The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1873-08-15
THE DEMOCRACY AND THE Rack
PAY STEAL.

THE DEMOCRACY AND THE Rack
PAY STEAL.
The efforts of the Democratic pa
pers TO throw the blame of what |
is denominated the "back pay STEAL"
on the Republican party is not meet
ing with much success. We believe |
the authorship of the measure be-
longs to that eminent Democratic |
leader, Dan. W. VOORHEES,. IT Is
true that some of the Republican
leaders were active in securing its
passage, bnt we believe they will
everywhere be repudiated by the
Republican party, as they have al
ready been by the Republican press,
and by conventions wherever they
have been held.
The principle argument of the
Democrats is that they were in the
minority, and consequently were
powerless. In speaking of minor
ity In this country it is usual to con-
vey an impression that as q part of
the body polite It ia practically
without power, and therefore ex-
empt from responsibility for the err
rOrs that creep into legislation. In
the abstract this would seem TO be
true enough, but in fact thu impress
sion IS decidedly erroneous. 4 mi
nority party may, aud very often
does, drop into a balance of power.
And this was the condition of the
Democrats In Congress when this
shack pay" steal was pending.
The rule is that the dominant par
ty shall be held responsible for all
measures unwise or impolitic; and
this rule, though it cannot be made
absolute, is probably as fair as any
political rule can we'll be. 1t is q
rule insisted upon by every party
in minority. And as upon its face
1t appears entirely fair and just, 1t
constitutes at once a check upon
majorities and q powerful weapon
In political warfare
But there are occasions in which
the rule docs violence to the facts,
and raleases a mischievous and un-
scrupulous minority from the re-
sponsibility that clearly lies at its
door. The law increasing the COM
pensation of Congressman Is a case
in point. One who reads only the
Democratic journals must arrive at
the conclusion that the Republican
majority in Congress is entirely re-
sponsible for that act. The stldied
effort of the Democratic press to
shoulder of all responsibility from
the Democratic minority goes to
create misapprehension of the facts
with q ceFtain class Of citizens. No
Democratic paper has had the fair
ness to lay the facts before its Fead-
ers, and when the facts are fully set
forth the reason for this reticence
becomes obvious. Two hundred
and flfty-eight members and Sem
ators voted on the passage of the
bill. OF this number one hundred
and tifty-six were Republicans and
one hundred and two Democrats.
OF the whole number of Republi-
cans voting seventy -four voted for
the bill, and eighty-two voted
against it. This shows q majority
of eight OF the dominant party
against increased compensation.
OF the whole number of Democrats
voting, sixty.One voted in favor of
the bill and forty-one voted against
it. This shows majority of twenty
of the minority party for increased
compensation. The bill therefore
carried by the slender majority of
twelve in total vote of two hun
bred and Atty eight.
Now, from this exhibit it will APP
pear that had thirteen of the sixty
one Democrats voting for the bill,
united with the eighty-two RepUb-
licans voting against It, the measure
could not have become law. Here
was n first-rate opportunity for the
virtuous minority TO become n bal
ance of power, and SO have defeated
what is now denounced by the mi
nOrity press as flagi.ious robbery
of the Treasury. The minority was
entirely equal TO the work of de-
feating the measure, and it did not
do it. On the contrary, in a strictly
party sense it was, as a conservative
minority. the power that vitalized
the measure. A large majority of
its working strength voted for the
bill, and small majority of the
Republican members voted against
it. If IL be asked why the action of
the Republjeaps voting for the bill
is not equally open TO criticism, the
answer Is that the Republican ma
iority Is on the defense in this mat
ter, and the Democratic minority
stands in the place of the accuseP
aud IL it can be shown that the mi
nority party was able. if so minded,
to defeat the will Of the majority
party. aud refused to defeat that
will, then the positions of the par
ties are changed, and the derelict
plaintiff must take his place in the
dock. The facts show that The ac-
cuser complains of his own wrong:
aud the charge, so far as il affects
the Repub!ica1 party, falls to the