The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1873-03-01

| required 70 attend to the public busi'
ness.
Mr.. Cox, OF N. Y, desired TO put it
his protest against increasing his oN
salary by bis own vote. He did moi
think it seemly for this House to vote
money IN it's own pocket itthey did ths
people would not send them back.
Mr.. Banks, OF Mass, said it was the
duty OF every Congress to fix Its owl
pay, and no Congress could fix the pay
OF q succeeding one, and they should
fix it at a price that was just; it was no
for the interest OF the country tha'
members should come here and stay fol
two years, ,uusccompanled by their iami'
lies.
Mr.. Farnsworth, OF Illinois, thought
little credit was due the gentleman
from California, for he had been the
fret to try 40 amendment touching the
salary OF the President, aud knew IT
was extended TO evsde it by making II
take effect alter the 4th Of March. The
same President had to slgn the Bill, and
any President who would sign a bill
Dcreasing his own salary ought to be
I'M peached. He claimed there was q
salary ring with the President at the
head OF it, with the cabinet. Judges and
mem bers all in it, and they all knew
when they took Office, what the salary
was, asd should be content with it.
Mr.. Stevenson, Of Ohio, opposed the
proposition to increase the salaries o.
mem bers, and said he was Satisfied
with his salary and did not think il
should be increased.
Mr.. Dickey, o. Pennsylvania, Did
you speak for yourstl; on that point
Mr.. Stevenson said he would speak
Tor bimsel, aud TOR Mr. DIckey and
other members also.
Mr.. Dickey said il Mr.. Stevenson
did not think he was worth more tnan
5000, be could vote against an IN.
Crease.
Mr. Stevenson suggested in return
that Mr.. Dickey received more per an
mum as Congressman that he had evei
received iu his lite in bis business.
This gave rise to very amusing
dialogue between Messrs. DI,key and
Stevenson as 10 their gains In business
pursuits. The latter said he had made
as high as $4,000 for one fee snd be
doubled whether Mr.. Dickey ever made
that amount in a year
Mr.. Stevenson said they had bar,
gained for IS 900 and il WAS shameful
to attempt TO increase their own pay.
Pending the consideration OF the lie
gislative appropriation bill when the
amendment was reached iu relation tc
the payment OF judgments oil the
Court OF CLAIMS the amendment known
as the Morrell amendment which re
quires proof OF loyaltybetore Judgments
can be paid excited good deal OF dis
cusson.
Mr.. Beck, of Georgia. and Young o.
Georgia, opposed it, Tne latter said ii
had been very properly characterized a.
very immoral amendment, and II
should be so designated, instead OF
Morrill, amendment.
Mr.. SheIlabergrr, OF Ohio, opposed
the amendment. He argned that Con
gress should not pass law to prevent
the payment Of judgments gwen by a
court OF last resort; il the question o'
loyalty or disloyalty was to enter into
this matter, Congress should provide
that the court should not grant Judg-
ment until after the PROOF OF loyalty, but
after Judgment had teen given, It was
wrong to LAY it should not be paid nntll
after a special appropriation by Com
gress.
Mr.. Hale. of Maine, argued that the
amendment was proper one, because
there were still many men in the South
who were represented and whose securl'
ty should not be allowed.
Mr.. Garfield, OF Ohio, said on this
amendment the Committee on appro-
pristions were divided, and the majority
had recommended non-concurrence to
this amendment oil the Senate,
If Congress wanted TO declare that
none OF the claims should be paid, let
it say 80 at once and save the court the
trouble Of passing upon the claims
IA said the practical effect OF the
an leDdment was to make the Congress
of the United States Court Of Appeals
fro m the judgments Of the courts, and
if that principle were once established,
the q there would be an end OF the in-
dependence OF the Judiciary.
The 93i amendment, relating to with
holding moneys due railroads Tor trans
ports,ion and freight to reimburse the
government for interest on Bonds was
reached.
Mr.. Holman, OF Indiaua, moved to
strike out all that portion OF the Senate
amendment permitting roads to brir &
suit in the court ofclaims, TO receive the
amount withheld. The authority to
withhold was iouni in the right reser-
we'd in the act OF 1864. The amend
ment was rejected.
Mr.. Holman made the point OF Or
der that under the rules no member
could vote upon measure in which he
was individually and particularly inter
ested.
The Cbair-Dawes-ruled that it
was a question for the conscience Of
each individual member.
Mr.. Holman insisted that Mr.. Hooper,
OF Massachusetts,, had votei and that
the rec Jrd of the House showed he was
directly interested.
The Chair ruled that it was a ques-
ton of fact which the Chair IVES not
called on to decide
Mr.. HOLMAN, insisted upon the with
drawal Of Hooper's vote.
Mr. Garfield moved that the Com
mittee arse and report the point to the
House. Agreed to. The case being
presented to the House the Speaker
r,Ia1 n tho memher uas directIv in