Sunday Washington globe., 1902-05-25


Interior Department rules in the printe d
decisions that omitted diseases shall be
considered under the act March @; but
Evans rules that they shall not be- He has
his way, and every case has to be appealed
or claimant gets defrauded Evans has
lately changed his order 30 as to permit
evidence being heard, but refuses to call for
1t; and has again by this new order directed
the clerks to ignore the act Of March O.,
1896, unless the claimant claims benefit of
it specifically, or files evidence TO prove in
justice His order is right in the teeth Of
the law and is illegal Now this new order
is a change from the decisions, but no
chance is given claimants to hnd il out until
their claims are rejected. The law itself
provides for only a new claim for pension.
How is claimant OF attorneys to know that
they must file special plea or file evidence
which amounts to the same thing. No calls
have been made for evidence, and being
away from here they are not permitted to
know the facts or that new rule has been
adopted which nulli6es the express Lam
guage Of the law and the printed decisions
Of the Interior Department 1t is the same
principle that Evans wanted to introduce
in proof before permitting an application
to be fled 1t is to trick the veteran out of
Oart or all OF his legal rights.
The same principle has been worked most
of Evans term on claims for increase and
rerating under the new law. The Interior
Department holds in the printed decisions
that under the new law a claim for rerating
may be joined in the application for in
crease, and the matter proved up; but by his
book, page Io2, section 3, Evans orders his
clerks to ignore the order for rerating. (See
n. n - \ = I.
bered that Evans worked this book through
the Interior Department in 1898, containing
many Of these phases in violation of T. d.,
page o3 and other decisions He had the
backing of the Hanna syndicate, but the
pressure Of appeals has been so great that
about three.fourths of the book on these
points has been from time to time over
ruled, after much of the mischief had been
accomplished.
After President Roosevelts two vetoes
of bills proposing relief to the two boys
who stand charged. one with desertion and
the other with mutiny, the daily papers
stated that delegation of veterans called
upon the President to know what he was
going 70 do with widows Of re.enlisted de-
serters of the Civil War period; and the
President answered promptly that as to the
widows he would give them the benefit of
the doubt What doubt Mr. PRESIDENT
What doubt can be extended to the benefit
of the widow which is not equally to be
given to the benefit of the soldier? Her
rights are based solely on the service and
right of the soldier. Is il to be thus broadly
stated that the soldier is to be defrauded,
and the widow favored on idenhcally the
same legal facts? The question is one of
record as to desertion. The records show
that the soldier deserted from one regiment
say within three months after his enlist
ment for three years, and within week or
two re-enlisted in another regiment and
served three years and was discharged after
a most reditable service and many battles
and skirmishes and wounds and diseases.
Were you talking through your hat, Mr.
President, to pull the wool over the eyes of
the veterans' There is never any doubt
about the fact of desertion. tits question
of cold law. The pension laws do not pro-
hibit pensioning deserters. The only
grounds for such action by the pension de-
partment has been assumed and based on
the supposed or constructive continuance
of a soldier in the service forever until dis
charged The law prohibits peusioniug a
soldier while in the service OF while on the
.etired list of the army.
The present rules Of the pension depart
ment in pensoning such. re-enlisted de-
serter who incurred his disease or wound
three days after the end OF three years from
his first enlistment and refusing 10 pension
his cOmrade who incurred his wound three
days before the end of the three years for
which he first enlisted, is a hoax aud a rule
of dollars, not Of desertiou See GLOBE,
April o. The re-enlisted service became
f,t lam val
ment's having received the service without
having disaffirmed the contract, and was
valid from the beginning, with only right
in the government to elect TO disaffirm it at
any time during the service, but not after
all the re-enlisted service had been rem
dered. The War Department holds that
this is the law The Attorney General holds
that this is the law. The Supreme Court
holds that this is the law. Every state in
the union holds that this is the law with all
voidable contracts The President of the
United States can not interfere legally with
the obligation of a contract The Constitu-
tion Of the United States has placed in the
hands of Congress the power to interfere
with contracts, and Congress is the only
power or authority in the United States on
that subject. Congress has never passed
law changing these contracts or denying
pension on the re-enlsted service. The
service from which soldier deserted having
been abandoned by soldier confers no bene-
fit, but not 50, in law, with his re-enlistment
Pension Commissioner Evans first had
his experts prepare a rule that would catch
the greatest number of these re-en1isted de-
serters. Evans has all work of knocking
out by large classes laid out by his experts
in the office. They are familiar with the
business, Evans is not. They at once told
him that but few re-enlistments took place
after the first term expired; that most all
the re-enlisted deserters re-enlisted within
a short time, many within few days, they
being largely boys who had overstayed
their leaves that by making the rule PEN
sion only those who hid out or kept in de-
sertion until the end Of the time for which
they first enlisted, the fewest possible PEN
sions would be allowed to re-enlisted de-
serters, and that those so pensioned would
be found to be the least meritorious of all
deserters; for their desertion whatever the
cause, became aggravated by continuance.