as I have said, I take no stock in this patriotic war-talk. I yield to no man in my devotion to this country. Whenever I am called upon I am ready to take my stand for the maintenance of the sovereignty of the Government of the United States, and for the protection of our citizens in all their rights against every enemy, foreign or domestic. But what is the question presented here? It is a proposition for retaliatory legislation, although it has not been even charged-much less successfully maintained that there has been any violation on the part of the British Government of any stipulation in any existing treaty; in fact, it is admitted that the opposite is the truth. Vessels not violating law have not been molested, and being seized and the law complied with they have been released.

The true way to settle this question is through the diplomatic departments of the two Governments; or, failing a settlement there, let us have a new treaty, taking care to appoint as our representatives men who will have sense enough not to yield to the commissioners of the British Government all they may demand, and get no advantageous concessions in return. There is no necessity for this haste, and no danger of any war; it is merely a matter of business, and such legislation is simply an effort to bring about by legislation a remedy for difficulties which exist by virtue of the incompetence of what are called diplomats."

The President approved the bill March 3, 1887.

Pensions.-Jan. 10, 1887, there was reported from the House Committee on Invalid Pensions a bill for "the relief of dependent parents and honorably discharged soldiers and sailors who are now disabled and dependent on their labor for support." January 17, Mr. Matson, of Indiana, moved that the rules be suspended, and the measure passed. In support of the bill he said: "The first section provides simply that the rule of evidence in claims filed by dependent parents shall be changed so that hereafter those who make such claims shall be required to prove only a present dependence, instead of a dependence existing at the time of the death of the soldier. This section of the bill is an exact copy of one section of a bill passed under a suspension of the rules, on motion of the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Warner), on the 21st day of April, 1884. That bill, in that form, passed the House and went to the Senate. It is in precise accord with the recommendations of the Secretary of the Interior, as contained in his last annual report, to be found on page 50 of that report.

"As to the second proposition, the more important one, I desire to call the attention of the House, in the first place, to the fact that this provision embraces honorably discharged soldiers of all the wars in which the United States has been engaged; it embraces those engaged in the Seminole, in the Black Hawk,

in the Mexican, and in the last war. It is a broad measure, and not confined to the soldiers of any particular war. The gist of the proposition, Mr. Speaker, is to take from the poorhouses of the country the soldiers who have honorably served their country during any war. The proposition contained in this section of the bill is simply that every man who is totally unable to labor, and is in a dependent condition, shall be pensioned at the rate of $12 per month. There is no provision for pensioning any one who has a less disability than a total inability to labor; and in addition to that he must show that he is dependent upon his daily labor for his support, and has no property from which to derive an income. It is a charity measure.

"It will not be asserted by the friends or enemies of the bill, I apprehend, that there is anything in any contract made by the Government that would call for this legislation; but the legislation itself is the outgrowth of a sentiment that I believe prevails, throughout the length and breadth of this country, against permitting the men who have defended the Government to remain in the poor-houses to be supported by charity; and it is in obedience to that sentiment that the committee deem it proper to bring in a measure placing these men upon the honorable roll of pensioners of the United States.

"Now, as to the matter of cost: I desire to say that early in this Congress, in obedience to a suggestion made to the Commissioner of Pensions, when he was before the Committee on Invalid Pensions, and was being examined in connection with various matters relating to the pension laws, he wrote to the authorities in every county in the United States for the purpose of ascertaining how many soldiers and sailors who had been in the United States service were then objects of public or private charity throughout the land. He learned from 1,240 of the 2,583 counties in the United States that in the 1,240 counties there are 5,172 cases of soldiers and sailors who are new being supported in the public institutions of charity. So that it is estimated, inasmuch as these reports came in about equal proportions from all sections of the country, that there are an equal number in the remaining counties, not quite one half having been heard from, and so on that basis it is assumed that there are now in the United States a total of 10,344 persons dependent upon organized charities in the several States and Territories who would become pensioners under this bill.

"The report affords no exact information as to the inmates of soldiers' homes, both State and national, who may be entitled to the benefits of the bill, but we are clearly of opinion, from the best information obtainable, that the number will not exceed 3,000.

