Terribly beautiful the serpent lay,

Wreathed like a coronet of gold and jewels.

It was done, without that protest from any one of the Republican members which their present temper would seem to have required. One by one the States thus became unrepresented; and not a word, except sometimes debate on the abstract right to secede, or tacit acknowledgment that it was best for the time. No attempt was made to arrest any one, if we may except an affidavit by some person of no consequence, and whose name cannot now be recalled, on the basis of which he vainly urged an arrest of DAVIS and others for treason. Even so prominent a Republican as Lieut-Governor STANTON, of Ohio, to say nothing of his namesake the Secretary of War, Mr. GREELEY, and Mr. CHASE, abetted this movement by proposing no constraint upon the departing sisters.

These facts, as the forerunners of the mighty conflict of arms, would be inexplicable did we not remember that from December, 1860, until March, 1861, there was a hope, as DOUGLAS and CRITTENDEN telegraphed to Georgia, that "the rights of the South and of every State and section would be protected in the Union."

The first efforts at compromise were by no means confined to the Democratic Senators and members. Gov. CORWIN, Mr. ADAMS, Mr. EDWARD JOY MORRIS, and others in the House; Senators CAMERON, Baker, Dixon, FOSTER, COLLAMER, and others in the Senate, were, at the beginning of the session, and for some time afterwards, regarded as not indifferent to a compromise which would at least retain the border States, if it did not stop the movement of the Gulf States.

The thirty-sixth Congress was unusually gifted. Especially were the Southern States represented by their most experienced and able men. They hoped that the step they were about to take would be bloodless; that their array in strength, and with the mien of resistance, would prevent coercion by arms. Even so late as the secession of Texas, after Judge Reagan, one of its representatives, had left his seat, he took pains to inform me, that he thought the South would be out only for a season, and that when the excitement subsided, and especially if any guarantees were given of the protection of their rights, they would return. In this, how signally ability and experience failed to discern the future! Mankind generally reckon the greatness of men by success. If this be the touchstone, the vaunted statesmanship of the South vanishes. But what a company of conspicuous names answered to the roll-call on the 6th of December, 1860!

At the head stands JonN C. BRECKENRIDGE, offering his name, so proudly connected with the history of Kentucky, to the task of dismember

ing the Democratic party, which had once so honored him. He was among the last to leave his home to take the sword for the South. Now he is a fugitive upon English soil, pleading with his stricken confederates to do the best by submission to Federal rule. Foremost in influence, if not in rank, is JEFFERSON DAVIS; how then unlike that DAVIS who, in Maine, but a few years before, had spoken nobly for the Union; and how unlike that DAVIS, the captive of the Michigan cavalry, and the prisoner at Fortress Monroe! His State was not among the foremost to secede. She waited until the 9th of January, 1861, before passing her ordinance, and her Senators lingered until the 21st before they withdrew. It is generally credited among those who were familiar with Mr. DAVIS's inclinations, that even after the ordinance passed he was anxious to remain. There is indubitable evidence that while in the Committee of Thirteen he was willing to accept the compromise of Mr. CRITTENDEN, and recede from secession. That compromise failed; because, as Senator HALE said, on the 18th of December, 1860, the day it was introduced, it was determined the controversy should not be settled in Congress. When it failed, the hero of Buena Vista became the Confederate leader. Much as he is underrated now by Southern men who opposed him during the war, he was fitted to be the leader of just such a revolt. Every revolution has a fabulous or actual hero conformable to the local situation, manners, and character of the people who rise. To a rustic people like the Swiss, William Tell, with his cross-bow and the apple; to an aspiring race like the Americans, WASHINGTON, with his sword and the law, are, as Lamartine once said, the symbols standing erect at the cradles of these two distinct Liberties! JEFFERSON DAVIS, haughty, self-willed, and persistent, full of martial ardor and defiant eloquence, is the symbol, both in his character and in his present situation, of the proud and impulsive, but suppressed ardors and hopes of the Southern mind. His colleague in the Senate, Gov. Brown, was, according to my recollection, still more reluctant to sever the connection. He was, even before the Charleston Convention, if not openly, covertly a co-worker with DOUGLAS and others in striving to preserve the unity of the Democratic party and the country. Gov. BROWN has been a member of the Confederate Congress, and has been outspoken in his criticism on the conduct of the Confederate authorities. I doubt if he had much heart or faith in the secession movement. He was overshadowed as a Senator by Mr. DAVIS; but was far more approachable, and perhaps more kind, in his relations towards other members. The most truculent Senator from the South was WIGFALL, of Texas, a man of scarred face and fierce aspect, but with rare gifts of oratory; bitter at times, if not classical, in his denunciations. But much of his strong talk

