views be correct, the effect of an adequate reward is not only to attract talent to the place where it is most needed—the legislature-but to make it more stationary there, and, what is more essential, to place it more beyond Executive control, and thus to realize the full effects of the theory of your Government. The additional expense would not be felt; and I know of no other objection, which has the least plausibility, except, that we cannot plead the example of any other country; and that it is calculated to produce too much competition for a seat in Congress. I acknowledge the want of example in other countries, and I think it worth serious investigation, what effect it has had on the permanency of their liberties. But why should we look for examples either to the State legislatures or to other countries? In what other instance have the duties of legislation involved so great a sacrifice of time and domestic pursuits? Compare our services here with those of a judge, or of Executive officers, and they will be found not less burdensome. Nor do I fear that the competition for a seat in Congress will be too animated. I believe that a sharply contested election, if corruption does not enter, is of public advantage. It brings the proceedings of this body more fully before the people, and makes them much better acquainted with their interest. It even makes a seat here more honorable in public estimation. Nor am I afraid that competition will produce corruption. Fifteen hundred or two thousand dollars a year will not be sufficient for this purpose. An election to Congress is, in this respect, more safe than that to a State legislature, as it requires so many more to elect to the former than to the latter. This security grows with the increasing growth of the country; as the number of constituents increase relatively to the representatives. There are other and important considerations connected with a just compensation to the members of this body; but, as they have been fairly presented by the report of the committee, I will not fully

discuss them. By inadequate pay, you close the door of public honor on some of the most deserving citizens. Talent in this country is principally from the middling and lower classes. These, in fact, constitute the great body of the community. A young man of talents spends his property and time in acquiring sufficient information to pursue a profession; he proves worthy of public confidence; ought he not to receive indemnity for the application of his time and talents to the service of his country? It would be economy with a vengeance, to exclude all such from the halls of legislation, or to make them mere political adventurers, who would enter here only for further promotion. The extent of our country points out another and powerful reason why the pay should be respectable. No one is fit for legislation who does not constantly bear in mind that our republic is distinguished from all others that have ever existed, by the extent of its territory. While we derive from this distinction many advantages, we are liable to great and menacing dangers. While we behold our growth with pride, it must, at the same time, impress us with awe. It is our duty to overcome space by every means in our power. We ought to attract suitable talents from the most distant part of our republic by a full and generous allowance. Distance itself constitutes a great objection with many to perform the duties of this body. Should the men who, by nature and study, are endowed with requisite qualities for public service, be forced by a miserable parsimony either to direct their talents to private pursuits, or to the affairs of the respective States, and men of inferior capacity be sent to this body, who can measure the public misfortune? What will tend more powerfully to dissever this Union? Some have taken up the idea, as extraordinary as it may seem, that the increased pay to the members is, in its nature, aristocratical. What is it aristocratical to compensate the public servant for his services to the public? Can it be considered as

favoring the power of a few, to extend the power and influence of the people in the affairs of the General Government ? It enables them to select the best talents for their own immediate service; it raises them in the scale of influence, by causing the most shining and aspiring talents to be dependent on them for promotion and honor; it makes their service more desirable than that of the Executive employments; and, by a simple process, enables them, through their immediate agents, this House, to hold a controlling power over any department of the Government. Such is the aristocratical tendency of this reprobated measure. I might extend my observations much further on this most important subject; but so much has been well said by others, that I will abstain. I must, however, present to the House a reason, which, I believe, has not as yet been touched on: I mean the happy effect which an adequate compensation would have on the tone of parties in our country. Make a seat in Congress what it ought to be the first post in the community next to the Presidency, and men of the greatest distinction in every part of the country will seek it. The post, then, of honor and distinction being in the people, and not in the President, will be open to all parties, in proportion to their ascendency in the Union. That entire monopoly of honor and public profit by the majority will not be experienced, which must be felt, when the honors of the country are principally in the hands of the Chief Magistrate. Those who best understand our nature, can the most fully appreciate the consequences. Although it may not abate the heat of party, it will greatly affect its feelings towards our happy political institutions.

SPEECH

On the Bill to set aside the Bank dividends and bonus as a permanent fund for the construction of Roads and Canals, delivered in the House of Representatives, February 4th, 1817.

[NOTE. This Bill, pledging the bonus and dividends of United States stock on the shares held by the Government in the National Bank, was reported by the special committee, to whom the subject had been referred, on December 23d, 1816; and on the 4th of February following, discussed at some length in Committee of the Whole, when it was amended in several particulars. On the 7th of February, the debate was renewed in the House, on the motion of Mr. King to postpone it indefinitely, and continued, with much animation, until late the next day, when it passed by a vote of 86 to 84.]

MR. CHAIRMAN:-It seems to be the fate of some measures to be praised, but not adopted. Such, I fear, will be the fate of this on which we are now deliberating. From the indisposition manifested by the House to go into committee on the bill, there is not much prospect of its success; yet it seems to me, when I reflect how favorable is the present moment, and how confessedly important a good system of roads and canals is to our country, I may be reasonably very sanguine of success. At peace with all the world; abounding in pecuniary means; and, what is of the most importance, and at which I rejoice, as most favorable to the country, party and sectional feelings merged in a liberal and enlightened regard to the general concerns of the country. Such are the favorable circumstances under which we are now deliberating. Thus situated, to what can we direct our resources and attention more important than internal improvements? What can add more to the wealth, the strength,

and the political prosperity of our country? The manner in which facility and cheapness of intercourse contribute to the wealth of a nation, has been so often and ably discussed by writers on political economy, that I presume the House to be perfectly acquainted with the subject. It is sufficient to observe, that every branch of national industry-agricultural, manufacturing, and commercial-is greatly stimulated by it, and rendered more productive. The result is, that it tends to diffuse universal opulence. It gives to the interior the advantages possessed by the parts most eligibly situated for trade. It makes the country price, whether in the sale of the raw product, or in the purchase of articles for consumption, approximate to that of the commercial towns. In fact, if we look into the nature of wealth, we will find that nothing can be more favorable to its growth than good roads and canals. An article, to command a price, must not only be useful, but must be the subject of demand; and the better the means of commercial intercourse, the larger is the sphere of demand. The truth of these positions is obvious, and has been tested by all countries where the experiment has been made. It has, particularly, been strikingly exemplified in England; and if the result there, in a country so limited, and so similar in its products, has been to produce a most uncommon state of opulence, what may we not expect from the same cause in our country, abounding, as it does, in the greatest variety of products, and presenting the greatest facility for improvement? Let it not be said that internal improvements may be wholly left to the enterprise of the States and of individuals. I know that much may justly be expected to be done by them; but, in a country so new and so extensive as ours, there is room enough for all the General and State Governments, and individuals, in which to exert their resources. But many of the improvements contemplated are on too great a scale for the resources of the States or individuals; and many of such a nature as the rival