The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1873-05-03
From the Indianapolis Journal, April ~.
THE ssSALARY CRAB"
AxofHHR CASE or e1AB-wHo ARR TO - RxAD
OUT OF TIE RgPUBLIcAN PARTY

A0 tuc Od1UIy ST0O u6b IeCcAvcu
. very large share Of attention in
the columns of the Journal, and
90 the Journal has evidently come
to the conclusion that any man who
voted for it should be ostracised by
the party, no matter what services
he may have rendered, and no mat
ter whether he had ever politically
sinned or not assuming this TO be
q sinl I desire to call your atten-
ton to another case, and to ask
whether the rule you lay down to
be applied to those who voted for
the recent increase is to be excep-
tionsl or general, and If exception
a. why!
On the 2sth Of July, 1856, [the
Congressional salary being then
$4,000 per annum], that being the
last day of the first session of the
39th Congress, and seventeen
months Of that Congress having
elapsed, there was passed as part
Of the sundry civil appropriation
bill, the following:
| "Ssc. IL. And be il further enacted that
the compensation Of each Senator. Represea-
| tAtIve and delegate in Congress shali be fve
thousand dollars per annum, to b computed
from the first day Of the present Congress,
| sud In addition thereto mileage at the rate OF
twenty cents per mile 10 be estimated BY the
nearest route usually travelled in goiog to and
Ssturniug from each regular session. But
| n0thiug herein contained shall affect mileage
accounts already accrued under existing
laws" 49,.
You say in your issue of to day
that you were the first to denounce
the s'back pay steal" Here is an
other ''back pay steal"
You will not fail to observe the
striking similarity between this and
the recent increase. They were
both made applicable to the Con-
gress that passed them The SEC
tion just quoted gave to each mem :
her and Senator an increase of
81, 600 per year, but did not cut off
any mileage and stationery so far as
that Congress was concerned The
recent act gave an increase of 81, 500
per year and deducted all mileage
and stationery, making the increase
in both instances about the same.
/ presume you will hardly say that
the fact that the recent act passed
on the last day of the Congress,
and that the former act was passed
only seven months before the Con-
gress expired, would make any diff
ference in the principle involved.
IF there is any difference in princi-
pie, it would be well to make il
manifest to your readers.
IF you will examine the Globe,
part s, 1866, you will find that
among others who voted for it are
the following Republicans, viz
Sherman, of Ohio; Henry s. Lane
of Indiana; Henry Wilson, of Mass
achusetts; B. F. Wade, of Ohio, and
Williams, of Oregon.
When this proposition was be-
fore the Senate, in which body i
originated, Senator Lane, of thi,
State, in q speech in it's favor, mad,
use of the following language, which
you will find on page 4,0i6 of tn
volume above:
II shall vote for the increase
believing tina
I have discharged my duty and tina
you Undressing Senator Hendricks
who was in the chair, have dis
charged your duty during the pres
ent Congress. I shall vote for it a
it is, to pay us in the past assuret
that no man who knows me vii
misconstrue my motive. Twill vot,
for it to apply to the present Con
gress."
It passed the Senate and went t,
the House. The House disagree,
to it and it went to a Conferenc
Committee. The committee repor
ted in favor of ii, aad when the re
port was under discussion in tn
Senate, Wilson, now Vice President
in speech said:
ssNow, sir, a word in regard t
the increase of our compensation
I voted for it because I thought i
itself it was right. I think 80 nov
I have been here twelve years, an
If I should die to night I would nc
leave enough to buy me pine co
: fin. I believe this increase is righ
in itself, and ought TO be made
In the House, among the Repul
Gcans who voted for it [see pag
4,287] will be found the names {
Farnsworth, of Illinois; Farquhal
of Indiana, and Schenck, of Ohio.
Among the Democrats voting fo
it, Kerr and Niblack, of Indian,
MIR. Julian did not vote.
By that act, each Member an
; Senator received exactly $4,OO
more than the salary was when b
} was elected.
!, They voted it to themselves Sc
enteen months after their terms b
gan; they took the money. Do ye
call that a ''grabl" Was it 'ssteal
: Since that, Senator Sherman b,
been reelected Senator, and is no
. chairman of the Finance Commi
tee. Do you think he should ha,
been defeated because of his vo
above referred to, and will you a
that he be displaced as chairma
3 A thief is not a proper person
q have at the head of such q comm
q tee, and if in your opinion he is
4 thief, should you not devote son
{ portion Of your columns to secu
ing his removal!
> Henry Wilson was again elect
n | GnNnkor ofxor kho% vote and =,