exchanged, and I had reason to believe from the cordial manner in which he always met me that there was no serious ill-feeling on his part toward me at any time, as I can truthfully state there never was on my part toward him; certainly no such feeling that was not openly expressed, but rather just the reverse.

When the usual memorial proceedings were had in his honor in the Senate Thursday, April 7, 1904, I told the story of our relations and expressed my estimate of his character and public services fully and in as simple and straightforward a manner as it was possible for one man to speak of another. What I there said is in the official record and need not be repeated here.

SENATOR CHARLES DICK.

In due time the Honorable Charles Dick was chosen to be his successor. He had been active in Ohio politics for many years. He had served as Chairman of the Republican State Executive Committee, and for a number of terms as a member of the House of Representatives. He had always been aligned with the Sherman, McKinley, Hanna, Taft factions, but I found him a very agreeable colleague, apparently anxious to harmonize all differences about appointments, and to consult and agree about all matters that required our co-operation.

In these respects he proved a great relief to me and I appreciated very fully and highly the friendly co-operative course it was his pleasure to take.

He did not participate actively in the debates, but he was faithful, prompt and efficient in the committee rooms, and soon took a good and well-deserved rank among his colleagues of both political parties.

He was defeated for re-election, not because of anything personal to himself, but because of the political disasters that overtook the party generally at that time.

Without knowledge on my part that he intended any such thing he wrote and published in the North American Review for May, 1908, an article in regard to myself of the most complimentary character.

I appreciated it more than I otherwise would because he wrote from the observation point of a long time factional opponent.

I quote from his article as follows:

There is perhaps no figure filling so large a place in the public mind at present who is so much misunderstood. That is the penalty paid by a man who has been so absorbed in his professional and public duties that he has had little time or opportunity to make the acquaintance of the people at short range, or to correct misrepresentations concerning himself. Very warm-hearted and very approachable, coveting human friendships as among the best gifts that life furnishes, his absorption in the more serious duties of life has made it impossible for him to cultivate to the extent he has desired the acquaintanceship of the masses, as well as the comradeship of congenial spirits. To live in the realm of the intellectual implies a certain aloofness from the world in general, and Senator Foraker's life has been an intensely intellectual one. Did not Senator Foraker hail from the State of Ohio, the State of William McKinley, who came later into public recognition yet was preferred before him, he would doubtless have been effectively urged for the presidency long before now. As long ago as 1888, when he was a conspicuous figure in the National Convention at Chicago, he had many ardent admirers who felt certain he was the logical man of the hour. As for himself, he was loyal to Sherman then, as he was to McKinley in 1896 and 1900, and to Roosevelt in 1904. He asked nothing for himself, but threw the whole force of his great influence and commanding personality into the conflict in behalf of his choice.

He has had many followers,-loyal, ardent and enthusiastic, and he has always been able to awaken the wildest enthusiasm among his adherents. He has not, however, so many intimates as some men in public life, partly because he has always been very domestic in his tastes and has been blessed with a surpassingly attractive home circle, but mainly because he has not needed intimates to help fashion his ideas and to assist in formulating his opinions as to public policies. In the first place, he has always been a staunch Republican, loyal to the principles of his party as laid down in its National platforms. To other issues as they arose he has applied a mind highly trained, an industry tireless in seeking the facts, a rare judicial acumen in weighing the evidence, and logic of the highest order in stating his conclusions. To these admirable qualities he joins the higher and rarer virtues of being absolutely honest with himself and a political independence which compels him to be honest and sincere with the public. His courage in the forum and before the public in general is not a whit less than it was in his boyhood days on the field of battle.

If political elimination should be the reward of his independent stand on any public issue, he would accept his martyrdom as philosophically as ever did any victim of persecution, and find regret only in the fact that he had but one life to give for a cause. He cannot be deterred from supporting any cause he deems right, simply because it

may be unpopular. His course on the railroad-rate bill was an illustration. To paraphrase a well-known expression, it was magnificent, but not politics. He realized he was taking his political life in his hands when he decided on that course, but that made no difference. believed he was right, and he was fearless in the fight he made.

He

Foraker is today his party's ablest debater on the floor of the Senate, with few equals and no superiors in public discussion, and is always an antagonist justly to be feared. He never talks for the sake of talking, nor to hear the sound of his own voice, but from firm conviction that duty calls. He never talks lightly or without sufficient information, as many an antagonist has ruefully realized on attempting to cross swords with him. In debate, sledge-hammer blow and rapier thrust are alike at his command. He marshals all the forces of oratory, but relies most on crushing blows at his adversary's weakest point.

