ut Prophecy Verified.
he A month ago your correspondent I
er- rected attention to the prophecy tn
in the oleo bill, which passed the hou
1or NIT