Mr. SCHENCK.. I move to amend by inserting the word “civil” before the word “officer” in the 3rd line of the 1st section; so that the clause will read, “that no civil officer of the U.S. appointed on the nomination of the President, ” &c. My colleague [Mr. GAREIELD] was entirely mistaken in assuring the House that there is now no law protecting officers in the military and naval service from arbitrary removal by the President. I remember very well the effort which he made in theo, Congress, when he was a member of the ComMilAffrs, to secure the passage of such an enactment; and I cooperated with him in his endeavors to attain that object. But although failing in that Congress, in this congress the effort was renewed, and such provision was inserted in the Army bill passed by this House reported from the ComMilAffrs, But when that failed, or seemed likely to fail altogether, in the Senate, I took care to select from that Army bill some 2 or 3 sections involving matters kindred to this, and particularly this, one, and succeeded in getting it incorporated into an appropriation bill. And the fact is this is the law as it now stands, as gentlemen will find by referring to the 5th section of the bill passed at the last session making appropriations for the support of the Army, &c. The section is as follows: Szc. 5. Abife: That section 17 of an act entitled “An act to define the pay, and emoluments of certain officers of the Army, ” approved July 17, 1862, and a resolution entitled. A resolution to authorize the President to assign the command of troops in the same field or dept to officers of the same grade without regard to seniority, ” approved April 4, 1862, be, and, the same are hereby, repealed..And no officer in the military or naval service shall, in time of peace, be dismissed from the service except upon and in pursuance of the sentence of a court martial to that offeet, or in conmutation thereof. As the law stands uow; there is no necessity for doing that which ordinarily I think is untenable; to mix up our legislation in regard to the civil service with our legislation in regard to military matters. Officers of the Army and Navy are now protected from peremptory dismissal, and they can only be deprived of their commissions by sentence of a court martial or by commutation of some more severe sentence, such as the sentence of death. As there is no necessity for making a sin gle provision in this beyond the civil service, I hope it will be limited to that line of Government patronage, to the regulation of officers appointed in the exercise of Government patronage for civil service. It is limited, it is true, to time of peace; and there is, I think, another proper discretion exercised by the legislative power. If this bill passeswithout limiting it to civil officers, then in time of war, in case of cowardice in the presence of the enemy, or in case of. any other offense, the a bitrary power which will give safety and perfect control to the war making power over the officers, who are operating in making that war must be done away with and everything come within the provision of this law. I hope the law in regard to naval and military will stand as it is now, allowing peremptory and arbitrary dismissal in time of war, but that when war has ended, in time of peace, it shall be only on sentence of court martial.