"The committee did not stop there. In addition to that, there has been added an estimate as to those who are not supported by public charity, but who are the recipients of private

relief-the recipients of charity from those who are not legally bound for their supportand there has been added, because of that class, an average of five to each county, giving a total of 12,905 in all. That added to the other number makes a total of 26,249 probable pensioners in the event of the passage of this bill. That is the estimate of the committee. Then, in addition to that, the committee considered the further fact that there were pending in the Pension-Office claims of those who perhaps could bring themselves within the provisions of this bill, who were now receiving a small pension, and they added on that account a considerable number, 6,856 persons in all. So that the grand total of those who are to be benefited by the passage of this bill is estimated by the committee, from the best available sources, to be 33,105 persons at an annual expense of $144 each, or a total aggregate of $4,767,120 per

annum.

"This estimate, Mr. Speaker, which I have given to the House, is based upon the number of soldiers in the last war. Now, in addition to that, the other soldiers of other wars must be taken into account. It will be liberal, I think, to say that not more than 10 per cent. would be added to it, and even if 15 per cent. more would be added under this section, it would still require less than six million dollars per annum to pay the expenses of all the pensions provided for in the bill.

"This, then, Mr. Speaker, is not only a broad and philanthropic measure, but it is a reasonable and conservative proposition. It is not wild and is not extravagant. It is in the line of action suggested by the Chief Executive in his last annual message."

In criticism of the measure Mr. Warner, of Ohio, said:

"While I may not vote against this bill, there are some features of it which I deem very objectionable, and I hope that at least in one particular an amendment will be allowed.

"There is no subject, Mr. Speaker, upon which Congress is called to legislate where it is more important to adhere to sound and consistent principles than in legislating upon the subject of pensions; and yet there is no subject on which we are so likely to be carried away by sentiment, by emotion, and, if I may say so, by demagogy, as on the question of pensions.

"The first section of this bill I heartily approve. I think it entirely sound in principle. There is every reason to suppose that a soldier who was killed in the war if he were living would extend aid now to his aged parents if in need. The question should not therefore be were they in need at the time of the soldier's death, but are they in need now? This bill differs very widely in principle, too, from the bill passed at the last session of Congress which I voted against, and if I ever cast a righteous vote I think that was one; I allude to the bill increasing the pensions of that small class who

66

were already receiving very large pensions. That bill to the few who had much gave more, and to those who had nothing it gave nothing. But, Mr. Speaker, the principal objection which I have to this bill is to the pauper feature of the second section. Indeed, the bill is made by this section rather a pauper bill than a pension bill. I do not like that feature of it. In 1818 a bill was passed not unlike this relating to the soldiers of the Revolutionary War; it was a bill granting pensions to those who were indigent or paupers, but it did not stand long. It was modified the next year, I believe, so as to include all who had not property of the value of $300. It never gave satisfaction, and led to frequent amendments, and finally was repealed entirely. The principle of this act was frequently condemned in the debates in Congress."

The rules were suspended, and the bill passed by the following vote:

YEAS-G. E. Adams, J. J. Adams, C. H. Allen, C. M. Anderson, J. A. Anderson, Atkinson, Bacon, Baker, Bayne, Bound, Boutelle, Boyle, Brady, C. E. Brown, W. W. Brown, Brumm, Buck, Bunnell, Burnes, Burrows, Butterworth, Bynum, J. M. Campbell, J. E. Campbell, Cannon, Carleton, Caswell, Davenport, Davis, Dingley, Dorsey, Dougherty, DunClardy, Cobb, Conger, Cooper, Curtin, Cutcheon, ham, Eden, Eldredge, Ellsberry, Ely, Ermentrout, Evans, Everhart, Farquhar, Fisher, Fleeger, Foran, C. H. Gibson, Goff, Grosvenor, Grout, Guenther, Hale, Ford, Frederick, Fuller, Funston, Gallinger, Gay,

