The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-04-23
PAY OF JUDGES.

A special from Washington gives the information that "the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of the House are opposed to the increase of judicial salaries. and .he Republican members decline to report it as a Party measure"
 The Advertiser regrets to hear this and hopes the inform ation is not correct. If 1t is, 1t probably means the failure of a thoroughly proper measure. Why Demo- crats should refuse to support it we do not know. We can understand why the Republicans object to making 1t Party measure. because there should be TO poli- tics. no partisanship and no sectionalism in it. It ought to receive the support of men of all parties on account of Its equity.
 If our Government were being conduct cd on the theory of economy in all its departments and all its branches, there might be- some excuse for opposition to this measure. but such is not the case. There is apparently no thought of money saving. and many of the expenditures and appropriations are so reckless and extravagant as to be almost criminal. It is not through any desire to save money or to inculcate lessons and habits ,of economy that any valid opposition can be made to this measure. If 1t Is simply playing politics. we do not look on 1t as the right kind of politics.
 The salary of a Federal District Judge is now five thousand dollars per annum, and that Is not enough Under certain circumstances and conditions that might be considered fair pay for one mans ser vices but it is not enough in this case. There are numbers of attorneys in Ala bama who make more than that, and some of them. at least. are not fitted to be Judges of the United States Courts. It is one of the most trying and import ant positions in our Government. and one which should be filled by men who are thoroughly qualified for the onerous du- ties imposed on them. It is no argument to say that there are always men ready to take a judgeshp when offered them, for this is true but it does not touch the merits of the case. Is the salary suffi- cient? is the question to he considered, and that must be answered in the nega- tive.
 If the Judge could spend all his time at his own home, it would not be so bad. but this he cannot do. Take the case of Judge Jones. for exam pie. If the duties of his office required him to remain all the time In Montgomery. where he has his home, he might live on the salary | but several weeks of each year must b' spent in Birmingham and several weeks | in Huntsville, and the cost of living ii those cities, and of travelling to and from them, makes a very large hole in hi, | salary.
 The proposition, was to increase thu salary to $500 year. and this is littl' enough It would add less than s2o0 00 l per annufn to the expenses of the Govern
 ment, and that is. comparatively speak ! ing. a trif1e. There are hundreds of ways
 in which more than that amount Is spent some of which cannot be defended or l the seere of economy, justice or good pol | icy Our Government is amply able l.
 afford this increase in the pay of som
 of the hardest workers in it's employ. ana
 should do 1t. Democrats and Republican,
 ought to unite in it's support and work to
 gethcr to do what Is right.