alarms the jealous and jaundiced imagination of the gentleman, and he thinks he sees concealed, "admirals," "titles and dignities," under "false colors." If the gentleman sees them at all, he must see them under "false colors," for they are mere phantoms of his imagination.

The gentleman expresses some surprise that this House has been furnished, under the sanction of the Navy Department, with tabular statements of the compensation allowed by Great Britain and France to the officers of their navies. We may obtain some information from these statements, though I confess they seem to me but illy calculated as a rule to direct us. But the gentleman, though surprised that the Secretary should give his sanction to such monarchical principles, has made more use of those tables than all the House besides. He states that the admirals in the British and French navies receive $7,900, and $7,500, in time of peace, and fifty per cent. more in time of war, and he adds, "these things are brought into the House to teach us poor republicans how very far we are behind the oppressive aristocracies of European countries." Yet, in pursuing his argument, the gentleman entirely forgets himself, and notwithstanding his severe denunciation against aristocracies," and his delicate censure of the Secretary of the Navy for his seeming sanction, he himself seems delighted with British and French pay, aristocratical pay, half-pay, to all subordinate officers. I am aware the gentleman censures the high compensation given to admirals, and why does he not disapprove at least the low pay given to lieutenants and midshipmen, and all subordinate officers? It is one system. The first officers receive very high compensation, and the lower and humbler officers a mere trifle. It is contrary to the genius and spirit of our institutions and opinions. The gentleman is in favor of levelling down, but not for levelling up. The gentleman informs us, and seems to quote with peculiar satisfaction, the compensation allowed by Great Britain.

66

In the British navy, a lieutenant of seven years' standing,
first rate, is allowed
$663 78

All other lieutenants,

Midshipmen,

In France, lieutenants of ship of the line,
In France, lieutenants of frigate,
Midshipmen,

531 02

450 00
337 00

[H. OF R.

Postmaster General,
Attorney General,
Comptrollers,

3,000

6,000

3,000 4,500

3,000

3,500

The gentleman, in the course of his argument, has been opposed to the compensation of the army and navy. He denounces the Blue Book for not "telling half the truth." He is opposed to the bill before us, in the general and detail, and he is opposed to the allowances under the present law proposed to be repealed by the bill we are considering. It does seem to me his jealousy and zeal have betrayed him into some errors and inconsistencies. It appears to me the bill we are considering has been misunderstood. I beg the attention of the House for a few minutes, while I endeavor to state its principles and explain some of its provisions.

It is provided by the bill that a senior captain in service shall receive

On leave, or waiting orders,
Navy commissioners,
On other duty,

Of this class of officers, which may be denominated the first class, we have thirty-seven, but only four can receive the highest compensation, because we have only four squadrons at sea. Of the second, only three can receive the 4,000 dollars, as we have only three navy commissioners. Yet it has been repeatedly asserted, in the course of the debate, that these thirty-seven officers would receive each and every one the highest compensation named.

The captains of our navy who command fleets and perform the duty of admirals, after fifteen years' service, rank, by the regulations of our Government, with a major general in the army. It appears by the report of the Executive that the amount of compensation actually received by a major general, in the year 1832, was $6,528 80. No one has proposed or desires to give the oldest captain in the navy a sum any thing like that 138 52 above named; yet there are gentlemen in this House who complain and object to the bill now before us, because it fixes the salaries of the officers of the navy too high, when compared with the army. Those captains in the navy who have served less than fifteen years rank with brigadier generals. The pay of brigadier generals, including allowances, by the same report, was, in 1832, $4,265 20. I will not pursue the inquiry. If gentlemen are disposed to equalize the pay of the army and navy, surely there can be no serious difficulty. We know what the officers of the army have received; we know the corresponding grades in the navy.

150 00 I consider these compensations as founded upon the same aristocratic principles as were those of the admirals, so much complained of; and yet, unless I mistake entirely the whole scope and object of his reasoning, they meet his approbation. Would the gentleman desire to see our officers, of the grades above named, reduced to the same pitiful compensation?

