After some moments’ silence the Professor remarked—“I should have said at the proper time that there is a House Committee for Foreign Affairs, as well as a Senate Committee. However, it has no diplomatic functions—it merely serves as an auditing committee.”
Q. “How much does the Secretary of State get a year?”
A. “$8,000. It was once raised to $10,000 and the very next year it was reduced to $8,000.”
Q. “And on that salary he ‘keeps open house’, as you say, for the Republic?”
“Just so.”
“Humph!”
“But, Professor”, said a wise-looking man near the platform, “I suppose you think it is good policy to stick to our traditional simplicity? What’s the use of so much entertaining? Is that a necessary part of government?”
“Well”, said the Professor, “I would say that our traditional simplicity is all right as an ideal, provided we don’t make a religion out of it. Hospitality is also a good ideal to keep before the people,—international courtesy, if you please,—and perhaps there is as much virtue in the one as in the other. At any rate, if there were no other reason, no self-respecting nation would allow its representatives abroad to receive every courtesy and not make an equal endeavor to return the courtesy. Now, entertaining costs money, and there is no government appropriation for any such purpose, thanks to our democratic ideals, and as was shown before, the burden of it falls on the Secretary of State, which is unjust; for it is well known that the salaries we pay our national officers are ridiculously small when compared with those of other nations. Some measures should be taken, apparently, to meet this legitimate expenditure. Have I answered your question?”
“Yes, but I think just the same as I did before.”