The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1859-09-06

H3% The Nadesboro' Argus is somewhat exercised
because exposed its unfair attempt to make the i'm
preston that Mr. Craige received annual salary,
member of Congress, which averaged $40 per day It
replies at length to show how the bill to increase the
pay of members originated, &C. We said nothing about
how the bill originated Who introduced tive mere
objected to the Misrepresentation of the Argus that
the per diem forty dollars, and we stated
that the democratic members from this State voted
against the increased pay while the Opposition
bers from North Carolina refused neglected to vote
On referring to the yeas and nays, we find that we
should have qualified the latter part of the above SEN
tence by stating that Mr. Puryear, wing, also voted
against it. But while the record shows that all the
democratic members together with Mr. Puryear, from
this State, voted against the BILL it ase shows that
R. T. Paine and Edwin G. Reade wings refused to vote
for against it, found it convenient to be absent
when the vote was taken.
The Argus in order to relieve itself from the dilemma
in which we placed it, says:
at is not the pay of any single member of Congress
to which object 1t is not the pay of members, as
appears upon the face of the bill giving to them So 900
each session, to which object, much to the
innumerabe e1trds in addition to this sum, which make
the pay of each much than 5000 per session.
Now let if the above will compare with what
the Argus said before the election. We quote from
that paper of July 2sth, follows.
"Voters, Burton Craige, some three years ago, re-
ceived eight dollars dug for representing (misrepre
sentng would be a better word) you in Congress! Was
he satisfied? He gets FORTY dollars doy!!!"
Does this show that the Argus tried produce
the impression that Craiges regular pay $40 per
day? and does it not FORTH in the strongest light
objection the pay instead of the extras? 1t said
nothing about the 'ertras" before the election. 1t SIM
ply said that three years ago he receved eight dollars
day." and now he gets forty dollars day. This
proves conclusivey that the Argus wanted make its
readers believe that the pay raised from eight dol
lars to forty dollars. 1t to this unfarness that
objected. When the pay SIS day, the 'extras"
little than at present, for by the COM
cept those ordered to be printed by the public printer
So that, if the Argus only objects the extras, it
says in the first extract make above, it ought to
favor the mode of compensation in preference to
the DID, and not attempt prejudice the people against
Mr. Craige for the passage of bill against which he
it oppose the reelection Of Gilmer and Vance for
receiving said "extras y?
The black republicans and southern know nothings
constituting the opposon) had the ascendancy in the
House when the bill increase the pay passed.
and the Argus had better hurl of its anathemas
against them for voting it down, instead of mis-
representing those who did vote against the bill.
The Argus may spin out it's articles in reply, and
Squrm and twist much it pleases, but it
excuse itself for endeavoring make unfair and
wrong impression.