[*PF*] March 16 1908 [*B*] Fairview My Dear Mr Roosevelt- I greatly appreciate your kind invition and shall take pleasure in attending the conference on the conservation of National Resources. I amI beg to assure you, in hearty sympathy with the purpose of the conference and I have no doubt that the discussion of the subject will be very helpful to us all. With great respect I am Very truly yours William Jennings Bryan [*P.F*] [*cfA*] The Outlook 287 Fourth Avenue New York Editorial Rooms Cable Address OUTLOOK NEWWORK EHAJMH March 16, 1908. Dear Mr. President: This week's Outlook contains an editorial paragraph on the Brownsville incident. It is based on your Message and Senator Foraker's bill. You letter inclosing a copy of the letter which you sent to Senator Warren has been a substantial service to us in confirming the position which The Outlook has taken from the first in regard to this affray and the Senatorial investigation. We have not this week, however, discussed the merits of Senator Foraker's bill beyond the single point of its ineffectiveness and futility. That seemed to be point enough. I have noticed that the statement of fact in your Message has not altered the misrepresentation of the present situation in certain public prints. It has interested me greatly to note, in conversation with men whom I casually meet, that misrepresentation of this sort has been one of the most effective promoters of public opinion in favor of the policies of your administration. Respectfully yours, Ernest Hamlin Abbott Hon. Theodore Roosevelt, The President of the United States, The White House, Washington, D. C.JOHN F. OLTROGGE GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN H. HENNESSY ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT SUPERINTENDENT'S OFFICE Collier's THE NATIONAL WEEKLY 416-424 WEST THIRTEENTH STREET TELEPHONE. 800 CHELSEA NEW YORK, N. Y. March 16, 1908. [*ackd 3/17/08*] Mr. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President, Washington, D. C. My dear Mr. Loeb: I am going to Washington the latter part of this week, and will have Mrs. Oltrogge with me. She would like to have the pleasure of meeting President Roosevelt, and shaking him by the hand, as she is a great admirer of him as a statesman. Will you please let me know if this will be convenient, say for Friday morning. At the same time, I will take up the matter of the printing of the two additional volumes of the Presidents's messages and addresses. Yours truly, John F. Oltrogge [*shorthand*]REFER IN REPLY TO THE FOLLOWING: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, WASHINGTON. March 16, 1908. [*Ackd 3/17/08*] [*L*] My dear Mr. President: A few days ago Mr. William M. Lewin, a practising lawyer of this city and a modest, sincere, patriotic citizen, was talking to me about certain rumors which were filing the air, that the Western Maryland R. R. receivership was only one of a series of similar incidents which were being worked up for the sake of their effect upon the public and upon Congress. The idea seemed to be that by such applications for receiverships the public mind would be impressed with the notion that your policy of holding corporations to some accountability, combined with the results of the Hepburn act in reducing actual earnings, was wrecking the finances of the railroad companies; yet, by having the president of a road made its receiver, the “grand stand play” of bankruptcy could be indulged in without any danger that the control of the property would pass out of the hands of the same clique who were doing the trick. Mr. Lewin wondered whether you had thought of the possibility of any scheme of that sort. He hesitated to address you directly, as you probably would not know who or what he was; so he has written the accompanying letter to me, to do with as I saw fit. It seemed to me that as it is brief and to the point,-2- I might best pass it on to you as it stands. If its author were not so honest and sound a man, I should not take this interest in bringing his views to your notice. Sincerely yours, F. E. Leupp.[For 2 enclosures see 3–5-08 & 3-14-08][For 2 enclosures see 3-5-08 & 3-14-08][*Ackd 3/117/08*] JOHN F. OLTROGGE GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN M. HENNESSY ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT SUPERINTENDENT'S OFFICE COLLIER'S THE NATIONAL WEEKLY 416-424 WEST THIRTEENTH Mr. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President, Washington, D. C. My dear Mr. Loeb: I am going to Washington the latter part of this week, and will have Mrs. Oltrogge with me. She would like to have the pleasure of meeting President Roosevelt, and shaking him by the hand, as she is a great admirer of him as a statesman. Will you please let me know if this will be convenient, say for Friday morning. At the same time, I will take up the matter of the printing of the additional volumes of the President's messages and addresses. Yours truly, John F. Oltrogge [*SHORTHAND*][[shorthand]] [*P.P.F.