The National tribune., 1911-03-30
LODGE ON PENSIONS

In response to letter from Comrads
Horace w. Field, SID Mass, Leverett,
Mass, protesting against Senator
Lodges action when the Sulloway bill
came up for consideration, Senator
Lodge wrote:
Dear Sir: I have your letter of the
10th, protesting, in behalf of the veter-
ans of Leverett. against my action on
the Sulloway pension bill. I have al
ways been, and am now. in favor of
extending all reasonable aid to the vet
Grams of the civil war, and need hard
ly say that my action was taken only
In response to a deep-rooted conviction,
and that IL could have approved the
bill I should gladly have done SO. Since
the civil war the Government has paid
out for pensions almost S4.009.00o,000,
and since 1875 our annual appropria-
lions have exceeded the combined ex-
penditures for the Army. the Navy and
rivers and harbors Altho the number
of pensioners has been decreasing since
1902, the annual expenditures have
steadily advanced, and this bill pro-
posed to add to our present expenses
sum equal to $685., 000,0 900 within the
next 10 years. No such sum is avail
able under our present system Of reve-
nue., and it could only be met by the
imposition of new taxes, in spite OF the
TACT tlldI there HAS Dteu ii-oNci tho
country great popular outcry in favor
of reducing or removing altogether
many taxes which are now imposed
under the present tariff. Congress every
year passes thousands of private bills
to relieve cases of real distress, and in
view of all these facts l did not feel
that l could conscientiously support a
measure which made absolutely no dis
tinction as to length of service or finan-
cial standing or actual disability, and
which involved a far greater amount
than the plan proposed at the Atlantic
City Encampment. / am not in any
sense hostile to pension legislation as
such, but 1 do believe that we should
make some distinction in pensions on
the ground of length of service, actual
disability and financial standing, and
that we should consider fully what Is
| involved for the whole country in the
way of new taxes if this bill is to be-
come law.-H. c. Lodge.
This letter is a specfous falsehood.
| Except by a determined effort to gross
Iy exaggerate the cost of the bill can it
be made to appear that the Sulloway
bill would have cost s3S5,o00,o 600 with
On the next 10 years. AS we have fire.
quently quoted DisraeIPs remark:
There are liars-liars and statisti-
clans" An accountant that would pre-
sent such misleading figures to any
great railroad or business institution
would be at once discredited and con-
sidered unworthy of his position. The
first discrepancy in these figures is the
| assumption that all those who are now
on the pension rolls will live for the
next 10 years. Everybody who reflects
a minute knows that the terrible raw
ages of death will in that time have
reduced the pensioners to one-third or
one-fourth of their present number.
Equally misleading is the Senator's
talking of additional revenue needed
for the bill and the necessity of reduc-
ing the taxes. There is plenty of reve-
nue. IL it is not devoted to enterprises
of doubtful benefit A host of things
for which Mr.. Lodges friends are clam
oring for millions of money can wait
until we have more certain informa-
ton as 10 their benefit We will prob
ably lose much more than we gain by
any such demand, since these schemes
are crude. incomplete and possibly are
nothing like as necessary as they are
represented to be. Lastly, his talk
about length of service actually dis
played financial standing as pretexr
for opposing any pension legislation