Mr. FESSENDEN. Now. this Jtcommission have been engaged during the last ten years in making that line and defining the boundary. It has been the most remarkable specimen of a drizzle that I ever knew in my life. The salaries of the surveyor and commissioner have gone on from year to year, and for the last 5 years the annual appropriations have been made tofinish this work. we years ago, when the proposition was made to me, as a member of the ComFinance, to make another appropriation, I refused to do it. The treaty was about to expire, and I knew it would not be renewed, and I refused to have an thing to do with it. It seems that last year tehonorable Senfrom Massachusetts moved an appropriation, which was inserted in the mise e laneous bill which was lost, in the same terms with this one. I believe, and appropriating the same amount. That was an estimate of whatit Would taketo finish up the work, and it was put on that bill. The service had not then been performed, but that went into the appropriation bill, and the appropriation bill was lost. Now, it seems that on the strength of that, although there was no law for it an no absolute necessity for it, the commissioner and surveyor, under the direction of the Dept, went on and performed services, of which we have no details, for 4 months. The whole salary for a commissioner for a, year, I think, was only $3,000, and the surveyor received, I do not know how much. perhaps half that sum. But without any law or an a reriution, itseems the rformedser y PP E. 7P9 vices for the 4 months from November 1 1865, to March, 1866; and here is an item of $3, 600 for the pay of the commissioner and surveyor, and contingencies. What the “ contingencies” are, I do not know. The commissioner, to my certain knowledge. has been for a great part of the time during the last winter here in Washington. If they are allowed travel at ten cents a mile from the fishing towns in Nova Scotia, where neither of them live, and make it up in that way, I should like to know it. Iwant to have the details of this proposed appro iiation. I am not willing to insert on this bi l an appropriation of this amount to pay these gentlemen for months services when I know that the salaries cannot amount tomore proportionally than 1/3rd of the sum, and the rest under the head of “contingencies, ” without knowing what they are, on the statement of the &cretary that he recommended it and $800 more for maps. It is not explained to my satisfaction. If the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts could only tell us what they are, and say that they are right, I am in hopes that I may be able to agree to it on account of my friend, who is the commissionerdown there; but really it does not look to me to be, right. In the 1st place, there was no appropriation to have this thing done: and if it has been done and finished up, there is no explanation of it. except the gross charge for so much for salaries an contingencies, all lumped together. Perhaps the map may be a good thing. It will show future ages what these fishing boundaries were; but they will never probably be established precisely in the same way, and if they are, it will be some time to come, I imagine. At an rate, if we are not to have a new treaty the whole thing is useless, all the expenditure is good for nothing, and the map is of no consequence. It only shows what was, and not what is. Now, I prefer that this amendment should not be adopted here, and that in the mean time the honorable Senator look into it and get the details of this bill and let us see what it does mean in reality, and then it may be put on some other bill. There will be another deficiency bill here, undoubtedl, during the session; and I would rather have more information before I agree to it, or before I will advise the Senate to agree to it.