The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-03-07
Not for PAY,

The Democratic members OF tne ucneIW
Assembly have it In their power either TO
make or 10 mar the fortunes OF the Demo
cratic party In Virginia. They should keep
the record Of the party so free from stain
that Il may he presented before the people
Mt any time with full confidence Of its ap-
prevail by them.
II there are good reasons why an extra
session Of the Legislature should be called
this spring, let it DC called. But all must
admit that Il will be difficult to ex-
plain 10 the voters why body which
had IL in its power 10 sit till
April should adjourn early In March
and then compel the Governor to recon-
yene IL In extra session, and then adjourn
again before the thirty days are out!
There can be only one reason given Tor
such course. That reason Is that the
members Of the Legislature cannot afford
70 remain here at their own expense to
legislate for the good Of the public. 1t
must not be lost sight Of, however, that
the members knew exactly what the law
provided in this regard, and that they
were nominated and elected over other
Democratic aspirauts who would then
have been perfectly willing to pledge
themselves not to claim nor expect any pay
for their services other than :" the salary J"
provided for by law. For 1t must be re-
collected that the Constitution requires
that the members shall be paid salary
that is, by the year,-and not per dtena
and that this provision was incorporated
into the Constitution by an amendment
ratified by the voters, and was put into
that instrument for the avowed purpose OF
preventing the General Assembly from
pro,racting its sessions for the purpose OF
getting the per diem compensation which
had previously been allowed them.
We take 1t for granted that no member
Will plead that the "salary" is too small.
1t is little enough, we concede; but at the
same time every member knew what it was
before he was elected, and knew also that
the Constitution forbids, him TO increase
ii by his own vote.
All Of our preamble was intended 10 lead
up to this single conclusion-namely, that
the members Of the Legislature ought to
provide by law that their pay for the extra
session shall not exceed their pay for the
regular session-iour dollars day. This
Legislature has full power TO reduce its
own pay, though the Constitution forbids
Il to increase that paw. To SIT here
twenty days and pocket nine dol
lars a day for so doing would be
to damage the Democratic party very
seriously. In all this talk, we assume that
the members do not wish to make money
out OF the extra session, but desire simply
to have their necessary expenses paid by
the State. AZ best, it is contradiction in
terms TO provide by law for two "sala-
ries " in one year. AS we have said, the
trainers OF the constitutional amendment
which requires "salary" to be paid
framed 1t with the avowed intention
of having the members paid by the
year, and thus freed from the temptation
10 extend the session for the purpose OF
getting the per diem. The extra session
contemplated by the Constitution was one
TO be called by the Governor in the "of-
year" But it is not important to our
present purpose whether the law pro-
yiding two salaries" for one year
is constitutional or not; or rather, as its
constitutionally can hardly be doubted,
whether the trainers OF the amend
mcnt intended there should he two
salaries IN one year or not. All that
We are advocating just now is law pro
yiding that at an extra session following
immediately upon regular session which
the members have refused to extend, the
pay Of the members, or the "salary" II
you prefer the constitutional word, shall
not exceed four dollars per day-in other
words, shall not be more than 1t would
have been IL the amendment had never
been incorporated into the Constitution
which requires the members to be paid
by the year and not by the day.