There is a vein of chivalry in his nature which leads him to champion the cause of the afflicted, the oppressed and the downtrodden. No cause is too humble to enlist the tireless support of his whole being. He espoused the cause of the black battalion discharged at Brownsville as zealously and fervently as he defended the railroads against the attacks of an almost unanimous public sentiment. He has not yet been convinced, and those who agree with him see no reason why he should as yet be convinced that he was wrong in either case. He made a successful fight against the forced union in Statehood of the Territories of New Mexico and Arizona.

He has the advantage of a college training after his service in the army, and at an age when he could derive the greatest benefit from it. He has always been a student and a reader, fond of his books, but too busy to enjoy them always as he desired. He has never been a follower, but always a leader. Whether his following was great or small, it was loyally devoted to him, and no one has ever thought of him as enlisted under the banner of any one else. Like a baron of the feudal ages, he has always fought under his own banner and carried it into the thickest of the conflict.

Senator Foraker's career since he came to the United States Senate has confounded his enemies and justified the highest expectations of his friends.

He has never succeeded through organization, has never mastered or seemed to care for the details of organization. Those who refer to him as a machine politician do not know whereof they speak. He is not a candidate to be put in harness and led or driven by the word of a campaign manager. In the years during which he has been a prominent figure in Ohio politics he has never had a "machine," in the sense in which that word is used to describe a political organization carried down to the smaller political subdivisions. His trust has always been in the people. . . . He has suffered much because he has been misrepresented and misunderstood, being too busy doing the work which lay before him, and following the paths where he believed duty led him, to take the time and make the effort necessary to promptly correct wrong impressions gained by some as to his motives.

DEATHS OF GOVERNOR FOSTER AND GOVERNOR BUSHNELL.

It was a singular coincidence that almost contemporaneously with the death of Senator Hanna the deaths also of Governor Foster and Governor Bushnell should have occurred.

On his way to Columbus to attend the inauguration of Governor Herrick, Governor Foster stopped over night at Springfield with his old-time friend, General J. Warren Keifer. While thus visiting he was suddenly stricken and died the following day, January 9th, 1904, at General Keifer's residence.

Governor Bushnell attended the inauguration and was on his way to the depot to take the train for his home. at Springfield when, while alone in his carriage, he was fatally stricken. Instead of taking the train he was taken to a hospital, where he died a few days later, January 15th, 1904.

To have two such distinguished ex-Governors of Ohio pass away so suddenly and unexpectedly at practically the same time gave a severe shock to the people of our State, which was still more keenly felt when Senator Hanna so quickly followed them.

These were all great men and good men.

They were often opposed to each other in our factional contests, but almost without exception they were warm personal friends until there came a break between Governor Bushnell and Senator Hanna in connection with Senator Hanna's first election to the Senate. Their names will always be associated in a distinguished and honorable way with the history of the State they served so long and so faithfully,

SINCE

CHAPTER XXXVI.

JOSEPH BENSON FORAKER, JR.

INCE dictating the foregoing chapter a deep sorrow has overtaken me and all my family. Our first-born lies cold and rigid in death; his marble-like face looking up to the stars he so loved to study.

For years I have cherished the thought that I had a strong staff to lean upon in my last days. Now it is broken, and the fond hopes and bright promises of a vigorous manhood are withered and scattered.

Friends were more than kind and hundreds of telegrams and letters expressing sympathy for the living and tender tributes of praise for the dead have been pouring in upon us from every direction.

His casket was literally embowered with floral pieces of the most beautiful design.

The dear Bishop who officiated spoke words of comfort and consolation and everything was done that could be suggested by the most sincere friendship and thoughtful kindness to assuage the grief of the hour. But all in vain! He is gone! Henceforth he sleeps with the dead-forever out of sight, but never out of memory.

His work seemed only begun, when like a young tree snapped by the storm he was cut down; yet he did not live in vain.

He leaves a precious memory that will forever teach to all who knew him patience, kindness and consideration for others.

Such a life cannot die. Its ending here is but the beginning yonder; for such a soul there must be a glorious rising on the shores of immortality, where all will meet again.