Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. President, the importance of this bill arises not only from the amount of money involved in it, which is $2, 260,000 a very large sum of money but also from the principles upon whichit is founded, and especially since the statement made by the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts. He admits the correctness of the general rule of law that iarties may enforce contracts fairly construed, without any hardship, and if losses occur to the contractor it is his loss; if, on the other hand, profits are made, it is his benefit. That rule is up lied to all contracts for the government by individuals, and no one feels it to be a hardship. But the honorable Senator iom Massachusetts now states that during this war, and by reason of this war, this principle of law cannot be applied and ought not to be applied. If that is true, then there is no end and no limit to the claims upon the Government. If that is true, the same claim that is made in this case may be made in behalf of every person who has furnished oats or hay or corn or supplies of any kind to the Army or Navy. It will apply to every class of claims that is made against the Government. It may be applied to every office holder of the Government, to every person whose salary has been fixed on a specie stand ard, to every person whose expenses have been changed by the existence of the war. It would apply to all classes of contracts as well as to mechanics. Now, I venture to say that there has been no time in the history of America when the me chanics of this country have been so prosperous and have made such large sums of money as they have during the recent war. Great activity has been given to all branches of industry. Every man who has had a she or who has been engaged in mechanical emp oyments has had constant occupation. All classes of industry have been made prosperous by the demands arising out of the war. The absence of laborers in the field of battle, the absence of ordinary competition, the vast supplies needed by the Government, and the purchase of every thing that enteis into the consumption ofhuman life were so great during the war that all classes of business men have been prosperous. I ven turn to say further that the very class of men for whose relief this bill has been provided have been more prosperous during this war than ever before. It is a matter of common remark that they have made large sums of money. Nearly all the wealthy manufacturers have become more wealthy; and this has extended not simply to those articles consumed by the Government, but to all articles of manufacture. There is no class of the people of this country for whom the Senfrom Massachusetts could with less force up eal for sympathy than for the mechanical an manufacturing interest of the country, simply because by the extent and nature and character of the war they have had constant occupation and employment without the ordinary competition. Now, the question arises whether we shall deliberately indorse a principle by which every contractor of the Government may claim from us the losses he has sustained on one articular contract. If the rule was applie generally, and you attempted to ascertain the loss of the individual and reimburse that loss, that would not be so heavy; butthat is not the case here. Here a particular class of vessels is selected, and it is shown that the contractors have lost money upon those vessels. Now it maybe that these same contractors. as I know is the case, because I know some of these contractors, have made very large sums of money on other contracts with the Government. It is not proposed to deduct those profits; it is not proposed to make an equitable rule upon the quantum meruit principlo, and giving them only what is properly an justly and fairly their loss in all their transactions with the Government, but you are to select a particular class of contracts, a particular class of vessels, on which there has probably been a loss of some 2 millions, and you are to reimburse that loss, leaving them to enjoy all the profits they have made on their contracts with e Government. 4 I venture to say that every person who owned a machine shop in the city of NewYork or Philadelphia, or the State of Ohio, who has been employed directly or indirectly in the manufacture of the muniments of war, has made several times the cost of his entire propertv before the war, if he has managed with ordinary skill, simply because those works have been constantly employed and yet, because these particular contractors have lost money in the building of a certain class of vessels, you propose to reimburse that loss. It seems to me we ought not to enter upon such a field. I am staggered at the probable results of such a policy. If this bill passes upon the ground on which it is now placed by members of the Senate, we shall have claims without end, and you cannot resist them. There have been cases where persons contracted to deliver hay at 15 dollars a ton and have paid 25 dollars a ton for it. Contracts have been made for cats, for wheat, for transportation, for supplies, for all kinds of mnuiments of war. Why do you not apply the same principle to those class of cases f You cannot resist them, if you once adopt this rule. I, therefore, am not prepared, on a question involving so large an amount as this particular case, and a principle which involves millions more, to vote for such a proposition. The Senfrom Massachusetts places this claim upon another ground, which 1 think has been sufficiently answered by the Senfrom Missouri, and thatis, that we instituted a court; they have made an award, and we are bound to carry into execution that award. If this were a court organized by law, and if an award had been made by it upon principles of law, I should feel bound by that award, although I might not approve of the principles adopted by the court; but that is not the case here. very day we 5 resolutions of injuiry; we call upon the SecyWar, or the SecyNavy, or the SecyTreasury for information. He furnishes that information. We do not bind ourselves before hand to adopt the conclusions of the SecyWar, or the SecyNavy, or the SecyTreasury. We do not even bind ourselves to take the facts that he gives us. So in this case, at the end of a long debate, at the end of a controversy upon this very class of claims, a resolution was offered, I think, by the Senfrom Iowa