The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1874-12-29

OF fact? What TACT? Perhaps 1t was the
fact whether he had earned the four or FIVE
thousand additional dollars. The mistake
lay in his miscalculatiop OF long suffering
peoples power of endurance. Admitting
the mistake. what was and is his plain duty?
To Jay the money back. But he does not
do that as so many others did. Like that
eminent stateman, Flanagan, of Fgsna-
gan's Mills, he has the money,
and he means to ieep it. Law and equity
both hold that contracts made in error are
to be- mended, and money obtained by mis-,
take to be refunded. The plea OF mis-
take should never be heard until an offer
is made to correct it.
But the main apology is that others did
the same. That is true Of Williams,
Shanks. Butler and many others who voted
for the bill. But should the Senator from
Indiana be ranked in such category No
democrat of Indiana voted for
it. They all voted against it. The
defense made in some personal speeches,
pasedu upon cases of an. increase of pay at for
mer periods, is not Sustained by the facts In
1866 the pay was s., 900. and it was increased
TO 5000. This increase is from 5000 to
s., 500. Then the currency was more depre-
ciated, and the cost Of living at Washington
was greater. Then the increase was made
at the FIRST session of congress, and included
that session; now it is made on the last day
of the third session OF the congress and in
eludes .hetwO former sessions. Then it was
made before the elections, and the members
went directly before tho people; now it is
after the elections where many of tie men,
bers had been defeated. This is well stated
by Judge Niblsck in his speech in the
House against this measure. He said:
Iregret exceedingly that 1 feel myself com
PEELED 10 oppose this report of the committee of
conf renee. Some years ago during the thirty
ninth congress, being upon the committee %
conference 10 which this subject referred,
was Induced TO take somewhat ac-
tive part in increasing the compensa-
tioH of members from 5000 10 $500
year, making reduction at the same
time of the mileage previously allowed. sup
ported that increase because thought that CIR
cumstances demanded a readjustment of the
mileage feature OF the compensation OF men,
bers, and because | felt that the average and ag-
gregate pay OF congressman had ceased to be
and expenses. We did it at the first session
OF the congress, however, and in advance
tng. We went before the people upon that ques-
ton in a cold and manly way, and The people
OF the country, as confidently believed they
would, endorsed our action so far that ques-
ton became in any way test one in the cleo
ton. 1t Goes seem to me most ext "a
ordinary, indeed, TO vote ourselves back pay for
the pas two years when have already re-
ceived the compensation allowed us by law
Others may do this but can not and will not.
Then we too are Just out of a canvass in which
retrenchment aud economy have been the
watchwoIds The business OF the country too
in many portions of II, is very much and pc
euiiarly depressed. In view of all these crcum
stances, do feel compelled, as have from the
, nfSt' TO oppose this increase OF our compensa
make my opposition effective in whatever way
honorably can. L am not deferred by any
threats or fears of an extra session.
That is the language of one of Indiana's
ablest and firmest statesmen and democrats.
The increase of pay in 1866, was not criti-
cised by single paper or voter of Indiana.
Why? Because the people thought So 600
was proper compensation. But when it
was raised to $500. it wssnot approved by
single newspaper or voter of the state
When congress was driven by public judg-
ment to change it, the salary went back to
8, 600, and the people were content.
The worst festure of the increase was that
general election had just been held, that
large number of the members had been de-
feated, some in convention and others be-
fore the people. Mr.. Voorhees, was of the
latter class. Without the vote of the de-
fea.ed members it could not
have passed the House. The wreck was
going down and the cry was sauve qti pcut
What Mr.. Voorhees, did that day stopped
the mouths of the democrats OF Indiana.
Although no other democrat from the state
so voted, il was thrown into the faces of the
democrats that they were in it too. The re-
publicans of this state have repudiated
every one of their men who so voted. The
democratic platform of last summer,
upon which the members of the legis-
Iature were elected, held that the grab is to
be condemned. Can they now endorse and
approve it, and answer to the peoplef Can
democrats in future days claim to be reform
ers worthy of the country's trust, il, as
party, they bestow the highest honor now
in their gift upon the only man in the state
who voted for the grab? In the speech at
Dayiess county Mr.. VOORHEES, claims, as
sort of set-off to the back and increased pay
the abolition of the ranking privilege. 1t
is a little difficult to see how that
has anything to do with it, mas
much as the bill abolishing the ranking
privilege appears by the Globe to have been
under the charge of Mr. Farnsworth of the
possoffice committee, and that the last action
upon that bill was in January, and it be-
came law before the increased pay was be-
fore Congress in any shape. But it was an
old set-off, considering that Mr.. VOORHEES,
was going out, and had enjoyed the frank
ing privilege during the Congress. 1t had
no back action. But as a sst-off TO
this pill, increasing his pay nearly 5000,
he supports a measure which will take from
the members OF the next Congress a privi-
lege they had enjoyed for so many years.
He displayed stern devotion to his father
land that nearly equals the patriotism of