Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-03-18

L did not think that was right, and there
upon offered to the Senate this, to-wit, to |
add fifteen per cent to the pay of all the fe-
male employees who received 5000 or less
than 5000, and after discussing It, aided by
nv CO conferees, both of them, and especially
BY the efforts of my colleagues Gp the COM
mittee from Pennsylvania, Mr.. Randall
we met with determined and general re-
fusal on the part of the Senate.
Mr.. Dawes. On,whatlgrCanda vi
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts,. 1t was
this. that we put up these salaries of female
clerks so high they came up to- elerkships
and their places would be sought for by
members OK Congress for somebody who
was a male and who had a vote 10 cast for
them, which l think is the best srgumept,
in favor of female suffrage ever heard.
[Laughter.J -,,.,.- -.g
Mr.. Dawes. What was the argument
used? "a 81 oNt
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts. It was
said it would affect them ia this way: That
their places were desirable according to the
emoluments attached to them and the
higher you put the salary the moro pres
sure there would be for the places, and
| they the, efore said the moment you get
| this up you will gradually work the female
clerks out Of the Departments. That was
the argument, and the argument which sat
| isfied them.
Mr.. Hoar. 1t is the very argument used
| by my colleague Mr.. Dawes] IN opposi-
ton to raising these salaries of female clerks
year ago.
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts,. 1 cannot
have my time Irittered away.
Mr.. Dawes. l never supposed, If the
gentleman will allow me minute, it would
be deleterious to raise the wages of those
| who had the least, but it would do no harm
TO raise those who had The least.
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts,. l cannot
yield for Interruptions. If gentlemen were
to take my time to clear their own records,
would want ten hours, instead of small
fraction of sn hour. Laughter.]
That was the argument, and yielded to
TO that argument. And more than that, l
yielded ID the express statement ofthe Sen
ate that they would not yield; so that if
this is put in here the public business would
be blocked.
Mr.. Dawes. l want 10 put one more
question to my colleague, if he will allow
me.
Mr.. Butler of Massachusetts. yield to
the gentleman.
Mr.. Dawes. l wish to ask my colleague
if this is tie first time he ever heard that
statement made in conference committee?
Mr.. Butler, OF Massachusetts. 1t is not
the first time | have heard it made. But
when state / do not yield, adhere to my
statement, and give other gentlemen cred
it for the same tirmness.-
And there was another difficulty. 1t
was said, "here we are at a dead lock, one
or the other must give way; now this is an
innovation on the law, and the one that in
novates must give way-and that is the
House." And on that ground l gave way,
stating at the time that would join hands
with my colleagues on the committee on
the question of the fixing of these salaries
hereafter. And | desire to have time to do
that.
Now, why were not all these salaries
fixed? The Committee on the Judiciary
considered this question, because you sent
it to us, and we made report upon it, and
we tried TO get hearing in the House
when there was full time to discuss it, and
discuss everybody's salary. But under the
rules of the House we have not been called
this session, and could not report. When
ever we tried to report some gentleman
jumped up and objected. Then when l
asked to suspend the rules, and bring it up
for consideration, was voted down.
There was no other place where it was pos
sible to put this question, except where it
could be put under the rules of the House,
and that is why it is here to-day.
1t is said that this is an inauspicious time
to raise salaries. In my judgment it is a
most suspicious time. The presidential
election has taken place, determining the
policy of the country for four years, so that
no miserable demogogue can make any po-
litical capital out of it. Both sides of the
House are voting for 1t; and he is mean
man that objecs to it, and l am satisfied
he cannot fni men mean enough to re-
elect him. L put myself upon that prophe-
cy, and you will see how it comes out; and
il will not be great time till it is determ-
ined.
We have just had presidential election;
and do gentlemen reflect that if we refuse
to raise the Presidents salary at this time
it cannot be raised under the Constitution
for four years. -.r
air. Farms worth. Exactly.
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts,. It can now
be raised under the Constitution. It is no
use to say that we are doing on the Sd what
we cannot do on the 4th of Of March. The
President can sign bills to-day which he
could not do on the 4th after tn hour Of
noon.
Mr.. FaInsworth. He could if Congress
passed the bills, and was in session.
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts. But il
Congress is not in session he cannot.
There is time specified by the constitu.
ton during which an officer can do certain
constitutional duties, aud after that be can
not; and therefore the constitution has
stated that the President shall not sign an
increase of his own salary during the time
for which he was elected, aud that con-
| stitrtional provision is well understood, and
has been followed in various State Legisl a.
lures.
Mr.. FarnsworLb. | would like to inquire
of the gentleman, for be is a lawyer, what,
in his opinion, was the reason the fathers
put that provision in the constitution ?
Why was the restriction put in?
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts,. To pre-
vent the President from using his influence
and power to raise bis salary while he was
President.
Mr.. Farnswort. Is he not President
now?
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts. Yes, sir.
Mr.. Farnsworth. Is not the spirit of the
provision the same to-day as it will be the
day after tomorrow?
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts. If this
can be said when you have man in the
chair whom you have had confidence
enough to re-elect, it may as well be said
that it cannot be increased for anybody
else who may occupy the presidential chair
because he may be elected the next time,
and may expect to be elected, and may use
the same power which you are afraid of in
this case, if you are going to watch what is
called the spirit of the constitution in that
regard, and have another word or two 10
say as to this matter.
Now, then, am told that we promised
TO carry this government on with true econ
omy. So We did. What is the economy
we talked abouts Was it on the question
I of salaries? Was it on the question wheth-
: er this man should get little more salary,
or that man should get little more salary?
No; the economy that l promised on the
stump and which l mean to carry out so
far as am concerned, was that there should
be no more lands taken for any use except
the peoples use; that there should be no
more subsidies paid; that there shall be no
use Of the public money except for the pub
lie service; aud believe as firmly as l be-
lieve in my own existence that this is the
true measure of economy.
| Gentlemen OnnOse The measure hecaDsa