Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1827-04-10

tiers al one court were appointed 10 ePSciu MIS-
sions a, another, and instead of allowing them any
additional salary and outfit tbs President had al
lowed their personal expenses in lieu OF outht.
also stated that Mr.. Jay was allowed his personal
expenses, instead of salary and ouht, on lis mis-
sion to England, in 1884; and 1t the gentleman
from Rhode Island had looked into his account,
with the same disposition to make the most oil II,
he would have found many items there ior the us
play Of his refined wit and humor, equal at least TO
MIR. Pinckney's mules. Now, MIR. Speaker, It SO
happens that Mr.. Pinckney received no OUTFIT or
salary for his mission 10 Madrid, and ii the eentte-
man from II. 1. hsd examined little further into
the documents, he would have found II out; Tor
is distinctly stated on page 5i, in the following
words:
&C Mr.. Thomas Pnckney, stationary Minister
at London, sent on special mission to Eiadrd,
and afio,cedhi expenses"
These expenses were in lieu Of outfit. but not
so in the case of Mr.. Clay and MIR. Adams; they
both received their full outfits and salary, which
the law declares shall be 90 compensation for all
personal services and expenses" and an 0d3S-
ton to these, the allowance stated yesterday,
viz for loss sale of carriage, house rent, and
travelling expenses, from ST. Petersbursh and
Gouepburg, to Client, sc. So much for the gem
tenla- skill in advocacy, SO ingenousy displayed
in an effort to cover up an extravagant and un
precedented charge, by the discovery OF sup
posed abuse 30 years before.
The gentleman no doubt, however, speaks by
authority he has had the last night TO consult
his authorities. and procure information from all
the sources within his reach, in order to 60 make
the most of ii:'' but the House will Judge how
much he has made Of it. He next undertakes TO
justify Mr.. Adams's charge Of $l,96G 81, for a
journey which ne neUer did make, by an allow
ance to Messrs. Bayard and Gsllatiu, of the same
sum for journey over land, from 81. Petersbursh
to Client, which they actually did make; and
he makes the remarkable discovery, that the cleik
In copying the account, had stated the allowance
made to Messrs. Il. and g. to be for travelling from
ST Petersburgh, " by London. to Client" instead
OF +" by Client, 10 London" This mistake,
which the gentleman f. ON Rhode Island has dwell
upon so much, has no bearing upon the main
point in the case, viz. That MIR. Adams charged
Tor his personal expenses on journey which he
never made; but it shows that he charged as much
tor travelling his n,asinG,y Tor az The gentleman
IRON isliode Island calls ~ mis- 90 constructive
journey from Client to St. Petersbursh AS
Aessrs. q. and b. were allowed Tor their reoi
Journey from ST. Pe,eIsburgh, by way of Client,
10 London.
1t has not yet been explained, how this second
Journey from 81. Petersburgh TO Amsterdam and
Ghent, was performed; as the account stands, Mr..
Adams was paid for travelling twice from ST.
PeterSburgh 10 Client; once 1856 sc and next
SiUOO, and once Tor returning, e $50 81 j.; now
TINS second Journey from ST. Petersburgh, is who'll
ly inexp!icable TO ;ne, unless indeed when he had
performed his constructive journey TO that place,
II was deemed necessary to make another " con-
Sfrucfiue journey" to &c; back again. have
not said that The extraordinary service in travelling
an unusual distance, may not have given them A
Claim 10 compensation; but surely the payment OF
Claim Tor services actually rendered, and expen-
ses actually incurred, can never justify payment
OF claim where no services were rendered, nor
any expenses incurred. Bat we NAV inquire
whether there were any circumstances in this case
oil peculiar hardship, as 10 compensation, that re
CURED these '' cOnstrucf,ve'' allowances | would
not have brought this into view, but for the ex-
travagancies which the gentleman from Rhode Is
land has pressed into this discussion. Mr. Adams
received tins outfit of $4,000, when he entered
upon The peace mission. Anohsr outfit OF SO. 600
upon his going from Client TO London, and within
The same year, salary of $4,000, making in one
year, si27 ,O00, which might be considered, l think
a very liberal compensation, without any addition
Tor constructive Journeys and expense at Paris,
winch items follows, viz
one journey from ST. Petersburg to Ain,;er!ar,
Ghtni, Hivre, s. mn
This the journey which stated yesterdsvI ''''o
could not .ijeIsaHdIt pu ports have been
made during the war; b"l - ihe'e i. another
charge for travelling from st. Pete! s,urg 60
ohen', me OF t'e'e must, presume, have beeu
a ceHStTluk.us Jruruey.
4 ne ~, . new; ITEM Is iy' expense at r4r $50 10
Petersburg, 5ee "a !
Msang tog esther, e8ses ~ |
near the gentleman from Rhode Island saw |
mat ain mistaken IN the statement AMI tina,
1855 90, ought TO be deducted from the above |
am not u'Ist'ken; II l. the gentleman who il labor
lag under mistake, which As will find, if he ex |
amines The account more aitentiyely. [ anpe The |
ltouse 10 satisfied on this point and If NOT. tia, |
'he gentlemen from Rhode Island will take ano,b
er occasion 10 give us lecture on the M ouriev of
constructive allowances. have intended M moro
Va IN 10 state iacs as hey appear On lie document
OF ihe House. have not charged any oer.oo
WIN corruption, nor have given these transac. /
"ohs any name than profuse dsburserr ent oftLe
PUBIC money, IN giving reward where no service
IS pretended 10 have been performed, and thin, |
u proper that the House ehonld have full view /
~ Tue suUlsct, That we may act undersandingly on
me Dill before US One hing is very certain
nose VINO nave received such very extraordinary
ronsf'uehUe allowances for themselves. eanuo, |
ia" ms cord any tighter npon Others than it had
Dsen done IN their O'yn ca5e---ihey would he more
'iRe'Y 70 relax "; and II we go on in this way. !
al responsibility ceases; indeed, if we NAV iodee
rom recent c"se, it mag he said that we have
nearly reached The point where the Executive msv
DO as he pieasss with the public money. vi,bon,
regard TO law; and whenever an inquiry is nrooos
cd with view TO correct an abuse, we are met bv
proposition TO extend it back 10 the beoinnino of
Tie Government III 1889, to discover if possiS,e
whether they cannot find some inadvenent act w |
lusufy an Unauthorized expenditure of public mo. !
ney' ih't system Of procedure is wrono - M a.
Ousc cen ever be corrected under it, if precs1sn.
can De found on any Of our old musiy recor,s eo-
YIOlhilOn OF law. Under this svste,n thoya II