and eccentric conduct was owing to that indulgence which the "Hole in the Wall" furnished for Congressional wrangle. Col. WIGFALL was a master drinker. Had he lived among the ancient Persians, he would have been in high esteem. Darius Hystaspes, among his other virtues, had it recorded on his tombstone, as WIGFALL might truthfully upon his : “Here lies a man, than whom no one could hold a greater quantity of liquor!"

Next to him in truculency, though not in sociality, was Senator IVERSON, of Georgia. He was outspoken and bold or the sudden disruption of the Union. The colleague of the latter, Mr. TOOMBS, was far more amenable to reason than his rough manner and boisterous logic indicated. He was a man of commanding person, reminding one, at times, of MIRABEAU. Bating his broad Africanese dialect, he was often intensely eloquent in the epigrammatic force of his expression. The Virginia Senators rank among the foremost in this movement. Much was expected from the moderation of Mr. HUNTER, but he did little to stay the Revolution. Little was expected of Mr. MASON, and he did less. The former was a calm, phlegmatic reasoner; the latter had a defiant, supercilious, and autocratic demeanor, that conciliated no one. Both were imbued with the heresies of the ultra CALHOUN School. Louisiana was represented by the malicious and unscrupulous SLIDELL, who combined the fox with the tiger. His savage and sneering threat to destroy the commerce of the North by privateers, I heard. As he delivered it, his manner reminded me of Mephistopheles in one of his humors over some choice anticipated deviltry. But who shall picture the sleek, plausible, and silver-tongued JUDAH P. BENJAMIN? His farewell speech was as full of historic garbling and untruth as of musical and regretful cadences. As he bade adieu to the old Union, he drew from the spectators many plaudits for his rhetoric, which he could not evoke for his logic. Next to him, in the suavity of his manner, if not in the cogency of his speech, was Judge CLAT, of Alabama. He is now in prison, having voluntarily surrendered. He had a bearing that was both dignified and graceful; and although never very hale in health, was too ready to assume his role in the daring drama. The other Senator from Alabama, Gov. FITZPATRICK, an honest miller and planter at home, was a model of senatorial frankness. I have not seen his name mentioned since the war. He was nominated in 1860 on the ticket with Douglas at Baltimore, and but for the incessant importunity, if not threats, of Southern men who thronged his room, to shake (as they did) his determination, he would have stood by the Northern Democracy in its struggle against the deserters from its organization.

