Mr. DELANO. Mr. Speaker, I have no objection to this claim in consequence of its merits or demerits; I do not propose to say anything aboutits individuality, but I do object to it on the ground of the principle which will be established if this bill bi; passed. I understand this is a proposition to remunerate a party who was in office some 16 years ago on the assuinptionthat the services he rendered were worth more than the law provided for his salary. That is the claim. Here was a distinct contract to do work fora specified price. The work has been done and the sum has been paid, but the party claims more. Now, how many of the judges of your highest courts use come here and ask with a better grace and a stronger claim an additional sum to their salary. So when you establish this principle you open a field for pouring out the treasure of the nation to an extent the magnitude of which you do not conceive. You will not find applications limited to persons in the PostOffice. They will come from the Treasury Dept, from the War Dept, from the Army, from the Navy, from every Dept of the Government. They will show you clearly the ought to have had more than they received. Tlnless, therefore, you have a Treasury that has no bottom, unless you have a capacity for taxation which has no end to it, you must not establish this principle, and especially at this time, when we al know the nation is groaning under a debt of necessity, a debt that must be met, a debt that must be provided for. I am astonished there is not a more Generalanxiety to see that this debt is not enlarged. What has been said by a colleague of mine on the committee is true in all its ength and breadth. We, of the ComClaims, have been certainly repudiating all claims resting on a basis like this. It is t“ime for the House to pauseWe must not rend our subjectsfrom our laws. And slick them in our will. 6th part ofeach? A trembling contributionl Why, we take, From every tree.lop, bark and part 0‘ the timber: And, though we leave it with a root, thus hacked. The air will drink the sap." We ought to look to it that we do not enlarge our already heavy taxation. I do not speak of this claim on its individual merits, but in reference to the principle involved. It will establish a irecedent which will pile up bur dens upon t lepeople needlessly. It will establilsh a precedent such as we ought notto establilsh at this time of all others.