Mr. BUCKALEW. Iain very happy to hear the explanation made by. the Senfrom RhdIsland. I have not had the slightest disposition to speak harshly er unkiuilly of anything that has been done by the Senate, or to speak unhnndsomely or critically of its prac tices and habits of action. I have no griefs of my own. But, sir, the Senator misconpeives the point of my observation. I did not refer to this subject for the mere u can of making compilaint, of making myse f e organ of the grie of other men, or to espress my own. I referred to it in illustration of the existing inequality of power by which necessarily so mum of patronage and of influence and of puthority in connection with the Government is given to one section of the country. i ow, sir, the Senators explanation, which is very well as far as it goes, does not cover the point of my argument, which was this: that because one section was over represented it had all this power here. Accepting that representation as a fact, these consequences flow from it. Now, the Senator, in reply, proceeds to tell me that these Consequences are e itimate and proper under the circumstances. oes he not perceive that if some 6 of these very good men of the East, who are chairmen of committees, were distributed in other sections of the country all these facts would havehad no existence. It is that distribution of these individuals in the outset, under the existing rule of the Constitution, which is justly obnoxious to criticism, and not so much the practice of the Senate after they are here. I would not subject any of the gentlemen that represent the East to indignity, much less to insu tI; would not criticise them; I would not for anything in this world inure their feelings or wound eir sensibilities; but, Air, in discussing a question of the basis of power tn this Government, gentlemen must permit me to refer to notorious facts and to show how that power is organized and show how it does act in this Government; and I do not feel myself open to the charge that I am an enemy of any person within the class covered by the argument which I submit. What I say is, that if we are about to redress inequalities under the Constitution of 1789, if we are about to repair the errors of our fathers, to improve upon their work, if we are to attain to an ideal perfection in our system, we are to strike at all the inequalities, we are not to bare our hand against the southern section, omittin a blow equally necessary and equally required by the facts upon an eastern interest.