The Constitution is the only authority for raising money, and that confines it to paying debts, providing for common defence and general welfare. Neither of these authorizes gratuities, or any like purpose. Sometimes these gratuities have rested upon even a worse foundation than personal favor, though seldom frankly avowed.

In 1841, after a month's service, President Harrison died., A bill was introduced by his friends to give his widow, or, in case of her death, his legal representatives, the sum of $25,000. Mrs. Harrison did not claim that the Government owed her any thing. It was a gift outright, and given for a reason assigned by Mr. J. Q. Adams, who reported the bill to the house, in these words:

"There had been more objection to the constitutionality than than there had been to the sum proposed. So far as there had been any discussion in the committee, it seemed to be the general sense of those composing it, that some provision ought to be made for the family of the late President, not in the nature of a grant, but as an indemnity for actual expenses incurred, by himself first, when a candidate for the presidency. It had been observed in the committee, and must be known to all the members of the House, that in the situation in which General Harrison had been placed far from the seat of Government, and for eighteen months or two years, while a candidate for the presidency, exposed to a burden of expense, which he could not possibly avoid -it was no more than equitable that he should, to a reasonable degree, be indemnified."

Here the ground is distinctly taken, that when poor men are elected President the Government ought to indemnify them for their expenses in obtaining the office. Once admit this principle, and the indemnity must be made, regardless of amount. This bill passed both Houses, which were decidedly anti-Democratic. This precedent, though not resorted to on the death of President Taylor, was invoked in behalf of the widow of President Lincoln, and $25,000 granted her, although a hundred thousand was claimed. It is to be presumed that this grant was made as an indemnity for election expenses, as in the case of Mrs. Harrison. If these appropriations were made on the ground of right, then the like sum is due to Mrs. Taylor, or her legal representatives. If they

were mere gifts, or provisions to cover election expenses, then there was a wanton violation of duty on the part of Congress in making them.

These cases are cited to show how little Congress observes the Constitution when legislating on such matters. Bad precedents in granting pensions are often made, and almost daily followed. Invalid pensions are clearly right, and necessarily result from the power to raise and support armies and navies. But these only form a part of the immense sum paid out as pensions. There is an army of people supported on pensions who have never seen any service whatever, and who are not invalids.

The Government at an early day set aside its share of naval prizes to pension the wounded and disabled, and for the temporary support of the widows of those killed in battle, or in the line of their duty. After the War of 1812 this fund amounted to a million and a quarter of dollars, and, being invested, produced over $70,000, which was applied for these purposes, and when insufficient the Government provided what more was needed. In March, 1837, a bill with a false title swept the whole of this fund away, and required an immense additional expense. It required that pensions should commence, not from the completion of the proof, but from the date of disability, even though the applicant continued in service, and received full pay. It extended them in all cases of death, whether incurred in the line of duty or not, so that, if the person became disabled from excesses or immoral acts, he would be pensioned. It extended widows' pensions, which had been only for five years, during their lives, and pensioned children until they were twenty-one, thereby conforming to the English system. It was ascertained that this act had passed without discussion on the last night of the session, in the House, under the gag of the previous question. In 1841 an attempt was made to repeal it, and restore the former law. Mr. Adams, who did not vote for the repeal, gave this account of its passage: "He was in the House, but could not say how it passed. He was not conscious of it, and the discussion must have been put down in the way in which such things are usually done in this House-by clapping the previous question upon it. No questions were asked; and

that was the way in which the bill passed. He did not think he could tell the whole story; but he thought it very probable that there were those in this House who could tell, if they would; and who could tell what private interests were provided for in it."

The amendment repealing this act was lost. It is remarkable that in the Senate, when this amendment was voted down, all the Whigs voted against the amendment, and all the Democrats but one for it. The vote in the House presented nearly the same division. No objection can be made to voting all moneys that are needed for the support of the Government. But passing laws to provide for paying electioneering expenses, and gratuitously pensioning for life those who have never served in the army or navy, is in violation of the Constitution and the rights of the people, whose labor provides the funds. There are now persons, whose original pensions were granted for five years under the old laws, who have drawn them for more than thirty years. Sometimes these pension acts are so worded that their real meaning is not understood by many voting for them. These acts, as far as they go beyond the old necessary laws, are not passed for the good of the service, but with reference to nominations and votes at elections. On examination, these things become quite apparent. Now, when the people are almost sinking under heavy taxation, these errors should be corrected and the ancient laws be restored.