*] 146 BROADWAY New York, March 16th, 1908 Dear Mr. Loeb:- I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your favor of March 14th, enclosing a check for $53.50, signed by Charles Scribner's Sons, and draft on Bank of America, of New York, for $548.29, both amounts being credited to the President's principal account, as requested. Yours very truly, Douglas Robinson S. William Loeb Jr., Esq., Secretary to the President, The White House, Washington, D.C. S[*Ackd 3-22-08 encl retd*] March 16 - 1908. Hotel Butler Annex Seattle Wash. J.A.R. Dear Cousin Theodore- I received the enclosed letter some days ago from Frederick von [Trumlo?], in regard to an application for a position as consul. He spoke to me some two or more years ago about desiring to enter the service as soon as had saved sufficient money. He was formerly head waiter in the Hotel Touraine Boston and I always found him very pleasant. I do not really know enough about him to feel like making a reccomendation except to say that I believe he would try to work for the good of the service. Out here the political situation is only one way and that is for Taftfrom all I can learn both before leaving Tampa and out here, Taft is the choice of the people as a whole. The other day talking to some railroad men in the operating department, they said that as a whole they thought the operating men as appart from the financier were for your administration and what had been done to you. As for myself I am out here with the street railway, at present leaving the equipment end, but expect to be in the transportation in a week or two. I shall probably be here at least a year and possibly longer. Please remember me to Cousin Edith and to the rest of your family and wishing you good luck, I am Yours sincerely James S. Roosevelt [*Ack'd 4/3/08] [*PPF*] [*Ans'd 4/5/08*] Embassy of the United States of America. Berlin. March 16, 1908. Mr. President: I had a further conversation yesterday with the Emperor upon the subject of a joint declaration by Germany, China and the United States in regard to the integrity of the Chinese Empire and the open door to the commerce of all nations in China, to which I have already referred in my letter to you of the 8th of January. He requested me to write to you again and say to you personally for him how important he considers it that some such step should be taken as soon as may be and some announcement of this policy be publicly made. As the Emperor used in speaking of this, the term "entente "cordiale," I suggested to him that anything in the form of a convention or treaty which might involve such understanding would require formal action by the United States Senate and that, in view of the well established principle of the United States Government in relation to foreign alliances, it might be doubted whether you would deem it expedient at this time to consider an "entente cordiale" in any form that might resemble, or be tantamount to, a treaty. But I reminded the Emperor ofyour frequent and decisive declarations in favor of the open door in China and the integrity of the Empire, which leave no doubt as to your policy in regard to the absolute equality of trade for all nations in that country. He replied to this that he should be satisfied if a formal public statement of that policy could be made jointly by China, Germany and the United States, without anything further, - and he asked me to say so to you. He said also that tentative negotiations in that direction had been begun here by the Chinese Minister some months ago, and that the Chinese Government had informed him that the new Minister to the United States would present the subject to you immediately upon arriving at his post; therefore he presumed, since the Minister is now in Washington, that you have the facts before you at this moment. He wishes you to know that he regards prompt action as of great importance in assuring the integrity of China. I promised him that I should send this letter to you by the first mail-bag going from here to the Department of State. During the course of this conversation the Emperor touched also upon the subject of an American Ambassador in Berlin, and expressed with much earnestness the hope that you will not appoint Mr. David J. Hill to this post when it becomes vacant; to which I replied that I know nothing officially of your intention,-3- nor have I been otherwise in the least as to that, beyond the fact that I have seen Mr. Hill's name published in the newspapers as that of the future Ambassador. The Emperor declared then: "But he is not the kind of man we ought "to have here, and I do not want him! I think something ought "to be done, and that the President ought to know this!" I inquired whether the Emperor wished me to make this an official communication to you as coming from him, in which case I should, of course, not fail to do so immediately. Whereupon he answered that whilst he did not wish to proceed to a formal official declaration, he felt sure that you would meet his wishes if they were presented to you personally, which is what he would prefer to have done. He said: "My brother, Prince "Henry, knew this Mr. Hill in America, and he tells me that he "will not do at all for Germany. Admiral