Portland gazette and Maine advertiser. (Portland, Me.) 1805-1818, 1816-03-26
IAN Congress.....First Session.
IN SENATE.
WhnHKsnAY. MARCH IL.

the adoption Of this sy stem supposes, would
they not under II, to increase their frohfs,
60 home before the public business Is I'M
ished fl moved 10 reduce the salary
now contemplated to S 1000 to Members
and s 1000 to presiding Officers, and three
dollars per day beside, for each day the
Members attended
Mr.. Macon moved 10 strike out the sal
airy, md TO increase the pay to-dollars
day.
Both the amendments were negatived.
MIR WILSON was opposed to the bill be
cause it was Retrospective IN Its operation,
because Of the state Of the treasury, the
pre ssure Of taxes, the amount o. the incrsase
Of pay, the badness of the prece dent and the
principle OF high salaries, and the manner
in which the bill had been hurried.
The bill was ordered TO third reading,
2 to /.
MARCH, a.
The bill to change the compensation OF
the Members OF Congress having been read
the third time -
Mr. Mason of Va. said lie would prefer
several notifications OF the bill but he had
only one insuperable objection to 1t, which
was that it was refrostecnDe, and immediate
in its operation. He considered II improp
sr or indicate (wi.hout meaning the least
reflection upon any gentleman who advo-
CO ed i,) 70 vote money GU, OF the treasury
into our ozun pockets For all useful pub
lie purposes he was willing TO impose taxes,
and to vo e money, as literally as any gen.
tleman. But ne cons idered the object OF
this bill to We nj too mixed and doubtful
character 10 vxemp, Tvs advocates entirely
from the suspicion OF interested AID selhsh
motives. H. was very far from impuing
such MOVIES to them.-But II was not e
nougn T. do rig he representatives oil
the people should SO conduc. themselves as
10 be above the suspicion Ut unworthy mo-
iiees.--He was M cobln, and he would
never acs or speak wi single eye TO pop
uiar spprobs ion and fAvo'.
MIR. CHICK also opposed the passage Of
the bill He could not consent to iegislate
in MS manntr.-No person, he believed,
hasi We, computed that the compensation
h. liter 10 be given 10 the members OF
Congress would be less than ZEN dollars ne
dau whilst Mr. G.. computed that II would
amount at tar average estimate to sepen
teen dollars and halt taer day, tor each
slav <ta. Asisr,o~A - - $50
6eesn maay years in operation and II was
not iii very lately that com plants had been
made that the compensa ion of,he members
wa, INSULT lent. his he said, was an uh-
fortunate time for the discovery, whilst the
public deb, was unliquida.ed, millions ot
public accounts yet unsettled, many OF th>
pa,rio, soldiers yet unpaid and taxes con-
tinued-was this the proper time to increess
the pay ofthe members TO SO extravagant
height! Mr.. c. was of opinion the com.
pen,ation of the members ought to be in
creased bu, i, ought to be done with pru-
depce and with reference TO the justice OF
the case, &c. The passage OF such bill
as this would be justly disapproved by the
people.
he question wa. then taken on the pas
sage OF The hill-which passed 2 10 IL
NJ. Varnum suggested that the title Of
the bill would be adj. an,agenusly amended.
by making ii /" bill 10 double the compen-
sation''
The Sen te then proceeded to the consid-
Grafton OF the bill from he House OF Repre-
sen,atises, which has been widely debated
in this body heretofore, suthorising the pay
ment for property lost, captured or destroy
ed in the service ofthe United States.
As it WIS las, reported from a selecr com
mi'tee, II proposes the appointment OF a
Board OF three Commissioners at the seat
of Government. to 81, on and finally decide
ali claims Of the character emb aced by this
bill
The tim. for exhibiting claims is limited
to two years
The bill provides for cases of losses of
property unde, contracts with the govern.
ment, Us wei. a, by in,hressmens, &c.
NJ. Mason, OF N II moved to strike GU, |
the word contract
This motion gave rise to come debate
1t was supported by the mover, Mr.. Rob-
berls and Mr.. Daggett, on the ground that
it would subject the United States TO pay !
for losses, the risks Of which every individ
ual in making contracts must have taken In
to consideration, and regulated his contract
accordingly. The motion was opposed by |
Mr.. Brown, Mr.. Barry, MIR. Lacock. and
Mr.. Talbot, on the ground that there were
many cases in which Wagons, teams, boats,
SIC are emDloyed in services, the nature |