154 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



nounced against this thing that nobody was at 

 liberty to say a word in favor of it, now come 

 in here with this lame and impotent conclusion. 



"Mr. Speaker, while I agree with these 

 gentlemen in their premises, I utterly disagree 

 to their conclusions. I propose for one to vote 

 for a bill which shall carry out the decision of 

 the people upon this subject, and utterly wipe 

 out all the effects, consequences, and benefits, 

 that have been derived by members of Con- 

 gress under that bill. And, Mr. Speaker, I 

 must do upon this subject as many gentlemen 

 have done, because we are all personally inter- 

 ested ; I must state my own personal experi- 

 ence on the subject and how I stand in reference 

 to it. I voted against the bill. In reference 

 to whether it was right or wrong as to the 

 amount, I was governed, I suppose, in my vote 

 very much as other gentlemen were. I voted 

 to retain the $5,000 because it was enough for 

 me. Before I came to Congress, I had been for 

 a considerable time in public office in my own 

 State, where salaries are very small, and had 

 become accustomed to live upon a very small 

 salary, and habits of simple and plain economy 

 that I had acquired in that way I could well 

 enough preserve here. Five thousand dollars 

 was an ample compensation for my services, 

 and furnished me ample means to live in the 

 manner in which I chose to live. Therefore, 

 so far as I was personally concerned, that was 

 the consideration that affected my vote. 



"But more than that, Mr. Speaker, I con- 

 sidered it an exceedingly unfortunate time to 

 make this increase. Various things that had 

 taken place last winter had greatly excited the 

 public mind with reference to corruption in 

 public office ; the whole country was agog upon 

 that subject, and I knew that this increase of 

 salary at that time, and especially the retro- 

 active feature, would excite public condemna- 

 tion, and draw down the censure of the people 

 upon it, as it has done, and therefore, sir, I 

 voted against it. But, notwithstanding my vote, 

 it passed, and then came the question of what 

 was to be done. The press of the country im- 

 mediately began to say that every man who 

 took that pay, that was given to him by law, 

 was a grabber arid a thief. The idea that I 

 held an office, the salary of which was fixed by 

 law, and was to be called & thief for taking 

 that salary, was not one that was very pala- 

 table to me. It did not commend itself to my 

 judgment nor to my conscience ; nor did I pro- 

 pose to be actuated or influenced by any threat 

 of that sort, and therefore, sir, I took the 

 money and still retain it. Other gentlemen's 

 consciences were more tender and susceptible 

 than mine. They began to be affected differ- 

 ently, and one after another they returned this 

 back pay into the 'Treasury. Well, what was 

 the result .of that ? "Why, people immediately 

 began to say they were cowards and hypocrites, 

 and that they did it merely for the purpose of 

 pacifying the press ; making a show of honesty 

 they did not possess; courting public favor, 



and commending themselves in that way to 

 the people. That brought me to commune 

 with myself, with my own judgment and con- 

 science, in relation to what I ought to do; 

 whether I were more amenable upon the one 

 side to be called a grabber and thief, or whether, 

 by pursuing a different course, I should subject 

 myself to be called a coward and a hypocrite, 

 who was, by false pretenses, endeavoring to 

 curry public favor. Well, now, the result of 

 my communing with myself was (and I do 

 not intend by this to cast any reflection on 

 the motives of other members) the result of 

 my own reflection and judgment was, that I 

 should be altogether more amenable to the 

 latter charge. That in point of fact it would 

 be much better proved, so far as I was con- 

 cerned, than the opposite charge, that, by keep- 

 ing the money thus given me by law, I was a 

 grabber and a thief. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, 

 I chose to retain what I received under the 

 law, and make my endeavor here to have the 

 law so modified and changed that I may be 

 allowed to return the money to the Treasury, 

 if that is the will of the people, without sub- 

 jecting myself to the charge of being a hypo- 

 crite and a coward, and of doing it because of 

 the clamor of the public press upon the sub- 

 ject. 



"And inasmuch as I found my conscience 

 upon this subject was a little obtuse, and not 

 easily moved by the threats and denunciations 

 of some portions of the press, and that a ma- 

 jority of the gentlemen who stood in the same 

 position with myself had consciences equally 

 as torpid as my own, and equally, perhaps, 

 needed the quickening of law to help them, I 

 propose that we regulate this thing by law ; 

 that by law we wipe out all the consequences 

 of that act by which the salary was raised and 

 given to members of the Forty-second Congress 

 and to members of the Forty-third Congress. 



"Now, this is an important question to be 

 decided. If we have not the legal power to do 

 this, if there is any thing in the Constitution, 

 either expressed or implied, that prohibits our 

 doing it, then we ought not to attempt to do 

 it. But I insist that there is not any thing in 

 the Constitution against it; I say that we have 

 a perfect right to do it. We cannot, of course, 

 go back and regulate the salaries of the mem- 

 bers of the Forty-second Congress. But we 

 have full power over the salary of every mem- 

 ber of this Congress, a perfect right to regu- 

 late it by law as we choose. 



"Now, the bill that was reported by the 

 minority of the committee, and which has been 

 proposed as a substitute for that of the major- 

 ity, goes to the extent of saying that members 

 of the Forty-third Congress shall account for 

 what they have received since the 4th of March 

 last. Nobody has questioned, and I think no- 

 body can successfully question, the power of 

 the House to compel them to account for what 

 they have received under the law since the 4th 

 of March last. Now, is not the question of 



