The National tribune., 1908-01-23
The Sherwood Bin.

Joseph E. Collins. Sd Wis. Oakfield.
Wis, criticises the Sherwood Bill, say
Ing. that while the measure is an i'm
portant one. the men who served three
or four years should have better treat
ment than the men who served only
Is months.
Abraham w. Sidwell, Oakley. Kan,
is not satisfied with Gen. Sherwood's
explanation of his bill. The man who
served Is months is not entitled to SO
much more than one who served but
Il. Comrade Sidwell at the age of 19
enlisted in 1864. which cuts him out of
the 81 day provision. In the early
part of the war, the Government did
not knowingly accept man under Il.
and consequently all this class would
be cut out.
w. +. Steele, Mansfield, o., approves
of the Sherwood Bill. but hopes that ii
VIII be amended to put all who served
80 days or more on the roll at 81 Il
day. This will simplify the bill and
reduce expenses by its simplification.
Sergt. John. l.. Welch, 5th U. S. Art.
Battery II. st. James, Mo-. takes ex-
ceptions to the Sherwood bill because
it specifically excludes all those who
served in the Regular Army; it even
excludes those regiments which were
raised during the war and which were
of the same nature as the volunteers.
The men who enlisted in the new Reg
ular Regiments were just as patriotic
as those who went into the volunteer
regiments, and they deserve just as
much. Comrade Welch lived in a
part of Illinois which was filed with
Southern sympathizers who tried in
every way TO prevent>young men from
entering the service. He made several
efforts to get into the army. but all of
which failed until he saw an advertise
ment of the 18th U. S. being organized
in Chicago. He then told his asso-
ciates that they might fool away their
time if they pleased, but he was going
to Chicago, which he did, and enlisted
in the first company of the 18th U. S.
He served with that regiment until he
veteraniZed and re-enlisted for three
years in Battery II, 5th U. S. Art, from
which he was discharged Feb. 2, 1867.
1t does not seem right that men who
did such magnificent work at Shiloh,
Stone River, and Chickamauga should
be Disseminated against as this bill
does.
w. H. Hickman, Crandon. S. Oak,
thinks that the Sherwood Bill Is too
good to pass.
John r. Jones, Racine, Wis, fayors
the Sherwood Bill.
Aaron Kinney, Fayette, O., says the
Sherwood Bill is like many others.
made to help some and leave out 9TH
ers who are just as needy and just as
deserving.
A. J. Hill. 37th Mass, Soldiers Home,
Bath. n. Y, is highly pleased with the
Sherwood Bill and thinks it should
make Gen. Sherwood President of the
United States.
Phil Sheridan Post, Reading, Mich,
indorses the Sherwood Bill.
John L. Younker. 18th u S., juno
ton City, o., believes in the Sherwood
Bill. which would save thousands of
dollars each year to the Government
for examinations, but it does an in
justice in excluding the Regulars Com
rade YOunker, who is now IS years
old, served from March 81, 1862, until
March 81, 1865, was wounded twice,
was six months and nine days in rebel
prisons, and has a Congressional Medal
of Honor. Why should he be exclud-
ed from the benefits of the act?
John Turner, 149th~ Pa, Clearfield,
Pa, is against the exclusions and limi-
tations in pension bills and particular
ly in the Sherwood Bill, which draws
several improper lines. There are
thousands of men who were too young
to enlist before 1864, and therefore they
did not have the requisite Is months
service under the Sherwood Bill, yet
they are just as deserving as some 9TH
ers who enlisted earlier, but did not
see as much of the fighting as those
Who went in in 1864.
A. ]. Baker, Blackburn, o., thinks
hat the whole pension business should
De simplified by adding the disability
allowance to the age allowance