Evening star., 1925-11-15


W due to insufficient provision
L L If not by actual starvation
this story Is of vital impor
lance to at least a thousand annui
tants who are on the verge of such
tate, of immense Importance to sew
eral thousand who have 50 little that
they can barely live in extreme pov-
erty, of very great importance to sev'
eral thousand others who have not
enough to maintain them in comfort
or great importanc to 430,0 pros
pectfve annuitantS, 1000 of whom
live In this city, and of grave interest
to every one.
Years before the World War a GER
tain official in public service became
paralyzed After his sick and annual
leave were exhausted he was totally
helpless. Then he was brought to
office in a carriage. lifted to a wheel
chair. rolled to his desk. and there he
sat during office hours, doing nothing,
but drawing full pay. This continued
for years.
A watchman was stricken with total
blindness. He held his job for years,
aided by others. and drew full pay.
A clerk became totally blind, but
was retained in service. doing practi-
cally nothing. for a long time, and
drew full pay.
OnclalS humane
Department heads would not turn
out helpless employees after years of
faithful service without provision for
their maintenance.
Such cases finally aroused a Con
sressman, and in connection with GER
tain others who deemed a retireme mt
system desirable, a bill was drawn up,
but 1t was years before it became a
law. On May %, 1920. it was enacted.
1t provided for retirement of employees
in the classified service who had
served at least Is years and had at,
tained the age of 10 years, except
that certain classes were retired at
age 65 and others at age 60. Annui-
ties ranged from SIS to $50 per month.
dependent on rate of pay and length
of service up to 80 years. At the
time the bill was drawn up such an
nuities were not so bad; but when
enacted into law the cost of living
here had doubled and has been going
higher ever since.
One per cent of the annuitants have
been forced out of employment on an
nuity of less than SIS per month, and
81 per cent on less than S36. 1t does
not require a vivid imagination to
realize that this means actual starva-
ton for some and great suffering for
many because of insufficient susie
nance.
Correction Held Vital.
This condition should be corrected
forthwith. Strange to say, none of
the amendments to the law hereto,
fore proposed undertake to alleviate
such condition. The Stanfield bill
which barely failed to pass last ses-
sion, proposed increase of 81 to 81 in
such cases, and proposed $40 increa Sc
n "a faI nf
Those whose need wassnperative were
to get practically nothing, while those
whose need was least were TO get
most. Those annuitants must not be
left to StaTve or suffer, and their
condition must not be made the basis
Of an amendent which does not relieve
them, but becomes the excuse for an
increase TO a few favorites who have
least need.
The original purpose of the law was
to avoid the inhumanity of turning
out superannuated and disabled en-
ployes who had served long and
faithfully without adequate provision
for their maintenance; but either
greed or carelessness prevented the
bill into an instrument Of greatest in
humanity and cruelty; and failure to
Immediately enact an amendment that
would bring adequate relief would be
disgraceful.
The most potent factor in bringing
about such dire results was the pro.
vision deducting 21a per cent from
the pay of each employe and
basing the amount of annuity on
amount of pay for the preceding
ten years. That altogether ignored
the element of need. 1t gave to the
high.paid. who had the best oppor.
tunity to make PROVISION for old
age, annuities that. meagre as they
now are, did not mean starvation or
poverty. unless the annuitant had
other helpless dependents and no other
provision or friends: but to the low
paid, who had had no opportunity
to make provision for old age, it gave
annuitieS that were SO trivial as to
make starvation or extreme poverty
a certainty.
Sees Law Theory Fail.
A most unbusiness-l like feature of
the law is the provision allowing the
same annuity to a younger as to an
older person. All annuities are paid
from the retirement fund, and the
theory is that each shall get out of
that fund all he puts into 1t. But if
the same annuity is allowed to those
having a greater expectation of life
as to those having a less expectation
OF life, the theory is violated.
On June 80. 1925, there were II ,689
annuitants. During the year 893 died
The amount of the deductions from
The pay of employees for the year was
S17,905, ,070,98; and the total in the
retirement fund was S44, ,865, 1856, the
interest on which for the year was
$2.123, 1861, making the total income
for the year $20,028.S6 S67.69. There
was paid out on annuities during the
year Sc ,235, 830.16, and on refunds to
discharged employees $2,713, ,452 ,16
leaving S11 ,079 .5S5.37 to be added to
the retirement fund.
With an income more than double
the outlays, and with an accumulated
retirement fund of more than $55, ,000,-
900, there can be no excuse for failure
10 increase all, and especially the
smaller, annuities to provide for main.
tenance of all in comfort, and to allow
greater increase TO high annuities
than to low would be wholly mex.
CuSable.
United States Obligation Held Great
One might think that, inasmuch as
the retirement law enables the Gov.
old-efficiency for mediocrity-pre
sumably without inhumanity in doing
so, thus protiting greatly, it should be
incumbent upon the Government to
share the cost or at least assume that
part of the cost due to the payment OF