the majority in that House? In the days of Washington, would any member
have dared to use, or would any other member have for a moment
tolerated, such language? It is but justice to say, that the tone of the
Senate Chamber is far more dignified; and many who have been members of
that body have established a world-wide reputation both as orators and
statesmen.

Let us now turn for a few minutes to that important subject, the
Judiciary of the States, one peculiar feature of which is, its being a
co-ordinate branch of the Legislature. The Supreme Court of the United
States is the highest tribunal in the country; it consists of a Chief
Justice and eight associate Justices, the Attorney-General, a reporter,
and a clerk. All questions affecting foreign ambassadors, consuls, &c.,
are tried before this court; and it is a final court of appeal in cases
involving constitutional questions, and various others, too long to
enumerate here. It has even the power of annulling the acts of the
Federal Congress at Washington, if such acts are contrary to the
Constitution.

The following article in the Constitution regulates the terms upon which
alone any change may be made, and which is of so peculiar and
conservative a character that I insert it in full:--

"ARTICLE V.--_Power of Amendment_.

"The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it
necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the
application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States,
shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either
case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this
Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three-fourths of
the several States, or by conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the
one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress;
provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one
thousand eight hundred and eight, shall in any manner affect the first
and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article, and that
no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage
in the Senate."

The foregoing article is a remarkable instance of prudence and
forethought, and acts as the strongest safeguard against hasty measures,
which in times of great excitement may sometimes obtain a majority that
would afterwards be regretted by all parties. If the principle involved
in any qu