New-York tribune., 1911-01-18
THE PENSION QUESTION.

We gladly print in another column Il
letter from a correspondent in STAN
ford. Conn. dissenting from some of our
criticisms of the SulIoway pension bill.
We do not want to miSlead anybody as
10 the effects of that measure We did
not say. as our correspondent evidently
thinks we did. that the increased cE-
uense entailed by the passage of the
SulIoway bill would amount to $500
100000 annually We said that It
would add SiJ.GOO.OOO 10 the annual pen
sion outlay. bringing The total mp 20
S200,00O.OO0 or more. The House Com
mittee on Invalid Pensions. which re-
ported the bill, approved the estimate Of
the Commissioner of Pensions. putting
the probable increase AT I5.OoOCn. and
we merely accepted that calculation rs
Trustworthy. Undoubtedly it IS not too
large.
Of course. all the advances in rates
could not 60 into effect at once. Z
would take Il year or more. perhaps. 20
adjust the claims for increases. But
the government would not be the gamer
by the delay. since its policy has been
Ia allow back payments 10 the date of
the passage Of the law creating new pen
Sions or enlarglng old ones. Nor do We
believe that the additional pension out
lay provided for by the Sulloway
measure would "aftcr the first year dc.
crease 10 the extent Of S6ooOHO or
81 OOOCOe annually. About 10000 pen
sonerS would get increased rates under
the Sulloway act. They AXE up less
than half of the pension roll. and me
net loss from the entire roll in 1902 10
was only 2j1ll Allowing a net loss of
1JGOO from the service pension roster
of 4JO.OrO-or ~ per ceut-the decrease
in payments om that account would prob
ably amount i'm the near future to more
than Sl.JOO.GNU.
our correspondent asks if we are not
willing 10 make any allowances for men
who went to the front between 1861 and
1860. We certainly are. The country
has properly made allowances for them,
generous beyond any parallel in history.
II has expended S3.916.61l,l2J for the
relief both of those who We're disabled
and of those who were not disabled. ana
for the widows and minor children
of those who lost their lives during the
war or have died since. The govern
ment is paying for pensions to-day nearly
s1fO. 900, 900 yedr--a sum which would
have staggered the imagination Of the
generation which fought the war. il
has given veterans preference in dp-
pointments to the public service and
has recognized their sacrifices indirect "
in many other ways The Tribune has
heartily supported extraordinarily liberal
measures Of relief. hut there must
be an end somewhere and VIC feel mat
the Sullcway bill oversteps the limit ot
equitable obligation. Our correspondent
has an honorable war record Of which
he nav we'll he proud. But does he take
any satisfaction in being Jumped win
tens Of thousands of others whose service
involved no special privation. with the
paid substitutes. the bounty jumpers
aud tho ninety-day men who never saw
the front. I'm general service class on
titled 10 draw pensions on exactly the
same basis: The government has gone
far enough in pcnsioning service alone.
If ucnsiOus are 10 he increased. the in
creaSeS should 90 10 those whose service
was the most exacting and relatively
the least compensated.