Mr. HENDRICKS. On this question I vote with entire impartiality. Both the circuit and the district judge of Indiana were appointed by Mr. Lincoln and are both of the party to I do not belong. But independently of at, I am very sorry to hear a reference to political considerations in the appointment of these registers, men appointed to discharge judicial duties. Is it possible that any senator here wants a man to be appointed to the discharge of judicial duties so that it may be a joon his part? Is it possible that party polities are to enter into the adjudication of these men, that one man is to be . because he is of one party and another not to be discharged because he is of the other party? or is the register expected to allow claims because they are presented by partisans? Is that the understanding? It is a thing I would not have thought of; it would never have occurred to my mind; but upon what principle is it? This register is to discharge part of the duties that belong to the district court, and ought he not to discharge these subordinate duties of that court in subordination to the judgment of the district judge? Suppose he undertakes to administer the law in his district in a manner not agreeable to the judge, is he not to be removed by that judge? Who is to remove these men if upon questions of fact or questions of law their adjudications shall be such as the court disapproves? Is another court to take jurisdiction of a register's removal, and is a judge having no connection with the business that is transacted by this man to remove him? Suppose the Chief Justice should appoint him oil. should allow claims that, not to be allowed, or disallow claims that ought to be allowed, or in any other respect his judgments should be wrong. The judge of the circuit court knows nothing about it; much less does the Chief Justice know anything about it. He certainly ought to be under the control of the district judge. Every reason is in favor of that and none against it. I believe the district judge of Indiana, Judge MacDonald, would appoint good men. I have a better opinion of him, however, than to suppose that he would pronounce every member of the Democratic party in Indiana and all the lawyers that believe in the doctrines of that party to be personally dishonest. I have not so much contempt for him as to imagine such a thing. I was anxious for his appointment because I thought he was an eminent lawyer and pure minded man; but if I thought he was so mean as to suppose that the Democratic lawyers of Indiana were a corrupt set of scoundrels and would not discharge the duties of a little office like this homestly, I would not speak to him. I would not entertain such an opinion of the Republican lawyers of Indiana for any consideration, and I would not go to any judge asking him to appoint to offices like these upon party considerations, because I should consider myself degraded by doing it.