The other Senators from the South did not play very prominent parts on

the Congressional stage. Mr. CLINGMAN, of North Carolina, was expected to fight the Union battle, but failed at the critical time; he had large experience in Congressional life, but, just elevated to the Senate, he rather pursued what he believed was the popular doctrine. He has since been a Colonel in the rebel service; he is the only Southern Senator, unless it may be WIGFALL, TоOMBS, and CHESNUT, who has had any military experience. The Senators from Delaware, BAYARD and SAULSBURY, were able men; the latter is still Senator; the former, a logical thinker, accomplished in Constitutional law, and a believer in the unforced association of the States, retired from his place disgusted with that public opinion which would not allow free speech as a means to restrain usurpation, and conclude the war. The Senators from South Carolina did not appear at the opening of Congress. Although that State did not pass her ordinance until the 17th of December, her Senators had resigned on the preceding 10th. The Senator from Tennessee, Mr. NICHOLSON, was no speaker; he did not make his mark; he had been, however, a successful editor. The other Senator, ANDREW JOHNSON, evidently made his mark. Although he had fought the battle in Tennessee for BRECKENRIDGE against both BELL and DOUGLAS, he came to this session as if he were a novus homo. He had great will and tenacity of purpose; his efforts were vigorous and effective in repelling, from a Southern standpoint, the aggressive debate of the secessionists of the Senate; his elocution was more forcible than fine -more discursive than elegant; he hammered away with stalwart strength upon his thought, until he brought it into shape. He rarely failed to produce the impression he intended. He is destined to act the greatest part in our future. DOUGLAS frequently expressed his regret that Mr. JOHNSON had not made his blows tell earlier in the hot conflict of ideas in 1860, when CRITTENDEN and himself were championing the interests of all sections, and striving to avert in time the calamities which were pressed by extremists, North and South. The Senators from Maryland, as from Kentucky, like their States, occupied middle ground, and were ever ready and eager to mediate. Would that the same could be said for Arkansas! It was understood that at least one of her Senators, Mr. SEBASTIAN, was reluctant to follow South Carolina; but the other, Mr. JOHNSON, was nothing loath thus to act. He has recently offered himself to the authorities, in a characteristic letter, frank and manly. Of the Missouri Senators, Mr. POLK went South, where his friends did not expect him to go; and Mr. GREEN, unexpectedly, remained North in the seclusion of private life. The former had been Governor of his State, but was not otherwise greatly distinguished. The latter was a worthy foeman of DOUGLAS in the fierce struggle on the Lecompton question. Of the

Northern Senators who were supposed to be most nearly allied South, were GWIN of California, LANE of Oregon and BRIGHT of The Senators from Florida were never regarded, however they as favorable to the secession movement; though the Representa Florida, Judge HAWKINS, was the first to urge the withdraw State as a reason for his indifference to compromise, and his serve on the committee. Messrs. MALLORY and YULEE have si somewhat conspicuous in the rebellion. Mr. MALLORY has be tary of the Confederate Navy, but neither of them exerted any o ble influence at Washington in the direction of disunion during th of 1860-'61.

The Republican Senators of the thirty-sixth Congress who w noted in the parliamentary conflict, were HAMLIN, FESSENDE CLARK, COLLAMER, WILSON, SUMNER, CHANDLER, SEWARD, WADE, TRUMBULL, DOOLITTLE, and BAKER—a galaxy of ability. these, as against the other extremists, stood DOUGLAS, CRI JOHNSON, PUGH, LATHAM, FITCH, THOMPSON, RICE, and POWEL these tribunes labored to save the nation, only those present at ferences know. I was often myself surprised at the speeches of and PUGH especially, mitigating the effect of the personal lil and other infractions of the Constitution, so as to remove from t ern mind their hatred of the North thus engendered. Few in these men did all they could, even to the last Sabbath evening adjournment, when Mr. CRITTENDEN electrified all by the glori of his last earnest, though ineffectual appeal for conciliation!

In the House, the elements of disunion can be discerned lyin logical strata in sections and States. The State of Maryland fu member who was a secessionist per se; although of the delegati KUNKEL and HUGHES seemed to be most sympathetic with the S same may be said of Kentucky; though since, both BURNETT a have been Confederate Senators. They were both eager for during the winter of 1860, and BURNETT even returned to the gress in 1861. He is now under bonds for treason. Virgini NETT, DE JARNETTE, and EDMUNDSON, most disposed toward Confederacy. BOCOCKE, SMITH, JENKINS, LEAKE, and others, mined to go with the State. They did not labor to foster c PRYOR was at times with, and at times against us. I do not t as eager as he seemed for a separate Confederacy. His care with its vicissitudes. The fate of JENKINS, who was a classm was what might have been expected. He fought bravely an ageously at the head of his cavalry. Rich in a patrimony