Hall, Harmer, Hatch, Hayden, Haynes, D. B. Henderson, Henley, Hepburn, Hermann, Hiestand, Hiil, Hitt, Holman, Holines, Hopkins, Howard, F. A. Johnson, J. T. Johnston, Kelley, Ketcham, Kleiner, La Follette, Landes, Lawler, Le Fevre, Lehlbach, Libbey, Lindsley, Little, Long, Lore, Louttit, Lovering, Lowry, Lyman, Markham, Matson, McAdoo, McKenna, McKinley, Merriman, Millard, Milliken, Moffat, Morrill, Morrison, Morrow, Murphy, Neece, Negley, Nelson, O'Donnell, Charles O'Neill, J. J. O'Neill, Osborne, Outhwaite, Owen, Parker, Perkins, Peters, Ranney, Reed, Rice, Riggs, Rockwell, Romeis, Rowell, Pettibone, Phelps, Pindar, Pirce, Plumb, Randall, Rusk, Ryan, Sawyer, Scott, Scranton, Seney, Seymour, Shaw, Sowden, Spooner, Springer, Stahlnecker, Steele, Stephenson, E. F. Stone, W. J. Stone of MisI. H. Taylor, J. R. Thomas, O. B. Thomas, Thompson, souri, Strait, Struble, Swope, Taulbee, E. B. Taylor, Townshend, Van Schaick, Viele, Wade, Wadsworth, Wait, Wakefield, J. H. Ward, T. B. Ward, A. J. Warner, William Warner, J. B. Weaver, Weber, A. C. White, Milo White, Wilkins, Winans, Wolford, Woodburn, Worthington-180.

NAYS-J. M. Allen, Ballentine, Barbour, Barksdale, Barnes, Bennett, Blanchard, Bland, Blount, Bragg, C. R. Breckinridge, W. C. P. Breckinridge, Cabell, Cowles, W. R. Cox, Crisp, Croxton, Culberson, DarCaldwell. Catchings, Clements, Compton, Comstock, gan, A. C. Davidson, R. H. M. Davidson, Dawson, Dibble, Dunn, Glass, Glover, W. J. Green, Halsell, Hammond, Harris, Hemphill, J. S. Henderson, Herbert, Hutton, Irion, T. D. Johnston, J. H. Jones, J. T. Jones, Laffoon. Lanham, Martin, McCreary, MePeel, Perry, Richardson, Robertson, Rogers, Sadler, Millin, McRae, Miller, Mills, Neal, Oates, O'Ferrall, Sayers, Singleton, Skinner, Charles Stewart, Storm, J. M. Taylor, Throckmorton, Tillman, Trigg, Tucker, Turner, Van Eaton, Wellborn, Wheeler, Willis, Wise

-76.

Bliss, T. M. Browne, Buchanan, Burleigh, Felix NOT VOTING-Aiken, Barry, Belmont, Bingham, Campbell, T. J. Campbell, Candler, Collins, S. S.

Cox, Crain, Daniel, Dockery, Felton, Findlay, Forney, Geddes, Eustace Gibson, Gilfillan, R. S. Green, Hanback, Heard, T. J. Henderson, Hires, Hiscock, Houk, Hudd, Jackson, James, King, Laird, Mahoney, Maybury, McComas, Mitchell, Morgan, Muller, Norwood, O'Hara, Payne, Payson, Pidcock, Reagan, Reese, Sessions, Smalls, Snyder, Spriggs, J. W. Stewart, St. Martin, W. J. Stone of Kentucky, Swinburne, Symes, Tarsney, Zachary Taylor, Wallace, A. J. Weaver, West, Whiting, Wilson-63.

The full text of the bill was as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That in considering the pension claims of dependent parents, the fact and cause of death, and the fact that the soldier left no widow or minor children, having been shown as required by law, it shall be necessary only to show by competent and sufficient evidence that such parent or parents are without other present means of support than their own manual labor or the contributions of others not legally bound for their support: Provided, That no pension allowed under this act shall commence prior to its passage, and in case of applications hereafter made under this act the pension shall commence from the date of the filing of the application in the PensionOffice.

