The Clerk read as follows:. The following is an analysis of the eyidcnee: “‘James W. Cole, notary public, 54 Wall street, NewYork, certifies, under his official seal, that on the 18th of October, 1865, he placed in a parcel, sealedwith his official scal, $60,000 in 5dollar U.S. conpound interest notes, all dated September 1, 1865, which was directed to. Qber, Atwater & Co., NewOrleans, Louisiana.’ This certificate describes the notes by descriptiolentters and numbers corresponding with the in ogo The petitioner's affidayit, sworn to before T. E. Stillman, notary public, NewYork city, asserts that he is a member of the commercial firm of Ober, Nanson & Co., of NewYork, and of Ober, Atwater & Co., NewOrleans; that on the 18th day of October, 1855, the New, York desired to remit to the NewOrleans house $60,000, to for cotton purchased there; that he drew from the National Bank of the Republic in NewYork city $60,000 in compound interest notes of the U.S., each dated September 1, 1865, and each note of the denomination of 50 dollars and of the numbers designated in the certificate of James W. Hale, notary public; that he caused said notes to be placed in ao said notary public, sealedwith his official seal, which votion dioio, or, Atwater & Co., NewOrleans, and was by him delivered at and deposited in the NewYork postoffice to be carried in the U.S. mails to NewOrleans; that the said, parcel was duly registered at the postoffice; that the said mail containing said, letter was dispatched by the steamer Republic, which was lost at sea October 23, 1865. The receipt attached to his affidavit is the original receipt of otter, the NewYork postmaster for, said and that the certificate thereto attached is certificate of saidol. the to the registry of letter, said the dispatch of the mail containing said letter, and the loss and non-delivery thergof.'. “The receipt referred to in the foregoing affidavit is as follows: “‘No. 1889. Registered letter. “Post Office, “‘NEWYORK. October18, 1865. “‘Received of Ober, Nanson & Co.; a jo. letter ado NowoLouisi ana. (To Which is printed the natine O IKELLEY, Postmaster.” “The certificate referred to in Mr. Ober's affidavit is dated at the postoffice, NewYork, January 11, 1866, signed by James Kelley, postmaster, and certi fics that a letter directed to Ober, Atwator. & Co., NewOrleans, Louisiana, was received in this office October is ise, from Messrs. Obor, Nanson & Co. was registered and dispatched in the mail forwarded the same day, per steamer, Republic, which was lost at sea, no part of the mail, so far as having he knew, ever been recovered. “Affidavits of E. Young, master and, commander of the steamship Republic; of Sarsfield E. Young, chief officer or mate, and of William H. O. Moor house, purser of the same, taken before notaries public, establish the ofacts; that said vessel sniied from NewYork for NewOrleans on the 19th of October, 1865, having on board the U.S. mails; that on the 24th of October, 1863, during a severe gale of wind, the vesselsprung a leak, which continued to gain upon her until about 4 o'clock p.m. of the day following, when she went down at a point about 140 miles cast of on. Georgia, and nothing was saved on board the ship except the lives of the passengers, who were taken off in the vessefs boats and upon a raft made for that purpose; that the mails remained on board the vessellocked up between flecks against the bulkhead of the ladies' cabin, and, at the time the vessel went down were lost with their contents in the sea.’ “The affidavits of Walter Kelley and James Young, of the city of NewYork, and clerks in having charge the postoffice of registered letters, establish clearly that said package directed to Qber, Atwater & Co. was placed in the mail bag for NewOrleans, which was delivered on board the steamer Republic. "The committeeare of opinion that the syidence lenves no reasonable doubt in regard to the destruetion of the notes described in the petition. As the securities supposed to be destroyed are in the nature of bank notes, having been issued for circulation, the committee unanimously agree that it would be unwise and unsafe to order duplicates to be issued no matter how clear and conclusive the evidence o destruction may be.”