Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1919-05-23
PENSION LAW DISCUSSED.
Several Features are Under D'ssat'
isfied Criticism.

An ANONYMOUS correspondent sign
mo himself TX X" discusses the ne"
pension law as follows: ..o-
There are something's in connection
with the proposed application OF tne
new Confederate pension la" lias
ought to be called to the attention W oi
the people and legislators and wen
considered. 1t is generally understood
whether correctly or not, that py lhe
act it was intended that an mono.
roll' would be made of all those tha'
fsitbfulIy served the State, or Confed-
eracy. as soldier or sailor IN the
army and militia and navy and Oh tns
widows Of such; and that the 'nohor
be not the empty one OF mScrioIhe
their names, but that tanslple non,
orarium, in the shape or casn shouio
accompany the enrolment.
The title of the act Is, An acI lo
put upon the honor roll all Conieael.
ate soldiers and sailors ana wlooms
of confederate soldiers and sailors
ond comnensate them for services
rendered from 1861 to 1865" Because
of the two circumstances, the exist
ence for years Of pension for olsa,
bled soldiers, sailors and widows, ano
the title, "honor roll" in the present
or latest, act, 1t is evident that tnere
is a difference in the two pensions.
Now the State pension board, Great
ad hv the last act, Is treating the two
acts inst alike. There is no recogni-
tion whatever of any status OF non
orr in their proposed distribution OF
the appropriation accompanying the
the creation of the honor roll.
There is nothing whatever In the
act creating the honor roll making
any distinction between r1ch ana poof
men or widows, yet the board pro
poses such a distinction; there Is NJ
distinction as to health, whether goou
or bad, yet the board proposes such; !;
there is no distinction as to length OF
time of service, yet the board proposes
such: there is no distinction between
the wounded and unwounded, yet such
is proposed. .., -
the act, every vestige Of honor is
eliminated. Who gave them such
authority?
Section l of the act does prescribe
that said State board shall make all
rules etc., necessary to enroll and
classify ali enrolment and to appor-
ton under such classes all sums that
may be appropriated for such pur-
poses" Now this means, when the
whole act and spirit OF the act is
considered to separate the soldiers ana
sailors from the widows OF soldiers
and sailors and to apportion FUNDS pc
tween these two classes, else the act
is a fraud upon the people Of the State
in an illegitimate increase in pensions.
Again. a woman married a man
prior to the war, or during the war or
inst after the war, he dies and she
again marries one who had been
soldier, but after January l, 1890; but
the second husband is now dead. why
can she not receive a pension because
of her marriage to her first husband
She has been the faithful widow TO
two faithful soldiers. The board de-
cides she is not entitled to a pension,
though she is needy widow. Is this
an honor roll?"
So much for the ruling of the State
pension board.
A bad defect in the law itself and
al inconsistency appears in that
section of the act which limits pen
siors to widows over 60 years or age
while granting pensions to WIDOWS
WHO married before January l, 1S9O.
So that q widow to get pension must
have been born prior to 1859 to be
over 60 now, while the law again says
that she must have been married 10
the soldier prior to January 1, 1871
(29 years since), and at that time she
might have been from AZ (marrying at
1S) to SO (marrying at 3o), all within
the 60 year limit. Thus a bona 1lde
widow SO years old. and helpless gets
no pension. 49,
The people desired a law that re-
cognized all the soldiers and sailors
and their faithful widows ana the
writer is satisfied that there VIII pe
great dissatisfaction with the WORKING
of this law