New-York tribune., 1904-09-25
Ay HONEST CONFESSION IN ORDER.

The New-York Evening Post" continues to
Illustrate the soundness and Justice OF President
Roosevelts recent criticism:
our opponents do not venture TO recite the
facts about our policies and acts and then op-
pose them. They attack them only When tley
have first misrepresented them.
As we showed the other day, The POST on
September u. IN assaiIing the Ware pension
order made this absolutely unfounded and mis-
leading statement:
He 1.-THE President hotly asserts that his
famous pension order was issued under the au-
rhority of existing law" How unlucky for him
that the solid Republican vote OF the House sus-
tained the point, when the order was later or
fered by the Democrats amendment, thai
Il was contrary TO existing law"
We demonstrated by citations from The Con-
eressionaI Record" for Monday, April 1S 1904,
that the Ware order was never offered as an
amendment by the Democrats during the con-
sideration Of the General Deficiency bill that
no ruling that the Ware order was contrary
10 existing law was ever made by the chair
man OF the Committee of the Whole, and that
no asolid Republican vote" and no vote Of any
sort ever sustained such q ruling. Yet in
spite OF this plain exposure Of its misstate-
ments "rhe Post" cannot bring itself TO ad-
NIT tts gross perversion of what actually did
happen on the floor OF the House of Representa-
tivex. It now drops the contention that solid
Republican vote was cast TO sustain the point
that the Ware order, offered by the Democrats
"as an amendment, was contrary TO existing
laws but IL VII not confess that the Ware
order was never offered an amendment and
was consequently never before the House Of
Representatives 20 be ruled on Said our neigh
Dor only few days ago:
That the order was a radical change Of the ex-
ssttng law was confessed by the House Republi-
cans when the Democrats. proposing 10 make the
thing legal. offered IL as an amendment TO the
Pension act Instantly Mr.. Hemenway chair
man Of the Committee on Appropriations, made
the point OF order that 81 was new legislation
in other words, was "a change of existing
law Af<>8 much squirTning when the Repub-
lcans found how they had been tricked into de-
ciaring tee Presidents order an act OF legisla-
tfon. the chairman Of the Committee OF the
Whole sustained the point OF order though he
tried 90 make out that the possibility OF re-
buttal made the Presidential order different from
the amendment.
This scarcely modines the original misstate-
ment The matter ruled On wns an amendment
offered, not TO the Pension act" but to the
General Deficiency Appropriation bill II was
not transcript OF the Ware onler, as is evil
Gent 20 any one who reads both the order and
the amendment It was ruled by Chairman
Crumpacker 20 be contrary TO existing law
precisely because IL was not ~of the same char
'acteF as the order recently promulgated by the
Commissioner OF Pensions." As Mr.. Crum-
packer decided, the order undertook ito pre-
scribe q rule Of REPUTABLE presumptions in the
decision OF pension cases." while the amend
ment established IAN absolute right TO certain
rates OF pension without regard 20 the extent
'of disability
The POST says that the chairman ''tried 20
make our that the order was Different from the
amendment IL he merely "tried 10 make this
out, why was it that his ruling was accepted
without protest from the leader Of the Demo-
cratic minority or from any individual Demo
crafi 1he decision, manifestly clear, that the