The Eaton Democrat. (Eaton, Ohio) 1875-1903, 1880-08-26
GARFIELD,s SALARY GRAB,

ter OF 1918, an expression OF ours
Garfield as a salary-grabber.
Well, what of it? Garfield, with hun
dreds of others, covered the entire
sum, which a large number Of Con-
gressmen said he had perfect right
to retain, back into the Treasury.
He opposed the measure and then
refused to take the money, and was
the second man to do so. No fault
in that.-Miami Helmet.
Whether Bro. Morris, of the Hel
met, publishes the statement that
Gen. Garfield opposed the salary
grab" because he knows no better,
or to keep his readers in ignorance
of the facts in the matter, we cannot
say, but we will be charitable enough
to believe he does it from q want of
information. John w. Forney, of
the Philadelphia Progress, declares
he was ignorant Of Mr.. Garield's
record at the time of his nomination,
but when he found it different from
what he believed 1t to be, he "revolt-
ed" and is now doing all he a
against him. He is too honest to
support a man for the Presidency
with such q wretched record. 1t may
be that Bro. Morris will pursue the
same course when he discovers how
mistaken he is about Gen. Garfield
and the salary grab. He is certain
ly too much of a Christian to uphold
a man for the highest office in the
gift of the American people against
whom he declared the brand Of enid
night robber could not be improved
on" and especially if we produce un-
mistakable proofthat he was justified
in what he said, and is now mistaken
in asserting that Garfield opposed
the measure" We propose to show
that James A. Garfield not Only vot-
ed for the salary grab bill, but that
he worked to C its passage, and
spoke in its favor, and we go direct
" to the Congressional Record for
the proof of u charges.
On the night of the Sd of March,
when the session of the 42d Con
gress was very near its end, and for
ty-two of the members of The House
were absent, Mr.. Garfield arose in
his place and said: Congressional
Record, Vol. 8, page 2099.)
1 rise to a privileged question. I
present the report of the committee
of conference on the legislative, exc
cutiye and judicial appropriation
bill.
The report was read agreeing to
the salary provision and at the end
of the reading we quote Mr.. Gar
field again from the Record, page
21O0:
I now call the previous question
on agreeing in this report of the COM
m:ttee of conference. After the
main question shall have been order
ed I will then yield a portion of my
time to others.
This was done and various mem
bers discussed the bill during the
hour. In the course of this debate
occurred the following: Record,
page doll
MI. Hubbard, democrat of New
Hampshire)-I desire to ask the
gentleman how much pzunder qoill
be taken from the Treasury If this
raising Of salaries IS adopted?
Mr.. Garfield Republican Of Ohio)
According to the best estimate
have been able to make it involves
an annual increase of expenditure
of about three quarters of a million
of dollars.
Mr.. Hibbard-How much for the
present Congress?
Mr.. Garfeld-For the present
Congress it involves an additional
expenditure of about one and a quar-.
ter millions.
1-Mr. Da1reetRenahliean or Mas
sachus etts )-Did the gentleman
hear the form in which the gentle.
man from New Hampshire put his
question: How much the plundel
would amount to?
Mr.. Garfield do not accept the
gentleman's statement as to that
It may be an unwise expenditure il
some respects. But IN most case
the increase IS proper and ought t.
be made. IT as not "plundeT" wnles
gentlemen here consider MemselUe.
not deserving of the promised pay.
We call particular attention to tn
above. It is not a Democratic asser
ton. 1t is from the official RECORD
of the House, and it shows positive
ly that Garfield was engineering thu
grab and that instead of "opposins
the measure" he defended it. WheI
the hour of debate vas up Garfield
applied the gag and demanded
vote. He argued that the Hous,
! must not vote down the report be
cause that would make necessar,
another committee of conference, ant
there was not time for that, but MI
Holman declared, (page 21O4, "w
have tooenty hours left in which tina
can be done" So that his plea o
not time enough was only a dodg
; to force a vote on the measure, whicl
was done and was decided in the of