Mr. DELANO. The House have listened to the reading of the resolution. It proposes a plan of action for the committee in reference to all claims for damages growing out of the rebellion in the States lately in rebellion, including not only damages that result from the necessary ravages ofwar, but also from appropriations of pro erty by our Army and Navy for subsistence an supplies. The committee are very clearly of opinion that it would be disas trons to the interests of the Government to undertake to pay the 1st class of damages that I have alluded to, namely, damages growing out of and resulting from the ravages of war. The committee are also unanimously of opinion that no claim rests upon the Government y the former usage of the country or by the law of nations for the payment of such damages. I do not deem itneccssary, takingit for granted that the House has listened to the reading of the report of the committee, to go into an argument. to show that thereis no responsibility resting upon Congress to pay those damages that are the result of the necessary ravages of war. I know that a Government may assume to pay those damages in the feeling of extreme justice, or of evenhanded justice, if it has the ability todo it. But if gentlemen will look at the magnitude of the ravages of the warravages which have been rendered necessary in order to make the war a successand will also consider the enormous expense that this Government has been put to, and the large accu mulation of debt incurred, they will see that to heap ii on the Government now the additionallia ility resulting from the assumption of those damages would be an act of injustice toour constituents. It would result, I think, in shaking the credit of the nation. It would place as in a condition of liability, I imagine, vastly beyond our capacity of endurance. These are simply statements, not arguments in detail, and I trust they are such statements as will be appreciated by the House without attempting to enforce them by details. I rely upon common knowledge of the facts in connection with the putting down of the rebellion to sustain me and to sustain the committee in its conclusion; so that I do not propose to detain the House by pressing this view of the subject upon their consideration. It could be elabo rated, but it must certainly be an act of superth iogation to attempt its elaboration before this House. Now, in regard to the next principlti embraced in this resolution, which excludes from payment damages resulting from the appmpriation of property by our Army for subsistence and for lupport, the committee are very well aware that I this question stands upon a different basis. For I thinkI might admit with safety, that, aceordin to the usage of nations and the law of nations and the previous practice of this Government, the Government should assume to pay in ordinary cases for damages that have resulted from the taking, appropriation, and use of property for the subsistence of the Army. But the committee have considered this matter and desire the House to consider it in the passage of this resolution. This class of damages isu so very large. It will be found to be much larger than gentlemen would be likely to apprehend upon 1st directing their attention tent. The long occupation of the States in rebellion by our armies, and the necessity of subsisting those armies off the countrye necessity forced upon the Government occasioned the appropriation of an immense amount of property. Now, sir, the largest portion of this prope belonged to men whose hands were red wit. the blood of our citizens, and who were desir ous of overthrowing our Government. No body, I apprehend, will entertain the idea for a single moment of paying that class of men. Those men whose purposes were treason, whose design was the death of the nation, are entitled to no consideration that should lead us to in demnify them for their losses. It was necessary to cause these losses. They fought this rebellion with such vigor and persistence that it became necessary for us to destroy their, means in order to put down their power. “o. did so; and in doing so we were compelled not only to lay our hands upon the guilty, but upon many occasions to lay them u)OH the innocent, in the appropriation of this c pass of property. Now, if it were a practicable thing to draw a line of discrimination between the guilty and the innocent, and the Government were able to pay, I would feel it my duty to vote for the payment of this class of damages when the claimants are loyal citizens. I beg leave, however, to suggest to the House the utter impracticabi ty of drawing this line of discrimination. I know enough, and I speak for the committee in this particular, to know that it would be an impracticable effort for us to endeavor to determine which were loyal and which disloyal. I will give the House on illustration of the difficulty. A claim, upon which I am prepared to report adversely, amounting to some 6 or 8,000 dollars, was presented to us by a loyal man with a parently absolute evidence of his 10:ilty. pon that claim 2 favorable reports have been made to the House by the ComClaims. I find thatit consists of some 60 items of property that were taken during the dministration of General Buell at the Set th. There are 60 items from 60 individuals, and when we came to scrutinize the claims not a particle of evidence was offered to US of the loyalty of anyone of the 60 persons interested in the claim. The presenter of it came with clean hands apparently, but he had, perhaps for the purpose of speculation, bought up or made some ar rangement by which he was to represent these claims, and upon these claims he has twice obtained a favorable report from a committee of this House. I But that is not all. If We go into an inquiry as to. the loyalty of these individuals, myword for it. every one of them will give us some evidence of loyalty. You will find that they will be able to procure exports affidavits or evidence of some sort up arentl sufficieut for the establishment of their loya ty. These and like considerations have brought the committee to the conclusionand that conclusion was unanimousthat an effort to discriminate between the loyal and the disloyal would be an imprac ticability, and that the result of it would e to bring the House to the payment of all this class of claims; and ifthat burden is heaped upon the camels back. I fcanihat we may have occasion to say that like the last feather it may break it. The Gentfrom Kentucky [Mr. SMITH] asks me if the resolution excludes all claims that may come up individually on their own merits. The resolution excludes all claims from citizens of disloyal States either forproperty that has been destroyed by the ravages of war, or for property taken and appropriated for the use of the Army.