Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1880-07-14

that the following propositions were
proven concerning myself: That never
agreed even to take the stock of Mr.
Ames; that 1 never subscribed for #
never did take it; never received any
dividends from it, and never was in any
way beneficiary by it. Sever
thousand copies of that pamphlet have
been distributed throughout the United
states. Almost every newspaper in the
United States has bad copy mailed to it.
Every member of the Forty Second Con.
gress-Democrat and Republicsn-had a
copy, and there is not known to me a
man who, having read my review. has
denied It's cOnclusiveness of the pronosI.
tlons. 1t is for these reasons that great
public journal, the New York Eoenino
Post, said few days ago that on this
point Gen. Garfeld's answer had been re.
celVed by the American people as sstifac-
Tory. Applause. | understand that
Mr. futile, of gainesville, said here on
tnls platform few nights ago that either
11e Committee of Investigation of the
house OF Representatives or Mr.. Garfield
nao committed perjury in regard to this
credit Mobilier matter. l think that
gehsieman Is Probate Judge. wonder
II he ever heard of two men MAKING their
statement of case differing materislIv
from each other without one or the other
OF them being perjurer. If Iwere in the
nanlt OF calling names 1t would not be
olmcuit 10 md name for man whose
intellectual vision leads him to such a
conclusion. Ii there is any gentleman in
Ibis audience VINO desires to ask anv
questions concerning the Credit Mobilier.
shall be glad to hear it. No response
IL not, would it not be about as we'll to
modify the talk on that subject hereafter
Applause.
THE SALARY GRAB.
The next thing 1 shall mention is a
question purely OF official conduct.-and
that is subject which has grown thread.
bare In this country, and yet desire YOUR
attention to it for few minutes. refer
to the increase of official salaries one wear
and q half ago. First what are the accu.
satiOns concerning me?
There are several citizens in this town
who have signed their names to state
ments in the newspapers during that dis
cussion, declaring that Mr.. Garfield had
committed theft, robbery; that, to use
the plain Saxon word, he was thief In
one of these articles it was argued in this
wise: elf | hire clerk in my bauk on
certain salary, and he, having the kew
W hAy ooAO, eahOS Oul DOUO Vi DID UUU more
than we agreed for and puts it in his
pocket, it is simply theft or robbery. He
happened to have access to the funds, and
he got hold of them; so did Congress,
"You can't gloss it over" says the writer;
cit is robbery"
Now, fellow citizens, presume you
will agree that you can wrong even the
Devil himself, and that it is not right or
manly to lie even about Satan. I take it
for granted that we are far enough past
the passion OF that period to talk plainly
and cOolly aboit the increase OF salaries.
Now, in the first place, say tonight
what | have said all through this tempest,
that for a Congress to increase it's own
pay and make it retroactive is not theft,
is not robbery, and you do injustice to
the truth when you call it 30. There is
ground enough in which to denounce it
without straining the truth. Now, if Con-
gress cannot fix its own salary, who can |?
The Constitution of your country, says in
unmistakable words, that Senators and
Representatives shall receive compensa.
ton to be ascertained by law az paid out
of the National Treasury" Nobody
makes the law but Congress. 1t was q
very delicate business in the beginning
for our fathers to make O law paying
themselves money. They understood it
so, and when they sent the Constitution
out to the several States the question was
raised whether 1t would not be better to.
put curb upon Congress in reference to
their own pay, and in several of the
States suggestions were sent in. When
the First Congress met, James Madison
offered seventeen amendments to the Con-.
stitution, and finally Congress voted to
send twelve of the proposed amendments
to the country. One of them was this:
ono law to vary the compensation of the
Senators and Representatives in Congress
shall take effect until an election has in
tervened." In other words, the First
Congress proposed that an amendment
should be made to the new Constitution
that 10 Congress could raise its own pay
and make it retroactive. That was sent
to the States for their ratification. The
States adopted ten of those amendments.
Two they rejected, and this was one of
the two. They said it should not be in
the Constitution. The reason given for
its rejection by one of the wisest Of that
time was this. He said: aft we adopt
it, this may happen. One party will go.
into power in q new Congress, but, just
before the old Congress expires; the de-
feated party may pass q law reducing the
pay OF Congress to 10 cents day. 1t will
never DO thus to put one Congress into
the power of another; it would be an en-.
CINE Of wrong AID Injustice" For this
reason our fathers refused to put into the
Constitution clause that would prevent
back pay. Now, it will not do to say that
provision that has been deliberately re-
jected from the Constitution is virtually
there, and 1t will not do to say that it is
just to call it theft and robbery for Con-
gress to do what 1t has plainly the Con-
stitutional right to do. use the word
right in its legal sense.
Now, take another step. I hold in my
hand here record of all the changes of
pay that have been made since this gov
eminent was founded, and in every case
| am not arguing now that it is right at
all, | am only giving you history of it,
lin every single instance when Congress
has raised its pay, it has raised it to take
effect from the first day of the session of
Congress. Six times Congress has In
creased its own pay, and every time it