JOHN BURNS'S SALARY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 914, 6 September 1910, Page 5

JOHN BURNS'S SALARY.

BATTERSEA THINKS MIAI MEAN ,By Telccraph—Press Association-CopyrleM. London, September 4. The Battersen Liberal and. Radical Association has decided to cense the registration of voters, alleging that Mr. John Burns ought to pay the cost (J3300) now that his salary as President of the Local Government Board has been raised from ■±;3000 to .-85000 a year. The loaders add;—" John must too the line, or seek a seat elsewhere." Mr. Burns at present contributes por annum towards tho cost of registration. , MR, BURNS NOT INTERESTED. The House of. Commons on June 17 raised the salary of Mr. John Burns from £2000 to ,£SOOO. a year. There were protests from Labour members and from some Liberals, but Unionists supported the increase, which was confirmed by 159 votes 'to 13—a majority of 14G. ■ The matter arose on the consideration of the vote for the Local Government Board. . Mr.- Asqiiith made the 'House smile with one of his opening sentences— "There is always a good deal of suspicion, when tho two front benches are found to.be in agreement." When the matter was raised last year Mr. Churchill and Mr. Burns, the holders of the two offices, pledged themselves not to accept the increase while they retained their respective positions. A Serf-Denying Pledge. Mr.' Churchill had since left the Board of Trade, and his successor, Mr. Buxton, had received, the higher rato of salary. "Tho assiduity and single-minded .devotion" with which Mr. Burns had devoted himself to his work received a tribute from Mr. Asquith.- "The House will have great satisfaction in seeing Mr. Burns released from the pledge, by which he can no longer be bound." Mr. Lees Smith, a Liberal member for Northampton, moved to reduce the salary by. ,£3OOO, and Mr.. Byles seconded. Mr. Lough, who was Secretary to the Board of Education under Sir Henry Campbell-Barinerman, fiercely attacked the increase. "You are justifying the taunts ,'of extravagance thrown at the Radical, Party," he exclaimed. Fiftyfive Ministers divided £0168,000 a year between them. - ' Consistency Wanted. The Labour members chimed in after this. Mr. Jowett appealed to Mr. Burns to show the sincerity of his previous opposition' to large. Ministerial salaries by declining the, increase "and thus setting an example of! c6nsistency." Mr. Seddon said the Prime Minister -had told them', that it was 'impossible to keep up the dignity of a Cabinet Minister on a salary of ,£2OOO. He would not remind' the House of Mr. Burns's own estimate of the value of a man's sorvices—an .allusion to a forgotten dictum of the member for Bnttersea that "no man is:worth more than £500 a year." .' : Mr. Burns apparently had little interest in what was bein(» said.'' He knit his brows over calculations which ho was making for a subsequent explanation of the. work of! his department. His short piece of; pencil was almost constantly ot work on envelopes and sheets of foolscap oh his knee. He was so busy earning his salary he had no time to listen to those, who were carping about tho amount of.it.. There was a, cheer from both Unionists and Liberals when tho division .figures stated above were announced.