Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1856-09-10
The Recent Congressional swindle.


Congress, increasing the compensation OF mein-
bers, in any other light than as q stupendous
swindle. The more we look at it, the more
criminal it appears, and the greater becomes our
establishment that the sovereign people remain
silent unconcerned spectators of the abominaoie
transaction We have already given our readers
an account of the provisions of the act, but IN
order to 'keep it before the people" will state
the case again. .-... r..s ..
Under the old law members of Congress were
entitled to receive the sum of So per day and
mileage, as compensation for their services,
when in point of fact they generally do the coun-
try vast deal more harm than good. AT these
rates each member of Congress would have re-
ceived for the last regular Session the sum OF
5000, and mileage. The second Session OF Con-
gress begins on the 1st of December and terml-
mates Oh the 4th of March, ninety-four days, for
which each member would be entitled to S752,
as the sum of his per dism-making his compen-
saton, for both years or the whole term, $2,T92,
besides mileage.
Now let us see what these Honorable M. Cs.
have DONE BY the recent act they legisated
into their pockets the sum of $4,000 per annum,
or 1000 for the whole term, more than double
the amount for which they agreed to serve the
people under the old law, and in addition to this
fixed salary they hang on to the mileage! The act
takes effect from the beginning of the session, so
that the very men who made the law are Its
beneHciaries. 1t is not only prospective, but re-
Prospective, and the members of Congress who
passed the bill receive as the reward for their
votes the sum Of $4,000 instead Of 1912, for
which they had stipulated to perform the work
In other words, each one of them has, without
consultation with the other party TO the contract
put his hand into the peoples money drawers
and transferred therefrom TO his own pocket,
the trifling little sum Of SS,3OS.
Now, we ask every honest man, If that was
not swindling, ENLIGHTENMENT of the public funds
downright robbery, in the name OF common
sense, common honesty and plain arithmetic,
what was it? IfSs per day was too little; II
they could not afford to do nothing for such pay
as that why then it was their privilege to resign
their seats and 90 home to mauling rails or some
other honest avocation. But by what princl-
ple of ethics they find it consistent with fair and
honest dealing to take from the public treasury
more than twice as much as they had agreed to
work for we are somewhat at loss to divine.
In the principles of the Democratic platform,
which recognizes the right of those to take who
have the power, the outrageous transaction may
be justified, but by no code of morals, human or
divine, that we are acquainted with.
But who passed the bill2 The names of those
who voted for it will, perhaps, remain forever
unknown, as those engaged in the work were
shrewd enough not to take the yeaS and nays on
the question. We know, however, that the
measure was first introduced in the Senate by q
Democrat, in the House the amount of compen-
sation originally proposed, was increased ON the
motion of q Democrat, and our strict construc-
ton Democratic representatives from Virginia,
who are shocked at the bare idea of taking for
the people of Virginia their share OF the public
lands or the pecuniary proceeds thereof although
refusing to be active participants in the pecula-
ton, did not hesitate to take the money which
others had distracted from the pockets Of the
people and put it into their own. Consistent
gentlemen! How suddenly their constitutional
scruples vanish when they have their own inte-
rests to take care of, instead of the peoples.
That this act of the Congress of the United
States was unconstitutional is at least as clear as
the acts repeatedly passed giving away millions
ofacres of the public lands, cannot be question:
ed. The Constitution says;
s'No Senator or Representative shall, during
the time for which he was elected, be appointed
to any civil office under the authority of the u
nited States, which shall have been created, or
the emoluments whereof shall have been en-
creased during such time; and no person holding
any office under the United States, shall be q
member of either House during his continuance
in Office" re1 -..n .r|
Now, why were they prohibited from holding
any civil Office during the time for which they
were elected, the emoluments of which have been
increased. Plainly to prevent the temptation to
which they might be exposed, of voting for an
increased compensation for some station to
which they themselves aspired and expected to
reach And yet those very men found nothing in
the letter or the spirit of the Constitution to pro-
hibt them from increasing the emoluments Of an
Office that they actually held.
In addition to this the Constitution expressly
forbids an increase of the salary of the President
of the United States the evident design of
which prohibition is, to remove from him all UNI
due influences, from the hope of increased re-
ward, and prevent any sort of bargain, intrigue
and corruption with the law-making power
We presume however, that these honorable leg
islators, conceive that the trainers of the Const-
tuition would have inserted like provision in
regard to thein if they had not believed that the
representatives of the people would be above
the reach of ptiful pecuniary considerations
At least they seem so to consider themselves
and in purely patriotic spirit, help themselves
to as much public money as their avarice Graves
and their protligate living demands.
We say the spirit of the Constitution is against
any such exercise of power by the Congress of
the United States, and we are perfectly astound-
ed that Virginia Democrats should touch dime
of the filthy lucre. There might be some apollo
gy for poor John S, Carlisle, who probably needs
money, and is laboring to secure for the tax-rid-
den, grooming people of Virginia the money to
which she is Justly entitled from the public lands
but for the rest of them there is no apology.
We do not pretend, however, to defend any of