& 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



155 



power precisely the same in relation to 

 tl.cy ii;ivo received as members of tlio 

 _ -second Congress ? " 



Mr. Stephens, of Georgia, said : " Mr. Speak- 

 er, I wish to make a few remarks upon this 

 Mil-j.-rt now under debate. For, as little as 

 nieinli.-rs nf tho House may think of this sub- 

 ject, in my judgment it involves a groat prin- 

 ; !!; and I shall speak mainly to the principle. 



As was remarked by the gentleman from 

 New York, who opened the debate yesterday 

 with so much eloquence (Mr. Tremain), I am 

 utterly disconnected with that branch of the 

 subject, the 'back-pay grab,' as it is called, 

 which has so entered into and pervaded this 

 discussion, but upon that branch I have some- 

 thing to say. Therefore my remarks will be 

 confined, first to the moral principle involved 

 in the question, and then to the political expe- 

 diency and policy of the increase of salaries 

 adopted by the last Congress. Sir, I was ut- 

 terly astonished the other day when some gen- 

 tleman undertook to speak of this question as 

 a party question. In my opinion neither party 

 is responsible for the measure of the increase 

 of salary at the last session. I believe that the 

 Democracy, in the proportion of votes, accord- 

 ing to the analysis I have seen, are as much 

 responsible for it as the Republicans. Perhaps 

 some of our Republican friends at the time the 

 bill was passed were a little shy a little timid 

 anxious to- have the measure pass, but at 

 the same time not wishing to take what they 

 deemed the risk of popular disfavor by voting 

 in accordance with their personal convictions. 



" But, sir, to come at once to the gist of the 

 morality of the act. The gentleman from New 

 York (Mr. Tremain) yesterday made some im- 

 portant admissions which cover the whole case. 

 He admitted that, by the Constitution of the 

 United States, each Congress for itself is em- 

 powered to fix the pay of its own members. 

 This, sir, is a wise provision of the Constitu- 

 tion, which the States, after its ratification, re- 

 fused to change. This provision of the Consti- 

 tution has been acted on from the beginning 

 of this Government. Congress has repeatedly 

 increased the pay, and at every such increase 

 the back pay was considered as legitimate as 

 the front pay. This the gentleman also ad- 

 mitted. This saves me from going into his- 

 toric details. I therefore confine myself to 

 principle. If it was not immoral to take it on 

 all former occasions, how can it be on this? 

 The principle is the same. Whenever the pay 

 has been increased, it was necessarily retroac- 

 tive and extra. Were the men who did this 

 thing in the last century and in the early part 

 of this century the brightest ornaments in our 

 history for intellect, for talents, and for virtue 

 were they ' salary - grabbers ?' Were they 

 'thieves' and 'robbers,' for doing just what 

 was their constitutional right to do ? 



" Now, sir, if there is any thing wrong, any 

 thing immoral, any thing dishonest, any thing 

 which would reflect disgrace upon a man's 



memory for taking this legal appropriation, I 

 mast confess I do not M.-O it. Ono gentleman 

 (mid that he returned it because it was too 

 much pay, and the iinmiry was promptly made, 

 bow much he thought would have been ad- 

 missible. 



" If it is wrong to take the whole, it was 

 wrong to take a single cent of it. The prin- 

 ciple is the same ; and, if it is wrong for the 

 present House to take what the law allow B 

 them to take, where are we to make the dis- 

 tinction between right and wrong? During 

 my life I have endeavored to pursue the right, 

 and, whenever 1 am acting in pursuance of the 

 rL'ht, I do not consider I am committing any 

 offense whatever which would subject me to 

 the charge of ' grabbing ' what did not right- 

 fully belong to me. 



" I say, Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed 

 the retroactive law at its last session it was 

 their right to do it their constitutional right. 

 I am not now saying whether it was expedient 

 to do it, but I do say that no blot should rest 

 upon the name of any man or bo cast upon 

 that of his children or upon his memory if, 

 after it passed, even against his vote, he took 

 what the law gave him. I have nothing to 

 say of those who, after taking it, returned it, 

 for that is a matter with themselves. All that 

 I mean to say is, that if I had been here, 

 whether I voted for it or not, I would have 

 taken it, and I should have felt I was justly 

 entitled to it, just as though it were eight dol- 

 lars a day or one dollar a day, if the Congress 

 voted it. 



"It was a constitutional law, constitutional- 

 ly passed, and those who are entitled to it are 

 as much entitled as at any other time to the 

 pay then fixed. If there were those who 

 thought it was too much, it was, of course, 

 their right to refuse to take it. I would not 

 attempt to cast a slur upon any gentleman 

 who saw fit to return it; I am only speaking 

 for myself. So much for the morality view. 

 It is well known that every Congress which 

 has ever increased the pay increased it from 

 the beginning; and I think I may Bay that 

 every Legislature in the United States which 

 has increased its pay increased it from the be- 

 ginning. There is not a single case of excep- 

 tion that I know of; and therefore I trust that 

 the press, that the men who attempt to lead 

 the masses of the people, will perceive where 

 the right is, and not attribute wrong where 

 there was none. If they think it was inexpe- 

 dient let them discuss it from that point, and 

 not allege there was any immorality. 



" This brings me to the second view which 

 I propose to present to the House. I am not 

 going to state whnt I deem ray services here 

 worth, but I do intend to state what I think 

 the services of a representative of any people 

 in any district in the United States ought to 

 be worth ; and perhaps I will go far above the 

 figure of any law which has ever been passed 

 upon the subject. I will say this : that repro- 



