Year: 1859

have been driven from every position they have taken. First, they said 1t was legal ly right. They backed down from the morality and contended simply that it was legal. They have abandoned that now and admit it was wrong, but that Senator Sebastian and Johnson took it, which we hatly deny. One says it was taken to le- galise the acts of the legislature and the Governor Is to blame Another says those who voted for the recess are to blame.- Still another says that we are to blame.- We have waited till they settle down on some one position. He who was to defend 1t, now is willing to admit it was wrong if he can persuade people to believe our Sena- tors were guilty of the same act. lie charges this on his tour and we are repeat edly told he produced the proof. That proof consists in letter which we give be- low:

 Treasury Department, Registers Ofiee,l

 May g, 1859. Hon. T. C. HINDMAN, Helena, Arkansas

 Sir: In reply to your letter of 4th inst, have the honor to inform ou that accounts on file Tn ts office, for pay of the members of the Senate ana House of Representatives make no reference to the recess usually taken during the Christmas holidays the members being paid during the time as also for Sundays. This believe has been the uniform practice since the commencement of the govern ment. Very respectfully, your obed't. servt'

 F. BIGGER, Register"

 The quibble here is on the word Ire cess" What need was there to go to Washington city? Wepresume there nev- CT was a legislative body, congressional or otherwise. that sat on Christmas or Sabbath days. Our former legislatures never did. Nwas a respect paid to sacred days and to that religion which declares them sacred.- In such cases the members are here, at their posts, still in the service of the State. But the hiatus in the term of the last General Assembly was different thing. A sufficient number to reduce the Assembly below labors and went home. There is no par allelism in the two cases. They are as diff ferent as two things can be. In one case, it is the cessation or rest from labor on the Sabbath and on the day of the nativity of Christ, when to work would be wrong in the opinions of the generality of mankind. In the other it is the voluntary abondon- ment of labor for number of working days.

 To use a homely illustration, let us sup pose farmer agrees to give man four dollars day while in his employ, until certain work is completed. On Christmas day the workman is told that he need not work. Still he receives pay because he was in service and ready to labor. Now let us suppose the workman gets tired and before Christmas leaves his employer, goes away, is sent for and returns after an ab- sence of three or four weeks Will any honest man say that he is entitled to four dollars day for every day he was absent, perhaps at his own home and working for himself or third party?

 We have been asked if we would con- demn our Senators for doing the same thing. We answer, yes. If Congress broke up, the members left their posts without fixing a day for their return, and were called back to complete the business of the session, and then Senators Johnson and Sebastian charged those days when there was no Congress, we unhestatingly say condemn them. The letter quoted proves nothing for the per diemists. The poof is the other way. All legislative bodies allow their members pay for Sun days, Christmas and those days when out of respect for the memory of some deceased person they adjourn without labor. But there never was legislative body anywhere that dissolved, went home, was called back and voted themselve pay for their truancy.

 We ask the reader to examine the above letter and compare the two cases. Was there ever more contemptible snbterfuge? As specimen ofpolitical pettifogging it is unique It did very well to read from the stump, to delude and deceive with, but its publication exposes the trick. What su prises us is that man of ability like Mir. Duval will quote this in support of posi- tion It is death blow to the per diem- ists. They put in plea of justification by precedent, but the precedent they offer is none at all. It proves what no one denies. All legislative bodies ad journ on Christ mas and Sundays But the late General Assembly dissolved informally, deserted and left the public business at a stand still.

 One by one the per diemists back down from their position, and finally settle on the quibble. The originator of it does not care what becomes of the per diemists, in- deed is willing to crush them so he can in- jure our Senators and former Representa- tives in Congress. But unfortunately he let his proof see the light and it is found to cut no figure in the case, or if any, to cut the other way.

 We ask our readers to examine the let ter and see to what ridiculous straits the per diemists are driven The lowest dema. goguery, the veriest quibbling and bare faced attempts at humbuggery characterize their course. Well, these are suited to the cause and to the men who espouse it.