The gentleman complains that the chairman, in presenting his reports in support of this bill, did not furnish a report and bill prepared by the Secretaries of War and Navy, and approved by the President, and sent to the Senate. He informs us that, by that bill, the compensation allowed to the officers, except I believe two or three of the highest grades, is uniformly lower than that allowed by the bill before us. By the report the gentleman refers to, with some approbation, as coming from the President and Secretaries, the senior captain of the navy, while on duty at sea, is allowed $5,500, $1,000 more than the bill before us. I wonder the gentleman did not see the "admiral in disguise" in that proposition. The gentleman states that it has been alleged in this debate, (and I say truly,) that the compensation of the navy was fixed in 1799; and he adds, whatever else that administration had been censured for, it was not guilty of being in favor of low salaries. Here the gentleman must yield to facts which speak louder than words. If the administration of 1799 fixed the salaries and compen sation sufficiently high, how does it happen that subse

H. of R.]

Pay of Navy Officers.

Of this class we have 251, but only seven can receive the highest sum, ($1,800,) as we have only seven vessels for this class, (many of whom are competent to any command.) This class ranks with captains in the army. Captains in the army received, by the report I have already often alluded to, $1,442 91. The average amount, by the bill, given to lieutenants, it is believed, cannot exceed that sum. I have had occasion, in the course of this debate, to state that the compensation of the officers of the navy was fixed thirty-seven years ago. Great changes have since taken place. Some officers of the first importance, as boatswains, gunners, sail-makers, and carpenters, have received a compensation entirely inadequate, and suitable men, in some instances, could not be found to do those duties. We have suffered loss of lives and property in consequence.

Mr. Speaker, I feel deeply interested in the prosperity
of the navy of the United States. I believe the pros-
perity, and even safety, of the country must, in a very
great measure, depend upon it. I trust my opinions and
habits are as far removed from extravagance, and ex-
travagant compensation, as any member of this House.
The laborer is, indeed, worthy his hire, and a just com-
pensation must depend upon the nature and character
of the service performed. I have no feeling or interest
but that of an American citizen, nor would I desire that
my children, or particular friends, should participate in
these high compensations, (as some gentlemen think;)
because I believe, considering their situation, privations,
&c., they are not, and will not, be desirable posts. Our

navy has been called one arm of our national defence.
Mr. Speaker, it is the right arm.
ter, in the event of a war, must be defended by "wood-
This country, hereaf
en walls." We are in no danger from Canada, Mexico,
or from the poor and miserable remnants of Indian tribes,
either on this side, or beyond the Rocky mountains.
I hope as ardently for the continuation of peace as any
man; for I consider war as one of the greatest calami-

ties that can befall a nation. But it is sometimes unavoid-
able.
The same tempers and lusts from whence wars
and fightings have sprung, still hold a place in the hu-
man breast. As it is the province, so it becomes the
duty of Government, in time of peace, to be prepared,

at least to some extent, for war.

serve us from the evil, by preventing its occurrence. Preparation may preWar is not ordinarily declared without looking to consequences. If, by the mercy of a kind Providence, we are permitted to escape the awful calamity of war, being free from its evils, burdens, and privations, the people of the country will cheerfully pay all lawful and proper expense to support and sustain our small but efficient army and navy. In peace a part of our navy is needed, and most usefully employed. Our navigation, commerce and fisheries, visit every part of the globe. Policy and duty require of us to afford them national protection. Our navy has saved us the price and dishonor of paying tribute to the Barbary Powers. It has protected and preserved us from pirates and robbery upon the ocean. It compels savages to fear and respect us, and opens an avenue to commerce alike beneficial to them and us, and promotes their improvement and civilization. It affords a refuge and sanctuary to our citizens far from their native country, amid convulsions and revolutions, when government ceases to direct and control man. It has, and I trust will continue to command, the respect and admiration of the world. navy is worthy of our regard and protection, and the Our question presented for our deliberation is, what measures are wise and expedient for us to adopt to sustain our gallant navy, while it so gallantly protects its country! Our eyes are naturally first turned to the officers. I know a high sense of duty and warm patriotism are the mainsprings of their action. But they deserve, and

[JAN. 7, 1835.

should receive, from their country, food and raiment: in a word, a fair and suitable compensation for their services. What should that compensation be?

ployment. War upon the ocean is fraught with dangers 1st. War or fighting is not a pleasant or desirable emand evils unknown to armies upon the land. Upon the ocean, man is called to contend not only with his human enemies, but with the warring elements.

