Mr. HILL. I move to strike out the entire clause. I do it for the reason that I think the facts do not justify the placing of any more money at the disposal of the SecyTreasury. I am unable to see why, if it is. done in this case, it may not with equal propriety be done with regard to the heads of other Depts. We have been appropri ating from time to time, I am quite sure, something like a million of dollars, if not more, in different sums, to be distributed at the discretion of the SecyTreasury to per soas in the employ of that Dept. By a report recently made it appears that that money has been distributed among his favorites upon the principle that “to him that hath shall be given and from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.” I find by the report contained in executive document No. 22 a statement showing that out of the $100,000 appropriated at the last session, one asst secretary received $250 per quarter increase, being at the rate of $1,000 per year. And I $375 per quarter appropriated to each of the 2 comptrollers, o at the rate of $1,500 a year increase. An now it is proposed to give this sum of $60,000 to be distributed in the same way. It occurs to me that it was not in accordance with the intention of Congress in appropriating these sums; that the design of {. in making the appropriation was to give to those who needed these sums of money, those not receiving a high rate of compensation from the Government, instead of placing these high sal aried officers of the Dept upon a vastly better footing than similar officers in any other Dept. Under this provision, and the distribution of this sum heretofore by the SecyTreasury, you have given to the officers of that Pdept, receiving salaries of $2, 5more, an addition of from 1,000 to 1500 dollars, while you have not made such increase to similar officers may deem in the interior Dept, in the State dept and in other Depts where equal skill is certainly required, and where equal compensation should be paid for equally valuable services. This is an indirect way of increased salaries for which the law has made no provision, leaving the matter in the discretion of the head of the Dept. I move to strike out this clause, because in my opinion no good reason exists for placing this money in the hands of the SecyTreasury, to be distributed at his direction, that not operate oin favor of any other dept; and, as Congress has not extended a like liberality in regard to the other Depts, I insist that it should cease in regard to this one.