sistence for each month during the war at all the principal markets of the Union, has been of great service. By adding to the price at the nearest market the cost of transportation to the place where the claim accrued, we get a fair measure of the value of the property claimed.

Similar tables of prices have been furnished by the Quartermaster-General. They have been of much use in reducing the inflated and exaggerated estimates which claimants generally put upon their property.

We deem it proper to add, in reference to the report of the Commissary-General above referred to, that it was made not long after the close of the war, with great care, for the use of the Government, from bills, vouchers, and data of actual purchases made by the Government during each month of the war, was published with the report of the Commis sary-General, and may be regarded as the highest authority for the price of commissary supplies during the war.

So the prices from the Quartermaster-General stand upon similar data, and are equally reliable. We refer to these authorities (which differ so widely from the prices set forth in the petitions of claimants) because claimants and their counsel sometimes seem to think that the evidence they present in each particular case should be the rule of the case.

We not only find the prices claimed in the petitions are generally greatly exaggerated, but that sometimes both prices and amounts increase with the lapse of time. Some claims presented to the Departments soon after the close of the war now appear before us much increased in amount and price.

Horses and mules appear to be of very uncertain value, ranging in the claims from $50 to $6,000. We allow for them as animals of average value, for army use, according to the quartermaster's prices at the time, unless the evidence clearly shows a higher value. There was no kind of property so much the object of theft and depredation, so frequently and so lawlessly taken for private gain, under the pretense of army use, as horses and mules.

PROOF OF TAKING.

Claimants seem to think that if soldiers took property, pretending to have authority, and promising it should be paid for, that the Government is thereby bound to pay for it. But such pretenses were frequently used by the lawless, and for private gain, as well as by those really having authority. Such artifices must not be allowed to prevail. We must look beyond them, at all the circumstances conneccted with the taking, in order to discriminate between lawful taking and lawless depredation. The Government is not bound to pay for theft or pillage. Hence it is not enough for witnesses to say "The property was taken by soldiers." All the facts connected with the taking should be stated, and, if pos sible, in the natural order of narrative.

If not so narrated, questions should be put as to the number of the soldiers, whether only one or two, whether officers were with them, and ordered or knew of the taking, the hour of the day, the distance from the main body, or the camp; what, and all that was said and done; whether threats of violence were used; whether there was other property taken, and especially household articles or valuables; whether ap plication was made for the restoration of the property to officers, and what was said and done in reply, and all the attending circumstances. Our instructions to the special commissioners are positive that the questions on all these points must be put and answers insisted upon. It is their duty to enforce these directions, to have them obeyed, or the refusal noted in the body of the depositions. If claimants or their

counsel allow witnesses to omit answering, or to evade the questions, the result must be that the claim is not proved, or is seriously discredited.

Where a receipt or voucher was given at the time, we follow it, and have no difficulty in ascertaining the quantity taken. But where the testimony depends on the testimony of witnesses testifying eight or ten years after the property was taken, the quantity becomes uncertain. Witnesses rarely furnish any certain data. Their attention was not called, at the time, to the amount taken. They swear in round numbers, or to the "property claimed in the petition," but rarely show any means of knowledge. In perhaps a majority of cases, proof of the amount depends on the evidence of the claimant, or his wife or minor children, or of some colored dependant once his slave. When we reflect upon the lapse of time since the claims accrued, and the facilities with which the memories of such interested or easily influenced witnesses may be manufactured, it is obvious that we must receive such evidence with caution. Still, in most of these cases, there was some property taken, and it would be unjust to wholly reject the claim. No other evidence than such as the claimant offers can usually be had; and that is subject to the serious objections above alluded to. Hence, in such cases it is extremely difficult to make any satisfactory decision.

VIII.-REBEL ARCHIVES.

The rebel archives in the possession of the Secretary of the Treasury and of the Secretary of War have been most obligingly opened for our use. They contain written contemporary evidence of the position of thousands of persons in the service of, or having dealings with, the confederacy. They are thus evidence of the highest value. Already they have furnished proof for the rejection of claims to a large amount. The knowledge that such papers are in the hands of the Government doubtless deters others from being presented.

The Secretary of the Treasury has occasionally, when it was needful and convenient, allowed us the aid of agents in investigating claims. The Secretary of War has also, when the duties of the service would permit, very kindly directed officers of the Army to examine claims in the vicinity where they were stationed. This has been of great utility. In one case satisfactory proof was obtained for the rejection of a claim of about $100,000.

IX.-OF THE UNFINISHED WORK.

As this commission, by the limitation of the act of Congress which created it, will expire in March next, we deem it our duty to report upon the amount of unfinished work before it, and the time required to finish it. The whole number of claims presented for allowance by March 3, 1873, will probably be about 19,000.

We reported at the last sesion of Congress 580 cases; herewith we send reports in 2,209 cases. We have examined about 700 other cases, which we have suspended for further investigation, but in which the work is chiefly done. By the 3d of March next we shall probably have examined and disposed of at least 500 more. There will remain, therefore, on the 3d March next, about 15,000 cases to be examined and decided.

Perplexing questions having been settled, the labors of the commis sion systematized, and all employed having become familiar with their duties, and having acquired facility in the dispatch of business, it is reasonable to conclude that the work will hereafter progress with more rapidity. From the rate of progress now being made, we think the remaining work can be finished in four years. When it is considered that the evidence in all cases over $10,000 must be taken orally before the commissioners, or some one of them, and that the depositions taken by the special commissioners are in some cases quite voluminous, and require long and laborious examination, it is plain that it will require diligence and industry to do the work in that time.