prior to the reduction of duties in 1832) to limit their compensation, and oblige them to report annually the amount of compensation by fees, &c., received by them, together with an amendment thereto offered by Mr. FILLMORE,

Mr. VANCE said it would be perceived by the provisions of this amendment, that its object was to get an expression of this House against that portion of the second section of the act of the last session, making appropriations for the civil and diplomatic expenses of the Government for the year 1834, which permits the custom-house officers to receive a compensation equal to what they would have received under the importations of the year 1832; provided the act of the 14th of July of that year had not gone into effect, and to give permanency to the limitations and restrictions contained in the residue of that section.

If gentlemen will take the trouble to examine this subject, (said Mr. V.,) they will find that the importations of 1832, upon which an attempt is made to fix the basis of pay to our custom-house officers, were greater than in any one year since the existence of our Government, with the single exception of 1816.

Now, sir, (said Mr. V.,) what are the effects of continuing this provision in your appropriation bill? Does not every member of this House at once see that it is a license to our officers to disregard all economy in the collection of our revenue? Does it not, in effect, say to them, distribute the funds arising from fees and commissions amongst your dependants and hangers on; for we have provided under the second section for you to come into the treasury, without limitation, for the whole amount of your compensation, if necessary? Sir, (said Mr. V.,) I know I will be told by gentlemen that this amendment will compel your officers to discharge duties without compensation, if it be adopted. Now, sir, to this assertion I have the same response that was given at the last session of Congress, when I had the honor to submit a similar proposition. Dismiss your host of supernumerary officers, and bring back the contingent expenses of the custom-house to what they were prior to 1828, and you will have sufficient means, under the laws as they now are, to pay all the officers necessary to the wants of the Government. Sir, (said Mr. V.,) I have heard much about the labor and toil of this class of our fellow-citizens; I heard a grave Senator speak of their toils during the last session, when this amendment, or one nearly similar, was before that body for their sanction or rejection, in which he said, speaking of a certain gentleman, that he was so pressed by labor that he could not take his meals at home; and, to my knowledge, the very person of whom the Senator spoke was then in the Senate chamber, and had been here for weeks, trying to rid himself of the provisions of the amendment adopted by this House at their last session; and, sir, I believe the gentleman alluded to is now in this city, and has been the principal part of

this session.

I cannot myself say how much labor these gentlemen perform; but one thing I do know, but touch their $5,000 or $8,000 per annum, and they soon present you a formidable front in Washington. They may be hard pressed at home, but they appear to always have sufficient leisure to visit this place when salaries are in danger of being reduced. Sir, (said Mr. V.,) I will not at present further discuss this matter. At the last session it was fully discussed, and, after a full hearing, it received the sanction of this House by a decided vote. The Senate did, however, dissent from the decision of this House, and it was returned to this body with this objectionable section that had been stricken out restored to the bill, and in this matter of disagreement between the two Houses, and from the advanced stage

[JAN. 27, 1835.

of the session, this body acquiesced in the Senate's amendment. But I well recollect that, both in the Senate and here, we were promised that this matter should be brought before Congress early in their present session.

All appeared to agree that abuses had grown up in the collection of our customs; that the salaries of offcers were very disproportionate to their services. But here we are; the session two thirds passed away, and no bill yet presented, nor will there be any bill until you stop the principal officers of your custom-houses from going into the treasury for a large portion of their compensation, under a law that is based upon false pretences, and contrary to the soundest principles of econ omy and impartial justice. Sir, (said Mr. V.,) I have no disposition to do injustice to any portion of the officers of this Government. I have no disposition to even enter into this debate. I am about to retire from public life, and would gladly have left this whole matter to other and abler hands. I had, from a reluctance on my part to enter into a political warfare on the salary of of ficers, waited until the last moment to see if some other member would not step forward and call the attention of the House to a subject of so much impor tance; but finding no one willing to undertake the task, I have felt it to be my duty to present it again to the consideration of the House.

Mr. V. said that, since he had offered his amend ment a few days ago, he had been looking into the expense of collecting the revenue at different periods in the Government, from 1811 up to 1834, and that his examination of the subject had strengthened his previous convictions of the necessity of arresting the progressive expenditure in that branch of our financial system.

