Mr. FESSENDEN. I think there is a very considerable degree of correctness in what has been said by the honorable Senfrom Wisconsin. My experience and observation have shown me that there are faults in the system which if they could be corrected we shou (I get along very much better and cheaper. I think it is a great mistake that we expect to get valuable services from able men in places where we ought to have able men for a compensation that Will not support them comfortab y well in this city. I know that in the Treasury Dept it has been exceedingly difficult to cap men who were competent to render the services required. In the position of 4th class clerks services are demanded that require the ability of men who can command out of the Dept a salary of $3,000 readily, and while I was there men of that description were resigning at the rate of 6 or 7 a week. As soon as they got well taught, well under stood their duties, and showed their capacity and their integrity, some national bank or some other institution would take them out of our hands by an offer of a much larger salary. That ought to be remedied, in my judgment, in all the Depts. I cannot undertake to say how much ought to be given, but there is no reason why the Government requiring the services of such men in considerable numbers for they are absolutely requisite should n of pay what others pay elsew ore for the same kind of services. Otherwise we shall not have the men; they will leave. There is no sort of difficulty in getting any number of 1st class clerks, and, perhaps, of 2nd class clerks in the Depts at the rates that we pay. There are 1000s of young men always standing ready to take positions of that description, and the services that are required of them being mostly coping, being services which require but a smal degree of abilit, comparatively, are such as almost anybo y tolerably well educated can render. But it is not so with the higher classes of clerks, the heads of divisions, the chief clerks, the book keepers. In the Internalrevenue Bureau, for example, a very high order of ability is required of these officers for many purposes; and so in the office of the Comp trol er of the Currency And in several other offices it is exceedingly difficult to get along for the want of sufficient salaries for that class of men. Now, sir, I have no doubt that if you would give any Secretary at the head of a Dept in this city, who was an honest and capable man, 2/3rds of the amount that you approppriate annually for the payment of clerksin his dept, and tell him to expend it at his own discretion and carry on the business, he would be able to do the business better for that amount of money than he does it now because you would then leave the selection of the men to him, and he would pay them according to their merits, what they earned and what the necessities of the case required. But there is one thing that stands directl in the way of all this; and that is that congress undertakes to regulate this matter. In the first place, we said, and the President said, You must appoint soldiers.” Soldiers are very well if the are capable, and if they have been disabled they are men who ought to have the preference, perhaps, over others, in being appointed clerks; but in the anxiety to get disabled soldiers in the Depts, and in the anxiety of members to have them appointed, following out what seems to be the public sentiment. the result has been that the usiness of the Depts has been embarrassed by having a good many incompetent clerks; and still it is insisted, and ionly insisted, in the newspapers and elsewhere, that trained clerks, who understand the business of the Depts, should be turned out for the purpose of giving their places to those who inve been fighting our battles. The principle is well enough; but the practice, to the extent to which it is claimed that it ought to be car ried, would be utterly destructive to the business of the Depts. Another thing: every member of Congress solicits the Depts for appointments, or pretty much every one; there may be exceptions. I know that I have been obliged to o it, and other members have felt obliged to do it; and having been in a Dept, I know that the public interests suffer from it. A clerk is removed for incompetency or some other cause; somebody comes and says, “It will not do to remove that man; he is a very important man in my district; he makes capital speeches; we cannot dispense with him; he has a great many connections, and important connections: and he must be put back again;" and he is put back. When I was in the Dept I made it a rule in reference to soldiers, that if a man came in with one leg or one arm, that should be a sufficient recommendation, provided he could get along at all; I appointed him and gave him time to learn; but it created very considerable embarrassment. That, however, is atrifle compared to the solicitations that come from Sens&Reps and their interference with the business of the Depts. The result is that we get more than are necessary, or more than would be necessary if attention was paid to the ability and capacity of those employed in the different grades. We have these difficulties they are owing to ourselves in a very great degree, more than to the heads of depts or to anybody connected with the Depts. I do not know of anybody in Congress who is free from the objection I have stated, to a certain extent. I know members are not always willin to do it, but they are compelled to do it, or think they are.