The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1903-02-26
SERVICE PENSION.
Views Of Comrades Interested In the
Proposed legislation.

Swamp Angel. Co L, Oath Ohio and Co.
j +, 1st L. s. EAg., Danyille H., writes:
/ .'Comraae f. u. Lloyd. Ge:stown, Pa,
has the service pension question settled
about right, but 4 see that Joseph Heis-
lser, Placervillc, Cal, moves to give the
six-months men So, instead of SO. /
second the motion: give no one less than
81 per month. Both of these comrades
have given their opinion as to what should
be done for the few unfortunates who have
lost an arm or foot since the war. Speak
right out i'll meeting, and say what you
think"
Washington Post. 80, South Bnston.
Mass, at Il meeting Feb. II. passed reso-
buttons unanimously indorsing Senator '!%
SCOTS SD per month service-pension bill.
Comrade John Mahoney. Commander;
Charles Bailey, Adjutant; James McMah-
on, Sergeant Major.
Aaron Ossman, Co. A. 50th Pa. Ire
mont. Pa. does Eot favor a seryicc-pen-
sion bill, unless it be in addition to dis
ability pension.
David r. Witter, Past Commander. Abe
Lincoln Post, %, Council Bluffs. Iowa.
writes: Il am in favor Of a So service
pension for all old soldiers who served in
the civil war. Nothing less is their due.
Do away with the heavy Clerical expenses,
tine is short in which to give
d. +. Kelley. Co. ID. 9th Ohio, South
Charleston, Ohio. Row 81 years old. and in
receipt of a pension of so per month.
writes enthusiastically in favor of the 81
per month service-pension bill.
Comrade w. A. Wells. Pleasantvillc
Iowa, writing in behalf of hickman Post,
800. states that at recent meeting. by
unanimous vote, the comrades Endorsed a
service pension of So pee month, in addi-
ton to any invalid pension under the pres
cnt law.
G.. Il. Croker. Co. +, 2eth Me-, Show
| hogan. Me-, has taken much interest in
the different views expressed by comrades
on the subject Of service pension. He be-
licvcs that Congress should do something
for the veterans ROW. Although not as
| old as many of the soldiers, Conradc
Croker is 60 years, and says that owing
to his army service. lasting from July,
! 1862. to the close OF the war, he is inca
pacitated for manual labor.
]. A. Wintermute. Co. F, Cd y. ]. Cav,
Springvilie. Pa. favors straight service
pension bill of 81 per month; the only
requirement being an honorable discharge
after at least 30 days service.
p. w. Anderson. Sergeant. Co. Z, Seth
H.. 457 Elm St, Blue Island, ILL.,, writes:
Il have been reading, with much interest
| the various articles bearing on the ques-
! ton of service pension. 1t seems TO me
that this is the only just and sensible So
luton Of the pension problem. Give us
n service pension law. 1t would seem.
| however. that the pension should depend
somewhat on the time served or the age
of the applicant. No pension should be
less than IS; every soldier ON reaching the
age of 90, should be entitled to S12. Let
the widows be pensiCned at 81"
Mrs. r. A. Rowiey, soldiers wife. Lima,
Iowa, writes: 1.-THE service-pensiOn bill
is just, with the exception that it does not
give enough to the veterans. Why should
not such a bill have been passed long ago!
The Old soldiers will not grumble because
some Ct their comrades get larger
pension than they; it is the rich men and
the meE who did not think it their duty
to shoulder muskets when our country was
in danger
H. w. Walker. Commander, ]. FL. Jen-
kins Post, 242, Williamsburg, Ohio,
writes: Il think S12 per month service
pension is the best we can hope for at
this time. / enlisted in August, 1861, for
three years, but was taken sick and was
sent to the General Hospital at St Louis,
Mo-, where l was discharged for disable
ity. February, 1868. l again enlisted in
February, 1865, for one year. and served
my time out. l am drawing s. per month
pension. l am glad that The National
Tribune has the backbone to take the
stand it does for the G.. A. X. boys.
hope you will continue to fight until You
succeed. / think it time to drop pension
clerks, Examining Boards. etc, and give
the men who saved our country little of
the surplus"
B. f. Rauck, Co. X, 18th Ind, Jefferson,
Okla, heartily favors the So service-pen-
sion bill He says he was never in hos
pital except to see sick comrades. and
never lost a days service except when a
prisoner of war. He did not apply for
pension until he was over so years of age.
and then was granted Sc per month.
Francis O'Leary, Corporal, Co. d. both
Ind, Rexford, Kan, writes: Il fully ap-
prove of the Scott service-pensiOn bill, and
think that the rate is not too high for
90-days man. as the moment he signed his
name and was sworn, MS life was in
stantly subject to any sacrifice which the
Government demanded, or saw necessary
to order, and if he was not killed, it was
because the Government could not see
that such Il proceeding would save any
money, or it would have so ordered. 1t
did not hesitate when there was any hope |
or prospect of gaining an advantage. |
Therefore, l have no patience with men
who make a distinction in regard to short |
termed men. All who took the oath were
brave men, and if they We're not killed or
crippled, it was just Il fortunate accident;
they took the risk just the same"
John W. Ratcliff, Co. L, 9th Ky. Cav.
Boyd, Tex, writes: Il advocate SD
per month service pension; let there be no
age limit The boy who enlisted at 10
is just as much entitled to pension rs his
elder brother who enlisted at % or so.
O. N. McClintock, AID Ohio, Cleveland,
Ohio, writes: 1T seems TO me that argu-
ments advanced why men serving three
or more years should receive more than
those serving less time are wrong. Take
my own case, for instance: l first en-
listed in the three months service in the
early part Of April. 1861, and in NOvem-
Der, 1861, for three years, but was dis
charged for disability in July, 1868. Now,
was it any fault of mine that l lost my
health in the service before serving my
time, and should not have the same con-
sideratiOn as though had served my full
time? l went in the service sound and
healthy; lost my health, and am getting
So. / believe the time is ripe for ser-i
vice pension, not according to the time
served, but the time for which the party
enlisted to serve"
VIM. G. Froeschle. Co. G.. 18th Ohio,
Fremont, Neb., complains of discrimina-
ton against long term men in the matter
of pension. He thinks that the three
months and short term men are receiving
greater pension than those who served
three years or through the war.
Benz. b. Prist, Co. A, 10Th Ohio, West