The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1873-06-28

sudden requirement of wealth. The only
standard which should govern Is nothing
less than the purity and elevation Of the
service; and whatever Is most likely to
conducc to this end, should be conceded
without reluctance.
My opinions may have been wrong
some able and spotlcss men have differed
with mc-but nevertheless have always,
as is well known been constrained to OPP
pose any increase of the pay Of members,
and mainly on two grounds First. that
IL was departure from the simplicity of
the republican character of our institutions, !
and second, that the office should he SO |
so far esteemed, at least to he considered |
and treated rs in itself some reward, as n |
title Of honor; and, If some pecuniary |
sacrifice should he inevitably incurred !
through its acceptance, that even then |
men of spirit and worth should still have |
some ambition for the service. In other
words, that il should not be merely COM |
mercial transaction, measured as between
the member and his country by money
| alone but one leaving some room for duty
and the legitimate honors of the station.
With these views | hope have been
able to consider the question as one that
mainly concerned the welfare of our coun-
try, and with as little reference to myself
as might be expected from the average of
mankind.
The naked question of the increase of
Congressional salaries, is one of expediency
and sound policy, and however determin-
ed, can be in no sense a crime, though 1t
may be so reprchcnsible a blundcr as to
make it, according to the phrase of Fouche,
''worse than a crime In this instance,
though il is not my business to defend the
act, 1t is fair to say, that it was claimed by
the advocates of the measure to be right on
account of the high cost of living at Wash
ington, and also on account of the future
surrender of a considerable sum for mile
age, stationery, newspapers and postage
the latter being an incompatible and I'M
known quantity. Yet it appeared to me
wholly wrong in substance, excessive in
amount, exceedingly inopportunc, and,
though sustained by a majority of demo-
Gratis likely to be detrimental to the party
in power 1t was more than the members
and the people expected when they were
elected. Therefore l did what | thought
reasonable to defeat the first amendment
and to defeat the report of the committee
of conference. and finally to defeat the
bill upon which the measure had been en-
grated. 1t is to be regretted that the
minority with whom | co-operatcd had
, not better success, but the odds were too
great.
But | do not understand that ! am
charged with dereliction of duty while the
, measure was pending. 1t is my awkward
manner of disposng of the "back pay,
, that is condemned BY no greediness or
> fault of mine, the ''back pay" was law
!. fully made my property, thereafter to be
kept or disposed of by me alone. although
at every step | had voted against it. | re-
ceipted for it and procured and transmitted
:. to the Treasurer of the State the L. $.
" | draft for tho amount gtotiur n him at ihc
same time that
U ''If a majority of the members had left
:, this money in the Treasury, | should have
! followed their example, but as they have
not, the people of Vermont will have tc
!, pay their proportionatc part of the whole
u !, and it seems to me only just to place my
u share where to some extent it will tend tc
= diminish the taxes of the State"
y Let lis see whether this will stand thu
= test of strict equity and justice or not, and
u whether it imposes any stigma upon my
Judgment or character
+ Some shelter might be found under very
distinguished names, outside of the State
of those who have personally expressed t.
. me in the fullest manner their approval o.
l. my course but | do not seek to shirk from
responsibility for acts exclusively my own
Senators, it is true, are Senators of the ma
ton, and as such accountable for their of
fetal conduct but the question of theii
back pay" is personal matter, witt
e the IacU as ,o :" ntcs~."n. concern. bevont
J, squarely voted for it or against it. Tha
!, closes their nat1onal accountability. 1t
II reception and final disposal concerns onl,
y themselves and their immediate constitli
a ency. The nation has no recognizable
i claim to call Senators to account for thei
n acts, not.being immoral, las private citizens
J. or outside of their functions as senators
u AS senator no unfathfulness to duty ha:
been charged, and as a citizen of Vernon
| must still be permitted to think that
have not fallen below my duty to the State
OF which there is so much reason TO be-
). proud, nor sacrificed in any respect per
g sonal honor.
AT the outset it was apparent that all
those in Congress- Especially the outgoing
members) who voted for back pay" would
necessarily accept of it, and it was soon
equally apparent that a majority of those
who voted against it would find no over
whelming reasons to decline its advantages.
G 1t is not improbable that three-fourths
G of the whole sum appropriated has
f been or will be forever withdrawn from
f the Treasury The people of each State
4 will contribute their full proportion of all
$ national taxes whether Senators and Re
representatives. of the State draw their share
, OF this money from the treasury or not. If
9 the Senators of one State give their ''back
pay to the United States Treasury, while
a majority of other Senators do not, then
that State, by its taxes and the contribu-
tons OF its Senators, pays twice the
amount OF its equitable share, and makes a
donation to all the States, including those
whose Senators have not restored the re-
3 spective amounts to the national treasury,
: as much as to their own State. Manifest
! ly this cannot be equitable. 1t is putting
the people of State against whose Sena-
tors there is no complaint, not merely on
level but at disadvantage with those
! whose Senators occupy the other side of
the question and who may have been the
chief authors of the whole cause of COM
plant. The people of Virginia may think
Their Senators fairly merit all they received.
J II so, why should Vermont, or its Senators
be called upon for anything by Virginia {?
Who knows whether Georgia, North Caro-
lima, Nebraska, Illinois and other States.
approve of the action of their Senators or
not? Their Senators claim that they do.
Even If they do not, would it not be enough
for those States to ask for refunding
from their own Senators before they de-
mand anything from Vermont The un
likelihood of securing anything at home is
not an excuse for importantly elsewhere.
Is there anything in the character of SER
vice rendered which should induce Yer
mont Senators to rate themselves below the
value accorded by the people of other
States to their Senators? These questions
point to the maintenance of equality at
Washington, without reference to position
at home, and State pride might be ex-
pected at least to answer them in the mega
tive.
II the idea is tenablo for Senators, who
neither seek personal profit or favor by
back pay, to restore it to the pockets of
the taxpayers, they ought certainly to be
privileged to look over the whole ground
and, studying who are most entitled to con-
sderation, render justice between the peo-
PIE of their own State and the nation.