And Mr. Doolittle then proclaimed that more than twenty Republican Senators, who had stood with him, “advocating Reconstruction upon the white basis,” now “go over to the side of the Senator from Massachusetts, and advocate his theory of Reconstruction upon the basis of negro suffrage and white disfranchisement.”[153] Then came another speech by the same Senator, in which he describes Mr. Sumner as adding to his demands only to find them adopted by Senators who had begun by opposing him. “My friend from Massachusetts ought to feel a sense of profound satisfaction to see the progress they have made. I mean no discourtesy, when I say the ideas advanced by him that night, rejected then by a majority of four to one, rule the Senate now. Not only have they educated, they have Sumnerized the Senate.”[154] Mr. Hendricks, of Indiana, the Democratic leader of the Senate, differing widely from Mr. Sumner, in the debate on the Supplementary Reconstruction Bill, gave this testimony:-- “I said in the Senate, a year or two ago, that the course of things is this: the Senator from Massachusetts steps out boldly, declares his doctrine, and then he is approached, and finally he governs. Believing that he is in the right,--I concede that belief to him as a Senator,--his place in this body and before this country to-day is a very proud one. He was told somewhat sneeringly, two years ago, that among his party friends he stood alone; and to-day they all stand upon his position. This is a compliment and indorsement of sagacity and intelligence that but few men receive in the course of a public life.”[155] THE PRESS. From the Senate the question was transferred to the great arena where pamphlets, reviews, and newspapers were the disputants. Here the opposition in the Senate found frequent expression. The Resolutions by their positive character offered a full front, and they were openly attacked. Public meetings and committees also made them the subject of discussion,--especially a great meeting at Cooper Institute, New York, and a meeting of the German Republican Committee in New York, where they were fully sustained.[156] The _North American Review_,[157] in an elaborate article, under the title of “Constitutional Law,” afterwards published in a pamphlet with the author’s name[158] on the title-page, treated the Resolutions with a severity which may be judged by the concluding words.