2d. An officer of the navy has two things to learn—
these arts is the labor of a man's life.
the art of warfare and the art of navigation. To learn

prevent their attending to or engaging in other business,
3d. Their employment, long absence from home, &c.
more or less profitable to almost all other classes of citi
zens. They are unavoidably subject to the expense of
and one for themselves on ship-board.
keeping two establishments, one for their family at home,

frequent removals. It is required more effectually to se
They, as well as officers of the army, are subject to
cure the most efficient service of officers and best inter-
adds greatly to their expense, and compels them to make
ests of the country. But it is a severe requisition. It
said three removes are as bad as a fire-that a rolling
great sacrifices of comfort and property. It has been
stantly rolling, and some of our distinguished officers, I
stone gathers no moss. We keep these men almost con
twenty-four times. The first grade of officers must be
have been informed, have been required to remove
presumed not only talented, but fortunate and success
ful, to rise by regular gradation to the highest dis-

tinction.

it will enjoy it but a very short time. The second In quiet and peaceful times it must be the labor of one's life, and a few who may hereafter attain and third grades, masters commandant and lieutenants, are of a higher order of character and qualification than the same grade of officers in France or England but, whatever their qualifications may be, there are We have many lieutenants qualified to command ships; no ships for them. Hope opens no such door of promotion. They must remain lieutenants. Let them England and France, but upon the more liberal princ be well paid, not upon the monarchical principles of ples of our own Government and institutions. I would make, once for all, the same remark of all the under officers, chaplains, surgeons, surgeons' mates, schoolmas ters, and midshipmen. What is a just and proper co the circumstances? The country is justly obligated to pensation for their service, taking into consideration all compensate them fairly and liberally for their services and if we can ascertain what that pay should be, I have avoid extravagance; if any part of the compensation no doubt the people would pay it freely. I would is so. be too high, let it be reduced. I am not aware that it gives offence to the friends of the bill, (though I am in If the three per cent. fund, as it has been called, favor of it,) let it be stricken out; I do not consider it agreeing to the details of this bill. I beg its friends not essential. There is, unquestionably, great difficulty to be discouraged. It has been agreed on all sides, by the Executive, Secretaries of War, Navy, and by Congress, by repeated resolutions and committees, that it sation of the officers of the navy. is high time to revise the law fixing the compen I trust gentlemen will yield opinions upon such parts of the bill as may not be deemed essential to secure its passage. Mr. REED was followed by

Mr. JARVIS, who rose and offered an amendment, which was read by the Clerk.

but

one. He

Mr J. said he professed a friendship for the navy, he trusted it was an enlightened and judicious wished to see some advance in the pay of naval officers beyond all reason. but he thought some of the provisions of this bill went If passed, he believed it would

tend to render that important arm of the national de-
fence unpopular with the people, with whom it had al-
ways, up to this day, been extremely popular. He
asked how their constituents would manage this thing,
f it were placed directly in their own hands? Most
members of Congress had also belonged to their sev-
eral State Legislatures. There was not a State judicial
office with a salary higher than $2,000. The Govern-
ors of five States received but $1,000 per annum; five
$1,500; and five more not exceeding $2,000. He could
only attribute the liberality of Congress on these occa-
sions to the zigzag manner in which the expense was
defrayed. In the collection of State taxes, the tax-
gatherer meets you at your door, face to face, but not
So with a tax collector through the customs. Mr. J.
said he would venture to assert that, if these salaries
were to be raised by direct taxation, not one member
on that floor would record his vote for this bill, unless
he expected to vacate his seat on that floor at the close
of the session. The increase proposed was more than
sufficient to cover the whole expenses of each of three-
fourths of the States, and more than the average of that

of the whole of them.

After some further remarks from Mr. JARVIS,

Mr. CROCKETT said he did not know how the motion he was about to make would be received by the House, but his object was to come to a determination on this subject some way or other. The House had already spent two weeks on this bill, and, to all appear ance, were likely to spend two or three more, unless some final stop was put to it. In the mean time, there was much important private business on the table, and, among it, some that greatly concerned his constituents. He therefore called for the previous question.

A majority of the House, however, did not second

the motion.

Mr. WISE expressed a desire to address the House; but as the day was somewhat advanced, he moved an adjournment.

The motion was negatived.

Mr. WISE addressed the House as follows: Mr. Speaker: I am in favor of the amendments proposed by the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. POPE,] and would sustain them, if I thought we could go into committee with safety to this bill. But, believing that the motion to recommit will be used, not by the gentleman himself, however, to defeat this bill entirely, I shall oppose the recommitment, and support the bill as it is, rather than endanger its passage by attempting to amend its minor defects.

