Mr. CHANLER. I regret, Mr. Chairman, that this whole subject has assumed somewhat of a religious character, and that the question of church and state has been drawn into this debate. I am sorry too that I have been referred to as having in any way attempted to characterize this Government as being specially for one side or the other in religious matters. All I mean to say on that i. is, that inas much as our Government is based upon the people, and as the statistical returns show a majority of our population, to entertain the Protestant faith, in that light only do I mean to assert that this is a Protestant Government. So far as my personal views are concerned I adhere to no doctrine which would favor a union of church and State, and I have no purpose whatever to introduce religious questions into a political discussion. But, sir, this is a practical question, and as such it has been treated with force and appropriateness by the chairman of the ComWays&Means, [Mr. MoRRILL] who has said that this position of minister at Rome is but an ornamental post of no advantage to the people of this country. That argument, sir, in common with a whole line of argument introduced by those who are trying to stop our appropriations for the mission at Rome, applies with equal force to nearly the whole list of diplomatic positions; and I am in favor of abolishing a large majority, if not all, of these diplomatic posts, which are absorbing to an immense amount the proceeds of the people's labor without affording them any return. I believe sir, that a well organized consular system based upon the commercial interests of our country will be better administered, and more consistent with our form of government. I recognize in the system of diplomatic appointment a subtle and indirect subserviency to the European form of government, which, from its monarchical character, is altogether unsuited to be a model for the enlightened Government of a free Republic. The chairman of the ComForAffrs [Mr. BANKs] has in his remarks this morning given us the key to that whole system. The Court of Rome refuses to send an embassador here why? Because that embassador would not hold his position here with that dignity which, under the rules and precedents of European diplomacy, is accorded to the rePresentative of the Church of Rome in all countries where the Catholic reli is predominant. That is the secret of the Curopean system, governed as it is by the strict est rules of diplomatic etiquette; and it will be found in the history of our diplomatic relations that in order to meet those obstacles of etiquette we have absolutely been obliged to change the order of our organization in diplo matic affairs and waive if not surrender the principles of our Government. Sir, I desire that our country shall withdraw from participation in the system of European diplomacy. We should have nothing whatever to do with it. Our principle is that of the common interest of our people in governmental affairs. I wonder, however, that in assailing the Pontiff of the Church of IRome gentleinen have not applied the same line of argument to the sovereign to whom we send on large salaries the supple kneed rePresentatives of this government [Here the hammer fell]