SEC. 2. That all persons who served three months or more in the military or naval service of the United States in any war in which the United States has been engaged, and who have been honorably discharged therefrom, and who are now or who may hereafter be suffering from mental or physical disability, not the result of their own vicious habits or gross carelessness, which incapacitates them for the performance of labor in such a degree as to render them unable to earn a support, and who are dependent upon their daily labor for support, shall, upon making due proof of the fact according to such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may provide in pursuance of this act, be placed on the list of invalid pensioners of the United States, and be entitled to receive, for such total inability to procure their subsistence by daily labor, $12 per month; and such pension shall connence from the date of the filing of the application in the Pension-Office, upon proof that the disability then existed, and continued during the existence of the same in the degree herein provided: Provided, That persons who are now receiving pensions under existing laws, or whose claims are pending in the Pension-Office, may, by application to the Commissioner of Pensions, in such forms as he may prescribe, receive the benefits of this act; but nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to allow more than one pension at the same time to the same person or pension to commence prior to the passage of this act: And provided further, That rank in the service shall not be considered in applications filed

thereunder.

SEC. 3. That no agent, attorney, or other person instrumental in the presentation and prosecution of a claim under this act shall demand or receive for his services or instrumentality in presenting and prosecuting such claim a sum greater than $5, payable only upon the order of the Commissioner of Pensions, by the pension agent making payment of the pension allowed, except in cases heretofore prosecuted before the Pension-Office, when, in the discretion of the Commissioner of P'ensions, a fee of $10 may be allowed in like manner to the agent or attorney of record in the case at the date of the passage of this act; and any agent, attorney, or other person instrumental in the prosecution of a claim under this act who shall demand or receive a sum greater than that herein provided for, for his services in the prosecution of the claim, shall be subject to the same penalties as prescribed in section 4 of the act of July 4, 1884, entitled "An act making appropriations for the payment of invalid and other pensions of the United States for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, and for other purposes.",

SEC. 4. That section 4716 of the Revised Statutes is hereby modified so that the same shall not apply to this act: Provided, That this act shall not apply to those persons under political disabilities. And no person shall be pensioned under this act for any disability incurred while engaged in the military service against the United States.

the Senate at the previous session of Congress This measure differed from that passed by in not limiting its provisions to soldiers who had served in the civil war. It came up for discussion in the Senate January 27, and passed that body without a division.

Feb. 11, 1887, the President sent in the following veto message:

To the House of Representatives:

I herewith return without my approval House bill 10,457, entitled "An act for the relief of dependent parents and honorably discharged soldiers and sailors who are now disabled and dependent upon their own labor for support."

This is the first general bill that has been sanctioned by the Congress since the close of the late civil war, permitting a pension to the soldiers and sailors who served in that war upon the ground of service and present disability alone, and in the entire absence of any injuries received by the casualties or incidents of such service.

While by almost constant legislation since the close of this war, there has been compensation awarded for every possible injury received as a result of military service in the Union Army, and while a great number of laws passed for that purpose have been administered with great liberality, and have been supplemented by numerous private acts to reach special cases, there has not, until now, been an avowed departure from the principle thus far adhered to respecting Union soldiers, that the bounty of the Government in the way of pensions is generously bestowed when granted to those who in this military service, and in the line of military duty have, to a greater or less extent, been disabled.

But it is a mistake to suppose that service pensions such as are permitted by the second section of the bill under consideration, are new to our legislation. In 1818, thirty-five years after the close of the Revolutionary War, they were granted to the soldiers engaged in that struggle, conditional upon service until the end of the war, or for a term not less than nine months, and requiring every beneficiary under the act to be one "who is, or hereafter by reason of his reduced circumstances in life shall be, in need of assistance from his country for support." Another law of a like character was passed in 1828, requiring service until the close of the Revolutionary War; and still another, passed in 1832, provided for those persons not included in the previous statute, but who served two years at some time during the war, and giving a proportionate sum to those who had served not less than six months.

A service pension law was passed for the benefit of the soldiers of 1812, in the year 1871-fifty-six years after the close of that war-which required only sixty days' service; and another was passed in 1878-sixtythree years after the war-requiring only fourteen days' service.

