EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.
_To the Senate_:
I return without approval Senate bill No. 2223, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elizabeth S. De Krafft."
My objection to this bill is that it is of no possible advantage to the
beneficiary therein mentioned. It directs that her name be placed upon
the pension roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the
pension laws. The effect of such legislation would be to permit Mrs. De
Krafft to draw a pension at the rate of $30 each month from the date of
the approval of the bill.
On the 26th day of February, 1886, under the provisions of the general
pension law, she was allowed a pension of this exact sum, but the
payments were to date from November 10, 1885.
I am so thoroughly tired of disapproving gifts of public money to
individuals who in my view have no right or claim to the same,
notwithstanding apparent Congressional sanction, that I interpose with
a feeling of relief a veto in a case where I find it unnecessary to
determine the merits of the application. In speaking of the promiscuous
and ill-advised grants of pensions which have lately been presented to
me for approval, I have spoken of their "apparent Congressional
sanction" in recognition of the fact that a large proportion of these
bills have never been submitted to a majority of either branch of
Congress, but are the result of nominal sessions held for the express
purpose of their consideration and attended by a small minority of the
members of the respective Houses of the legislative branch of
Government.
Thus in considering these bills I have not felt that I was aided by the
deliberate judgment of the Congress; and when I have deemed it my duty
to disapprove many of the bills presented, I have hardly regarded my
action as a dissent from the conclusions of the people's
representatives.
I have not been insensible to the suggestions which should influence
every citizen, either in private station or official place, to exhibit
not only a just but a generous appreciation of the services of our
country's defenders. In reviewing the pension legislation presented to
me many bills have been approved upon the theory that every doubt should
be resolved in favor of the proposed beneficiary. I have not, however,
been able to entirely divest myself of the idea that the public money
appropriated for pensions is the soldiers' fund, which should be devoted
to the indemnification of those who in the defense of the Union and in
the nation's service have worthily suffered, and who in the day of
their dependence resulting from such suffering are entitled to the
benefactions of their Government. This reflection lends to the bestowal
of pensions a kind of sacredness which invites the adoption of such
principles and regulations as will exclude perversion as well as insure
a liberal and generous application of grateful and benevolent designs.
Heedlessness and a disregard of the principle which underlies the
granting of pensions is unfair to the wounded, crippled soldier who is
honored in the just recognition of his Government. Such a man should
never find himself side by side on the pension roll with those who have
been tempted to attribute the natural ills to which humanity is heir to
service in the Army. Every relaxation of principle in the granting of
pensions invites applications without merit and encourages those who
for gain urge honest men to become dishonest. Thus is the demoralizing
lesson taught the people that as against the public Treasury the most
questionable expedients are allowable.
During the present session of Congress 493 special pension bills have
been submitted to me, and I am advised that 111 more have received the
favorable action of both Houses of Congress and will be presented within
a day or two, making over 600 of these bills which have been passed up
to this time during the present session, nearly three times the number
passed at any entire session since the year 1861. With the Pension
Bureau, fully equipped and regulated by the most liberal rules, in
active operation, supplemented in its work by constant special
legislation, it certainly is not unreasonable to suppose that in all the
years that have elapsed since the close of the war a majority of the
meritorious claims for pensions have been presented and determined.
I have now more than 130 of these bills before me awaiting Executive
action. It will be impossible to bestow upon them the examination they
deserve, and many will probably become operative which should be
rejected.
In the meantime I venture to suggest the significance of the startling
increase in this kind of legislation and the consequences involved in
its continuance.