his services
a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished
during the period for which he shall have been elected, and
he shall not receive within that period any other emolument
from the United States, or any of them.'

"Alexander Hamilton, in No. 72 of the 'Federalist,' declares
that the very purpose of this enactment is to put it beyond
the power of Congress to compel the President 'to surrender
at discretion his judgment to their inclinations.'"

Almost immediately after I entered the Senate the case came
up of the title of William Pitt Kellogg to a seat in the
Senate from Louisiana.

In January, 1877, a Republican Legislature was organized
in Louisiana, which recognized Mr. Packard as the lawful Governor
of the State. Packard had been elected, according to the
claim of the Republicans, at the same election at which the
Republican electors, who cast their votes for President Hayes,
had been chosen. That Legislature elected Kellogg. When
President Hayes refused to continue his support of the Republican
government in Louisiana by military force, the Democrats organized
the Legislature, a Democratic Governor took possession of
power, and the Republican State Legislature melted away. It
had done little or nothing, except to elect Mr. Kellogg.

Under these circumstances, the Democrats on the Committee
on Privileges and Elections, and in the Senate, claimed that
the recognition of the Democratic Governor had an ex post
facto operation which determined the title and right of the
Legislature who undertook to elect Mr. Spofford, Mr. Kellogg's
competitor. The Republicans, on the other hand, claimed that
nothing which occurred afterward could operate to determine
the question of the lawfulness of the Kellogg Legislature,
or its power to elect a Senator. That must be settled by
the law and the fact. Upon these we thought Kellogg's title
to be clear. Kellogg was seated. But when the Democrats
got a majority, two years later, the Committee on Privileges
and Elections, under the lead of Benjamin H. Hill of Georgia,
undertook to set aside this judgment, and to seat Mr. Spofford.
Mr. Hill made a long and, it is unnecessary to say, an able
report, setting forth the view taken by himself and by the
majority of the Committee, and recommended the admission of
Mr. Spofford. I advised the Republican minority to decline
to follow the Democrats into the discussion of the evidence,
and to put the case al