Mr. BRANDEGEE. I ask leave to report back from the ComNavAffrs senate bill No. 176, for the relief of George Henry Preble, a commander in the Navy of the U.S., with a recommendation that it do pass. There is a report accompanying the bill, and unless some gentleman desires further information, after it has been read I shall ask for the previous question. The bill provides that the proper accounting officers of the Treasury be authorized and directed, in settling the accounts of George Henry Preble, a commander in the Navy of the U.S., to allow him pay as a commander from the 16th of July, 1862, in the same way and manner as if the order discharging him from the naval serviCe had never been issued. It appears from the report that the petitioner alleges that, being an officer in the Navy on the 5th of August, A. D., 1862, he was promoted to his present rank, to date from the 16th day of the preceding July; that the senate on the 21st day of the then next February confirmed him as such commander. He further alleges that while he was on duty, on the 12th of October, 1862, he received official notice by a letter from the Navy Dept, dated September 20, 1862, that he was dismissed from the naval service; and that he remained in that situation until he was, on the 21st of I'ebruary, 1863, confirmed as commander by the Senate on a nomination of the President made on the 12th of the same month. Under these circumstances, he prays that he may be allowed pay as commander afloat from the 16th of July, 1862, to the 12th of October, in the same year, and of a commander waiting orders from the latter date to the 21st of February, 1863, when he was confirmed in his present office by the Senate. The facts alleged in the petition the committee find, on reference to the official records, of the Government, to be true. The nomination of Commander Preble, made by the President on the 12th of February, 1863, to take rank from the 16th of July previous, the precise time from which his former appointment was to date, and its subsequent confirmation by the Senate on the 21st of the same month, in the opinion of your committee had the effect, and was manifestly intended to have the effect, of putting him precisely where he would have been if the order of the Navy Dept of September 20, 1862, discharging him from the naval service, had never been issued, and must be considered and taken to be a full revocation of that order, and a condonation of any real or supposed offense or delinquency, on his part subsequent to the pe. riod from which his commission was to entitle him to take rank. Under these circumstances your committee are of opinion that the prayer of the petitioner is just and reasonable and ought to be granted, and report a bill for his relief.