Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1875-08-20

| lultEtSb Oh Industry.
Thereupon Mr.. Dickey (auother
Pennsylvania Protectionist), assaulted
Mr. Cox for speaking for the whole
people. He charged that Cox knew
no State boundaries, etc.
Again in this debate Of 1872, we
have this;
Mr.. Brooks-I offer the following
amendment:
After the line nine, section two, In
sert the following:
Provided, that no higher duty shall
ever be levied, collected, or paid, than
sixty-f per cent Gd UalOren.
MIR. Randall-To what does that
amendment apply? To iron?
Z member-to everything.
MIR. Randall hope it will be voted
down.
On page $50 (Forty-second Con
gress, second SESSION. there came up an
amendment on sal soda, to make soap
cheap to the consumers. Mr.. Randall
sustained the point, "Where the gov
eminent and the soap manufacturers
will be best served" This is his ex-
preston of tariff for revenuel Soap
makers-not consumers. There may
be principle even in soap.
But without going into the record, as
contained in speeches of either Mr..
Cox or Mr.. Randall, it is enoughto say
that in Mr.. Cox's fsixteen years ser
vice from Ohio and New York,
he was constant and vigilant foe to
the extortions OF protection. Mr..
Randall in his twelve years was always
the advocate Of greedy State interests
and class monopolies. AS a sample,
contrast their votes of the session re-
ferred to-pages 3I5S-9. There was
Mr. Dawes substitute to reduce GER
tain duties ten per cent-iron, cotton,
wooden fabrics, etc.-to which Mr..
Finkelberg, Republican, of st. Louis,
moved an amendment, to cut of ton
per cent more, making the reduction
twenty. The Democrats generally
voted for Finkelberg's amendment,
Randall and otherPe Pennsylvania Demo-
Gratis against. 1t was lost, 80 to 1O8.
Then on Dawes ten per cent reduc-
ton, Haldeman and Cox called the |
ayes and noes. 1t was carried III |
to ~. Haldeman, Storm and |
Myers, Pennsylvania Democrats,
boldly voting "aye." Randall
voted no. On the final vote to refer
with instructions for reducing ten per
cent, the vote was III ayes, and Is
nays. Randall in the negative, and
that too against other Democ, ats from
his State, who had the courage to be
Democratic. This is record enough,
on the tariff, for these members.
On the salary grab, Mr. Cox voted
and spoke against it, and gave it back
NEARLY $4,000 among the first. He
was active in moving its repeal, and
voted along with a very few to reduce
the Presidents salary also. Mr.. Ran
dall's record appears in his remarks,
which We quote below. Messrs. Hol-
mar, Hawley and others raised the
point Of order that the Butler amend
ment increasing salaries Of members
to $500 was out of order, having
been negatived. Mr.. Randall said, che :
was sorry. FEB. a, 1873, Sd session,
i2d Congress, page 1872.
Mr.. Randall replied to Hawley, de-
nouncing this excessive virtue" Of
thus:
Mr.. Randau-AIr. Chairman, 1 do |
not think there is any occasion for an c
exhibition Of excessive virtue on this a
question; Tor Is there any good cause
.or a iatter. II may not be amiss for
ne to recall at this time a little expert
snce I have had IN this connection. I
Has here in 1856, ard upon a call Of
he yeas and nays, was one Of three
men on this floor who voted TO increase
he congressional salary from $1,000 to :
s, 900. l did so for the reason (which I
| told my people at home) that :
thought l was worth the increased sum; :
hat I knew l spent more. Every Re- !
publican paper in my district COM
nended my vote, and said that I had
more courage than all the men who :
-oted on the other side. What was the
'esult! The seeds We gOwed upon that
-. 1
md within few days afterward both
Houses Of Congress voted to make the
from $1,000 70 $1,000 l .
lever had a constitute who objected :
o my course upon Il question. !
am in favor OF the increase now
proposed. One Of my reasons Is that I
you viii put members of Congress 7
'eyond temptation by giving them an !;
salary, you will pass fewer :
ubsidy bills. Laughter and applause. | :
believe we earn the s., 500 for which :
propose 10 vote; IL / did not so be- (
ieve | would not vote for it. l re-
member another incident N connection 7
nth the increase made four or five !
ears ago. At that time there was one =
lember so pure that he refused to take :
rom the Treasury the money Congress Z
Oted him; and his constituents voted
hat they wanted 10 such man to repre-
ent them. Laughter.
Now, Mr.. Chairman, on that particu- n
lr principle l believe l am right; / q
slieve earn that money; and if my c,
onstituents are not willing to pay me Il
hat earn they had better find some 81
ther Representative. Applause. = e
Globe, page 1876, part =
II, third session, FOrty. second Con- %
reSS. :,
Mr.. Cox denounced the measure as b
ldecent. He said he would never by u
is own vote, increase his own pay; 4
nat members would hear from it; that b,
was a violation of an implied con- "
act with the constituencies. This is 3
ut a glimpse at the record of these al
70 aspirauts. y