Sir, said Mr. V., if the House will give me their attention and hear me patiently, through a few statistical ta bles that I have prepared on this subject, if they do not come to a like conclusion, I will submit with great pleas ure to any decision they may think proper to make of the subject.

In the year 1811, I find there was collected at the cus tom-house, on imports, $13,313,222 73, and that the cost of collection was a fraction under 3 per cent. on the

amount.

In the year 1816, I find there was collected at the cus tom-house, on imports, $36,306,674 88, and that the cost of collection amounted to less than 25 per cent. on the sum collected.

In the year 1826, I find there was collected at the custom-house, on imports, $23,341,331 77, and that the cost of collection was a fraction under 4 per cent. on the amount collected.

In the year 1834, I find that there was collected at the custom-house on imports, $24,353,004 25, and that the cost of collection is but a fraction under 6 per cent. on the gross amount collected, and but a fraction under 10 per cent. on the nett revenue paid into the

treasury.

It is here proper to say that, with the exception of 1834, the per centage on collection has been calculated on the gross amount; as I have not been able to find from any tables amongst our documents, with the exception of that of the report of the Secretary of the Treasury of December 15th, 1834, on the compensation and number of custom-house officers, a separation of the gross from the nett revenue, and for that year I have given the cost

of collection on each sum.

Now, sir, permit me to present this progressive expenditure in this branch of our financial system in a dif ferent form, and then let me ask gentlemen to examine and judge for themselves, at what time, and under what administration, there has been the most extravagance and least restraint in this branch of the public service.

JAN. 27, 1835.]

[H. OF R.

Making a progressive increase on the collections of the revenue on imports, in four years, of $52,790 70, equal to a fraction over 5 per cent. for the term of four years, or of a fraction over one and one fourth per cent. per annum.

So much, Mr. Speaker, for the increase of expenditure under that head. And now, sir, I will give you the increase of expenditure on the same objects in the next four years, and we will then see how the amounts will compare, and whether we can find any satisfactory explanation for the necessity of the expenditure in these four years, being nearly five times as great as in the four preceding years for precisely the same objects, with this exception, that, in the first four years, there was collected at the custom-house on imports $86,357,900 50; and in the following four years there was collected $97,294,136 05. Now for the proof of this assertion. In the four successive years, commencing with 1829, the cost of collection on imports, at the custom-house, was as follows:

and such, sir, will continue to be the increase, unless you strike from your laws this objectionable section, and bring back the necessity of economy amongst your offi. cers of customs.

So much, Mr. Speaker, for clerk hire, stationary, and contingencies. I will now give you a sample of additional allowances under this section, at four of our principal cities, in the year 1833:

In the city of Boston, seven weighers received extra $9,608 55 compensation under this section of And had previously received 16,548 07

Total,

$26,156 62

$15,307 90

29,618 49

1831, 1832,

1,216,009 57 1,315,226 52 Making a progressive increase of expenditure, in four years, on the collections at the custom-house, of 301,558 dollars and 94 cents, equal to a fraction under 24 per cent. for the term of four years, or little less than six per cent. per annum.

Now, sir, I have the key to this extraordinary increase of expenditure; and if the House will bear with me, and lend me their attention a few moments longer, I will solve the mystery.

This 2d section, that gentleman are so anxious to retain, does away all necessity in your custom-house of economy and rigid accountability. Nay, it goes further; it gives a license to your principal officers to expend, under the sanction of the Secretary of the Treasury, the whole amount arising from fees and commissions, in paying off subordinate officers and contingent expenses, the result of which has been to increase the number of officers and the amount of contingencies.

Now, sir, permit me to give you a table of statistics, showing the rapid increase of expenditure in the collector's office in the city of New York, taken from an official paper in the Senate's documents, No. 435, 6th vol. for 1834:

Here, sir, you have twenty-three subordinate officers of your custom-house receiving, for duties that can be performed by any honest, industrious mechanic, who would be willing to labor for two dollars per day, the enormous sum of $82,713 51, making an average annual salary of within a small fraction of $3,600 each. This, sir, includes only one inconsiderable class of your customhouse officers, who, under the restrictions I propose by the amendment, will receive out of your treasury $46,000 instead of $82,713 51, an allowance, in my opinion, liberal to a fault; for, my word for it, if ever this matter receives that attention from this House that its importance demands, these gentlemen weighers will not be allowed their $2,000 per annum.