My colleague, [Mr ALLEN,] who addressed the House the other day in opposition to this bill, distrusted all legislation which appeals to prejudice or passion-to feelings of national pride or glory; to neither of which does this bill appeal so much as to an enlightened sense of national justice and policy, and individual right, founded solely on the just law, "that the laborer is worthy of his hire," and that the faithful servant who labors much, risks much, is responsible for much, and deprived of much, in important public service, should be adequately paid in proportion to his labor, his risk, his responsibility, and his privation. Sir, I fear there was no necessity to awaken distrust against this proposed increase of the pay of the navy. There was no manner of danger that this House was about to be carried away by any intemperate zeal, by any passion or prejudice, or by any feeling of national pride and glory for the navy. Far, far from there having been too much feeling for this class of public officers, there has always been a total want of feeling or interest in their behalf. They have repeatedly come, and you have as repeatedly sent them away empty; they have cried, and you have heeded not their petitions; they have knock

[H. OF R.

ed, and the treasury has been closed against them; and this, too, when others have come, and you have loaded them with gold; when others have but whispered, and you have nodded your assent; when others have taken the key, and opened the door without knocking, and you have turned away your heads from the robbery of the treasury, to keep from being State's evidence! The army pay has been increased; the Secretaries have been made courtiers; their clerks, like candles, are yearly newly dipped; one Department has learned to take the public money without asking, and you have made all extra appropriations asked for besides; have put your own hands pretty deeply into the public purse; and the very messengers, footmen, "Columbia's white slaves," of you all, are richly larded with the very drippings of extravagant expenditures of the public money. And look at the navy pay list! The very same it was in the time of Paul Jones, and the only pay list of any branch of your service not stained with wastefulness, but pale and meager with degrading parsimony. And now, forsooth, you are told not to let a sense of national pride and glory carry you away, in the midst of all this scene of extravagance on other subjects, in preventing the elbows of your captains from peeping through their coat sleeves on the quarter decks of your proudest ships on foreign stations! Sir, I do invoke the national honor and pride to remove injustice, to preserve something like equality of pay amongst all public servants, according to their duties and responsibilities. No one need invoke the glorious achievements of your navy, which has proved to be one of the most faithful public servants, to increase the pay of its officers for the purposes of gratifying pride merely, when your present Secretary of the Navy reports that their pay "is altogether inadequate to an honorable discharge of their duties." Yes, sir, "to an honorable discharge of their duties;" and when, too, your own committees have reported it to be "degradingly low."

It is with these reports and this evidence they approach you saying, proving, that the inadequacy of their compensation is killing to their spirit, their pride, their honor, and common honesty; weakening to the navy's strength, injurious and destructive to the public interest, by degrading and corrupting the country's fighting men. It is upon these topics of justice and interest, and not of glory, though of national honor and pride as connected with justice and interest, that I mean to speak; though I cannot see the unfairness of a good and faithful servant's pointing to his well doings, when he comes to ask justice at the hands of those whom be has nobly served, especially if he has been more than thrice ungratefully refused his just ducs. He should be paid in some gain, and not all in glory; and if, in seeking his dues, he should happen to speak of his deeds, his solid argument of inadequate compensation should hardly be impaired in our minds by his stirring up the recollection of his past glorious services to the country. Sir, I wish to present some facts to the House. gross amount of the present pay of the commission and warrant officers, provided for in this bill, is, in round numbers, $770,000

The select committee first propo-
sed an increase of
By its second report it proposed
an additional increase of
All the amendments in the Com-
mittee of the Whole, and in the
House, have increased the pay
Making the whole increase

