“General Garfield.—We will take each particular thing at the proper time and place. A note is handed me of which I will speak in this connection. It is that during the debate Mr. Garfield answered a question of Mr. Hibbard, of New Hampshire, who said, ‘How about this plunder? How much plunder will it take out of the Treasury?’ And that Mr. Garfield’s answer seemed to imply that he did not regard it as plunder. I believe there has been as much said on that particular reply of mine in connection with this salary business as any thing else that has been said. Now I have already answered that in the general remarks I have made this evening, namely, when a Democrat from New Hampshire rose in his place and put a question to me, inquiring how much money it would take out of the Treasury if this salary act passed, and put it in the form of saying how much ‘plunder’ it would take, I did not at first notice that he used the word ‘plunder,’ and I answered it would take a million and a half dollars out of the Treasury. Then Mr. Dawes rose and said, ‘Did my friend from Ohio notice the word ‘plunder?’’ Does he acknowledge this to be ‘plunder?’ I then said, ‘No, I don’t acknowledge that this is plunder. If any gentleman thinks that he is taking more than is justly due him in his conscience, let him call it plunder if he pleases.’ “Now, an attempt has been made to make it appear that Mr. Garfield approved the salary act because he answered this man that he didn’t regard it as robbery. I answer now, I do not regard it as robbery, and never have.