Mr. ROSS. If it will not. discompose the gentleman too much, I would ask him to state whether that was during the time he was drawing ay as a member of Congress. Mil: CONKLING. I do not quite understand the pertinence of the question of the Gentfrom Illinois, [ML Ross.] But I will endeavor to enlighten him. Hc probably knows for I presume that information has extende to him, that the term of members of Congress commences on the 4th of March and as the retainer which I have spoken of was in April, which, I will inform the gentleman, isa month that comes after March in the calendar, he will very likely be able, by the rule of 3, or by some other role with which he is familiar, to cipher out whetherl was a member of congress at the time or not. I an pose the Gentleman put his question all in the way of good nature; and I give my explanation to him in the same way. I should be sorry to suppose that the member from Illinois, or any ot or member of this House indeed, I should be sorry as an American to suppose that the standard of intelligence anywhere in the country is so low, that any human being, unless it be that distinguished mathematician and warrior, Provost Marshal GenlFry, believes that there is the slightest impropriety in a man who is a member of congress practicing his profession as counsel in courts, or accepting from the Government of the U.S or from any other client a retainer for such professional services. It would be very extraordinary, indeed, if some distinguished gentlemen, whom I will not name, who have recently performed most conspicuous professional services for the Government while they were members of Congress, had subjected themselves to the criticism of the Gentfrom Illinois, or of anybody whatever, always ixcepting, of course, Provost Marshal General i ry. So much for that part of this bundle of papers given to a pretended statement of the circumstance of my acting as counsel for the U.S. I come to the next point which occurs to me. There is:1.statement, if I up rehended it aright, that some effort was made by me to have “concealment” I think that was the word in regard to the 21st congressional district. That is mere assertion. No circumstances are stated upon which it could be founded, therefore I cannotdissect it, but I pronounce the statement utterly and absolutely froundless nothing whatever of truth can be found in it. On the contrary, in the investigation which took place before the court mar tial to which reference has been made, every thing that could be investigated pertaining to the 21st congressional districtwas investigated. The matter of recruiting there was held 11, that the light might shine through and through it; and nothing in that statement amazes me more than that the Provost marshal General or anybody else should dare, even in so daring a document, to put on record an assertion so utterly baseless. So far I have noticed only some of the more far fetched libels in these papers. I come now to the question which was made by the member who causes this letter to be read, the pretense that it in some way bolstered up the assertions made by him the other day. This letter was read in part, we were told, to"show that I was not warranted in pronouncing untrue the statement that I had had personal “ uar rels” with the Provost Marshal Gene.I beg leave, Mr. Speaker, to remind gentlemen of the precise statement which on that occasion I pronounced untrue. The member from Maine said I read from the Globe“I do not suppose that the HoRep care anyting more than the ComMilAffrs about the great recruiting frauds of NewYork or the quarrcls of the Gentfrom NewYork with GenlFry. in which quarrels, it is generally understood the gentleman came out 2nd bestat the War Dept.” I will not stop to read further (althoughI propoe to have all I have marked inserte in my remarks) the various forms in which the statement was made that I had had personal quarrels with Provost Marshal GenlFry.