Year: 1879

ton of diplomatic agents sent by the United
States to foreign governments. On two
occasions the Secretary of State has, within
q few weeks, made a special communica-
tion to one or the other House of Congress
on the subject-once in reference to the
pecuniary condition Of the family OF the
late Minister to Berlin, and again, within
O day or two, in respect to the inadequacy
of the pay of the Minister to London, as
represented by him to the Department OF
State in an official note. These two are
special cases of n recent date, but, as
every one knows, the question OF what
is the proper salary to be paid to
our public ministers in foreign coun-
tries disturbs and delays the delib-
erations of nearly every Congress.


This last certainly ought not to be, nor
ought there to be sent to either House such
communications as those to which we have
referred by name. The question OF the
pay Of such public agents should not only
be answered by Congress, but answered in
q way to give permanency to the answer.
In the case of the late Mr.. Taylor it is
represented to Congress that he incurred
pecuniary obligations for house and furni-
ture which, since his term Of Office was so
brief, his estate is unable to meet. If an
adequate performance of the agency upon
which the late Minister to Berlin was sent
by the government compelled the under
taking Of those obligations and his estate
cannot meet them then obviously the govern
ment should respond. And so if in London
Mr.. Welsh is incurring similar obligations,
whether they are or are not beyond his own
pecunary resources, o similar necessity
presses upon the nation. The real ques-
ton in both cases is this, Is an annual
salary of seventeen thousand five hundred
dollars sufficient for public minister of
the United States at London or Berlin
The answer to this obviously depends first,
on the expenditures in either Of those cities,
which must necessarily be made by diplo-
matte agent of this country to enable him
to itly perform the duties of the agency
intrusted to him. In deciding this ques-
tion Congress will, of course, satisfy itself
as best it may whether the satisfac-
tory performance of the ordinary Off
cial work of the legation necessarily
demands expenditures in a social way,
aside from ordinary personal outlay, and
if there be demand of that character
what will be the probable extent Of it.
There will come an inquiry for what sum,
as compensation, competent man ought,
in the absence OF any special circumstances,
to undertake the agency. And when the
salary is once fixed, upon a proper Ameri-
can basis, it should be considered as estab-
lished beyond the reach of such special
appeals as are now before Congress. It has
been urged that there are, and ought to be,
those in our country who are competent,
and would be willing, to undertake a
diplomatic life in Europe without an
official salary; but there are those who
say that such terms of employment
would not be we'll for the agent nor
economical or wise for the government


But, however that may be, the rule of
official salary is now in force, and it is not
likely to. be presently changed. What,
then, shall be the scale of salaries? OBJ
viously it must be American. Our foreign
salaries must be in harmony with our home





and the chief of all our diplomatic agents
has but ten thousand dollars year the
pay Of public ministers abroad must have q
proper relation thereto, in view of the
actual situation at the particular foreign
court. Much Of the confusion and uncer-
tainty about diplomatic salaries among our
own people who are at home grow, we
&c oc ! tha
of the work which, in the present condition
Of diplomacy, our government has need of
at the hands OF it's diplomatic agents; and
o great deal of the dissatisfaction of those
agents with their pay comes of what they
think that our people require of such
agents in the sense of hospitality or social
display. Our public ministers abroad are,
we suspect, unhappy very often about
representations which may be made to
Senators or to the Secretary of State about
their style of living, as the phrase is; and
it is no doubt true that many superficial
and thoughtless persons do think and
say that our public ministers should live
and dispense hospitality as does the British
Embassy in the great political capitals.
But no sensible man or woman in Europe
expects that or recognizes any occasion for
it. The United States are in an important
sense outside of the European family Of
sovereigns. It's diplomatic agents, whether
called ambassadors, or legates, or nuncios,
or internuncios. or ENJOYS, or ministers,
or deputies, or commissioners, or ministers
resident or charge d'atfaires, cannot have
the same relation to a member of that
European family as one of the diplomatic
representatives Of another member of tho
family would have. An American cannot
have the same associations in the court circle
of Berlin as Lord Odo Russell has who
represents sovereign who is the mother of