von Tirpitz and Admiral "von Müller, who know him, have said the same thing;- and "all my reports from The Hague are unfavorable." I did not not conceal from the Emperor the embarrassment that I found myself in or the extreme delicacy that I felt in treating personally a question of this nature, which relates to my own post and to say my own immediate successor; which, indeed, he admitted at once that he understood fully. It happened, however, that just at this time, Lloyd Griscom had come up from Rome for a few days to make me a visit andit occurred to the Emperor that he might make this personal communication to you through him. He asked me what Mr. Griscom's relations are with you, to which I replied that you are a personal friend of his; whereupon the Emperor said: "Very "well, then I shall make a clean breast of it to Griscom !" He talked with him for a long time afterward, and sent you a message which I think Mr. Griscom, who is leaving for Rome, will write to you from there within a few days. I have the honor to be, Mr. President, Very sincerely yours, Charlemagne Tower. To the President of the United States.[*[Enclosed in Foulke, 3-17-08]*] [ *[3-16-08]*]Efforts of Administration to Use Federal Patronage to Aid Secretary Brings War. _____________________ Washington, March 16.--The politicians in the presidential political puddle are just awakening to the fact that the [x] has entered upon a policy of chlo[x] [x] sent in by the President that even faintly smack of having been made in the interest of Secretary Taft. That this policy is to be carried out consistently until the end of the session also is learned. Never since the foundation of the Government has public patronage been employed to such an extent as a means of securing delegates to a presidential convention. It seems as if Frank H. Hitchcock, Mr. Taft's manager, has carte blanche to use federal offices as pawns to be dealt out in exchange for delegate votes for the secretary of war. Mr. Hitchcock appears to be at liberty to send for politicians and promise them offices if they will support Taft, all of the while confident that the administration will ratify any deals that he may see fit to enter into. Senate Declares War. It is upon this sort of trafficking in offices that the Senate has declared bitter, relentless war. The first outcropping of this policy was in the rejection of the Ohio postmasterships. Then followed the refusal to confirm Grant Victor of Vinita, Okla., who was appointed United States marshal under an agreement that he would transfer his allegiance to Taft. If all the appointments that are being held up were known the country would be provided with a sensation. Seven weeks ago the President appointed Wheeler Martin collector of internal revenue for the eastern district of North Carolina, to succeed E. C. Duncan, who resigned to become one of the receivers of the Seaboard Air Line. This is the biggest patronage plum in North Carolina. Martin's nomination is being held up for reasons satisfactory to the Senate. The President's appointment of assayer of the mint at Charlotte, N.C., is meeting a similar fate. Far-reaching presidential politics is figuring underneath the surface in these and similar holdups. It is the general policy of the administration's opponents in the Senate to give encouragement to the nonoffice-holding element throughout the South. This can best be done by blocking the confirmation of appointments made in the interest of Secretary Taft. By holding up all such nominations during the life of the present Congress the Senate will take a long step in the direction of tying the hands of Secretary Taft's managers, as far as the South is concerned.[*[3-17-08]*] [*Send 3-18-08*] 56 BEACON STREET Dear Mr. President I see they have voted to put "In God we trust" back on the coins. Why don't you get even with them by putting"I know that my Redeemer liveth" on the Treasury notes? Yrs WSB [*[igelow]*] Boston - March 17h[*F*] B-R Office of the Attorney General, Washington, D.C. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE QUI PRO DOMINA JUSTITIA SEQUITUR March 17, 1908. The President, The White House. Dear Mr. President: I have carefully examined the enclosed draft and have a few suggestions to make with respect to so much of it as concerns my special work. On page 2, four lines from the foot, where I have put the letter "A" in faint pencil, I would insert the words "except when the contempt is committed in the presence of the court, or in other cases of urgency." This recommendation will be closely scanned and severely criticised, and it is, I think, desirable that no excuse be given for the imputation of a purpose to make prosecutions for contempt ineffective. On page 3 in the sixth line from the foot, where I have placed the words "bearing at all upon" in pencil brackets, with the letter "B," I would substitute for these words: "tendency to restrict." This change seems to me necessary to make the statement absolutely accurate. In the sixth and again in the third line from the foot of page 4, I suggest the substitution of "might" for "would." As I