Mr. POMEROY. I am not entirely satisfied with the explanation given by the Senfrom Massachusetts in reply to the suggestion I made irshort time since in relation to military store keepers. He said he would consider the subject, and perhaps report upon it hereafter. I do not think that is entirely satisfactory, because the multiplication of bills relating to the Army is not very desirable. When we have an Army bill before us we had better perfect it and insert in it all the provisions that we intend to make for the Army, rather than bring up the subject again in a new bill. In order to test the sense of the Senate I will move to strike out in the 14thsection the words “the same compensation as is now prmided by law, ” and to insert, “ rank, pay, and emol uments of a cagtain of cavalry, ” so that the section will roa: That the number of military storckecpers in the quarterinnsters Dept shall licreafter be as many as shall be required, not exceeding 16. with the rank, pay, and emoluments of a captain of cavalry. These storekeepers, as I have said, have the uy of acaptain of cavalry now, but they do not iave any rank. They cannot command anybody. lf a squad of soldiers is sent to one of them to guard military or ordnance stores of any kind, he has no more control over them than any civilian would have. It has been frequentl represented to me that it is a matter often etrimental to their service, because they cannot command even a lieutenant or anybody else. I My intention was not to oblige the Dept. The Senfrom Iowa says they are old men, and if we give them commissions in the Army they may be at on the retired listat some time hereafter. I do not know how that is. Inever had one appointed myself. I have no personal interest in the subject. I do not know an old man in the service who is a military store keeper. There may be some. But be that as it may, these officers have large responsibilities. Millions of public stores are committed to them. They have to watch over them and be vigilant in the discharge of their duty. They now get the ay of captains, but they get no rank, no e oIuments, and they have no standing. As this proposition does not increase their pay, I.think we ought to give them at least the rank and standing in the Army of captains. I have seen a.letter from General Meigs in which he recommends this proposition and says he would like to have it done. I know of no objection to it. If it increased their pay 25 cents a day I would not urge it. I notice that we have just added 25 cents a day to the ny f those who are doing extra service on etaSied duty. If this proposition would add that much to the pay of these storekcepers I would not urge it; but it does not do that. It gives them the rank of captains with the ay of captains, which they now have, and if ey should be killed I suppose it would give pen llons to their widows or hcirs if they have any. This subject was called up last year and the ilitary Committee gave their attention to it, and now when it has come up again the chair man of the committee says he will consider it hereafter. If it is to be considered at all, let it be considered now, and let the question he closed. I do not want to bring the subject to the attention of the Senate again. I therefore submit the amendment that I have indicated.