Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senfrom Iowa will observe that this bill is not intended to take away the general jurisdiction of the quartermaster and commissary Depts to Settle for supplies and the general business of those Depts. It covers only the class of cases where there is a controversy, and it is limited to cases where supplies have been taken by the proper officer an a receipt given for them, or where they were taken by the properotheer and no receipt given, an where the claimant was a loyal man at the time the property was taken, and has remained a loyal man ever since. The bill is only intended to apply to that class of cases. They would not settle those claims in the quartermaster and coinmissa Depts because the propervouchers ha not been given: We passed a law one or 2 years ago authorizing the Quartermaster and Commissary Generals to settle that class of cases, where the receipt had been given by the properofficer, or where he had not given a receipt, if the property was taken and used by the Army, an the man from whom it was taken was a loyal man at the time, and has continued loyal since. They have been set thng those claims. It was limited originally to claims that existed in the loyal States. This bill proposes to extend that provision to all similar cases the Senfrom WestVirginia had a ease up the other day to all similar cases all over the U.S., in disloyal as well as loyal States, wherever the properofficers took the property for the service of the Army and the vouchers were not executed. Now. instead of allowing those claims to be settled in the quartermaster and commissary Depts, they are transferred above a certain amount I am not sure about the amount to the Court of Claims. That is all there is of this bill. It was not intended to give the Court of Claims 0. general jurisdiction in regard to cases where the propervouchers exist and where by the existing laws these Depts would have authority under the general law to settle the claim. It would involve another very serious question if you imposed upon the Court of Claims the passing upon all these accounts for transportation where there was a controversy about them. They could not do it. I think that would be too extensive a change. There would be an objection perhaps to it, that to take that general class of case s the court would have to have a great many clerks, and it would be impossible to do the business in the court.