pardon, madam, but I've come to tell you that Parker is elected." (Laughter and applause.) "Roosevelt has been defeated. The Republican Party has been turned out of power. The Democracy have come in. The policy of the United States is to be changed with respect to the Philippines, and I have come here to tell you of that." "What is it you want to do?" "I want you to dismiss school. Tell the children to go home; take their books with them; they need not come back; there will be no school here tomorrow." (Laughter.) "No school here next week or next year. Pull down the flag." (Cries of "Never!") "Pack up your duds and make haste to get into Manila and on to a transport, for fear the French, or the Germans, or the Russians, or somebody else will come in before we get away to take our place." (Applause.)

My fellow citizens, do you want to see such a proceeding as that? (Cries of "No! No!") You don't want to see it, and no man will ever be elected to power who advocates any such a result. (Applause.) It would not only be an act of poltroonery that would brand us before the nations of the earth as incapable, but it would destroy all our prestige, our influence, and all our power in the Orient to keep open the door to American merchantmen.

I closed as follows:

I want to say, in conclusion, that the great objection I have to Democracy is that it never can find power to do anything. Democracy is predicated on the teachings of Thomas Jefferson, a great man, who rendered conspicuous service, whose name will live forever in the gratitude, as well as the history, of the American people; yet his teaching was to magnify the State and minimize the national power. In that earlier day it was disputed that the Federal Government had power to make internal improvements; it was said it could not build the national road through Pennsylvania and Ohio, and it did not until after a protracted debate.

And thus they denied our power to levy tariff duties for purposes of protection, and when we got into war with Spain they denied our power to despoil the enemy of his territory, unless, at the conclusion of the war, we intended to give it back to him, or make it a State of the Union. The Republican Party, on the other hand, found its platform in the teachings of Alexander Hamilton, who taught that the Federal Government has not only all powers expressly delegated, but also all implied powers necessary to the execution of the expressed powers. (Applause.) That the power to make war carries with it the power to destroy the enemy, to sack his cities, destroy his ships, take away from him his territory-just as we took Cuba, Porto Rico, the Philippines, and just as we would have taken the whole of Spain herself in three months more. (Applause.)

In other words, the Democratic Party had been an incapable and unsatisfactory agent, because it is founded on the basic idea of "Can't;" "You can't do it;" "No power to do it," "It is not according to the Constitution."

The Republican Party has been doing things, because it believes George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and Alexander Hamilton, and all our fathers, when they made the Constitution, intended to bring into the family of nations a sister not inferior in sovereign power, but one equal in sovereign power to the greatest of all the nations; and they foresaw that the time would come when this American Republic would stand, not at the foot, but at the head of the nations, as we do today. (Applause.) We have simply proceeded upon this idea. The results are known of all men. (Prolonged applause.)

Election day came, and Roosevelt and Fairbanks were elected by overwhelming popular majorities and by a majority of 196 votes in the Electoral College.

There had grown up a sort of custom according to which a Vice President succeeding to the Presidency on account of the death of a President was spoken of as "His Accidency." There were many among the critics of President Roosevelt who had prior to his election applied that title to him. A few days after the election I returned to Washington and called upon President Roosevelt to pay my respects. When I was ushered into his office he walked forward briskly to shake hands and welcome me. In doing so he announced with manifest satisfaction, "You are shaking hands with His Excellency, not His Accidency."

I congratulated him upon his decisive victory. He expressed great satisfaction that his majority was so pronounced, and remarked in that connection that he accounted himself fortunate in having had Judge Parker for his opponent; not because of any lack of appreciation for Judge Parker's ability and character, but because his views were such that a large element in the Democratic Party could not very well become his supporters.

In the conversation that followed he thanked me profusely for the work I had done in the campaign, and spoke of his forthcoming administration as one with respect to which he would feel at liberty to have his own policies, rather than under obligation to continue the policies of McKinley, which he had until that time been pursuing.

As I look back to that conversation I think I might well have taken some alarm as to the future. But I did not.

He spoke of his pleasant relations with different Senators, mentioning particularly Senator O. H. Platt of Connecticut. He spoke of him with words of highest praise and said he hoped during the next four years to have these same pleasant relations continue with all of us, so that at the end we might lay down our labors with the same respect and feeling of warm friendship for each other that then prevailed.

