New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-09-17
CONSTITUTION CLUR "LoGLc..,

The Parker Constitution Club of New-York
City, pursuing its task of exposing the alleged
''usurpatiOps' Of the present Executive has is
sued a pamphlet-Report No. dealing with
the pension order Of March 10 last 1t reaches
the conclusion that this order was "uncOnstitu-
tional, lawless and most reprehensible" But
the argument by which this conclusion is
reached is a marvel Of legal ineptitude and in
consistency. The gist of the Constitution Clubs
contention is that Congress did not authorize
the appropriation OF pensions because soldiers
''of the Civil War We're aged sixty-two, aud the
''honOring OF pension certificates, obtained on
that score by President ROOsevelts Secretary
'of the Treasury is an illegal license by which
that official permits the money of the nation
Ito be distracted"
The Dependent Pension act Of June. 1890. pro-
vides:
All persons who served ninety days or more
in the military naval service of the United
states during the late War OF the Rebellion. and
who have been honoFably discharged therefrom,
and who are now or may hereafter be suffering
from any mental physical disability or dis
abilities Of permanent character, not the result
or their own vicious habits. which incapaci-
tates them from the performance of manual labor
as TO render them unable TO a support,
shall upon making due proof of the fact 40
eording 70 such rules and regulations as the
Secretary Of the Interior may provide, be placed
upon the list Of invalid pensioners OF the United
States. and be entitled to receive a pension not
exceeding s12 per month and not less than SO
dollars per month. proportiOned to the degree
OF inability TO earn support.
Pensions are to be given for disability. That
is admitted. But how is that disability to be
determined? Solely according 10 such rules
and regulations as the Secretary of the Inte-
''riOP may provide" Is there anything in this
language TO limit or qualify the discretion of
the Secretary Of the Interior? Must he pre-
scribe that disability must be determined on
individual personal examination? Or has he
latitude TO lay down certain general rules for
dealing with different classes Of cases, and 10
establish certain prima facie presumpuons, sub
ject TO rebuttal: 1t seems 10 us that a com
mon sense Interpretation of the language of the
statute leaves the Interior Department free to
lay down general regulations, subject only TO
the power Of Congress 70 review or alter them
II the Constitution Club believes, on the con
trary that no general rules can be formulated
but that each case must be dealt with individu-
ally on its merits, it is welcome to the conten-
ton; and it could easily test the validity Of that
construction Of the. law by making up a case
for submission TO the federal courts
But can the Constitution Club afford to take
such stand? Evidently it cannot and will
not The club carries On its list Of vice-presi-
dents the name Of John G. Carlisle AS mem
Der OF the second Cleveland Cabinet Mr. Car
isle acquiesced in a ruling made under that
administration by which pensioners disabil-
ity was held TO be determinable not by indi-
vidual examination but by a general age rule
It would be inconvenient for the Constitution
Club to admit that one of its most distinguished
officers had been party to such 'unconstitJl-
tiOnal and lawless' procedure The clubs
pamphlet accordingly has TO shOw-and really
tries 10 show-that making seventy-five years a
general, though REPUTABLE test of disability OF
one sort is constitutional" while making six
ty-twO years a similar test of another sort of
disability is wholly unconstitutional" The
Hon. John Sharp Williams said in the House
of Representatives last April that if he had
ever heard or known OF the LOchren order he
would have denounced it as quite as "unconsti-
tutionaP' as the Ware order. Not so the cham
pions of law and order in the Parker club
They have the righteousness to say:
Much has appeared IN the public prints about
the order of the Pension Bureau issued under
Mr.. Cleveland's administration This order pre-
scribes sevsnty-hve years of age. We need not
discuss the question whether that order was
,usfihable; certainly IL was unimportant |
The first order may be justified as |
legitimate rule Of evidence for the convenience |
q me department and within the scope of the |
s Statute Inc second was the creation of a new |
stoned.
But II Congress has not authorized the pen
sioning Of soldiers because fhav were sixty
two" Sc also has not authorized the yensionine |
OF soldiers because they were seventv-fye. It |
is as much an illegal license" 70 nav one class |
as 70 pay the other. AS a matter ~ fact. Con- |
gress has authorized the payment Of pensions |
to claimants found 'dissbledn. and 70 apply |
one presumption In Determining disability Is i