Sir, let me ask gentlemen to examine and compare our present with our former expenses. Under the administration of Mr. Jefferson, the cost of collection in the city of New York was $61,347; in 1832, it was $408,791. Why, sir, you now pay to your weighers alone, in the city of New York, $44,926 39, a sum nearly equal to the whole expense of collection in that city in the year 1802.

And now, sir, let me ask gentlemen if it is not time to arrest this increased and increasing expense, which is accumulating in a ratio that will in a few years turn the balance sheet against the Government, and then I suppose we will be called upon to resort to direct taxes to pay our custom-house officers.

Mr. CAMBRELENG said that he concurred with the gentleman from Ohio in the object he had in view, and he thought that that gentleman, in parting from the House, could not have conferred upon it a better legacy than the resolution he had offered, and the speech by which it was sustained. Yet he must be permitted to express a belief that the gentleman had made a very material mistake in some of the positions he had taken. In stating the rate per cent. which it cost the Government to collect the revenue, he had commenced in the year

1811, when all the imports of the country were charged with a very high duty, and had brought down his statement to the year 1834, when all the duties were low, and when many of our imports were free of duty of any kind. For this difference, the gentleman seemed to have made no allowance. He would have done no more

than justice if he had stated the enormous increase of importations which had taken place in some of those years, and they were at the least double the amount of some of the years preceding. Yet Mr. C. was ready to admit that the expenses of the customs were great, had increased, and ought to be diminished. But the true foundation of the greater part of this increase was to be found in measures of which that gentleman and his friends had been the warm and persevering advocates. He alluded to the multiplication of guards and restrictions which had been introduced with a view to secure the payment of the revenue, and which demanded a host of officers whose services had never been required before. As the gentleman was so desirous of cutting down this branch of the public expenditure, he trusted to have his aid in an effort to repeal at least one half of the laws relating to revenue, which had been passed since 1816, and thus to give simplicity to the business of collections. The multitude of appraisers, the square-yard duties, and running-yard duties, and various minimums, with all their appurtenances, now combined so to complicate the task of getting goods through the custom-house, that it required fifty clerks a whole month to accomplish what might formerly have been done in a few days with less than half the number. Mr. C. insisted that the present mode of paying custom-house officers was altogether wrong. The whole revenue received ought to go into the treasury, and those who collected it ought to be paid by appropriation. Mr. C. again explicitly stated that he did not object to the inquiry proposed, but only that it should be introduced into an appropriation bill, where it certainly did not belong, and where it originally had had no place. He had understood the chairman of the Committee of Commerce to say, that it was contemplated by that committee to introduce spontaneously a bill intended substantially to effect the same object.

Mr. SUTHERLAND (chairman of the Committee of Commerce) said that he considered it as not very material whether this proviso should be adopted or not. He had said that he thought it best, at present, to go through the bill as reported, and the Committee of Commerce would bring up the question, some time this session, at least so far as the names of the officers were concerned. The bill before the House was an appropriation bill. It contained no provision, of any sort, in relation to customhouse officers, but the gentleman from Ohio was endeavoring to put that subject into the bill-a clause of limi tation, although it contained no appropriation to pay the salaries to be limited. He understood that it was contemplated, in the other House, to introduce a provision of limitation. If such were not the case, he stood pledged to offer to the Committee of Commerce some measure on that subject. They were prepared to say that the compensation of some of the officers of the customs. should be reduced. It might be well enough, however, to remember the vast capital which was vested in the city of New York; the millions upon millions which were constantly passing through the custom-house there. If Congress should refuse to the revenue officers the necessary fees and stationary for the discharge of their duties, the revenue could not be collected. It was a common saying that figures could not lie; but, for his part, he believed that, as generally used, they were the greatest liars of the age. The gentleman had paraded a great many of them in his speech, and, to be sure, they looked very well on one side of the question. But if the gentleman, instead of coming from over the mountains, had had his resi

[JAN. 27, 1835.

