The mountain sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1844-1853, 1849-08-16
Salaries here and in England.

The Reformer RICHARD CoBDEN, some
days ago, in recent debate in the British
House of Parliament on the bill to reduce
the expenses of the government twenty
per cent, made the following striking
comparison between England and this
country, and the public men of each:
A salary of $4,000 year for occupy
ing the Treasury bench was much more
than need be paid to any man. He would
go further than a reduction of 10 per cent.
on such salaries. Why, considering the
general range of profits and prices, should
we pay our public officers more than
double the salaries paid to the public Off
Ger of any other country? Take the Uni
ted States. (Hear, hear.) 1t was great
empire, second only to ourselves in mari
time importance. Well, the four princi-
pal Secretaries of State in the United
States received only gl $50 year each.
Now those men correspondent in dignity
and importance with the Secretaries of this
and other countries, and were in all re-
spects quite as distinguished as they were.
1t was impossible that any individual on
the Treasury bench could conceive that he
Mr.. Cobden) in any way detracted from
their importance or their merits, by COM
pairing them with those men. Take next,
to Paris had 100000 year; our ambas-
sador to Austria had $4,000 year; and
our Minister to Spain had g6,50O a year;
while the United States did not pay to
their highest diplomatic functionary more
than $4,000 year. Now, he put it to
the house-had they one ambassador or
minister abroad who would consider it
derogatory to his dignity TO be compared
with Mr.. Bancroft! Had they superior
man to Mr.. Bancroft! (Hear.)
Who amongst them all stands higher in
his profession, or az man? Why, then,
should we pay 100000 a year to an am
bassador at Paris, when the Americans
pay only $4,000 to their ambassador at
Paris! But it was not his proposition that
the salaries paid this country should be
reduced to the same figure as that of the
United States. Let it not be said he was
for bringing down their establishment to
those of republic. If the house would
reduce them 20 per cent. that would satisfy
him, and they would be still well paid.
But what he wished the public function
aries of this country to exhibit more prom
inently was a sense of loyalty, and an ap-
probation of the honor which attached to
the holding of Office, and not an exclusive
desire to being paid for carrying on the
public establishments of the country.
Were such feeling displayed by public
men it would greatly enhance the dignity
of their position and heighten the estima-
ton in which they would be held by the
community.
He had thus, then, indicated what was
the class of officers the reduction of whose
salaries he wished to see effected. There
were, in his opinion, not only many that
might be reduced, but many public SER
wants whose services might be dispensed
with altogether. The hon. gentleman
had lost sight of the great number of su-
pernumeraries that we had, and who were
not required. The noble lord at the head
Of the Government had stated that Prime
Ministers formerly had sinecure offices,
which they could give to their sons.
Now, it did not seem to him that Minis
ters of the present day lost sight of their
relations together.-(' ('.Hear," and laugh
ter.) A great part of the patronage at the
disposal of our Ministers ought to be con-
sidered as some compensation for the la
bors of their offices. Besides, there were
retiring pensions in this country, but in
America there were no retiring pensions
for civil services.