said to have a faint and distant resemblance to our
Parliamentary agents, and they are in no way recognised by Congress.
Their work consists in endeavouring to force all members who purpose
presenting public or private bills to employ them, which, of course,
involves a "consideration;" and, as their name is "Legion," and their
motto on this point "unanimity," they are enabled, owing to their
influence with the members, to throw the greatest possible obstruction
in the way of most bills which are not passed through their "greased
palms." The result need not be described. The correspondent of the
_Times_, who, if report he correct, has held the highest situations a
citizen of the United States can hold, states, in a letter to be found
in that journal, on the 27th January 1857, that the Minnesota Land Bill
had been said, in the House of Representatives, to be supported by
bribery, and that one member openly avowed in his seat that he had been
offered 1500 dollars for his vote in favour of the bill. The consequence
was an inquiry into the alleged charge, and doubtless it will affect the
weight of the Lobby. He adds--"The Lobby has, no doubt, great influence
on the Legislature, but it is not yet all-powerful." In estimating the
effect of a vote, it must be remembered that there are only 234 members
in the House of Representatives, and 62 in the Senate; and, to give some
idea of the interests concerned, the correspondent states--"It is
scarcely an exaggeration to say that the Federal Congress at Washington
has a disposing power over twice the amount of national property subject
to the votes of the Parliament at Westminster." Those who feel an
interest in this subject I would strongly urge to read the whole of the
very able letter alluded to.

I have before spoken of the very great readiness with which any stranger
gains admittance to Congress to listen to the debates. As a broad
feature, I believe their discussions are carried on in a sober,
practical, business-like manner; nevertheless, most outrageous scenes
have occurred. I subjoin the following extract, not from any one
sentence it contains, but from its continuity, as a proof that the tone
of the House is not worthy of the dignity of so great a country. A
member of any community may get up and use the most gross and offensive
language; but if the offender be immediately called to order, and made
to retract the offensive expressions, the community thus vindicates its
char