Mr. COOK. I shall proceed very briefly to reply to the various points made by gentlemen who have opposed this bill. If I had ever doubted whether the bill ought to pass, all such doubts are entirely removed when I see how weak are the assaults that able men have been able to make upon it. Let us look for a moment at the evil that is sought to be remedied. In the State of Kentucky the popular sentiment was greatly divided during the great rebellion. A very large number of the citizens of that State, after exerting their utmost influence to carry the State into the confederacy. did join the rebel military organizations. The citizens of Kentucky were represented both in the congress of the Union and the rebel congress, and fought each other on her soil, the one side for the Union and the other for the confederacy. It must be aparent to every one that such a contest must have been one of exceeding bit terness. All the passion of which our nature is capable was aroused and excited, and a fury was added to the strife, such as only arise when a.mans fees are those "of his own house old;” and after the war had continued with varied success upon Kentucky soil for 4 years, and when the rebels were forced to submit the feelings of bitterness and hate which had been increasing and becoming intensified during the long and deadly strife were neither eradicated or subdued. In many portions of the State the majority of the people had sympathized with and given aid and comfort to the rebellion, and when the actual war was over the feelings of hatred with which they regarded the Union soldiers and officers yet remained. In the rapid march of the armies, both national and rebe, across the State of Kentucky, it was necessary that horses should be impressed, that forage should be athered, and army supplies taken wherever t ley could most readily be found. Had not these means been resorted to at the time Braggs army invaded that State, and on other similar emergencies, the result of the contest in that State might have been greatly different from what it was. Now, the simple question raised by this bill is, shall the officers and soldiers who. acting under the authority of their commanding officers, arrested guerrillas and seized horses and supplies for the use of the Army, be protected from individual responsibility therefor? This bill proposes to protect not the commanding officers who issued the orders, but the subordinate officers and soldiers who executed them, and who were bound to execute them. The Gentfrom Kentucky [Mr. HARDing] insists that a soldier is not always bound to obey military orders; which means, Isup pose, that he may, afterthe order is given, have time given him to reflect and debate upon it, and then , if in his judgment it is not a properOrder, he may refuse to obey. hI opinion is that in time of actual war when the safety of an entire army depends upon rompt obedience, that time for discussion and deliberation on the part of the private soldier would be very brief. he question comes back, will we protect the men who executed the orders of the Government or will we suffer them now to be ruined because they have stood by the Government in this crisis? The entire point of the argument,dent Jackson. what was constitutional and Democratic then 5 of the Gentfrom Kentucky was that the 3 State authorities would afford to these men properprotection. Why, sir, it is palpablethnt in some portions of the State of Kentucky, where the rebel element preponderuted, the feeling of the majority of the people toward active Union men who have borne arms in de fense of the country is such as would disqualify them from sitting as jurors in cases affecting such Union men, especially in cases into which political questions mustnecessarily enter. But the great principle for which I contend is, that the Government should protect itsofficers in executing its laws; to abandon them is wrong and weak. It is not a.question affecting Kentucky only or mainly; when the military control shall be withdrawn in every southern State, the same questions will arise. No Union man who has served his country can live in those communities unless protected by his Government. All such suits are promptly disposed of by the military in those States now. fiut the magni tude of the question may be understood from the fact that inihentucky, where the military cannot interfere with the courts because the State government has not been overthrown by the relimi lion, 1500 suits