Mr. WILLIAMS. I think if these incidental side issues were omitted, and the discussion confined to the questions before the Senate, very much time would be saved. I simply make that suggestion. I think I can give the Senate some information on this subject; otherwise I should not trespass upon its time. “By the act of July 1862 the wages of the employees in the navy yards are to conform, as nearly as consistent, with those of private yards in vicinity the immediate of the respective yards. Under this law boards have been appointed at intervals of 2 months to ascertaintherates of wagespaid by private establishmentsnearthe yards. By the rates so ascertained the wagesof the several classesof workmen in the yards have been regulated. Through this law the ratesof wages in the yards have changedor varied to suit thosepaidoutside. They haveadvanced with the advance of labor in similar depts of private establishments. The mechanics have been vigilant to seethat justice wasmeted to them under the law, and are always ready to demand it if done.” not Now, sir, I have a table here exhibiting the rise in the wages of these persons employed in the Washington ionffor a period of 6 years; and I will give a few specimens to show that great injustice has not been done to these workmen and laborers in the navy yard. Take, for instance, the carpenters. In 1860 they received from one dollar and 80 cents to 2 dollars and 25 cents per day; in 1861 from 2 dollars to 2 dollars and 50 cents; in 1862 from one dollar and 75 cents to 2 dollars and 50 cents; in 1863 from 2 dollars to 2 dollars and 75 cents; in 1864from 2 dollars and 50 cents to 3 dollars; in 1865 from 3 dollars and 25 cents to 3 dollars and 50 cents; in 1866 from 3 dollars and 25 cents to 3 dollars and 50 cents; so that their wages have greatly increased as prices have advanced. And so with the smiths, the joiners, the painters, the machinists, the boiler makers, the iron founders, the bricklay ers, and the laborers; their wages have doubled since 1860. There is a reason, notwithstanding what the Senfrom Ohio says, why these persons should not be embraced within the provisions of this resolution, and the reason is given in the paper which I have read. There are persons appointed to ascertain if their wages are as high as the wages paid to workmen engaged in private establishments, and if they are found not to be so high, those who have the super intendence of the yard have the power to raise their wages, and they have raised their wages as circumstances have required. If the work men and laborers in the navy yard are to be included, then those in the arsenal, those in the Government Printing Office, and those on the Treasury and Capitol extensions must also be included. According to the computation which I have made of course I cannot be exactly correct this amendment, if it is carried to its legitimate results, will increase the appropriation made by this resolution nearly half a million dollars simply to add 20%. to the wages of the workmen, laborers, and employees about the city of Washington. There are 1200 men employed in the navy yard; 100s are employed in the arsenal; 100s upon the Capitol and Treasury extensions; 5 or 600 are employed in the Government Printing Office; and it is very easy to see that this sum would accumulate with great rapidity. The main reason why they should not be included is that these persons are employed by the Government as they areo by other persons. Their wages are fixed by those who employ them; and they can be raised whenever the circumstances require it. They are paid the highest wages that are paid to similar work men anywhere, and the Government is more punctual than any private person in the payment of its debts to them. There is no particular reason why they should be paid this 20% and their wages thus advanced over those of persons engaged in similar employment in private establishments. Although this resolution does in some cases unavoidably embrace persons whose salaries are not fixed by law, yet the theory upon which it proceeds is that the compensation of the employees in the different Depts has been fixed by law and therefore cannot be changed so as to accommodate the salaries to the change in circumstances and expenses, and for that reason this 20% is proposed to be paid upon upon their salaries. The amendment to the amendment was rejected; there being, on a division ayes 10, noes 21.