88.-HEMAN J. REDFIELD.

It is with great pleasure that we give a short sketch of Mr. Redfield. His life has been a long and useful one, ever devoted to the maintenance of democratic principles and upholding the country in the days of its peril. He was born in Connecticut, December 27, 1788. His father moving to Western New York, he assisted him on his farm until 1808, when he entered the Canandaigua Academy. He remained there two years, and then read law with John C. Spencer, and was admitted to practice in 1815. When the War of 1812 came on, he laid aside Blackstone, Bacon, and Tidd, and volunteered as a private soldier, and served two campaigns. He was in the battle of Queenstown

Heights, in September, 1812, and was with General Harrison at Fort George, in November, 1813, where he received a brevet from the commanding general for gallant services. He commenced the practice of the law at Le Roy in 1815, and was appointed a justice of the peace and master in Chancery, and soon afterward district-attorney. He was a State Senator during 1823, '24 and '25. It was during his service in the Senate that he became distinguished as one of the celebrated "seventeen" Senators who were shown up in coffin handbills, and whose effigies were hanged and burned. From the adoption of the Federal Constitution down to 1824, the Presidential Electors in New York had been elected by the Legislature. In Governor Jay's time he was called upon to convene the Legislature to the end that the law might be changed, and thus deprive Mr. Jefferson of electoral votes of the State. He indignantly refused to do so. The Legislature elected in 1823, a majority being Democrats, it was understood, would give the votes of the State to whoever should be nominated by a Democratic caucus. William H. Crawford was thus brought before the people, and fairly entitled to the votes of the State. The friends of other candidates sought to defeat the will of the State by changing the law. For this purpose a bill had passed the Assembly and was sent to the Senate, where it received full consideration and much discussion. As no one of the proposed methods of election received a majority of the votes of the Senate, a motion to postpone further consideration until after the election prevailed, seventeen Senators voting for it. Among these were Mr. Redfield and Alvin Bronson, of Oswego, who are the sole survivors of those distinguished men. Instead of their conspiring to cheat the people out of their rights, they sought to prevent a fraud upon those who had elected the Legislature to carry out their wishes. Not one of all this number of Senators failed to be sustained by the people. Two of them-Charles E. Dudley and Silas Wright-subsequently became United States Senators, and the latter Governor of the State. Both Mr. Redfield and Mr. Bronson feel proud of their votes on the occasion.

In 1825, Mr. Redfield was appointed one of the commissioners on the part of New York to settle a boundary question with

New Jersey. He was post-master at Le Roy for more than twenty years. He soon became distinguished as a lawyer. When the arrangements were being made for the trial of those accused of abducting William Morgan, he was offered the position of special counsel to assist the Attorney-General. He declined the offer, and recommended John C. Spencer, who accepted and acted as such on the trials. He also, in 1835, declined the office of circuit judge, tendered him by Governor Marcy. During the same year the Legislature appointed him canal commissioner, which he declined. When the Holland Land Company, in 1836, sold out their remaining lands in five counties, he was appointed agent of the new proprietors, and acted as such for thirteen years, for which purpose he removed to Batavia, where he now resides.

President Pierce, on coming into office, tendered him the appointment of Naval Officer in New York, which he accepted, but was soon transferred to the office of Collector, which he held until June 30, 1857, when he resigned, although President Buchanan offered to continue him. In every official position held by Mr. Redfield he gave complete satisfaction. It is highly creditable to him, that when he rendered his accounts as Collector, they were found correct to a cent, although they involved the large sum of $143,493,957, and were promptly settled, exactly as he rendered them. He is now a cultivator of the soil, which has ever been a favorite employment with him, making two blades of grass grow where only one grew before. In all the perils to which our country has been exposed, he has ever been on the side of his own Government. He sustained Mr. Polk through the Mexican War, and exerted himself on the side of the Government during the late war. He was a member of the Peace Congress at Albany, which sent delegates to the one at Washington. He presided at meetings and lent his influence to secure the quotas of men called for at different times during the war, and contributed largely in raising funds to aid in that purpose. Although he believed the war was needlessly brought on and might have been avoided, and that its management was not creditable to the Administration, still, the life of his country was involved, and halting was wrong,