Mr. PARKER moved that the further consideration of this bill be postponed till the first Monday in December next. He said they had lately had the subject of augmenting the salaries of all the officers here mentioned, except the PRESIDENT and VICE PRESIDENT and themselves, under consideration; and as they had resolved to refuse an advance to others, he trusted they should also refuse it to themselves. He thought the present an improper time to go into the subject. Mr. HARTLEY wished the gentleman would consent to some day next week. He could not say he was ready to agree to the whole of the advances proposed, but he wished the subject to be taken into consideration, and perhaps by the time he had mentioned they might have some further information on the subject of our finances. Mr. MACON said, the most regular way for the gentleman from Virginia to obtain his object, would be to move to have the bill committed to a Committee of the Whole, and made the order of the day for the 4th of March. Mr. PARKER made that motion. Mr. HARTLEY hoped this motion would not be agreed to, as it was a sort of manoeuvre to get rid of the subject, which he did not approve. He would either have the bill negatived at once, made the order of some day in the present session, or postponed till the next. Mr. AMES said gentlemen had no doubt a right to govern their own votes according to their own notions of propriety. No man had a right to prescribe to another. His conscience was no rule to any other man. But he thought he was authorized to say, they neither had nor claimed a right to do a right thing in a wrong way. To agree to the motion proposed, would be an insincere way of putting a negative upon the bill. He trusted gentlemen who wished this would do it in a more direct way. The compensation of the PRESIDENT and VICE PRESIDENT could not be augmented, he said, after they had entered upon their office; and to say they would take up the subject for consideration at a time when their powers would not exist, was an evasive manner, which he approved not. It was an easy thing for gentlemen to say _no_ on the question, without taking this circuitous way of putting an end to the subject. Mr. VENABLE thought the view of his colleague would be answered as well by a postponement to the 3d of March as to the 4th, and it would be more orderly. Nor did he think this way of disposing of the business called for the censure which the gentleman from Massachusetts had thrown upon it. It was a question upon which that House had already decided by a considerable majority. No new light had been thrown upon the subject, and he thought it by no means disrespectful to postpone it. It was well known that the effect of this motion would be a postponement for the present session. This was what he wished; and if his colleague would consent to alter his motion to the 3d of March, he should not hesitate to vote for it.