Buchanan County bulletin. [volume] (Independence, Iowa) 1869-1891, 1875-08-27

The McGregor Times feels called
upon to attempt to parry the force of
our comparison between Ainsworth
and Kirkwood, on the score of "sala-
ny grabbing" The point we made
was this, that if Kirkwood was emit
tied to the appellation of "salary
grabber" for receiving seven months
pay before he entered upon his du
ties as Senator, Ainsworth is equally
entitled to it for drawing pay for
nine months before he enters upon
his duties in the House. The Times,
in answer to this, is compelled to in
terpose the technical plea that Aims
worth's term has commenced, and
that this rightfully entities him to re-
ceive compensation for which he rem
ders no service whatever. Ainsworth
has never sat day in Congress, his
credentials have never been read in
that body, he has not taken the oath
which qualities him to act as Rep
resentat:ve; he simply holds the Ger.
tificate of the Governor that ut an
election held in the fall of 1874, in
this district, he had q small majority
of the votes cast for Congressman.
Under this he draws his monthly sti-
pend Of $4l6.66, which will amount
to $4,000 before he shall have per-
formed one hours labor for the Gov
eminent or his district. 1t is true
that Mr.. Ainsworth draws this gratu-
ity according to law, but it is also
true that Gov. Kirkwood drew pay
from the time his predecessor resign
ed, strictly in conformity with law
and precedent long established. The
Times says:
But the BULLETIN says that kirkwOod
was justified by law Admit that the law
gave him the right to draw the money is
it just and equitable? Is it honest to de-
liberately take pay for eight months time
that the office was vacant
Since the Times has consented to
examine the equity Of the transaction,
would not it's question have been
more appropriate in this shape: els
it honest to take pay for any length
of time for which no equivalent i'll
service has been rendered, aohether
the office Is vacdnt or not?" There
may be much said on both sides Of
this question, so far as it relates to
the particular cases under discussion,
but if it is decided that it is not hon
est to draw pay for work not per-
formed, irrespective of the condition
under which it is done, how much
better off is Mr.. Ainsworth than Gov.
Kirkwood? The Times fails to re-
member that the indictment against
Gov. Kirkwood by the Democratic
press generally takes this shape;
sHe has received $ll,3Os.O7 for 134
months service" Now, can it not
be as truly said of Mr.. Ainsworth at
the end of his first year: 'He has
received $1,000 for 3 months SER
vice." and will the Times say the
scrap of paper with the. Governors
signature in Mr.. Ainsworth's pocket,
gives him an equitable right to draw
from the public treasury, money he
has not earned, while for Gov. Kirk
wood to draw money from the same
source, under similar circumstances,
except the aforesaid scrap of paper,
is criminal in the last degree? We
ask our McGregor contemporary to
view this matter again in the light of
the equities it has invoked, and then
say candidly it there is any real diff
erence, except the purely technical
one, between the action of Kirkwood
and Ainswortn, for which each has
justification of law and precedent.