The service pension bill passed at this session of Congress, thirty-nine years after the close of the Mexican War, for the benefit of the soldiers of that war, requires either some degree of disability or dependency, or that the claimant under its provisions should be sixty-two years of age; and in either case that he should have served sixty days or been actually engaged in a battle.

It will be seen that the bill of 1818, and the Mexican pension bill being thus passed nearer the close of the wars in which its beneficiaries were engaged than the others—one thirty-five years and the other thirty

nine years after the termination of such wars-embraced persons who were quite advanced in age, assumed to be comparatively few in number, and whose circumstances, dependence, and disabilities were clearly defined, and could be quite easily fixed.

The other laws referred to, appear to have been passed at a time so remote from the military service of the persons which they embraced, that their extreme age alone was deemed to supply a presumption of dependency and need.

The number of enlistments in the Revolutionary War is stated to be 309,791, and in the War of 1812, 576,622; but it is estimated that on account of repeated re-enlistments the number of individuals engaged in these wars did not exceed one half of the number represented by these figures. In the war with Mexico, the number of enlistments is reported to be 112,230, which represents a greater proportion of individuals engaged than the reported enlistments in the two previous wars.

The number of pensions granted under all laws to soldiers of the Revolution, is given at 62,069; to soldiers of the War of 1812 and their widows, 60,178; and to soldiers of the Mexican War and their widows up to June 30, 1885, 7,619. The latter pensions were granted to the soldiers of a war involving much hardship, for disabilities incurred as a result of such service; and it was not till within the last month that the few remaining survivors were awarded a service pension.

The War of the Rebellion terminated nearly twentytwo years ago; the number of men furnished for its prosecution is stated to be 2,772,408. No corresponding number of statutes have ever been passed to cover every kind of injury or disability incurred in the military service of any war. Under these statutes, 561,576 pensions have been granted from the year 1861 to June 30, 1886, and more than 2,600 pensioners have been added to the rolls by private acts passed to meet cases, many of them of questionable merit, which the general laws did not cover.

On the 1st day of July, 1886, 365,763 pensioners of all classes were upon the pension-rolls, of whom, 305,605 were survivors of the war of the rebellion, and their widows and dependents. For the year ending June 30, 1887, $75,000,000 have been appropriated for the payment of pensions, and the amount expended for that purpose from 1861 to July 1, 1886, is $808,624,811.51.

While annually paying out such a vast sum for pensions already granted, it is now proposed, by the bill under consideration, to award a service pension to the soldiers of all wars in which the United States has been engaged, including, of course, the War of the Rebellion, and to pay those entitled to the benefits of the act the sum of $12 per month.

So far as it relates to the soldiers of the late Civil War, the bounty it affords them is given thirteen years earlier than it has been furnished to the soldiers of any other war, and before a large majority of its beneficiaries have advanced in age beyond the strength and vigor of the prime of life.

It exacts only a military or naval service of three months without any requirement of actual engagement with an enemy in battle, and without a subjection to any of the actual dangers of war.

The pension it awards is allowed to enlisted men who have not suffered the least injury, disability, loss, or damage of any kind, incurred in or in any degree referable to their military service, including those who never reached the front at all, and those discharged from rendezvous at the close of the war, if discharged three months after enlistment. Under the last call of the President for troops in December, 1864, 11,303 men were furnished who were thus discharged. The section allowing this pension does, however, require, besides a service of three months and an honorable discharge, that those seeking the benefit of the act shall be such as "are now or may hereafter be suffering from mental or physical disability, not the

result of their own vicious habits or gross carelessness, which incapacitates them for the performance of labor in such a degree as to render them unable to earn a support, and who are dependent upon their daily labor for support."

It provides further that such persons shall, upon making proof of the fact," be placed on the list of invalid pensioners of the United States, and be entitled to receive for such total inability to procure their subsistence by daily labor, twelve dollars per month; and such pension shall commence from the date of the filing of the application in the Pension-Office, upon proof that the disability then existed, and continue during the existence of the same in the degree herein provided: Provided, That persons who are now receiving pensions under existing laws, or whose claims are pending in the Pension-Office, may, by application to the Commissioner of Pensions, in such form as he may prescribe, receive the benefit of this act."

