Mr. FESSENDEN. 4500 dollars, and the other judges get $4,000, and the judges of the Court of Claims all get $4,000. I have not understood that there is a question of precedence at the Presidential Mansion or at court anywhere between the chief justice of the Court of Claims and the chief justice of the DistCol. If there is, perhaps we had better settle that somehow or other. We must give one $4, 500 because the other has it, if is any reason; but does not the same logic apply to other officers? There are no men in this city who work more hours or harder or have more important business before them than the heads of the several bureaus, and they only get $3, 500; some of them $3,000 only to this day. The same remark is true of the Comptrollers and the Auditors. The 1st Auditor gets but $3,000, and he has accounts for 100s of millions passing through his hands. He must work all the time. Why should we not put them up to $5,000 in the same way? They hold office but a short time and must live in the city while they hold it; the office is not a permanent one. The general idea is in fixing the salaries of men appointed for life, not to fix them so high as you do the salaries of those who hold only for a short period and must be at greater expense. There is no force, as it strikes me, in the argument of the honorable Senfrom Illinois, and I cannot understand why this matter is urged unless you are going into a general increase of salaries. I think we have gone far enough. The fact is, it seems to me, we are rather in advance of the men themselves in a great many instances; we get disturbed and distressed because officers do not receive more when the officers themselves make no complaints about it, and if one man is put up we are looking out for somebody else who does not complain to see that his dignity is not injured. I think that is not the way to deal with the public money. I think there must be some end to this thing, and I hope the Senate will not adopt this amendment.