The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1880-09-01
creased his salary and giys hln bsek Peg Z

creased his salary and gave him back pay
And, II not, why not, II he was opposed y
the measure2
second-When he drew his back pay
did be do 50, not regarding Il a. ius!l!
and properly his own, simply TO await TIT
\ passage Of another law Rta future session
which would compel Its Tetnrnf
Third-If the money was not nghtiulfy
the Senator'S, and he thought It ought q
be refunded, could he not have covered Il
into the Treasury, ss other Congressmer
did, at any time alter he drew IT. and thti
too, as well without Is with such compul'
sorry law? For TO me, there Is something
irfisistably funny In the Idea OF q man
waiting about twelve months for the pur-
pose Of being compelled and required to
do 4 thing, which he avershe was anxious,
and which he certainly was at perfect lib
erty 10 do all the while, but which, as q
matter OF fact, he never did do alter all.
Fourth-If this money did not honestly
and Justly belong TO the Senator, had he
any more right TO turn It over 70 the State
School fund for the qualification OF bis
generous impulses, as well as TO secure
the commendation Of his constituents,
than he would have had TO devote It 70
any other purpose which commended IT.
self TO his taste and Judgment Can the
getting OF ill.gotten gains be sanctihed by
deyoting them TO holy uses, and Is 1t not
the only proper course 70 return them 70
the true owner2
Fifth-Did not the Senator in public
speeches, at Nicholas O. Il. and other
places, and in private conversations as
well, take the position that although he
had opposed the law, still alter Il was
passed the money was as justly and hon
estly his own as any he had ever earned.
sfxth-And will the Senator soy, now,
whether he turned this money over to the
State because he really thought he had no
right 10 1t, or was IL because OF the storm
OF indignation which the SALARY Grab"
had aroused throughout the whole coun-
try, and, II 1t was because he had no
right To Il, what title could he transfer to
the School Fund?
seventh-Will the Senator seriously
maintain, as lawyer, that alter the law
was passed and the money had been
drawn and had become thus the property
OF the Senators and Representatives, and
alter Congress had adjourned, that 1t
would have been competent for 1t 70 pass
a law, at future session, (such as he says
he adyocated) which would have compell-
ed restitution, any more than 1t Is now
for Congress by Statutory En-
actment TO compel any class OF citizens 10
to the Government, without
compensation, certain portions OF their
property.
l can well understand why q member Of
the House Of Representatives who did not
believe in the "Grab" should draw his |
part like Garfield, and then return it early
TO the Treasury, or q Senator like Davis |
might draw It, and use 1t with some plattsi- |
bility al iedS,, and, under cover Of the lay,
insist that It is bis Of right, bnt how 4 |
who admits that be has no |
right TO 1t, that he ought TO have been
by law TO disgorge, could draw
it and donate it TO any person or purpose,
or do aught with 1t except to refund 1t to
The rightiul owner, the Government OF the
United States, Is what ] utterly fail to COM
prehend, and, ] think, the people Of this
State win be as sloY 10 appreciate shch .
course as am. Certainly It ia not the ]
light Thing to purchase with the peoples |
money sTepllation Tor charity, enlarged
iberality and pnbliespiritedness.
Replies to the foregoing questions seri-
ltim from the Senator may do much TO re.
ieve his constituentsirom grevious doubts,
md will certainly crafty very greatly an
lnxlous IgaplRER,