It is manifestly of the utmost importance that statutes which like pension laws should be liberally administered as measures of benevolence in behalf of worthy beneficiaries, should admit of no uncertainty as to their general objects and consequences.

Upon a careful consideration of the language of the section of this bill above given, it seems to me to be so uncertain and liable to such conflicting constructions, and to be subject to such unjust and mischievous application, as to alone furnish sufficient ground for disapproving the proposed legislation.

Persons seeking to obtain the pension provided by this section must be now or hereafter

1. "Suffering from mental or physical disability." 2. Such disability must not be "the result of their own vicious habits or gross carelessness."

66

3. Such disability must be such as incapacitates them for the performance of labor in such a degree as to render them unable to earn a support."

4. They must be "dependent upon their daily labor for support."

5. Upon proof of these conditions they shall "be placed on the lists of invalid pensioners of the United States, and be entitled to receive for such total inability to procure their subsistence by daily labor twelve dollars per month."

It is not probable that the words last quoted, "such total inability to procure their subsistence by daily labor," at all qualify the conditions prescribed in the preceding language of the section. The "total inability" spoken of must be such" inability-that is, the inability already described and constituted by the conditions already detailed in the previous parts

of the section.

It thus becomes important to consider the meaning and the scope of these last-mentioned conditions.

The mental and physical disability spoken of has a distinct meaning in the practice of the Pension Bureau, and includes every impairment of bodily or mental strength and vigor. For such disabilities there are now paid one hundred and thirty-one different rates of pension, ranging from $1 to $100 per month.

The disability must not be the result of the applicant's" vicious habits or gross carelessness." Practically this provision is not important. The attempt of the Government to escape the payment of a pension on such a plea, would of course, in a very large majority of instances, and regardless of the merits of the case, prove a failure. There would be that strange but nearly universal willingness to help the individual as between him and the public treasury, which goes very far to insure a state of proof in favor of the claimant.

The disability of applicants must be such as to "incapacitate them for the performance of labor in such a degree as to render them unable to earn a support."

It will be observed that there is no limitation or definition of the incapacitating injury or ailment itself. It nced only be such a degree of disability from any cause as renders the claimant unable to carn a

support by labor. It seems to me that the "support" here mentioned as one which can not be earned, is a complete and entire support, with no diminution on account of the least impairment of physical or mental condition. It it had been intended to embrace only those who by disease or injury were totally unable to labor, it would have been very easy to express that idea, instead of recognizing as is done a "degree" of such inability.

What is a support? Who is to determine whether a man earns it or has it or has it not? Is the Government to enter the homes of claimants for pension, and after an examination of their surroundings and circumstances settle those questions? Shall the Government say to one man that his manner of subsistence by his earnings is a support, and to another that the things his earnings furnish are not a support Any attempt, however honest, to administer this law in such a manner would necessarily produce more unfairness and unjust discrimination and give more scope for partisan partiality, and would result in more perversion of the Government's benevolent intentions, than the execution of any statute ought to permit.

If in the effort to carry out the proposed law, the degree of disability as related to earnings, be considered for the purpose of discovering if in any way it curtails the support which the applicant if entirely sound would earn, and to which he is entitled, we enter the broad field long occupied by the Pension Bureau, and we recognize as the only difference between the proposed legislation and previous laws passed for the benefit of the surviving soldiers of the civil war, the incurrence in one case of disabilities in military service, and in the other disabilitics existing but in no way connected with or resulting from such service.

It must be borne in mind that in no case is there any grading of this proposed pension. Under the operation of the rule first suggested, if there is a lack in any degree, great or small, of the ability to earn such a support as the Government determines the claimant should have, and by the application of the rule secondly suggested, if there is a reduction in any degree of the support which he might earn if sound, he is entitled to a pension of $12.

In the latter case, and under the proviso of the proposed bill, permitting persons now receiving pensions to be admitted to the benefits of the act, I do not see how those now on the pension-roll for disabilities incurred in the service, and which diminish their earning capacity, can be denied the pension provided in

this bill.

