The New York herald., 1873-12-10
aemaeosue 40 not iawn for ,nrir, nor take 1t and

Mr.. LAWRENCE, trep.) OF Ohio. made speech In
the people, whose agents the members OF Congress
were. II Congress failed to wipe out the law the
omission would be visited with the continuous De
leat OF the republican party and tnat woniu De
calamity TO waich he tMr. Lawrencel would not
contribute.
Mr.. WILSON, (-ep.l or Ind, asked him whether he
(Mr. Lawrencel did not take $4,000 back pay in
1866.
Mr.. LAWRENCE tamid loud laughter all over the
Housel replied that ne did take what every other
member OF that Congress took. He added that the
salary fixed by the act OF 1866 had not outraged the
public Judgment and the public conscience as the
act OF 1878 mad done and that that fact furnished,
perhaps some reason why the members OF that
Congress had not returned the back pay.
Mr.. WILSON tried to get an opportunity 10 pnt
some further questions to Mr.. Lawrence, bat the
latter, amid much confusion and laughter, refused
TO yield Tor the purpose.
Mr.. KELLOGG, trep.) OF Conn.,, asked Mr.. Law
renee whether the members OF the Thirty ninth
Congress had not taken double mileage for them
selves and reduced II onc-half as 10 iuture Con-
crosses.
Mr.. LAWRENCE replied that he did no, recollect
precisely as to that G-aughterl
MT. RANDALL, OF Pa, asked nm whether ne had
Mr.. LAWRENCE replied that he had, but that he
had returned the dlnercnce 10 the Treasury.
Mr.. KENDALL. ldem.) OF New, opposed the re-
peal. While he had the utmost respect or the
VIII OF the people, when fairly expressed, he made
clear distinction between popular Will and popu-
lar clam0r. lie claimed to be able to show that
the salary, as 1t now stood, was less than the old,
especially in the case OF the members from the
fdT west, anu Ue uuueTLOOk 10 uO 50 Dy sHONluS
that they lost by the abrogation OF mileage, the
repeal OF the ranking privilege and the with
drawal OF allowances Tor stationery and newspa-
pers. He WIS not here TO attempt to Gciy the
popular will, but he repeated that he drew wide
distinction between the popular Will, fairly ex.
pressed, and popular clanior, led by demagogues
and by a c0frupl and partisan press.
MIR. NEGLEY, irep) OF Ia, made some remarks
in alIusion to what he called the extreme SEN
sltiveness OF the gentleman from New York tMr.
C0X). He tMr. Negley) mad seen III the public
papers that tnat gentleman had drawn his back
cause they were orphans, and tnat when the tele-
graph announced that all that was mortal OF James
Brooks would soon pass over the portals OF time
and care he (Mr. Cox had returned the money TO
the Treasury. lie had not kept II all summer, but
he had kept t from the 10th OF March TO the 30th OF
April. He tMr. Negiey) did not question the
gentleman's motives or his right-he mad simply
referred To the facts.
Mr.. Cox--Does the gentleman arraign my state.
mentY i have stated that returned the money to
the Treasury two weeks before Mr.. Brooks death.
Mr. NEGLEY-I have not stated otherwise.
would not mlsfepresent the gentleman. having a
proper regard 10r my own sell respect and for his
feelings; but the gentleman appears on this floor
immediately on the commencement OF this session
as the conspicuous figure OF group OF gentle.
their associates for committing great
wrong against the public treasury and public sen.
timent, and desire TO refer to the gentlcman's
own acts IN order to put him in the position in
which he has put himself. From June to Novem-
not elected member TIL the 5tn Of November. :
MI. Cox-ls the gentleman aware OF the law on
the subject? a#
Mr.. NEGLEy-l am aware of the law and so is the
Mr.. Cox-The law Is express in regard to It Is
the gentleman aware OF the law.
Mr.. NEGLEY-l am aware OF 1t.
Mr.. COX-Let us see what 1T is.
Mr. NEGLEY-lf the gentleman will permit me- /
will be more lndulgent to him than he has been to
me. The gentleman has only served nine days In
this Congress, and yet has drawn over $4,000 II
tnat is not drawing back pay appeal to the COM
Mr.. COx-Has the gentleman served any longer
in this House than / have? / was sworn III the
same day as he.
