Mr. EDM S. The extreme injustice of the amendment of the Senfrom Iowa as apilied certainly to the State of Vermont, and I do not know but to other States they can answer for themselves compels me to enter my dissent to that in particular. It is fair to say, also, that I dissent from the amendment of the Senfrom Massachusetts; but that is far better for my State than the amendment of the Senfrom Iowa. The State of Vermont from the beginning, from the 1st soldier of hers that entered the field and I believe she has never been accused of being behindhand in sending them there provided by State tax for every soldier an extra compensation of 7 dollars permonth; so that everysoldier of her 20,000, or whatever her share might have been and it was filled received from month to month, as he was in the field performing service, 7 dollars permonth from the State in addition to his U.S. pay. He received at a time when it was fit and proper that the faith and justice of the State should be exercised toward him because it was at a time when, more than any other, himself and his family whom he had left behind needed it. We entered upon that scheme as an act of justice so that the dear ones who were left behin should be provided for then. The result of it is that it only leaves a compensation under this amendment to all of our soldiers of one dollar and a 3rd permonth and no more. N ow, if you take from that the U.S. bounty that has been paid, of $100 in the 1st place, and then of $200, $300, or $400 in later times, according to the particular circumstances un. der which each man enlisted, the result is that, except in the accidental cases of death some times when the mau did not serve out his term and therefore his 7 dollars permonth. stopped, there is not a soldier of the State of Vermont who will receive a penny of bounty in pursuance of the amendment of the Senfrom Iowa. Out of the $200,000,000 or $800,000,000 that you propose to give to.the soldiers of the nation, the Vermbnt soldiers will receive not one dollar. Thatis the “equalization” which they are to have under the provision so kindly offered by the Senator lrom Iowa, and supported by the Senfrom Ohio, on the ground, I suppone, that the burden upon the Treasury will be ess. I Now, reverse the picture. thatis the equalizatinn of the bounties for us. Where is the equalization of the burdens upon the States on the other hand? The State of Vermont pays one halfof 1% and a little over of all the internal taxes of the country. It is asniull sum, to be sure, fractionally; but the resultis, under this measure as provided for by the amendment of the Senfrom Iowa, if it will take, for illustration, $200,000,000 to accom plish the object, it will be the duty of the State of Vermontto contribute from the labor of her people $1,000,000 toward it. ThereforeI while you profess to equalize the bounties to soldiers in Iowa and the other States, where they did not provide for them in the time of need, you call upon the State of Vermont to pay over a million dollars to those States without receiving a penny of compensation or bounty in return. Certainly, if that equalizes bounties it unequalizes, if there be such storm, the bur on of taxation which our Constitution and laws require to be imposed equallyu on the States. Ifor one, sir, object decidedly to this late species of gratitude which, in order to show your generosity toward the soldiers of one section of the country, takes from the pockets of the soldiers of another section (because they are at home and hard at work, all who have not their graves in the South) the money to make that good. If the State of lawn or the State of Indiana or any other State feels that she has not done justice to her soldiers as the time went by, it is not too late for her to show it. The have the power of taxation in those States, suppose. They know the wants of their local so iery. They are quite competent and able to provide for them. Why ca I upon us who, as the time went by, made proper and efficient provision, so that we were not only just but generous to our soldiers, and they are satisfied with it. I do not wish to occupy the time of the senate; but, sir, it up ears to me that in these considerations we have rather underrated the material of which these soldiers are composed. As has been said by the Senfrom Ohio, they are not mercenaries, they are not hire lings, the are not persons whose favor, political or otherwise, is to be bought and sold by the paltry bid of a few bounticsjust now. They are the citizens they are the responsible men of the nation; they are the owners of property, small, to be sure, individually, but pro)erty which is sacred to and cared for by them. I‘hcy feel the responsibilities and the troubles that are imposed upon us now in the way ofing clear and pure our public faith as hkigehepy as any Senator in this hamber does. I do not believe that they will feel complimented by an extraordinary effort at this time, under a proession of equalizing bounties, to unequalize and disturb the burdens imposed upon the different States and to imperil in a large degree the public faith and the public credit. Thus much I have said in relation to the pending amendment as it applies to my State. Vhen the amendment in ciicf comes to be considered I may have something to say upon the details of it.