Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1822-01-29

reduce the emoluments at Richmond to do
justice to the officer at Norfolk The ques-
ton ought to be AN insulated one, he argued.
and not connected with another. The pecu-
liar state of affairs at Norfolk, Mr.. b. remark
| ed, result from the navigation policy now in
force. That town was once prosperous, and
| the compensation of the Collector, at "A Gem
mission of three -fourths of one per cent, a
mounted to 5000 dollars. 1t was now differ
ent ; such was the effect of the navigation sys-
tenn adopted for the public interest, of which
Nr. b. said he did not mean to complain, be-
| cause private good must always yield ts the
public interest Such was the effect of this
| system, however, on the port of Norfolk, as
| stated by the Collector, whom he would as
soon believe as Cato himself Mr. B. exam
ined the basis on which the calculations of the
Committee of finance were bottomed,to shew
that the commisson at Norfolk ought TO be
two per cent. The Office was one of great
| responsibility, and il there was any thing i'm
the argument urged yesterday by the gentle
man from Louisiana, founded on the unhealth-
mess OF New Orleans, that argument would app
| ply with nearly as much force to Norfolk
MIR. b. then proceeded to oppose the dminti-
ton oil the commission of the CoIt ctor ut
Richmond Ii the mover Of the reduction
went upon personal considerations, he could
| assure him that the Collector at Richmond
was the last man that ought To be touched
This officer was an old man, with large fam
lily, entirely dependant on the income Of the
| Office ; he was soldier of the revolution,
gallant and distinguished one, a man of whom
the father ofhIs country had made honorable
mention-who had led the forlorn hope at
Stony PoiDt-whOse name would occupy a
bright page in the annals of his country
| ShouId this man have the support of his age
taken from him and his family be left without
bread? He hoped not /; and to prevent it
Mr.. Is. moved division of the question, that
1T might be taken separately from Rich
mond and moved, further, that Norfolk he al
| lowed two per cent.
| Mr. HOLMES replied at some length, and
argued to shew that it was as just and reason
able to reduce the compensation at Richmond
| from its present amount, as to increase that
| at Norfolk.
The question being taken on Mr.. Barbour's
motion To raise the commission at Norfolk TO
two per cent. it Was negatived-ayes 10.
MIR. HOLMES motion to fix the commission
| at I per cent. was then agreed to.
The question being stated on reducing the
commissions at Richmond to ! per cent, to
which Mr.. Holmes had varied his motion
Mr. BARBOUR observed, that the gentleman
had heretofore been borne out in his system
by the Treasury Department. pretty strong
prop and the bill had so far been mpregr,a-
ole; but in the present motion the gentleman
WAS not sustained by any authority but his
own suggestion and Mr. b. hoped the Sc
| nate would unite with him in defeating the
PROPOSED amendment, which would reduce
the compensation of an important Office and
most worthy and distinguished revolutionary
veteran, which did not even now exceed 1000
| dollars.
| NJ. HOLMES would not dispute TINT every
| N m
| patriot, and hero of the revolution, and
that Congress ought to be liberal in provi-
ding for them /; but gentlemen had forgotten
to remember that what, with beraty to one
and another, we had been reduced to the ne
cessIty OF borrowing money, and now were
obliged to call ON the liberality of our cOnsti-
tuents to pay 1t. He would be as liberal as
any man to the revolutionary soldier, but this
was not the time for liberality. That liberia
llty had brought the nation into its present diff
| ticulties, and this was the time for retrench-
ment; and if the public exisencies could not
he met by saving thousand dollars here
and thousand there, we shall have either to
| lay taxes on our constituents, or borrow more.
! tie spoke of the difficulty of retrenchment.-
If we propose to reduce the army, the friends
of the army oppose tiff the navy, tho
friends of the navy oppose tiff the officers
on the civil list, their friends oppose if. This
officer must have enough to pay for his wine,
and that revolutionary veteran be provided
for; and all this must be paid by the farmer
| who never sees glass of wine.
/ Mr.. BARBOUR replied at some length. A.
mong other things he adverted TO the pen
sion law of 1918, which he, with two or three
Others, opposed IN vain. In zeal, in affection,
in reverence, for the soldiers of the RI volu-
ton, he would yield to no man but he fore
saw that the act of 1918, providing for the re-
evolutionary soldiers, would let in hundreds
and thousands not entitled to its benefits and
he had endeavorrd to- stem the torrent when
IT was eOacted he was therefore not char
geable with any of the blame Of that measure,
which had so severely embarrassed The fnan-
ces of the nation. He again urged, with much
earnestsess, the revolutionary merits Of the
collector at Richmond (Major Gihbon) to pre-
vent reduction Of his condensation
Mr.. MACON remarked, that the Senate were
not now legslating for revolutionary soldiers,
but were fixing the compensation of a collect
or, and the man that fills the Office ought to
De thrown entirely out OF the question for,
though the present officer was a revOulioua-
ry soldier, his successor will not be-, and the
motive of course will fall if any thing bat the
: office be considered. This had been the uni-
= form and correct practice of the government
: me said, aud he cited instances in point.
Mr. D'WoLF was in favor of the amend.
ment, for the reason that the second and
third rate ports were better paid than the frs
rate, from the great inequality Of the dutie,
= and responsibility. The first object Of thi.
hill was to save revenue, and the next to equa
lize the compensation Of the officers Of the
/ customs. The justice ofrrducing tie pay o
isichmoud, aud raising it ri Norfolk, was clea
!; to him audit was required by impartiaIiiJ
towards the officers of ports in the north