THE BERRY INFLUENCE, 1875-1882 181 



overthrow of Ministries which was discrediting the Legislature. 

 He did not echo the cry of Mr. Berry and his followers that it was 

 the "keystone of democracy," but he thought that care for their 

 salaries would sometimes check members in reckless onslaughts 

 upon a Government that had the power of a dissolution. 



The general question of payment for political services has been 

 often and vigorously discussed. As a means of securing the ablest 

 men it has certainly not been a success. At the present rate of 

 pay it practically invites mediocrity to make a living out of politics. 

 To the professional or mercantile man who gives his services to the 

 State, the amount is barely adequate to the calls upon his purse 

 which the position entails, and in any case is of no moment. To 

 the artisan whose revenue has been based on 3 per week, it seems 

 to promise a career of luxuriant leisure. As a natural corollary of 

 universal suffrage, the numerical majority, with a frank avowal of 

 their devotion to class interests, have largely united to secure a 

 share in this respectable emolument for the labour party. Thus, for 

 many years there has been a certain percentage of members whose 

 sole means of living was represented by the monthly cheque received 

 from the Victorian Treasury. Its direct effect upon the Assembly 

 has been towards narrower views of statesmanship and a perceptible 

 lowering of the average of intelligence and business capacity. It 

 has also helped to make the rank and file more docile in the hands 

 of clever leaders, who do the thinking and talking for them, and 

 more blindly loyal to their party whether right or wrong. That 

 it has a tendency to lower the dignity and independence of the 

 position, and to foster self-seeking, has been shown by the fact that 

 in a neighbouring colony Parliament had sunk so low that a Bill 

 was introduced protecting the salaries of members from attachment 

 by their creditors. 



The Bill claiming 500 a year was thrown out by the Council, 

 and again in 1869 it rejected a renewed proposal with the amount 

 reduced to 300. It would be tedious to recapitulate the arguments 

 used in these oft-recurring debates. They were so contradictory 

 that at length the Assembly appointed a Select Committee, of which 

 Sir Charles Gavan Duffy was chairman, to bring up a report on 

 the subject, fortified by the fullest details of the practice in all other 



