The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-04-06
The Rejection OF Mr.. Dana-The Mis-
sion TO England.


The vote in the Senate on the nomination
of r. H. Dana, Jr., to be Minister to Eng
land, will alarm and distress the conserva-
tive sentiment of the country. The Irib-
,ne, whose Washington correspondent
seems to be member of the executive ses-
Mr.. DANA twenty democrats and eleven re-
publicans voted against him, and seventeen
republicans in his favor. It is painful to
see in this list antagonistic to Mr. Dana such
men as Bayard, Herman, Thurman and Ran
dolph. We can understand how the leaders
of an opposition party should not stand in
the way of the plumbers of the party in
power There is political law, which seems
to meet the approval of representative legis-
lative bodies here and in England, to the
effect that the duty of an opposition is to OPP
pose, destroy, overturn. This is the theory
that animates the liberals in their war upon
the proposal to call the Queen Empress. If
the democrats in the Senate meant to throw
odium on their body they did it in voting
against Mr. Dana, for if Mr. Dana had been
supported by them he would have been con-
tirmed.
1t would have been much better for
Messrs. Bayard, Herman and Randolph to
have waived any party advantage that may
come from the defeat of Dana and gone upon
tho record as supporting the President
whenever he dominates gentlemen to Office.
No better man than Dana has been named
for high place in many day. His defeat is
disheartening to all who believe in republic
can governments as the best method of
securing good men in Office. 1t only re-
mains for the President to send some man
into the Senate as Minister who will COM
mand the confidence Of the country and of
both parties. The opposition to Mr. Dana
began in personal pique. 1t took party
shape as soon as the World opposed him.
The victory is the result of an alliance be-
tween General Butler, s'machine" republic
cans and the democratic Senators. Now let
the President give us a nomination with q
character so high and pure that there cannot
even be criticism upon it.
Such a candidate is Henry w. Longfellow.
Mr.. Longfellow is an honored, illustrious
and gifted citizen. His name is house,
hold word throughout England. He would
do credit to both countries. There would
be no cabal against him. The fact that he
is literary man should not be bar to his
nomination. Our literature has furnished
some of its most famous representatives to
diplomacy. Joel Barlow, whom Byron was
disposed to regard as the American Homer,
was our Minister to France in the great
Napoleon's days; Washington Irving was
Minister to Spain; Edward Everett was
Minister to England !; his brother Alexander,
to China, Spain and the Netherlands Bay
ard Taylor was secretary to our Russian
Legation Mr.. Bancroft served us
at two courts, London and Berlin
Henry Wheaton was sent to Prussia and
Denmark by Mr.. Van Buren,; Mr. Marsh is
now in Rome and Mr.. Boxer in st. Peters,
burg Hawthorne represented us in Liver
pool and Howard Payne in the East Mot
ley was at Vienna and London, and Robert
Dale Owen served us ut the now extinct
court of the two Sicilies. Therefore it
would be very graceful thing for General
Grant to send Longfellow to London. 1t is
nomination that would meet with universal
favor, not only in England but in America.