Library Collections: Document: Full Text

PROPOSITION THIRD.

The time spent by soldiers as prisoners of war, not under parole, but in actual confinement, shall count as follows, viz: each winter month as six months; each summer month as three months.

In almost all countries the hardships to which prisoners of war are more or less exposed, have ever been regarded as conferring upon them a claim to reward of some kind. But inasmuch as these are some of the necessary incidents of war, no positive rights accrue to them in the premises. Accepting, as they must, all the accidents to which their profession exposes them, they cannot exact any indemnity; and it is only in order to reward them for the additional sufferings thus incurred, that governments have generally consented to count the time thus spent doubly to their credit. But in the present war the degree of hardships imposed upon our captive soldiers has so far transcended anything ever before witnessed among civilized nations, as to entitle them to the largest measure of reward, in counting time of service, that can possibly be allowed; and we have accordingly suggested six to one for the winter months, and three to one for the summer, as the credit in time to be given them.

PROPOSITION FOURTH.

Whenever a specially meritorious action has been performed by a soldier or non-commissioned officer, a full pension should be granted to him in addition to his regular pay. But on afterwards completing twenty-five years in the service, or on being honorably discharged therefrom on account of wounds or disease contracted in the line of duty, no additional pension should be granted.

It has been the custom from time immemorial, to reward by marks of peculiar distinction, the soldier who performs a specially meritorious action. This has only been a recognition of the principle that the hope of a reward is the best and most enduring stimulus which can be applied to the human mind. And that in proportion as men can be assured of a direct gain, either in fame, honor or treasure, by reason of their efforts, will those efforts be made with alacrity and zeal. Among the military nations of antiquity, rewards, not only for general services to the State, but for specially meritorious actions, were recognised as an obligation due from the State to its citizens, and wherever an individual thus distinguished himself, he was forthwith elevated by public decree to a dignity which placed him on a footing with the most honored of his fellow-citizens. Thus the corona obsidionalis was presented by a beleaguered army after its liberation to the general who had relieved it; the corona civica, to the soldier who had preserved the life of a Roman citizen in battle. Both these distinctions were considered as among the highest the State could confer, and on that account their attainment was hedged about by very severe restrictions. Among the moderns, it has been usual, besides promoting the meritorious person, to superadd some form of gratuity, either in the nature of a pension, or an exemption from public burthens. In France, in particular, the creation of a Legion of Honor by the first Napoleon has always been recognised as an act of great wisdom as well as justice. There the legionaries, besides the cross, receive a pension, and the institution does not restrict its membership to military men alone, but includes all who have distinguished themselves in the cause of humanity. In this respect it stands without a rival.

The advantages conferred upon an army by such a system of rewards are incalculable. They stimulate the soldier's pride and manhood; keep him on his good behavior, develop his sentiment of nationality, and make him feel that he is a ward of the State itself, which will unfailingly honor him, according as he honors himself. This acts as an incentive to the best class of men to enter the army, where, in former times, too often, only the shipwrecked in fortune, and, worse still, in character, were found disposed to join its ranks.

Nor would it add to the probable number of pensioners, since, in times of peace, the number of opportunities to perform specially meritorious actions, must, of necessity, be limited, and besides, the soldier, when thus rewarded, has no further claim to any pension, although he should afterwards complete his twenty-five years of service, on the well-received principle that no person should enjoy two simultaneous pensions from the same source. As long as he continues in the army, the soldier has his pay and his honorable pension; on leaving it, he, of course, parts with his pay, and retains his pension: so that, as between him and the one not thus distinguished, but who receives a retiring pension, the difference is only in time. Both, after twenty-five years, receive a similar pension, only that the honorable pensioner has had his in advance, and superadded to his pay, while the other has had to wait twenty-five years before receiving his. We can but think this as wise and just a method of rewarding meritorious actions in the army, as the circumstances of our institutions will permit.