He was a very happy man. He was full of the spirit of triumph and full of hope and courage with respect to the future.

He fully realized that a great opportunity had come to him for usefulness to both his party and his country, and was determined to embrace and improve that opportunity to the utmost.

I had the same opinion and entertained the most optimistic expectations as to his forthcoming administration. He went out of office saying, according to a published interview, that he had "had a bully good time," and expressing the thought that he "had made good."

I am sure he did have a "bully good time," and that as to most matters he "made good," but in some particulars there is at least room for argument. At any rate I was compelled to disagree with him as to some important questions, of which I shall speak in the next chapter; not, however, either offensively or defensively, but only because not to do so would be to leave these notes incomplete.

While testifying (April 23, 1915) as a witness in his own behalf in the Barnes libel suit, he said, speaking of me, according to newspaper reports, that I had bitterly opposed him, but "nevertheless he always had for me a great liking." This was a kind expression which I not only appreciate but fully reciprocate, and never more SO than now when "watchful waiting," truckling to Colombia and the Panama Canal surrender combine to recall in refreshing contrast his stalwart Americanism, his virile character, his fearless courage and his rugged and aggressive way of doing things that ought to be done.

CHAPTER XL.

DIFFERENCES WITH PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT.

PRIOR to President Roosevelt's election in 1904, he and

I had never had any serious differences of opinion about public affairs. Later I differed with him in a broad way as to the Initiative, the Referendum, the Recall and all the other Socialistic ideas, as I regarded them, that had been advocated by W. J. Bryan and other Democrats, and by Socialistic leaders generally, to the extent he adopted and advocated them.

It is not my purpose to speak in this connection of that difference, but rather of three matters that presented themselves in concrete form, about which my Senatorial duties required me to differ with him positively and earnestly. They were Joint Statehood for New Mexico and Arizona, the conferring of the rate making power on the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Brownsville shooting affray, on account of which he discharged a whole battalion of the 25th Infantry, colored troops, without sufficient evidence as I thought then and still think.

In the Senate I discussed at length and repeatedly all these subjects generally and in detail. It never occurred to me in connection with the question of Joint Statehood for New Mexico and Arizona, or the discussion of the rate bill, that I was either saying or doing anything that would give him offense, or cause him to have any kind of ill feeling. I assumed that he was strong enough and broadminded enough and had respect enough for my duties as a Senator to accord me the privilege of differing from him and of maintaining and advocating with respect to such differences such views as my convictions of duty might lead me to entertain.

I am sure if there had been only these two differences there would not have been any trouble-not more at least than a mere temporary disappointment.

As to the Brownsville matter it was different, but I shall deal with that in another chapter.

So far as the Statehood matter is concerned that has already been, perhaps, sufficiently dealt with. If I add anything at all to what has been said, let it be that the President first officially announced his position in favor of Joint Statehood in his Message sent to Congress December 5, 1905. On this subject he said:

I recommend that Indian Territory and Oklahoma be admitted as one State and that New Mexico and Arizona be admitted as one State. There is no obligation upon us to treat territorial subdivisions, which are matters of convenience only, as binding us on the question of admission to statehood. Nothing has taken up more time in the Congress during the past few years than the question as to the statehood to be granted to the four Territories above mentioned, and after careful consideration of all that has been developed in the discussions of the question, I recommend that they be immediately admitted as two States. There is no justification for further delay; and the advisability of making the four Territories into two States has been clearly established.

With special reference to his claim that territorial subdivisions involve no obligation on the part of the Government to adhere to them in making States, I pointed out in the course of the debate on the subject that when the territory of Arizona was created in 1863 during the administration of Mr. Lincoln, Congress provided in the act

That said government shall be maintained and continued until such time as the people residing in said territory shall apply for and obtain admission as a State.

This I contended was in the nature of a pledge given by the Government on which the people of Arizona had a right to rely in becoming citizens of that territory and in taxing themselves for the erection of public buildings and the establishment of schools and colleges.

In addition to the fact that I entertained the views I expressed in debate, on account of which it was impossible for me to accept and follow the President's recommendation for Joint Statehood, the record shows that as early as in 1903 I had, in support of the bill then under consideration