$116,000
84,000

6,000

The gross amount of pay, as proposed by this
bill,

The

206,000

$976,000

Relying, then, upon the reports of the Department and of the committee, that there should be some increase, the sole question is, whether this amount of increase is too much? The present pay of the navy was fixed in the eighteenth century. The changes since then have been great in every point of view. Though articles of family and personal consumption are perhaps lower now than then, yet the wants of men have multi- | plied in a quadruple ratio. Respectable living is much higher to the officers. What was respectable living then is mean now, to almost every grade and class of society. The navy itself has greatly increased, and its duties multiplied; the responsibilities of its service much more onerous than formerly; the living of officers, their duties and responsibilities then, being to the living of officers, their duties and responsibilities now, as a ship of war then would be to a line of battle ship now. The present pay is said to be "degradingly low." I should think, then, that the sum of $200,000 was no very great increase to raise the pay of so many officers and men from such a condition to that of a respectable footing. This sum appears reasonable to me, especially when the whole list, with its increase, will gain by comparison with that of any other branch of service. And if the increase of pay is not in the aggregate too much, there is no reason for recommitting this bill on account of its form. The officers of every grade more generally unite in approving the pay proposed, and its distribution, and are better satisfied with what they call the "symmetry" of this bill than with that of any other ever proposed. For this I have the authority of respectable officers of every grade. And the main object of this bill is not only to increase and regulate, but to equalize the pay of the officers-not to equalize the pay of the army and navy, but to equalize the pay of the navy by itself. It was found wholly impracticable to compare the pay of the army with that of the navy. There can be no assimilation of the pay of the two, because there does not, and cannot, exist any relation whatever of grades and duties between them, except by the mere arbitrary regulation of the two Departments, for the idle purposes of etiquette: There are and must be more numerous grades in the army than in the navy. And the duties of a sailor to those of a soldier can no more be assimilated than the fishes of the sea to the birds and beasts of dry land. But as a comparison was instituted by my colleague, I must beg leave to set him right as to certain errors of which he was guilty, both as to the pay of the officers of the army, and as to the relative pay of the army and navy. By regulation of the Departments alone,

Commodores rank with brigadier generals;
Captains with colonels;

Masters commandant with majors;
Lieutenants with captains.

[JAN. 7, 1835.

as the first grade of the navy ranks with brigadier gen erals and colonels, and the second grade with majors, we must compare the pay of the navy captains with that of all the officers of the army, from major generals down to majors, with whom masters commandant rank. How stands the comparison then?

From major generals to majors, according to the report of the Secretary of War, there are thirty-eight generals and colonels and lieutenant colonels, as offsets to the thirty-six captains of the navy. How stands their relative pay? Sir, I will not touch that Blue Book, a lie upon the calendar. I refer you, sir, to Adjutant General Jones's report to Congress in 1832 and 1835. He makes the statement of the army pay, under the present lawRank. Major general, Brigadier general, Colonel, Lieutenant colonel, Majors,

Total pay per year.

$6,512 64

4,422 32

2,941 32

2,372 32

2,106 32

This table, with the notes, will enable us to ascertain very nearly what the army pay is.

"Note.-Officers are required to keep their servants and horses, to entitle them to their allowance."

"Double rations are allowed to officers when commanding separate posts, and are to be added to the above in such cases."

"Fuel and quarters are allowed by regulations, and paid through the quartermaster's department, and are not included in this table."

The subsistence or rations of a major general, per year, amount to $1,095. Double rations,

House rent (fuel not included) about

$2,190 800

$2,990

$8,607 64

5,898 32

3,379 32

2,806 32 2,698 32 But this is not the worst of it. Nearly all of these grades, and many of the captains, have separate posts. Besides, the brigadier generals are major generals; the colonels, brigadiers; the lieutenant colonels, colo nels; and the majors are lieutenant colonels, by brevet. There are not less than five officers in the army who receive the pay of major general. Their pay and emoluments,

The pay and emoluments of five commo-
dores, commanding squadrons on foreign
stations, is

Balance in favor of army,

Now, sir, my colleague very honestly, no doubt, but very unjustly to the navy, took the pay of thirty-six captains of the navy, (a commodore is nothing more than a captain,) and compared its gross amount with that of one major general, two brigadier generals, and the colonels of the army. The balance was large, of course, against the navy. But, sir, it was a false balance. There is no grade of the navy as high or corresponding with that of major general. Below him to the rank of captain in the army, with whom a lieutenant of the navy ranks, there is a most numerous list of superior officers, all ranking higher by brevet than their nominal grades, and some of them receiving the brevet pay. In the navy the highest rank is that of captain. There 1. no topmast higher to which a sailor may climb. Here motion in the navy is dammed up, and the number is rank is, of course, comparatively much greater that of the corresponding rank in the army. But, Major general's pay, per year,

$44,038 20

14,700 00

$29,338 20
There are now but four captains of the navy com
manding squadrons, called commanding by courtesy,
who each receive, while employed
month,

16 rations per diem, at 25 cents,
Allowance for cabin furniture,

Per annum,

as such, $100 per $1,200 00 1,440 00 300 00

$2,940 00 $8,807 64