Mr. HOWARD. I had occasion, sir, the other day when this bill was before the Senate, to, make some remarks upon it, and tosay that I was opposed to the passage of such an act. It is very true that the amendment which has just been adopted by the Senate in regard to the evidence of loyalty of the claimant relieves it somewhat of the objections I entertained to it; but it does not by any means remove all my objections. The operation of the bill, if it shall become a law, Wlll not be restrained, as was that of the act of 1864, to the States in rebellion, but will affect every State of the Union, whether loyal or disloyal; and under the bill, every man in a disloyal State whose property has been taken will be enabled to present Iiis claim to the QuarterMGen or Commissary general, as the case may be, for indemnification out of the Treasury of the U.S. for property thus taken. I do not recognize this as a sound principle of legislation so far as the insurgent States are concerned. It is the theory of our Government that the majority in a State shalli ule, and such is the practice. Every one of the insurgent States was carried out of the Union and involved in the rebellion either by the direct vote or by the assent of a majority of its citizens. In 1861, at the breaking out of the war, Congress passed an act by which the President was authorized to declare States and parts of States in insurrection against the Government. In pursuance of that general law, he, from time to time, issued his proclamations informing the world that these States were in insurrection, until 11 States of the Union were involved in that denunciation. As 1 said on a former occasion, these insurrectionary States and all their population, old and 'oung, male and female, loyal and disloyal, ecame, in law, and to all practical purposes, the enemies of the U.S.; and became such under an act ofCongress, for the proclamations were all issued in pursuance of that act. Now, sir, here is a proosition to allow every person throughout the rebel districts whose property may have been taken in the regular and necessary operations and movements of our armies to put down the rebellion, to claim an inde.nnity for property taken by our Army in the course of those necessary operations. The insurgent States. as political communities, were, in the sense of the laws of war and the laws of nations, the enemies of the U.S., and all their property, no matter of what kind 0r descrition, was liable to be seized in the course oft e operations of the war by the Union armies who entered their territory, and liable in precisely the some sense that the property of alien enemies in a foreign country would be liable to be taken and used by the Army of the U.S. that should enter its territory in the prosecution of a war. It was the misfortune ofloyal menwho hop pened to be Within the insurgent districts that would only call for some few millions. their property was thus taken. It was their misfortune to reside in a community the majority of which became, by their voluntary act, the en emies of the Government; but, sir, I submit it is one of those misfortunes which cannot be guarded against. It is one which befalls every people against whom a war is carried on. It might be claimed of the U.S. with equal consistency that they should pay persons residing in a foreign country with whom we should be at war a like indemnity simply upon the ground that they were at heart friendly to the U.S., although in a hostile country. such a payment out of the public Treasury would be an anomaly in the history of war. Mr. President, I have as much commiseration for the Union men in the rebel States who have been overbornc and oppressed by the majority as any other member of the Senate; but I cannot consent to indemnify them simply because they happen to be thus unfortunate. It is one of the misfortunes which the individual must bear, and does bear in all other cases of war, unless the evil has been removed or alleviated by the treaty of peace, which some times takes place. Now, sir, can the honorable Senfrom Vermont, who urges the passage of thin bill, inform the Senate what amount of money is likely to be claimed and taken out of the Treasury to furnish the indemnity this bill will require? He informed us the other day that probaRH' it hit warrant has he for saing that it will only call lbr a few millions? oes he not know, do we notall know, that these claims will spring up as thick and as pestilential as the frogs ofEgypt, in eve nook and corner of the late confeder acy? is reply is, that only loyal men will be allowed to prosecute theirclaims, and that such, and such only, can come into court or go before the Commissary or the QuarterMGen. Sin the history of this rebellion has developed satisfactorily to my mind a state of morals.on the part of the rebels which forbids me to place any confidence in their oaths or assurances. The whole thing from beginning to end, both at home and abroad, has been a continuation of the'basest perjury and erfidy that could be committed. Willl it be iflicult among such persons to find witnesses to come forward and swear that A B, although a blood stained rebel from the be inning to the end, was neverthe less a good nion man at. heart, and that he always spoke in favor of the Union on all proper occasions, as required by the amendment of the Senfrom Illinois? Sir, under this bill I can prove by witnesses to be called from the rebel States any claim belonging to any person, not even excepting Davis himself, or Lee; I can multiply witnesses by the score who will swear that the claimants are and ever have been loyal men. It costs them nothing. They have no conscience about it. swear that black is white or white black if thereby they can get money out of Uncle Sam’s Treasury and at it in the pockets of their friends. I will not open the Treasury to so great a danger, one which in its effects hereafter is so well calculated to in] ose, and which must indeed inevitably saddle the U.S. with an enormous amount of unjust debt a debt which is to be counted by millions upon millions and 1000s of millions before these claims will all be settled and adjusted. Sir, I am opposed entirely to the enactment of any law on the subject going beyond the limit fixed in the act 061864, which allows persons whose property has been taken in the loyal Statesand receipted for to present their claims.