Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1873-08-08
President Grant and the Salary Bill.

The part borne by the President in re-
lation to the so-called salary-grab appears
| to be the subject of persistent misrepre.
sentation, in some cases by those whose
personal knowledge of the facts contra
diets their statements. From an authentic
source it is learned that the question of
increasing the Executive salary was one
that came early and often before Presi-
dent Grant, in various shapes and through
different channels, and that his treatment
of it was simple and uniform. 1t was
first presented to him in tangible form
during the session of Congress next sue
cecding his Inauguration by various
Senators and Representatives visiting the
Executive mansion on the business of
Congress or their constituents. The OBJ
iect of most of the inquiries addressed to
him was understood to be whether he had
any personal feeling on the subject, either
for or against an increase of salary for the
President of the United States His in.
variable reply was, that the subject was
one on which the President could not,
with propriety, have any opinion of his
own as distinct from the popular branch
of Congress, except in the improbable
contingency. that such an increase should
be named as would be inconsistent with
the revenue of the government or with
the comparative simplicity intended by
the founders of the Government to sur
round the person of their chief executive
officer.
The atfiXing of what was then so large
salary as $4,000 to the Office of Presi-
dent, by the men in Congress who had
previously been the virtual trainers of the
Constitution, satisfied President Grant
that the intent was to measure the COM
pensation. by the amount of ceremonious
dignity which Congress judged to be
necessary to the usefulness of the office,
and that, for his part, while he should be
perfectly willing to serve out his term
at the old rate, he could not consent to
compromise what he considered a sound
principle of non-interference, or to place
in false or embarrassing position those
of his successors who might have to con-
slider the same question, by opposing
either before or after the fact, any measure
for the reasonable increase of the Presi-
dental salary. AT no time during the
pendency Of the question was the amount
suggested as the new rate of cOmpensa-
tion less than fifty or more than one hun
dred thousand dollars per annum.
Though he did not regard the higher
figure as unreasonable, the President did
on several occasions take an informal de-
parture from his own standpoint, TO the
extent of expressing a preference for the
lower-named sum. This, however did no
violence to his leading views, that the
President in office should not be forward
in the discussion of such a question, and
should not so act as to subject any Presi-
dent coming after him to unfair compari-
sons, but leave him or her as free from
embarrassing precedents as President
Grant found himself 1t is quite posi-
BILE that some of the Senators and Repre-
sentatives who engaged themselves in
informal discussions of the subject at the
Executive mansion, without invitation,
were actuated by interested motives, but
none such were ever treated with greater
consideration in consequence of their
course, and the President never, directly
or indirectly, attempted to influence the
action of any member of either house of
Congress upon the question. None of his
visits to the Capitol during the latter days
of the session were for the purpose of
helping the passage of the salary bill, and
his only attempts at legislation were di-
rected toward such important public
measures as the bills to carry into execu-
tion the provisions of the Treaty of Wash
ington, and effect a satisfactory pacifca-
llOu VI hOulSlduh, III 4luC ldtteI VI WHICH
he was unfortunately not successful.
In reference to the back pay and in
crease of pay voted to themselves by the
Houses of Congress, the Presidents views
are alleged-te be-that if a veto had been
possible without compromising important
public interests contained in the same
bill, the precedent established by such a
Course of procedure would have been a
serious blow to the independence of Con-
gress, and more deserving of the censure
than compulsory and passive assent to
the principle of 'back pay" However
commendable the President may have
deemed Speaker Blaine's action, no occa-
sion was offered him for following the
precedent in his own case. The President
is represented as holding to the view that,
as members Of Congress are of necessity
to be intrusted with the delicate subject
of regulating their own compensation, the
constituencies who pay the salaries ought
to bear the fact in mind when nomina-
tiOns for Congress are in order,-WdShiRg-
ton Cor. Boston AdUeltiser.