Mr. WASHBURN, oflndiana. Mr. Speaker, the amendment proposed by the Gentfrom Ohio, in my opinion, simply offers a premium for a mans ignorance. It is the fault of the paymasters themselves if any stoppages are made against them. The amendment provides that the money to be aid shall be paid only to those who are in default. The paymaster who, after enterin the Army, discharged without default all file duties imposed upon him, and who has no stoppages against him, gets nothing, while the officer who has been negligent in the discharge of his duties, and has stoppages and suspensions against him, gets a premium for his carelessness and inefficienc. This bill, standing without the amendment, in my opinion, is simply a proposition to increase tbe ay of paymnsters not in the future, but to go liack over the whole war, and give additional pay. What reason is there for it? Is it because they did not get enough in the 1st place? Was the salary of $3,000 a year insufficient? If that be so, the same argument can be made for every otheer and soldier in the Army, for their pay was entirely inadequate. If, then, these paymnsters, who stayed back in the rear, who never came up to the front unless iu exceptional cases, are entitled to additional salary, why should we not ive it to the officers and soldiers who suffered tchardships of the field, and marched through the storm of 100 battles? We are asked to reward these men who held the very best positions in the Army because they have not attended to their duties. because a man paid $25,000 to a regiment which did not belong to the service because he made a mistake, not knowing his duty, and paid out $25,000 to men to whom it on ht not to have been paid, to men whom the Dept de cided never were in the service, we are asked to refund that mone which is charged up against this paymaster. do not say that the:1 moster paid the money fraudulently, but O say that it was a mistake arising from gross negligence or gross ignorance of duty. fhere is not a business man who would not be held responsible for committing such an error; and do not know why these men should not be held responsible. 1 he amendment says that it shall only to those who have not neglected their bedpuatyid. The bill es s that every one shall have an increase. llfy friend, General SMITH, from Kentucky, on the other side, will tell you how much money officers lost by reason of mistakes which they have no means of having refunded. I do not see why these Officers, who had comfortable positions in the pay Dept, should be provided for to the exclusion of all others.