A Consistent Body

Much as the United States Senatfc tas been crïticised of late years, there is a oertain sort of consistency in its public i ;ts which cannot fail to excite the admiration of the impartial observer. Whatever may hsve been its faults ov its failures in other directions, it has never failed of a proper sense of its own dignity and its superiority to the public judgment. Oftentirnes misapprehonded and misjudged by its cotemporaries, the calin and uuprejudiced pen of the historian will set it down as a singular harmonious and bomogeneous body in the respect of being true to itself and its own reputation, in the face of popular clamor. It will be recorded of it that when Charles Suraner gave offense to it - and when we speak of the Sonate, we mean of course the majority, which is absolute in its councils- it summarily deposod him f rom achairmanship for which in the judgment of the people he was the best-fitted statesman in the country, and put in his place Mr. Simon Camoron, whose life and charaoter and public services gave no offense to the niajority in that body. Also, that when one of their nmnbcr was found by uu 111vestigating committee guilty of corruption, and there was a popular deinand for his expulsioa, the Senatê, mindful of its own dignity and jealous of dictation, ocoupied itself with a resolution of censure till the Senator's term expired, and let him go unharmed. Also, that when another, a Christian statesman, was proven guilty of an attempted bribery of a Legislature, they rose superior to the testimony and let him out at the expiration o his term without a word of dissatisfaetioi at his conduct. Also, that when other honorable Senators camo into that body followed by e vidonce that they had bough their seats, the Senate stood upon its dig nity and held that the certifícate of elee tion was a clean bill of health. It may be said of it too, that in confir ming nominations it has mantained the same consistent record. In only one no table instance has it refused to confiim a Presidential appointment, and that was case where its own dignity was involved When the President nominated Judg Hoar of Massachusetts to the Supreme Court Bench the Senate rose in opposi tion. Judge Hoar was an able lawyer, a learned, conscientious, and upright man and the people cornmended the appoint ment as one of the best that could hav boen made. But Judge Hoar had, when Attofney-General, declined to conside the offices in his appointment as patrón age to be apportioned out among Soria tors and meuibers of Congress, and hac insisted on the old fogy notion that can didates for offices at his disjjosal shoulc have qualifications. It is said, but it i almost incredible, that he had gone so fa astosnub some prominent person whc "demanded" an office for a friend. C course the Senate would notconfirm suc a nomination. How could it consisten tl with its own dignity ? And what is mor necessary to preserve than the dignity o that body have been confirmed, aud í „nmimtinn for Chief Justice awaits anc