Mr. WADE. All thesame. That, they contend, is entirely insufficient for the support of themselves and their families, and I think it is perfectly apparent to every member of the Senate that at the present time no man in their position can support himself and his famil as they ought to be supported the ear roun in this city on the salary new pai to these judges. For myself, 1 have opposed at all times the increase of salaries; fdo not like to yield to it in any case; but in my judgment this is exceptional. I do not believe that these judges can, indeed they inform me that it is impossiblethat they can, continue in their positions unless their salaries be increased, and the committee having the subject under consideration thought it would be right to increase the associates $1,000, making them $4,000, and the chief justice to $4, 500, giving him $500 more than the other judges. Of course the sum fixed must be arbitrary; there is no par ticular measure you can assume; butwe thought this would be reasonable, and it would be tol erably satisfactor to the judges themselves. That we know. hope there will be no objection to it. Iwill say, while I am up, that the other parts of this bill refer almost entirely to the practice of the court. There are no principles of law that are altered or changed by it except as to attachments. The process of foreign attachment, I believe, does not obtain, or is very de fective in this District, and it is thought they ought to have it for the collection of debts and the expedition of business here. In almost every community in every State that I know of they have been under the necessity of having a law on that subject; and if the people want it here we think they are entitled to have it. The writ of attachment provided for in the bill is in the common form used in the States, for although they vary in their legislation on that subject do not vary very materially as to the conditions on which a man may seize the property of his neighbor. It has to be regu ated somewhat, and it is regulated in this bill as it is, I believe, in most of the States, but not in all of them. Some parts of the bill really affirm what was a little doubtful in the original bill which was drawn and presented by the ComDistCol and that is the reason, I suppose, why this bill has not gone to the ComJudiciary. The original bill only provided that this court should have common law and equity jurisdiction. They have, however, exercised admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, and they have done it in the way that this bill proposes. It affirms and makes perfectly legal that which might be deemed a ittle doubtful without such abill and it was thought best that it should be madelogal, althoughI clieve the have acted upon the same principle as thong they had full legal authority. I hope the bill will pass.