FIFTY-FIRST CONGRESS, 1889-1891. 1523 
unearned salary for at least one year of service that the Lord had not 
permitted him to render. 
Each and every one of us would vote to give it to that family, and I 
am glad to know that the Senator from Arkansas would not be pres- 
ent to register a negative vote. He has rendered distinguished sery- 
ice to his State and has shed additional luster upon its very proud 
escutcheon, and the Senate would claim the right, whether the Con- 
stitution carried with it the grant of power or not, to recognize in 
his heirs at law the obligation that they felt that they owed to him 
in the court of conscience, but not in a court of law. 
Now, this is the question, Mr. President, with which we are con- 
fronted. Joseph Henry wrote his name high up on the scroll of fame 
that emblazons the history of this world and makes .its brightest 
pages still brighter. He rendered his service without fee and with- 
out reward. His successor died in the prosecution of the work that he 
had so ably and so efficiently carried on during his life. The Congress 
of the United States recognized the service of his successor, not in his 
person, but after he was buried, and made their acknowledgment to 
his family. The question is whether we shall refuse this pittance in 
the shape of a recognition of the distinguished service that this great 
man rendered to his country. I for one am not willing to withhold 
my vote. 
The Senator from Arkansas may demand the yeas and nays, and I 
will go upon record as promptly and unhesitatingiy as I speak here 
now. I think the country owes it, not to the dead man, not to his 
children, who, I am told, have no fortune, but I think the country 
owes it to itself to make some recognition of its obligations to him for 
the services that he rendered; and I am only amazed at the smallness 
of the amount contained in this amendment to the bill. 
Mr. Berry. Mr. President, I shall only detain the Senate for a few 
moments. 
In regard to the politics of the parties, to which the Senator from 
Kentucky has alluded, I know nothing. I do not know the politics of 
Professor Baird or of his family. That has had no influence directly 
or indirectly upon the position I have taken in any way whatever. 
I opposed the appropriation for Mrs. Baird in a few remarks, and I 
stated then that it would be used as a precedent in order to bring in 
other claims. It was urged that it stood on peculiar grounds, by itself 
and alone, and could not be used as a precedent; and yet the Senator 
from Kentucky cites it to-night. 
It is not the amount; $10,000, of course, to the Government of the 
United States is a very small amount, but it is the principle that is 
involved in it. It matters not as to the amount, but it carries with 
it the seeds of great difficulties to come hereafter, as it appears to me. 
The Senator alludes to me individually, and says if I should unfor- 