dence in a State upon the seaboard, and had examined with candor into the actual facts of the case, the gentleman himself would admit that these officers performed a laborious duty, and were entitled to a proper compensa. tion. So far as the city of Philadelphia was concerned, Mr. S. could say, with perfect truth, that not one of the revenue officers belonging to that port had any claims on him. He was influenced wholly and exclusively by a sense of justice. He wished to give them their due, and nothing more. In the mean while, he wished to keep the bill clear from all foreign matter. Let the subject go to the Senate. The Committee of Commerce in that body consisted of gentlemen quite as learned, and quite as familiar with all that related to the revenue, as the hon. orable gentleman from Ohio. That committee had examined these subjects last year, and had introduced the very section which it was now the object of the gentle man to expunge. If any thing of this kind must come into the appropriation bill, that committee were compe tent to introduce it there; but he felt authorized to say that they would not do this, if they could in time bring in a general bill on this subject. The proper course would be to send the bill to the Senate, and not to inter rupt or delay its passage by pressing amendments of this

kind.

Mr. FILLMORE said that he concurred generally in the views which had been expressed by the gentleman from Ohio. Since that gentleman's amendment had been introduced, Mr. F. had carefully investigated the laws under which our revenue officers were paid, and it was his purpose to propose a further amendment, which he hoped the gentleman from Ohio would consent to adopt as a modification of his own. He had no desire to reduce the compensation of those officers too low. He was anx ious that their salary should be fixed at such an amount as was right, and at no more, and should be so graduated that it should be no longer the fact that those who did the least duty should receive the highest pay. The gen tleman from Ohio would find, upon examination, that the amendment he had proposed would not remedy the evil of which he complained. The compensation which these officers received was made up in two or three dif ferent modes. The collectors received a per centage upon the duties collected, and certain fees of office. The same was true of many other classes of these officers; but as to the weighers, measurers, and gaugers, there was no law which made their pay in proportion to the revenue received; on the contrary, they were paid specifically for duties performed. The inspectors received a per diem. The duties of their station were arduous; and, previous to 1816, they had been allowed two dol lars per day, together with certain contingencies, but in that year their compensation had been increased fifty per cent., and instead of two dollars they now receive three dollars per day. They were employed, as it ap peared, every day in the year, nor were they idle on those days generally devoted to public worship. This salary was perhaps not too much, but the allowance made to weighers, gaugers, measurers, and markers, though in proportion to the work done, was certainly greater than it should be. The report from the Secre tary of the Treasury, instead of being such as was called for by the House, to guide its legislation on the subject, was a mere transcript from the second part of the Comedy of Errors, the Blue Book. Let any man compare the returns there made with the provision made by law, and he would at once perceive that they were not cor rect. They stated nothing of any allowances for fines or contingencies. The collector, for example, down for $4,400, while his share of fines, &c., was proba bly quite equal to the amount of his salary; so that, in fact, his place, instead of being worth but $4,400, was worth probably more than 7 or $8,000

was set

Mr. F. would call the attention of the House to one or two items in this record. Joseph Lowry, of Boston, a weigher and gauger, received $3,714, a sum which greatly exceeded what many, if not most, of the Governors of the different States were allowed. A certain George Gwyer, a weigher, received $6,097. This seemed a large allowance, yet it was $3,000 less than what another officer of the same rank received in one year. As it was probably apprehended, by the authority making up the Blue Book, that this amount might possibly appear somewhat enormous, a note of explanation was subjoined at the bottom of the page, stating that this included the wages of laborers and other expenses. Now, Mr. F. would like to know what these laborers received, and what was meant by these "other expenses." He was at a loss to conceive what they could be. This, however, was all the explanation given for a salary which exceeded that of any one of the heads of Departments, which surpassed the allowance to any Governor in the Union but one, and which greatly exceeded the pay of any judge in the highest court in the nation. The man who received it was a weigher, and received his appointment from the collector. Cases of this sort Mr. F. must consider as abuses, and such abuses as called for an effectual remedy; but that remedy would not be furnished by the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio; that amendment would not reach the case. The law of 1829 was daily evaded, and the same man abused its provisions so as to draw from the treasury two or three different salaries.

Mr. F. said he would now offer an amendment, which he hoped the gentleman from Ohio would accept.

