Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1873-10-15
The President and the " Back Pay"

The President and the Back Pay.
In his letter Of last spring upon the :. back
pay" Mr.. Garfield very properly asked why
It's Republican opponents were nos iogica'
enough to censure the President, whose sal
airy was doubled by the bill. and without
whose signature it would not have become
law. But many of them do 80, frankly.
Many Of the best friends of the President re-
greet sincerely that be signed the bill. let
the circumstances must not be forgotten, n0
the excavations that may BE- offered The
Presidents salary was believed to be wholly
inadequate. Mr.. Willard, of Vermont,
however. has recently published statement
by which it appears that the special appro-
priations for the White House amount lot
tue year 1914 to seventy-seven thousand
dollars. and he says that the Presidents lam
ily expenses and those of his table are all
that are paid from his salary. We dc not
know what changes in this respect there
may have been since the earlier days; Dut
certainly, if salary of twenty-five Thousand
,llars was not extravagant tor the Presi-
dent eighty years ago, twice that sum can
not be imtnoterate salary for him now. II,
however, an appropriation OF the amount
and for the purposes mentioned by Mr.. Will
lard is to be continued, twenty-five thousand
dollars is certainly an adequ ate compensation.
Ii the object be to furnish retiring compe-
tence for the President, let that purpose be
| frankly stated and discussed in Congress
The only reason for furnishing 1t indirectly
is that the country would not approve It..
| And If that be true; it IS a Conclusive reason
against it.
| But beside the fact that the Presidential
salary was no larger than it had been at the
close of the last century, when dollar was
80 much more valuable than now, Is the other
| consideration, that the chief oHeDse In the
"back grab - s that 1t is retroactive Tor
Congress. But it was not made so IN the
case of the President Therefore in Signing
it he did not award himself compensation for
services already rendered and recelpted ior,
as the members did, although, OF course, he
did award it to them. Moreover, if the bill
were vetoed, the necessary appropriations
would Tail, and an extra session OF Congress
would become Indispensable, which would
involve serious draft upon the Treasury
Tnis is true, and this apparently determined
! General Galfield's vote. But although this
is true, the expense OF an extra session would
| have been no more than that OF the back
| increase of the salaries OF the mem bers; anc
If it had been ten times as much, the bill
should have been vetoed. Toe President
should have said distinctly that the amend
ment, the " back grab,' was an offense that
be could not sanction; that he would not bt
| coerced To authurfz; a plain wrong by the
alleged necessity of plsslng the appropria-
tions; and .h t the responsibility OF an extra
session must fall upon those who made Ii
necessary.
Had the President SAD this 10 his usual
plain manner, it would not DULY have been
right, bat It would have been the most pop
uiar act OF his administration Ii would
have shown the country that he vas not con-
used by plausible sophlstries, and that be
not only saw clearly what should be done,
but that he had the courage firmly to do it.
Foe tact that his veto would have made an
increase of his own salary impossible during
his second term would have commended hin
only the more warmly to public respect and
admiration Such an act also would have
stayed the ten loucy to reckless and doubtful
financial legislation. Il would have recalled
the simple, sober standards OF expense and
of pubic honesty winch are not only often
forgotten, bat ridiculed. 1t Was a great op-
portunity lost. And the most faithful Re-
pu5licans and friends of the President, how.
ever they may regret that it should be said,
| VIII not ueDy tudt IL Is Tue lfubH.
IT oar view be correct, it would have been
better both for the Massachusetts and the
New York conventions to have rebuked uG-
tquivocaliy the whole n assure, leaving cen.
sure TO TALL where 1t justly belongs. Bat
even in trying 20 discriminate, they fail
Our New York resolution declares that
public censure belongs to those of what
ever politics whose votes enacted such pro-
vIsiJn.' But is not the signature that IN id,
the provision effective as responsible rs the
votes that enacted it7 Tue resolution cen.
sures the President, If it censures Congress.
The better action vi the Conventions would
nave been TO echo the Wisconsin Republican
demand that it be made C Inssitutionaly I'm.
possible Tor any Congress to Increase its Owl
comp ensatiop. And the better course fol-
nvividual Republicans is to regret, not t,
jetend, the action OF the President.-Har
per's Weekly.