Mr. CLARK. Ine ticed as the bill was read that by its provisions the SecyTreasury is not only authorized but he is required to issue new notes in this case. I was about to propose that the words “and required” be stricken out of the bill, so that the Secretary shall be merely authorized to do it, and then of course he would do it unless he was satisfied that it ought not to be done. I desire to say that the ComClaims examine cases of this kind with great care. They examine them not only with such evidence as is before the committee, but in each case they take ains to send to the Treasury Dept an ascertain if there is any information there on the subject. In this particular case we sent to the Treasury Dept and got such information as they ha. We ascertained there that nothing had ever been heard of the notes or of the coupons, so that there remains very little doubt that they were lost. There is a difficulty in framing a general act to meet cases of this kind, though it would be very desirable if it could be done. It would save the committee a great deal of labor, because these are claims which require to be examined with cat care. I have not the least objection to tie amendment suggested by the Senfrom Maine, if he thinks it desirable; but if we strike out the words “and required, ” I think the amendment suggested by imwill hardly be necessary. What we all desire is, that the Treasury should be guarded, and that new bonds should not be issued in any case until it is satisfactorily ascertained beyond question that the old ones had been lost. Cases have arisen where bonds have been issued in lieu of those supposed to be destroyed where the old ones have afterwards come to light, though [am not aware of any such cases under I the General Government. 1 have in my mind I now ocase which has been before the committee in regard to a California war bond that was supposed to be lost, and the old one has undoubtedly reappeared. There is another class of cases about which I we have often moredifficulty than we have about bonds; and that is, applications for the payment of Treasury notes which have been est where a person alleges that he has lost a certain amount of Treasury notes, and there is no identification whatever. The Senfrom Maine suggests that he would never grant such applications. That has been the opinion of the committee; they have never reported a bill of that kind; but those cases present the diflicultiesthat have occurred to the committee. We have followed the rule of never providing for the emission of a new instrument until the old one could be identified. You will see at once, Mr. President, that if we were to issue new notes or bills for a certain quantity that had been lost and not identified, t ic bond which we take for identification would be of no avail. I move to amend the bill by striking out the words “and required” after “authorized.”