Mr. STEVENS. I move that the rules be suspended and that the House resolve itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union on the special order. The motion was agreed to. So the rules were suspended; and the House accordingly resolved itself into the ComWhole on the state of the Union, (Mr. Dawns in the chair,) and resumed the consideration of the special order, being the bill (H.R.No. 791) to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for the service of the fiscal year ending the 30th of June, 1866, and for other pugpro.sSesT.EVENS. The ComAppro riations found referred to it, by order of the House, the claim of this officer. We supposed that it was our duty to dispose ofit, and we saw no reason why we should not dispose of it as 'we did. We do not propose to as the Gentfrom Ohio [Mr. Scussox] whether it has come in at the back or the front door when this House sends it to us. We hold that we understand and know when we have a right to act upon a thin sent to us, as well as the chairman of the ComMilAffrs. So much for that. We took this claim and we recommended considerablyless than one 8th part ofit. That was all that we suppose came within the rules. As regards the rule which was adopted at the commencement of this session, on the report of the ComClaims, it does not touch this case. That rule is as follows: Rrmlaerf.That. until otherwiseordered.the committee of Claims be instructed to reject all claims referred to it for examination by citizensof any of theStateslately in rebellion growing out of the destruction or appropriation or damage of property by the Army or avy engagedin suppressingthe rebellion. That rule, I say. does not touch the case of General Stone. He never was a citizen of a rebel State. He was a citizen of Pennsylvania, and remained so. He was in the rebel States only as an officer of the Army, He came, therefore, within the rule, and we, in pursuance of what was considereredas mostoverpowering justice, reported in his favor. We violated no rule. I have no respect for that resolution of the ComClaims. I look upon it as a most cruel and unjust rule to say that citizens of the U.S. who have lost their pro crty by its being taken by the Army oft e U.S. from military necessity under an order of a U.S. officer shall not be paid because we are embarrassed. It is as much as to say, because we have not just as much money aswe can appropriate to pay every body now, we will robthem. It is nothing more. I thought so at the time that resolution was passed though it does not reach this case and I think so still. ltdoes notbind us, and when I come to vote I shall pay no regard to such a rule. If we cannot pay them let us give them certificates ofindebtedness or bonds, and not cut off all these people because of this rule of the ComClaims. I say again, I look upon it as the most rank injustice, as wronging the most meritorious, suffering classes of the people of the U.S. I scorn the princip 0 contained in that resolution, although I have great respect for the committee that reported it, and never when I am called upon to act will I act in accordance with it. iHere the hammer fell.]Mr. SCHENCK. I simply wish to say this in res onse to the Gentfrom Pennsylvania. verybod knows how petitions are presented here. They are presented by individual members and referred to any committee the member ch00ses to indorse upon them. And everybody knows that when a committee finds that a subject has been referred to it which does not properly belong to the matters which, under the ru e, should go to that committee, it is usual to report it back and ask to be discharged from its consideration, and that it be sent to the appropriate committee. Every body knows, therefore, that it would have been the most natural thing in the world for the ComAppro riations, finding a claim of this kind before them, to have reported it back and asked to have it referred to the appropriate committee. the CHAIRMAN. Debate is exhausted ou the motion to strikeaut the paragraph.