New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-06-29


these men az thieves or the receivers OF
etolen money. In 1866 the delegation from
Wisconsin in the House consisted OF 4. 4.
Wasbburn. /. c. Sloan. Philetus Sawyer
and Walter d. Mclndoe. Mr.. Washburn
voted for the bill: Philetus Sawyer against
n: Sloan and McInGoe did not vote. All
-four received the back pay voted by .he
bill Is there any man here tonight willing
20 brand Governor Washburn as a thief
Willing to declare that Sloan, Mclnuoe ana
Sawyer were :he receivers OF stolen money
] the names above mentioned are not ches-
sshed and balloved in American history.
Npop what names rest the halo OF American
glory! The men who have stood by prlr-
Ciple: the men Of both parties who are
AMOS, esteemed. and whose men cries are
most cherished, are found in this list Of
men who received back pay. Therefore. 20
brand the receiving of back pay as the re,
ceiving Of stolen money, Is to brand
1hose in whom we glory az thieves.
j; Hale and Bell. Sumner and Wilson.
Foo,e and Co,amer, Fish and Seward.
Stockton and Wright, Bayard and Clay.
con. Thompson and Crittenden, Jones anC
Bell, Wade. Pugh and Sherman. Douglas.
Trumbul! and Yates, Hamlin. Fessenden
and Morrill,. Cass and Stuart. kusk and
Houston. Dodge and Durkee. Lane Az:
Hendricks. Davis and Guthrie, Morrill, ar..
Fessenden. johnson and Creswell. Wright
and Stockton. Harris and Morgan, Wade
ard Sherman, Nesmith and Williams, Al.
:hony and Spyague, Edmunds and Poland.
lack Chandler and Jake Howard, Ramsay
and Norton and T. y. Howe are all thieves
or the receivers Of stolen money, then he
who steals Or receives stolen money must
be admitted 10 be in most excellent con-.
pauy: and if driven 20 make my election l
should prefer 10 be classed with those.
rather than with their present accusers.
Ihi. list of those heretofore supposed 70
deserve well of their country, and to have
added to its glory, but who are now brand
cd as thieves, or the receivers OF stolen
money, might be increased by referring TO
the House OF Representatives. Tor these two
wears, which have not done, except to the
members from our own State. All the melE-
bers of the House in 1886 and lStb received
their back pay except one, who, II Is sait,
went home to his constituents and ran Tor
reelection, principally upon tie ground OF
his merit in refusing back pay. He was
Aefeated and it is said afterward returned
70 Washington and attempted to draw his
back pay, but found that he was too late.
am very happy to have my colleagues
Judge HOwe) permission to say to you TO-
night that although he thought it was net
best to pass the increased salary bill at the
last session, and, therefore, voted against
il; vet that he believes $500 is not above a
fair CONDENSATION for his services; that lie
has drawn the money, and sees no reason
for returning it. Although Judge Howe
voted against the bill and voted for it, the
only difference OF opinion between us was
that he thought that the last session was
not favorable time to do right; believed,
Is have always believed, that it was right
~ do right at any time, and always.
But upon what principle, if 5000 be no
more than fair compensation for the ser
vices OF Senator or Representative IN Con
gress, which is generally conceded, and
Il. IN Qf n
justice OF equity can the people deny that
CONDENSATION to the Forty second Con
gress! 1t has been said, know, that their
services were rendered upon q con
tract. have tried to show that proposition
ansound. But cOnceding Its sOunCness,
euppose you had hired man to labor for
YOU through the summer, at SD per
month, but at the expiration of his term OF
service, YOU were perfectly satisfied his
services had been worth $lj per month.
True. in such q case you could not be con-
PEELED by . court to pay more than the
stipulated compensation. But could you
- an honest man turn him from your
farm with less than what you be.
lieved his services had been fairly
worth! Could you take advantage of his
contract TO do him injustice, and still pre-
serve your self respect. Could you do SO
and say that you had done unto him as
you would wish him to do you under sim:-
lar circumstances! Suppose you can CON-
pei man to labor for yoI at less than a
fair compensation tor his services, Is u
honest 70 do SO!
The STAKEHOLDER Of the South did nothing
more. He had the power to compel his
elave 70 work without compensation; the
law of the State gave him that power. He
exercised it, and enjoyed the fruit OF an
compensated toll. The world denounced i
es . wickednees. How in principle these
eyro cosas differ oycanf that in one case .he
power to do wrong was conferred by law
and the other BY contract. leave to cas--
8ts to settle.
That portion Of tho press now employed
IN attempting 70 convince people that those
who supported the salary bill last winter
sre thieves, are parading the letters OF Sen
stor Bayard Vice President Wilson, Gen
eral Farnsworth, ClarksOn N. Potter and
others in confirmation of their theory.
Clarkson N. Potter was, / believe. the
first member of Congress who turned Oh,
to be too virtuous to receive his back lav.
He is therefore entitled 10 conspicuous
mention. ClarksOn N. Potter is one Of tie
wealthy men of New York. Three or !ouC
thousand dollars with him would not make
Q ripple on his bank account. He voted
for this bill: the press raised howl. ana
he squatted. He wrote letter donating
his back pay to the government OF course.
his letter was not intended for publication.
d
manded that in giving aims the left hand
shall not know what the right hand does.
But the press gets everything. They got
potters letter.
Did Senator Bayard really intend to give
the support of his example and opinion to
principle which fixes upon the brow OF
his aged father the brand of "thief ~ Did
Senator Wilson intend to declare that be
was thief in 1856 and 1866. when he DO: b
voted for and received back paw
Why is it that men who voted for and r..
ceived back pay in 1856 and and in is'
now refuse to do the same thing = / ans~e,
that the Credit Mobilier investigation 81
last winter SO diseased the public mip'
and produced such public morality tn;
things which are perfectly right are r.
garded as wrong; and these men lack th'
nerve to face storm even IN defense OF
principle Henry Wilson and General Farms
worth and others who voted for back pay
in former years. and received 1t from tn
treasury are now claiming popular apPro
baton for not doing precisely what the.
had done before. If it is larceny or a Jesse
wrong to receive back pay Tor services
in the Forty-secOnd Congress, which thes'
meu admit by refusing it, then !: was as
ceny or a lesser wrong for the same men 4
receive back pay in 1860. 90,
Washington left the impress OF his cha1
Acter upon his own and succeeding genera
tions. Jefferson, Madison. Hamilton an
others gave an impulse to publc thongn
and fixed standard of public virtue nn
der which we have grown 10 be q srea
and happy people. But II was ieis 10
Cakes Ames to fit the standard OF publ
yirtue clean out of mortal reach and clea
out of human sight. Things which, We've
In +bo I,obt of our Sayiour's teachings an