(Mr. FILLMORE then moved an amendment, the substance of which was, that no officer should receive, either in the shape of salary or fees, or by a union of employments, more than $each; the sum being left blank.] It would be observed that the operation of this amend ment would not be to fix, but only to limit, the amount of salary to be received. He was willing to regulate the compensation of these officers by a liberal scale; but it ought certainly to be restrained within some fixed and determinate sum. One word as to this matter of limiting salaries. The gentleman from Pennsylvania, at the head of the Committee of Commerce, [Mr. SUTHERLAND, ] had said that he concurred in the propriety of such a measure, but that he did not consider this as the proper time or place to do it; and the gentleman seemed to intimate that there was a prospect of reporting a general bill regulating the entire system. Mr. F. would greatly prefer this; but did any man suppose, was there a man in the House who could believe, that a bill could be reported in time to pass this session? He suspected not. Indeed, the gentleman had been careful not to give any express assurance of such a thing; but, lest gentlemen should be inclined to doubt, he had added that, if no such bill should be reported in this House, the Senate would amend the present bill, so as to secure the object in view. But that gentleman must surely be too well acquainted with parliamentary practice, and parliamentary law, to believe that this House was to look to any other body to do that for it which it could and should do for itself. The gentleman knew that it was improper, and out of order, even to allude to what was passing in the other House of Congress. Were they to neglect their duty, because the Senate would do theirs? Did not the gentleman know that our bill would go to the other House near the close of the session, when there was no time left for amendments and alterations? If the compensation of these officers was too great, the present bill ought never to leave this House until the evil was corrected by provision of law. He hoped the gentleman from Ohio would accept the amendment as a modifica tion of his own.

VOL. XI.-70

[H. OF R.

Mr. VANCE not replying, Mr. POLK rose and inquired whether he would or would not accept the amendment?

Mr. VANCE said that he must decline accepting the amendment. It left so many salaries to be fixed by the House, that he feared it would involve them in endless difficulties. All he wanted was a general provision that should embrace the whole ground. He doubted, too, the policy of abolishing, as the amendment proposed to do, all allowance of a share in the forfeitures. This, he apprehended, would work injuriously, especially on the frontier.

Mr. POLK said that, after the repeated assurances from the chairman of the Committee of Commerce, that this subject was under consideration in that committee, and this by order of the House, after the re. ception of a detailed report from the Secretary of the Treasury, giving to that committee all necessary information on the subject, he could not conceive why this amendment was thus pressed. This was an appropriation bill, and here was a proposition which went to remodel the entire system of compensating the officers of the customs. What necessary connexion, what connexion of any kind, existed between them? If it should be said that a provision on the subject had heretofore been appended to a similar bill, his reply was, that it had been done from necessity, and necessity only; but that necessity did not now exist. The Committee of Ways and Means had not deemed it to be their duty, in reporting this bill, to go beyond the appropriations necessary to carry on the civil and diplomatic duties of the Govern ment; and, should the amendment be farther pressed, he trusted that the House would act upon it, and reject it, and let the bill be passed without further delay.

He would add a word or two on the subject of abuses. Gentlemen must be aware that the sums received by these weighers and others, of whom so much had been said, were not paid them under any arbitrary determination of the Treasury Department. The Secretary of the Treasury had no discretion in the matter; the compensation was fixed by law. It was the law of the land which allowed the per centage on duties collected. At ports of smaller consequence, where a custom-house must be kept up to prevent smuggling, but where little was collected, the law allowed three per cent. on the amount; but at the large seaports, where the bulk of the revenue was received, it allowed but one sixth of one per cent. As to the number of clerks, the Secretary of the Treasury was empowered to designate their number and compensation; but this was not to go beyond a certain limit.

But what had all they had heard to do with those who administer the Government? They were but executive officers, and it was their duty to carry the law into effect. If the law was wrong, change the law; but an appropriation bill was no place to do it. The principle of the law was just and fair: at ports where the duties were few, the salaries were small; where the duties were multiplied and onerous, the salaries were large. Gentlemen talked about "leeches" who sucked the blood of the nation. Such language was easily adopted. Nothing was easier than to bring general and sweeping charges; but if gentlemen believed what they said, why not call for a committee of investigation? Let the House have a report; let them have facts to go upon. But, besides, the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio would not effect what he supposed it would. The gentleman talked of one thing, but did another. The modification which had been proposed would indeed fix the salaries; but this the gentleman would not accept. And if he had, was that House, without the report of any committee to guide them, and at the heel of an appropriation bill, to set about to arrange all these