The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-01-30
PInnder in Congress.


The subject of the increase of congressman:
salaries TO $4,000 came up in the House incl
dentally last week. A faint attempt was made
! to suggest a review of that action, which was
| speedily hustled down. The Chairman of the
| Judiciary Committee, to which the question
| was referred, complacently observed that as
! Congress voted the increased compensation, it
would of course stand by it, and, therefore,
any action on the subject by that Committee
would appear to be useless. BY others, the
subject was turned into a joke, the point of
which was, that if it Is proposed to refund the
extra compensation, don't you wish you may
get il ~
We suppose we may, without giving oTense
express our convictions on the abstract subject
of stealing. We dlsclaim, of course, on such
delicate subject, all personal alluslons. But this
We say:-That when body which has access to
the public treasury Is elected to serve a given
term at a certain rate of ray, they have no
right, because they have access to the treasury,
TO help themselves to more. 1t they do, they
take from their employers that to which they
have no claim. There is in the city of New
York municipal body who are alleged to be
notorious public robb rs. They are commonly
reported TO be thieves and sWIndlers on a large
scale. An American buns with indignation to
hear it said that the foremost city of the CONT
nent Is in the hands OF men who would have
been disgrace to Sodom. What do these men
90? They simply help themselves from the
strong box, and they stuff their pockets from IL.
They rob the public.
Now we should like to know where the essen.
tlal difference is between such a body as we
have imagined and the municipality of New
York; Where is the difference in the principle
OF their action Each votes itself money from
the public treasury. Each helps itself to what
1t wants from an open public chest, because it
is open. Suppose we say each takes as much as
he dales Where, then, is the difference in the
Crlminaiity of the transaction?
But VINO shall say, if members Of Congress
raise their o Rn salary from $4,000 TO S50OO they
are to be Cassed with the infamous members of
the New York "RjnuY We say no such thing.
We make no such allegation. We make every
possible disclaimer. The member, of Congress
are gentlemen and honorable mon. We know
that by their titles. But will everybody be
charitable? The members of Congress wanted
more money They went up TO the public chest
III a body, and took it. That is the simple
fact The propriety of the action being ques
toned, the response to the suggestion is jOCu-
lar. Don't you wish you may get 1t back p is
substantially the reply. The Inuty Con-
grCSs has an honorable record, with one eXcep-
ton. The members took money to which they
were not entitled. This blot on their record has
caused many a true Republican TO exclaim,
"Out, damned spot!n There was perilous
conflict in the elections. Men swallowed their
regrets, and their indignatIons aud their con-
demnations Of this fact, choosing TO overlook
everything but the one main issue. They con.
sldel ed that patriotism demanded as much as
this. They left other things to be revie we'd at
other times. The increased compensation was
one OF them. There were plenty of men who
telt the act to be a foul stain upon the party to
which they belonged, and in whose glorious
record they claimed q personal share They
felt their own individual pride humbed by it,
Their banner was no longer clean. 1t had the smut
OF greed upon it. Theysull bore it aloft but they
ayerted their faces, and to the taunts of their
enemies they were silent. Now, when the sub
ject is alluded to in the popular branch OF Con-
gress, il Is met with a chuCkle:-'We have
taken the money. You think it should be re-
tunded. DON'T you wish you may Get it?' Even
the ring could not improve upon that style OF
! talk.
Now. what is the plain duty of Congress in
this matter of raising salaries? Shall Congress
exercise no power over the pay of Congress ?
Certainly But not over its own pay. 1t it be
sald that the salary of members of Congress is
insufficient let il be turned over TO proper
committee OF the body for investigation. 1t it
shall be determined that the compensation is
, inadequate, and should be increased, then let
the increase be applied to prospective service
TO future Congresses only. This is the only
honorable and manly proceeding. 1t is the only
way the thing can be done without sCandaliziug
the whole body. Such an example of heller
skelter grab for extra pay as was made BY the
members last session, such Sinking OF per-
sonal responsibility for a dirty act, such a
dodglng OF yeas and nays on the vote, such
attempts to retreat into the dark to AVOID cen
sure Tor an act that would not bear the light.
were burninP disgrace. If the present Con.
gTess is too mean to do anything but skulk on
the subject, let that which is TO assemble on the
4th Of March have the grace to enact promptly
that no future Congress shall raise their Own
pay. IL they will not do so much as that, wg
may some day have a Congress elected that may
conclude to take fifty thousand dollars yCaI
apiece cut the Treasury instead of five thou.
sand. On principle, the one act would be Just
as dCtensible as the other.