Mr. CRESWELL. I do not see the force of the argument suggested by the honorable Senfrom Maine. It matters not, certainly, so far as these officers are concerned, what amount of customs is received at their respective offices. The salary ought to depend upon the capability of the individual, the capacity of the man whose services are require, and the expenditures to which he is subJected. In the city of Baltimore, there are 2 deputy collectors; in Boston there are 3 deputy collectors, and in NewYork there are 7; so that if there is more business to be done there, there are also many more persons to do it. In NewOrleans there is but one deputy collector. It appears to me thatthe capacity and the amount of labor required of these individ equalsshould be the measure by which we should regulate their salary, not the amount of business done at the particular office where they are employed, because a man may be employed in a sinecure in an Office where other persons may perform a great deal of labor. It seems to me that the same justice We exhibit toward NewYork, Boston and NewOrleans, should be extended toward other cities where men are required to perform precisely the same duties.Mr. MORRILL. How can it be that the collector of customs at Baltimore who collects a million and a half, or 2 millions at most, has the same responsibilities as the collector at NewYork, who collects 150 millions? Is there any sort of comparison between the 2 cases? These salaries are predicated upon that element. That element enters very argely into them. These offices are all scaled. They are scaled, not with reference to the particular personal qualifications of the men, but the responsibilities of the office, and those responsibilities attach in proportion, or are supposed to do so under our policy, to the amount of duties collected, because there is no other way of measuring the responsibilities of these men but by the amount of duties collected. Now, these 4 offices are selected as the leading officcs in the country, and it was supposed that they might very properly be increased. But if you grant this amendment, necessarily, to be just, you must include Port land. My friend would not object to that, perhaps; but the committee did not think it worth while to extend it to these offices, and the Dept did not recommend it. I think, for the reason I have stated, it is obvious there is a distinction between the collectorship at NewYork and the collectorsbi at Baltimore.