The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1873-05-03
3 RTCHMON ID,

the man IOT vice ffeSlQ0nG VINO nAO
30 recently 'sgrabbed" or 'tstolen"
"a, 900 from the treasury OF the
United States.
Now that the excitement Of the
campaign is over, is it the deliber-
ate opinion of the Journal that the
party should have ''rebuked" him
by refusing him q nomination be-
cause of that vote, and should have
defeated him at the polls? Do you
believe his act was dishonest or
dishonerable? After Gen. Schenck
had given the vote above stated, he
was twice elected to Congress; he
has since been of great service to
the country. as one of the negotia-
tors of the Treaty of Washington,
and is now serving acceptably as
Minister at the Court of St James.
Do you think he should have been
'ostracised, because, as a member of
the House, he voted to increase the
salary!
Senator Wade had acquired not
a little reputation as a man of hon
or and integrity. Do you think he
forfeited it all, and needs to be re
buked because of that vote? Are
you ready to denounce him as q
thief, agrabber, unworthy of further
confidence?
Do you think that the President
should proceed at once to remove
Attorney General Williams because
of his vote? Do you think that ex-
Senator Lane did dishonest or
dishonorable act when he voted as
above and took that $4,000. Speak
plainly on this subject. Do you
advise the Republican party never
again to trust these men? Do you
think it ought to purify itself by
proceeding in some formal way to
read such men out of the party, or
would you apply your rule to re-
cent acts, and protect others by
some sort of political statute of
limitations?
I might refer you to another case
of precisely similar character that
occurred at an earlier period in our
history, but as death has interposed
and prevents the "rebuking" or
reading out of such ''grabbers" as
Henry Clay it is perhaps now un
necessary. / presume you do not
intend that your "denunciation'
shall reach such as he.
Coming down to State affairs !
wish to know whether you propose
to apply your rule to members OF
the Legislature who voted to in.
crease their pay. When they were
elected it was five dollars per day.
They raised it to eight dollars pei
day. Is the latter sum too much
In your Judgment for the services o1
q man qualified to make laws for q
State with q population of near one
and three-quarters millions of IN
habitants!
We have vast interests now JUS
beginning to be developed. The,
involve questions of the graves
Importance, among them that o
transportation, in which every in
dustrial interest is involved. I
eight dollars per day is too mucl
for men competent to perform sucl
duties; you should not only say 81
but give the people your judgmen
as to what would be o proper com
pensation.
Do you regard all the men wh'
voted for it as grabbers, thieves
public plunderers, unworthy of trus
or confidence!
And do you believe that 81, 80,
per year, cutting off all stationer,
and mileage, is too much for ma,
who has the requisite ability ant
the industry to grapple with tn
questions necessary to be consider
ed in making laws regulating tn
diversified interests and bushes
relations of nation of about fort,
millions of peoples If you thin
so, please read the debate in th
Senate, especially the speeches 9
Senator Morton, Cameron, Logal
and Carpenter, and give your read
ers a synopsis of their views. Thei
testimony might aid your reader
in coming to a just conclusion.
Do you think that man ik
Senator Morton, whose services j
the Senate have elected the prais
of even his adversaries, should hav
: no more than meet his expenses
{ If you think he is entitled to a real
enable compensation, and tbs
81, 800 ID not unreasonable, can 20
3 give your readers any good reaso
why he should not have it for th
Forty Second Congress, in whic
he performed a vast amount of l.
r Dor, and rendered invaluable se,
. vice to the country; and will 20
inform your readers whether the1
| is, any other way to get it except b
D Congress voting it, And if $3.50
. is not too much in your judgmen
will you point out where the di
: ference is in principle, whether
is voted on the first or last day, {
q the seventeenth, or any other mont
I" of the Congress? If it had bee
8 voted on the first day of the Fort
Y Secon,l Congress, would it ha'
+ been wrongi If not, then does
. become wrong because the vote VI
q postponed until q later day in tn
K Congressa
i If You say that it should not
% increased because when elected Il
+ salary was $5, 600, and that made
. contract for the term, then I won