mittee, he was complimented by having the bill placed in his hands by his colleagues, with instructions to report it favorably to the House, and, if possible, to secure its passage. The confidence the Committee had shown in Mr. Jones' parliamentary skill and ability when it entrusted the fate of this important bill to his care was not misplaced, for he succeeded in having it passed by the House, and it is largely to his efforts that the country is indebted for the existence of this valuable tribunal.

The Court was to be a court of record, to consist of three judges, to hear and determine all claims founded upon any law of Congress, or upon any regulation of an executive department, or upon any contract, express or implied, with the Government of the United States, and all claims which might be referred to it by either House of Congress. If the Court should find that the petition did not set forth a ground for relief, the case was to be reported to Congress, and if Congress so directed, the Court was to proceed to hear and determine the case. It was to report to Congress all cases upon which it had finally acted, stating the material facts and the opinion of the Court in the case. The Court was also directed to prepare bills in such cases as should receive its favorable action, for the consideration of Congress, and the testimony was to be laid before Congress, whether the case received favorable action by the Court or not. All cases, whether reported favorably or adversely,

were to be considered and acted upon by Congress, and the action of Congress was to be final.

This measure was intended to secure the protection of a judicial body and judicial methods in the thorough investigation of the claims that are constantly being made and pressed against the Government, without surrendering the control of Congress over them, and without surrendering any of the sovereign prerogatives of the Government. Experience has proved its wisdom, the Court, after nearly half a century of usefulness, having abundantly proved the value and success of the plan.

The tariff came incidentally under discussion again at this session, by the introduction of a bill to refund to certain companies duties which had been paid upon railroad iron. Mr. Jones opposed the bill, and in defending himself from the charge of being a protectionist, he said that he objected to the bill because he was opposed to all class legislation, and would oppose a similar bill if it was for the benefit of a Pennsylvania corporation. He said it was the protectionists who passed the act of 1832, which exempted railroad iron from duty. "I am no protectionist," he continued; "I am for equality of taxation. If a general law is proposed putting everything subject to taxation for revenue upon the same footing of equality, I shall not object to it. I am in favor of a revenue standard. I do not want more revenue produced than is absolutely necessary for an economical administra

tion of the Government. I object to this bill, not upon the principle of protection, but because I think that railroad iron should be placed upon the same footing with all other subjects of taxation." About this time Mr. Buchanan had made up his mind to retire from the English mission, and he wrote to Mr. Jones from London, under date of January 11, 1855, as follows: "I have often thought of suggesting to you the mission to England, for which you are well qualified, but have refrained from doing so because you are so much needed at home. If to the present salary there were added house-rent, this would not be an undesirable position even in a pecuniary point of view. Besides, this Legation and that at Paris for the convenience of American citizens ought to have a permanent abode and not be changed with every succeeding Minister. The frequent removals of it disarrange the papers, and do injury in a variety of ways. I now pay £740 ($3581.60) for a furnished house and stable. If I could have taken a lease of such a house for twenty years for the Legation, I am quite satisfied it might have been obtained for £500. Deeming that it could do you no harm in any event and whether elected to the Senate or not, I have suggested your name, in proper terms, to Governor Marcy, but have truly said: 'I make this suggestion without the knowledge of Mr. Jones, and without having the least idea whether it would be agreeable to him or not.'"

The reference in this letter to Mr. Jones' election

to the Senate was suggested by the fact that he was then being very generally considered for the seat in the United States Senate from Pennsylvania which was about to become vacant. In January, 1855, he received a large complimentary vote on sixteen ballots in the caucus of the Democratic members of the Pennsylvania Legislature, for that honorable position.

The printers of Reading, Pennsylvania, celebrated the birthday of Benjamin Franklin on January 17, 1855, and invited Mr. Jones to be one of their guests. His public duties at Washington prevented him from accepting this invitation, but in reply he wrote the following letter:

GENTLEMEN:

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

Jan. 15, 1855.

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your invitation to join you in the celebration of Franklin's Birthday, on its next anniversary. I regret that the pressure of public duties in an advanced stage of a short session of Congress will debar me from the enjoyment of what I would esteem a high privilege. One of the surest marks of the rational progress of the age is the growing disposition to celebrate great events in our early history, and the names of great men who, by their nature, genius, and undaunted energy, have stamped the character of their gigantic minds upon their country. History is philosophy teaching by example; so the mere political dogma that in this glorious country all men are born politically free and

equal would be but a mere abstraction, a theory which future generations might doubt, were you not able to point to its practical exemplification in a Franklin and a host of others. Born to poverty and with few facilities for cultivating his mind, he learned, while manipulating his types as a printer's boy, that in this new world the avenues to honor, to usefulness and distinction, were open to all. The love of country kindled the flame within his bosom. Single-handed, and unaided by fortune or friends, he cast his frail bark on the tumultuous waves in the voyage of life. The result is told in his country's history, and that history prompts you and kindred spirits everywhere to celebrate the day of his birth. The character of Franklin had so many elements of greatness in it that patriots, statesmen, sages, and philosophers might each in turn celebrate the day for those distinguishing traits of character congenial to their own tastes and pursuits. These characteristics, however, were results. You, as printers, propose to celebrate the birth of him who, when a printer's boy, and through that medium, first began to develop the workings of that mighty mind which in time challenged the admiration of the world by its wonderful productions.

Of its appropriateness it is needless for me to speak; all recognize it. Had Franklin's lot fallen elsewhere, he might have been lost to the world. Little does this busy, driving world know its obligations to you, nor, indeed, can it, unless by some sad catastrophe the printing art should be blotted out, leaving the world in moral and intellectual darkness. All the masses of mankind know of the past, all their hopes of the future, depend on your art. The scintillation of genius, the