Of course none will apply who are now receiving $12 or more per month. But on the 30th day of June, 1886, there were on the pension-rolls 202,621 persons who were receiving fifty-eight different rates of pension from $1 to $11.75 per month. Of these, 28,142 were receiving $2 per month; 63,116, $4 per month; 37,254, 86 per month; and 50,274, whose disabilities were rated as total, $8 per month.

As to the meaning of the section of the bill under consideration there appears to have been quite a difference of opinion among its advocates in the Congress. The chairman of the Committee on Pensions in the House of Representatives, who reported the bill, declared that there was in it no provision for pensioning any one who has a less disability than a total inability to labor, and that it was a charity measure. The chairman of the Committee on Pensions in the Senate, having charge of the bill in that body, dissented from the construction of the bill announced in the House of Representatives, and declared that it not only embraced all soldiers totally disabled, but in his judgment all who are disabled to any considerable extent; and such a construction was substantially given to the bill by another distinguished Senator who, as a former Secretary of the Interior, had imposed upon him the duty of executing pension laws and determining their intent and meaning.

Another condition required of claimants under this act is that they shall be dependent upon their daily labor for support."

This language, which may be said to assume that there exists within the reach of the persons mentioned "labor," or the ability in some degree to work, is more aptly used in a statute describing those not wholly deprived of this ability, than in one which deals with those utterly unable to work.

I am of the opinion that it may fairly be contended that under the provisions of this section any soldier, whose faculties of mind or body have become impaired by accident, disease, or age, irrespective of his service in the army as a cause, and who by his labor only is left incapable of gaining the fair support he might with unimpaired powers have provided for himself, and who is not so well endowed with this world's goods as to live without work, may claim to participate in its bounty; that it is not required that he should be without property, but only that labor should be necessary to his support in some degree; nor is it required that he should be now receiving support from others.

Believing this to be the proper interpretation of the bill, I can not but remember that the soldiers of our civil war, in their pay and bounty, received such compensation for military service as has never been received by soldiers before, since mankind first went to war; that never before, on behalf of any soldiery, have so many and such generous laws been passed to relieve against the incidents of war; that statutes have been passed giving them a preference in all public employments; that the really needy and homeless Union soldiers of the rebellion have been, to a large extent, provided for at soldiers' homes, instituted and supported by the Government, where they are maintained together, free from the sense of degradation which attaches to the usual support of charity; and that never before in the history of the country has it been proposed to render Government aid toward the support of any of its soldiers based alone upon a military service so recent, and where age and circumstances appeared so little to demand such aid.

Hitherto such relief has been granted to surviving soldiers few in number, venerabie in age, after a long lapse of time since their military service, and as a parting benefaction tendered by a grateful people. I can not believe that the vast peaceful army of Union soldiers, who have contentedly resumed their places in the ordinary avocations of life cherish as sacred the memory of patriotic service, or, who having been disabled by the casualties of war justly regard the present pension-roll, on which appear their names, as a roll of honor, desire at this time and in the present exigency, to be confounded with those who through such a bill as this are willing to be objects of simple charity and to gain a place upon the pension-roll through alleged dependence.

Recent personal observation and experience constrain me to refer to another result which will inevitably follow the passage of this bill. It is sad but nevertheless true that already in the matter of procuring pensions there exists a wide-spread disregard of truth and good faith, stimulated by those who as agents undertake to establish claims for pensions, heedlessly entered upon by the expectant beneficiary, and encouraged or at least not condemned by those unwilling to obstruct a neighbor's plans.

In the execution of this proposed law under any interpretation, a wide field of inquiry would be opened for the establishment of facts largely within the knowledge of the claimants alone; and there can be no doubt that the race after the pensions offered by this bill would not only stimulate weakness and pretended incapacity for labor, but put a further premium on dishonesty and mendacity.

The effect of new invitations to apply for pensions, or of new advantages added to causes for pensions already existing, is sometimes startling.

Thus in March, 1879, large arrearages of pensions