Mr. HENDRICKS. I think this bill makes the question for the Senator and each Senator to decide. We must decide a on the question of right and conscience, whet or we ought to take the property of a true man in the southern States, a man who, against the force of, popular opinion, in presence of personal dangers, stood “up for is country in the warwhether we shall visit upon him the stern rule which may be enforced against a public enem. As a matter of conscience and right, more because there may be a technical right which we can enforce, shall we do it? Itink it is not right to do it. But, sir, this country has not been in the habit of enforcin that right of war to which the Senfrom Michigan refers. When our columns invaded Mexico our commanders did not choose to treat even the Mexicans, who were an questionably foreign enemies, in the sense and manner which the Senator now demands against our own citizens in the southern States, but when our commissar and quar termaster’s depts took supp ies for the Army from the people of Mexico, they were paid, and paid the full value, so that when our Army passed over a section of country it lefifriends instead of enemies; and the whole body of our people approved the policy adopted by Genera Scott and General aylor in that regard. And now a principle and a policy which we adopted wisely, and which was approved by the country in a war against a foreign Power ed that foreign country, is not regarded by the Senator as proper to be extended to the true men of our own country in the late controversy. Mr. President, I cannot understaud this at all. I cannot understand why a loyal man in the South shall not be' paid for any article that he has an lied to the Army.' y objection to this bill when it was before the ComJudiciary and we were considering it there was, that it did not 0 far enough; that it did not take away the a judication from the QuarterMGen who, in regard to these claims, is exceedingly close and Iiard, while in other respects the mono goes by the millions. That is the objection have to the bill; but I did not suppose any Senator would say that a bye] man in the South who is entitled to peculiar regard should not be paid for his property when that property went to feed the soldiers and horses 0 our Arm, simply on the ground that we may claim a.tee nica rule of war against him. I do not think we have that claim. I do not think such men were foreign enemies. I think they were citizens within the limit of our own country struggling for that country. These are the plain views that will govern my vote upon this question.