Knoxville weekly chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1875, 1873-10-22
JUDGE BUTLER SPEAKS AT GREENE.
VILE.
He Defends His Vote on the Salary In
crease and Explains How the Bill Passed.


GREENEvILLE, Tuesday, Oct. II, 1878.
Special Correspondence of the Chronclel
According to previous announcement,
Hon. r. r. Butler addressed p large and
enthusiastic cCncourse of people here to-
day, vindicatng his Congressional course,
and repelling the odious charge brought
by unprincipled, designing demagogues.
a synopsis of his remarks may not be I'm
interesting to your many readers.
After thanking his constituents for the
confidence reposed in him during the past
four years, he remarked: II have been
assailed frequently, in my district, for Civ
ing certain vote in Congress. Having
been charged with every oftense, almost
in the catalogue of crimes, l thought i
had passed the RubicOn, and would be
permitted to spend one vacation quietly at
home with my family. / come to-day to
explain to you my course of action in the
last Congress- ......... ...
A great deal has been said about the
salary grab" voted for the law. did
so conscentiously. l believed was right,
/ felt was right. If l committed an err
ror twas an error of judgment and not of
intention-had L given vote to increase
your taxes--to take q farthing out of your
pockets would not murmur ut the anim-
adversion heaped upon me, for L would
feel that it was deserving. The people are
notungrateful; they are willing to dojustice
TO public servant, but INSCRIPTIONS Con-
gressional aspirants are making a great
noise over the matter-trying to infiame
the discordant elements of the populace.
When our government was formed, the
salary of the President was fixed at $685.
000 with population ofthree million peo-
pie, which continued up to the 18th of last
March. Now we have n population of
forty millions. The Presidenttold his friends
they were going to make beggars out of
his family. The committee appointed by
Congress to investigate the affair reported
that the President had expended fourteen
thousand dollars of his private finances
for thesupport and education of his family.
Was this right? Was it Just, that the Chief
Magistrate of the Union should be crippled
in his financial resources? How was it
with the Supreme Judges? Three of them
told Congress that they would be compelled
10 resign their positions, as the salaries
vere Inadequate to the demands of comfort
and the necessary expenditures. How was
- with the Cabinet officers, who entertain
the foreign ambassadors, emissaries and
our Vice notwithstanding $4,000 per
annum and paying 1000 alone for house
rent, while other indispensables rendered
their expenses five times as great as their
salaries.
Now as to the Senators and Representa-
tives. My calumnators never tell you
that Maynard voted for thebsaw-that
Brownlow voted for it. The 9compensa-
ton of members of Congress is left discre-
tionary with Congress itself. The Consti-
tuition saws that SENATORS and Represen-
tatives shall receive compensation for their
services to be ascertained by law" But,
says one, we don't mind the increase il
you hadn't received the back pay. There
never was an increase of salary without
going back.
When the Thanking privilege" was
abolished, Congress cut down our wages
two thousand dollars-cut off our mileage
cut off our newspaper postage, etc.
We sent the Sergeant-atArms to weigh
our book matter, and found that the post
age alone would amount to eleven hun
dred dollars to each Representative then
take the mileage off, and If the increase
had not passed members of Congress would
have received about twenty-five hundred
dollars as their salary. There are some
members of Congress that expend annual
/ ly more than their salary. They were in
different as to the passage OF the law. so
you see at a glance that this law was in
tended to benefit the poor man-to give
every man, irrespective of his financial
condition, the privilege Of aspiring to the
| pie. Whenever you increase the compen-
sation of officers, the poor man has
an equal chance with the rich man to go
back to Congress. Some men voted for it,
but when they returned home and beheld
the Visage of their constituents they re-
fused to accept it. Others opposed it, but
when the bill passed they thanked God
and accepted the money. l voted for it
from principle. L never disguise princi-
pie; / never betray n friend. Let me call
your attention for one moment to an extract
from letter of Senator Morton's, the pro-
bable candidate for the next Presidency:
The Constitution has given to members of
Congress the power to determine the meas
ure of their own compensation. In this
matter they are made their own judges.
1t is a delicate thing to give officers the
power to determine and fix the value OF
their services, but under our form of gov
eminent this power could be lodged no
where else than in Congress. The pay of
members of Congress has been increased on
five % different occasions, and on every
occasion the increased pay has been dated
back to the beginning of the Congress in
which it was made. The last time before
the present was in 1865, and gave back
pay for the period of eighteen months
The principle involved in back pay is not
different or worse now than it was
the first time it was voted for
and taken. 1t is the greatest
injustice to say that the members of the
Forty-second Congress, who voted for the
back pay have been guilty of stealing, or
of infandah fraud upOn the Treasury