ADDRESSES OF MAJOR LACEY 227 



that administration — money that ought to have been 

 paid in 1894 — so that we are paying now for the past as 

 well as for the present. 



The present commissioner of pensions has pursued 

 a liberal policy and yet has kept within the letter 

 and the spirit of the law, and yet an increase in the 

 roll has come now from the fault of the previous admin- 

 istration; it has come from the setting aside of orders 

 made in the past cutting down pensions improperly. Pen- 

 sions in many cases were cut down to $6 a month un- 

 der the new law, which have been restored by the present 

 administration to the limit of the act of 1890 — $12 a 

 month. This administration is doing that which the 

 former one should have done. 



Mr. Sayers : Mr. Chairman, I am sure my friend does 

 not wish to misrepresent the administration of the pen- 

 sion office. Now, does he not know that when the act of 

 1890 was passed it became the policy of the administra- 

 tion at that time, which was a Republican administration, 

 to allow pensions exclusively under the act of 1890, and 

 to pretermit for the time being the applications which 

 had been made under previous pension laws and which 

 involved the payment of large arrearages? Does he not 

 know that to be the fact, and does he not also know that 

 in order to execute the act of 1890 the force of the pen- 

 sion office was increased by over 700 clerks? It was dis- 

 tinctly stated before the committee on appropriations as 

 a reason why this increase of clerks should be allowed 

 that it was the intention of the administration to execute 

 the act of 1890 as rapidly as possible. 



Mr. Lacey: I do not concur in all of the gentleman's 

 statement. That the act of 1890 was given precedence in 

 the pension office over the old law, "on account of the 

 large arrearages " I do not concede ; but I do concede that 

 preference was given to claims under the act of 1890 for 



