Year: 1873

II IN thh llItu OtxltS UT W His SLalt


STAFFORD, VT, June 25, 1873.
Han G G. Benedict, Burlington w.:
Nv DEAR SIR: By the tone of the public
,ress it would seem that have made a
wrong disposition of my part OF the so-called
CongTesslonal back pay" Ii the press oc-
eony higher plane Of action than that upon
Irbieb | have stood it is my duty to climb
nr 10 it if can; but, while do not insist
hat tbey are wrong, may not be allowed to
sbou w6y have been, and remain still, un-
sonscious Of transgressing any rule of moral
;tv or business propriety? 1t is barely
n6ssible that the important difference be-
fF,reen the case of a Senator and that of
Kenresen tative has been overlooked, or that
the reasons by which have been guided have
not been fully presented, or. if they have,
that less weight has been accorded to them
bv others than by myself. To be thought
Tigbt is we'll, but to be right, at my time of
be. is far better.
The press is generally none too bold in its
criticisms. and would by no means dull its
edge. as in it's g sober second thought" it
il always apt to be just; but criticism, to
he lastingly effective, should not call shovel
a shade when it is really shovel, nor brand
3 whole body of men as corrupt when it is
gery certain that some, and probably much
the larger part, were absolutely stainless.
By means am [ about to appeal from the
mess 90 the people, but may [ not ask the
I1re-. 10 hear before they decide? Is it not,
however, little queer that the mode of
emu.ging my pockets of back pay " should
from any cause appear to excite more COM
nent than its retention might have done?
Certainly, no notoriety was sought or antic
I,a.ea, and there was no near election
peDdlng that would suggest base object even
to an enemy, GfI have any, or the groyelling
work Of propitiating a constituency by a
contribution to their pockets. 1t the bride
was not large enough to tempt me, 1t was
too small to corrupt whole state With. My
onlv purpose was to satisfy myself, whether
others were satisfied or not, and to complete
the sincerity and symmetry OF my own
record on the question, which was at every
stage distinctly and pointedly adverse to the
passage of the measure. After its final pas
sage my purpose not to receive the $ back
pay'' was avOwed, and the only matter un-
determined was, what should be done with
it, and this at last was determined IN accord
ance with what to me appeared to be the
simple dictate of duty, and the sternest re-
Quirements Of equity. Being able to trace
so much of it., | restored 1t to those from
whence it came.


The salary question is undoubtedly grave
one but one that under the Constitution
always has been ana always must be deter
mined by Congress itself. From the founda-
ton of the government, Congress has re-
reAtcdly exercised this grant of power. No
other body has jurisdiction of the subject.
The same prerogatlve is held and constantly
exercised by every legislative body of the
country. It's exercise by Congress was legiJ-
innate, and 1t is only It's abuse that calls for
denunciatiOn. If Congressman err, as
think they have erred, by putting too high
aD estimate upon the value of their services.
the people must teach them more modesty
and retiring habits. Let those and only
those who have been guilty of any abuse
have the full weight Of tue penalty.


1t is not disputed that the compensation
should be enough to command the services
Of men Of ability and integrity, whether rich
or poor, and whether engaged IN prosperous
business or lucrative professions, and this
without divorcing them from their families !;
but it should not be 80 large as to suggest
and support extravaganza III style of living,
nor be an equivalent to the sudden acquire
ment of wealth. The only standard which
should govern is nothing less than the
purity and the elevation of the service and
whatever is most likely to conduce to this
end should be conceded without reluctance.


Nv opinions may have been wrong-sOme
able and spOtless men have differed with
ne-but nevertheless | have always, as is
well known, been constrained to oppose any
increase of the pay of members, aud mainly
on two grounds first, that it was depar-
ture from the simplicity of the republican
character of our INSTITUTIONS, and, second,
that the office should be so far esteemed. a
least as to be considered and treated as IL
itself some reward as title OF honor ; and
If some pecuniary sacrifice should be newt
Itably incurred through its acceptance, tina
even then men OF spirit and worth shoulC
still have some ambition for the service. Ii
other words that it should not be merely 6
commercial transaction, measured as between
the member and his country by money alOn'
but one leaving some room for duty ant
the legitimate honors of the station.


With these views | hope | have been able
to consider the question as one that mainiy
concerned the welfare of our country, anC
with as little reference to myself Us might b.
expected from the average OF mankind.


The naked question OF the increase oil
Congressional salaries, is one OF eXpediencJ
and sound policy, and, however determined
can be IN no sense crime, though 1t ma,
be SO reprehensibie biunder as TO make 1t
according to the phrase OF Fouche, s. worse
than a crime" In this instance, though i
Is not my business TO defend the act, 1t l
fair to say, that it was claimed by the advo
Gates Of the measure to be right on accoun
Of the high cost of living at Washington
and also on account OF the future surrende
OF a considerable sum for mileage, stationery
newspapers and postage-the latter being a
incompatible and unknown quantity. Ye
itappeAred to me wholly wrong in substance
excessive In amount, exceedingly Inoppor
tune, and, though sustained by majority G
democrats, likely to be detrimental to th
party in power. Ii was more than the mem
bers or the people expected whom they wer
elected therefore | did what | though
reasonable to defeat the first amendment
and to defeat the report of the committee c
conference, and finally to defeat the bi
upon which the measure had been engrafteC
1t is TO be regretted that the minority wit
whom | cooperated had not better success


but the odds were tCo great


But do not understand that am charge


with dereliction of duty while the measal


was pending. 1t is nv awkward manner
dlsposing of the g back pay that is col
demned BY no greediness or fault of min


the " back pay" was lawfully made N
property, thereafter to be kept or dispose
OF ty me alone, although at every step ha


voted against it. Ireceipted for it and pr
cured and transmitted to the Treasurer OF tt
State the U. S. draft for the amount, stain
to him at the same time that


g Ii majority of the members had lie
this money In the Treasury, L should ha


followed their example; but, as they ha


not, the people of Vermont will have TO ps


their prOportionate part of the whole, and


seems to me only just to place my sha


where to some extent 1t will tend to dIminI


the taxes of the State.


Let US See whether this will stani the te


OF stlict equity and justice or not, al


whether il imnnses any stigma upOn 4