Mr.. NEGLEY-But am not showing such dis
gushing amount OF virtue as the gentleman, and,
consequently am not here making my own de-
tense. Iie objection which have had to this
whole proceeding was the introduction OF this bill
and the indecent haste OF the gentleman to bring
IL M before aos tne country % while % our industries
finances demand immediate legislation. l have
had no intention TO be personal IN tnis matter.
simply alluoed to the statement In the newspapers
not with any intention Of arragning the gentle
man (Mr. cox before the House on question
which he had a perfect right to act on according
To ms best Judgment. But the gentleman appears
here as the Judge advocate OF the people. He ar
ralpns his associates ior committing great crime
the Treasury. When he makes that statement l
desire the House and the country to under
stand exactly The part which he mas played
II he s So styles Ias' it. W II this this asT measure Re
had been introduced in the interest OF economy it
would have commanded my vote and my earnest
support II 1t had been introduced out OF respect
TO public opinion by the gentlemen who had the
m9sr ra M TO mean those Who mad
give IT my support; but, on the contrary, it has
been introduced by number OF gentlemen who
have just escaped from the fOllies OF their youth
and who come here for the purpose OF earning
some new reputation. Uaughtero
Mr.. WILSON, OF Indiana. said 1t was not his pur-
pose to argue against the repeal OF the Salary BILL
nor to argue that the salary not fixed too
high, but he desired TO show that there was
nothing in the action unworthy or dishonest: that
man might vote Tor 1t and still be the peer in in
tegrlty and conscience OF all the multitude of his
detract0rs He proceeded to refer to preccdents
on the subject, naming many OF the popular and
distinguished men VINO voted for like measures,
and received the benefits OF them, and he repeated
to Mr.. Lawrence, OF Ohio, the question whether he
had not drawn the back pay voted by Congress in
1866
Mr. LAWRENCE replied that every member OF that
Congress, except the members ON West Virginia,
had taken the pay nxed by the act OF 1866. He
condemned the Salary act or March 8, 1879, not so
much because Of the hack pay. as because both the
back pay and the 'front.' pay were too nigh.
Mr. WILSON, OF Indiana reminded Mr.. Lawrence
that he had condemned 1t while ago because il
Mr. LAWRENCE il was back pay too
much in amount. (Laughter.)
Mr. DAWES, OF Mass.-i want the gentleman from
Ohio fMr. Lawrence) to tell US how much back pay
be would go Tor. loud laughter.) He says tnat
in 1865 he took his back pay because every member
oi Congress did so He returns the increase OF pay
because, he says, the people condemn it. SO he
goes with the multitude, whatever way the multi.
tude goes. loud laughter at the expense OF Mr..
MIR. LAWRENCE desired to make rejoinder; but
Mr.. Wilson, who had the door, declined to yield to
him.
Mr. PARSONS (rep.l OF Ohio, hoped his colleague
(Mr. Lawrence) would be allowed TO answer, be-
cause he needed very much to put himself right.
(Laughter)
Mr. LAWRENCE retorted that his colleague would
have an opportunity to answer some inquiries.
Mr. PARSONS declared himself ready to answer
any inquiries.
Mr.. LAMIsoN, (den.) OF Ohio, criticised the posi-
tion Of his colleague (Mr. Lawrence), and ridicued
him for his assumption OF superior virtue in con-
nection with the salary question. The same degree
OF interest, he declared, which modern ages have
1elt in regard to the features OF Homer would
be felt by future ages in regard to those
OF the famous author OF the report
OF the select committee on the New York election
frauds. (Laugnter.) He asserted that the popular
clamor against the Increased Salary bill was got
up mainly by demagogues and interested politi-
clans that he had met his constituents and argued
the question to their entire satisfaction, and that
he had no fear OF his ability to convince them again
that his position was correct.
Mr. STARKwEArHER, (rep.) Of Conn.,, advocated
the bill reported BY the select committee. He, too
drew distinction between the expression or the
popular will and the public camor got up by the