Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1873-10-03

lard is one of them-who think that the
salary of Representative should be equal
to that of the President. The people gen
orally, however, we are safe in saying, do
not look at the matter just in that light, and
it is. we venture to say, one of the least of
their present troubles that the pay of the
chief ma gistratc and that ofour national leg
islators are not more nearly on an equality
The first fixed sum enacted as the sal
airy Of members of Congress. was 81 800.
That was about onc-SerenfeeRM of the
Presidents salary. 1t was exceedingly
unpopular with the country and lasted but
a single Congress, the next one restoring
the pay to the old Fer diem. The yearly
aggregate of this varied, ofeourse, with the
length of the sessions; but for twenty or
thirty years it could not have averaged
over thirteen hundred dollars a year,
or about one-twentieth Of the salary OF the
President. The country was apparently
very well suited with this proportion. But
the ratio did not remain at that point.
The Congressman, having the power to raise
their own pay, raised it again and again,
while the Presidents salary remained the
same In 1856, the salary Of member OF
Congress was made 50 900, or little more
than one-eiqlih of the President :. In 1866,
it was made s. 900, or one.ff1h of the Pres
dents. 1t is now about ones erenth,- NOT
" onc-tenth of the Presidents. These
comparisons are not fundamentally exact,
as we have discarded the items Of mileage
on the one side. and the rent Of the Exc
cutiye Mansion on the other. But they are
exact enough for all practical purposes.
Now, then, If seventeenth of the Presi-
dents salary was enough for Congress
man in old times, a screnth is now too much
too much for those who have it to pay, if
not for those who receive it. Moreover, If
it was proper that the pay of member
should increase with the cost of living, it is
hard to see why the Presidents pay should
not also increase for the same reason. If
twenty-five thousand dollars was no more
than a reasonable salary for the chief magis-
trate, in 1893, then i; is too little in 1873.
Probably one hundred thousand goes
little further now than twenty-five thousand
did in the days of George Washington.
II the President had been content with
his salary, it would have been well enough
to leave it As it was If not content, then
49,. Io1-,,-o +l,o ,,o,,,1, a., lou oC III tho
facts Of the case, are willing that it should
be larger than it has been. 1t is now but
about a third of the sum that England pays
to the second son Of Queen Victoria, and
what is a better argument, for we would
not pattern our Republican salaries on the
scale of princely emoluments abroad-it is
not as great now, in view of the worth Of
money and the growth of our country. as
the President salary was fifty years ago.
Many private citizen now spends fifty
a year, without charge of extrava-
gance or ostentation. The people, if we IN
derstand their temper, do not desire to
scrimp the head of the nation. They arc
willing he should have enough to enable |
him to sustain handsomely the expenses Of !
his family and his position, and have some !
thing over when he retireS They also |
think their representatives should have been
content with $1,000 year. though it is
but a tenth Of the Presidents salary: and |
We fail to see any flaw in the logic 10y which |
they reach these conclusions.