Mr. WADE. The Senfrom ’ennsyl vania [Mr. Bucmnswj who wished that I would move to take it up. It was before the committee, I believe, esterday, and after full deliberation they inadse their report upon it, and amended the House bill by ecreasing the amount very much. Some of the gentlemen of that committee are present, and suppose they can answer an questions in regard to it. The Senfrom Oyregon[Mr. WILLIAMS] can explain it much better than I can. Iknow that the committee have deliberated upon the evidence in the case veryfully; and the only question, as I understand: that waspending before fthat committee was the question as to the amount of damages that should be allowed for certain property that was destroyed by the Indians at the timementioned in the resolution. The right to such damages, I believe, was conceded by all, both in the House and in the Senate; but our committee cut down the dam ages considerably, some 8 or 9,000 dollars, from the amount allowed by the House. Of course it turned on a mere estimate of the damages, derived from various witnesses, as to the value of the property destroyed. I believe that is the only question there is pending, and I suppose it is a question about which men weak form different judgments. Different men would form different estimates as to the value of the property destro' ed. The committee I know to be an exceedingly vi 'lant one, and one that would be very apt to ta e care of the interests of the Government in a question of this kind. The amount is pretty large, and the matter received the deliberate judgment of the committee, as I know the had it under consideration for some time. have read the testimony in regard to the damages, and I think that there is in it room for any tribunal to vary somewhat. If I was to judge myself, however, I should suppose that in estimating the damages the House Ihad made nearer an average of the testimony than the Senate committee, who cut it down; but that is not for me to say. It was before the committee for examination, and their judgment, of course, is infinitely better than mine on such a subject. I think there is no reason to object to the resolution unless gentlemen want to overhaul all the evidence.