their situation, for their vanquished competitors, of the same spirit, and from the same motives, will perpetually be endeavoring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people.

Besides these evils, sir, though we may set out in the beginning with moderate salaries, we shall find that such will not be of long continuance. Reasons will never be wanting for proposed augmentations; and there will always be a party for giving more to the rulers, that the rulers may be able, in return, to give more to them. Hence, as all history informs us, there has been in every state and kingdom a constant kind of warfare between the governing and the governed; the one striving to obtain more for its support, and the other to pay less. And this has alone occasioned great convulsions, actual civil wars, ending either in dethroning of the princes or enslaving of the people. Generally, indeed, the ruling power carries its point, and we see the revenues of princes constantly increasing, and we see that they are never satisfied, but always in want of more. The more the people are discontented with the oppression of taxes, the greater need the prince has of money to distribute among his partisans, and pay the troops that are to suppress all resistance, and enable him to plunder at pleasure. There is scarce a king in a hundred, who would not, if he could, follow the example of Pharaoh-get first all the people's money, then all their lands, and then make them and their children servants forever. It will be said that we do not propose to establish kings. I know it. But there is a natural inclination in mankind to kingly government. It sometimes relieves them from aristocratic domination. They had rather have one tyrant than five hundred. It gives more of the appearance of equality among

citizens; and that they like. I am apprehensive, therefore -perhaps too apprehensive- that the government of the States may, in future times, end in a monarchy. But this catastrophe, I think, may be long delayed, if in our proposed system we do not sow the seeds of contention, faction, and tumult, by making our posts of honor places of profit. If we do, I fear that, though we employ at first a number and not a single person, the number will, in time, be set aside; it will only nourish the foetus of a king (as the honorable gentleman from Virginia very aptly expressed it), and a king will the sooner be set over us.

It may be imagined by some that this is a Utopian idea, and that we can never find men to serve us in the executive department without paying them well for their services. I conceive this to be a mistake. Some existing facts present themselves to me which incline me to a contrary opinion. The high sheriff of a county in England is an honorable office, but it is not a profitable one. It is rather expensive, and therefore not sought for. But yet it is executed, and well executed, and usually by some of the principal gentlemen of the county. In France, the office of counsellor, or member of their judiciary parlia rents, is more honorable. It is therefore purchased at a high price; there are, indeed, fees on the law proceedings, which are divided among them, but these fees do not amount to more than three per cent on the sum paid for the place. Therefore, as legal interest is there at five per cent, they, in fact, pay two per cent for being allowed to do the judiciary business of the nation, which is, at the same time, entirely exempt from the burden of paying them any salaries for their services. I do not, however, mean to recommend this as an eligible mode for our judi

ciary department. I only bring the instance to show that the pleasure of doing good and serving their country, and the respect such conduct entitles them to, are sufficient motives with some minds to give up a great portion of their time to the public, without the mean inducement of pecuniary satisfaction.

Another instance is that of a respectable society who have made the experiment and practiced it with success now more than a hundred years. I mean the Quakers. It is an established rule with them that they are not to go to law, but in their controversies they must apply to their monthly, quarterly, and yearly meetings. Committees of these sit with patience to hear the parties, and spend much time in composing their differences. In doing this, they are supported by a sense of duty and the respect paid to usefulness. It is honorable to be so employed, but it was never made profitable by salaries, fees, or perquisites. And, indeed, in all cases of public service, the less the profit, the greater the honor.

To bring the matter nearer home, have we not seen the greatest and most important of our offices, that of general of our armies, executed for eight years together, without the smallest salary, by a patriot whom I will not now offend by any other praise; and this, through fatigues and distresses, in common with the other brave men, his military friends and companions, and the constant anxieties peculiar to his station? And shall we doubt finding three or four men in all the United States with public spirit enough to bear sitting in peaceful council, for, perhaps, an equal term, merely to preside over our civil concerns, and see that our laws are duly executed? Sir, I have a better opinion of our country. I think we shall never be without

a sufficient number of wise and good men to undertake and execute well and faithfully the office in question.

Sir, the saving of the salaries, that may at first be proposed, is not an object with me. The subsequent mischiefs of proposing them are what I apprehend. And, therefore, it is that I move the amendment. If it be not seconded or accepted, I must be contented with the satisfaction of having delivered my opinion frankly and done my duty.

LORD CHATHAM

WILLIAM PITT, first Earl of Chatham, was born at Westminster in 1708.

In

He was the grandson of Thomas Pitt, Governor of Madras, who was known as "Diamond Pitt" from the fact of his having sold a diamond of extraor dinary size to the Regent Orleans for $680,000. William Pitt was educated at Eton, whence he passed to Trinity College, Oxford. It is an interesting fact that Demosthenes was his favorite author. After spending some time in France and Italy, he entered the army, but his military career was short. In 1735 he entered Parliament for Old Sarum, a rotten borough belonging to his family. He soon became a leader of the opposition to Walpole. In 1746, he became Vice-Treasurer of Ireland, but soon resigned this post to take the more important and lucrative office of Paymaster-General of the Forces. He refused to profit, however, by the practice of previous paymasters, who had appropriated to themselves the interest of all money lying in their hands. He was dismissed from office by the Duke of Newcastle in 1755, but in December of the following year he became Secretary of State and leader of the House of Commons. 1757 he was the virtual head of the administration, and continued in power till 1761. During these four years it is customary to say that Pitt's biography is the history of England. When he resigned office in 1761, he received a pension of £3,000 a year for three lives, and his wife was created Baroness Chatham in her own right. For himself, he still preferred to retain the title of the "Great Commoner," but in 1766, when he was invited to form a Cabinet, he accepted the office of Lord Privy Seal, and thereupon became Viscount Pitt and Earl of Chatham. In 1768 he resigned, and did not resume his seat in the House of Lords until 1770. His last appearance in the House of Lords was on April 2, 1778, when he opposed the Duke of Richmond's motion for an address praying the King to conclude peace with America on any terms. He died on May 11 of the same year. The speech which we here reproduce was one of many pronounced against the policy followed by Lord North in dealing with the American Colonies.