explained in my recent letter, I think the outlawry of modern business methods and labor organizations-2- by the anti-trust law, on which our friends dwelt so much at our recent conference, is theoretical rather than practical; and it would be more nearly in accordance with entire accuracy to describe the consequences of retaining the law without amendment, here suggested, as possible or, at most, probable, rather than certain. In the third line from the foot of page 5, I would substitute the same word "might" for "should." This I think a much more important change, since it will imply that the registration of contracts should be permissive and not compulsory. In the second line from the top of page 6, where I have included the words "whether reasonable or unreasonable" in brackets, and put the letter "C," I would substitute for these words "if at all in restraint of trade." In the third and fourth lines of the same page, where I have put the letter "D," I would substitute for "unfair, unreasonable, or" the words "subsequently determined to be." The point of both these changes is that, in my judgment, the Department of Justice should not have any discretion with respect to the policy of instituting proceedings under this law. The appropriate administrative authority should decide whether the contract ought to be licensed. If it is licensed, then it should not-3- be the subject of a prosecution; if it is not licensed, then it should be prosecuted, whatever any other authority might think of its "reasonableness," "fairness" or other characteristics. In the fifth, sixth and seventh lines of the same page, I have enclosed in brackets and marked with the letter "E" the words "combination could be overturned by the Government only through suit undertaken in due form by the Department of Justice." For these words, I suggest the substitution of "contracts could be disapproved and forbidden only after notice and hearing with a reasonable provision for appeal" that is the say, if a contract apparently harmless when filed should turn out, by subsequent development, to be contrary to equity or the public welfare, the Bureau of Corporations, or whatever other authority was entrusted with the function of licensing contracts, could revoke the license previously impliedly given it; but this would be done only after due notice and a fair hearing, and with some provision for a summary review on appeal, by the judicial authority. This is what I understood you to suggest with respect to the revocation of these contracts at the time of the conference, and the ideas impressed me, at the time, as a very happy one. It would be, however, a hopelessly cumbrous and ineffective practice to require suite in equity to do away with the -4- effect of an improvident approval of a contract. Just below "E" I have put a faint pencil query against the succeeding passage. I fear that any provision in the proposed bill which may correspond to to what is here stated will be found in practice eiether ineffectual or open to constitutional objection. My reasons for this view are set forth at some length in my letter of several days since, and, as there stated, I am not sure that it is impossible to effect the purpose suggested in this passage, but the corresponding provision will have to be skilfully drawn and carefully revised. I hope that these comments will not impress you as captious. Some of the criticism may be rather minute, but is seems to me very important that we should be absolutely sure of ground in dealing with these problems. I should say here that I have not seen the bill to which you refer in the third and fourth lines from the top of page 5. Pray believe me, as ever, Yours most respectfully and truly, Charles J. Bonaparte, Attorney General.Wm. Dudley Foulke, Richmond, ind. [*Cf F*] Richmond, Ind., March 17, 1908. The President, White House, Washington, D.C. Dear Sir:- Please do not feel that it is necessary to explain to me the details of the facts regarding the calumnies against you published here-abouts. I wrote with the idea that Bonaparte might find some way of stopping the mouth of a [good] libeller, like Louis Ludlow. That is his real name. I had an experience with him when Commissioner. He published a libel about me or the commission, I forget the details, but I told my stenographer the next time he came in my office to take down the conversation. When he came, I called his attention to the article. I asked him the source from which it was derived. He could not give it, it was mere rumor, etc. I told him the statement was made out of [old] whole cloth and he admitted he had no knowledge of its truth. As he left the office I told him that the conversation had been reduced to writing, that I intended to transmit it to [the] his paper and ask them whether they wanted news of that kind secured in that manner. He was badly frightened, he retracted, apologized, and I had no more trouble with him afterwards for a long time, though I understood he complained to others that I had taken an unfair advantageWm. Dudley Foulke, Richmond, Ind. of him. The article I sent to Bonaparte amounts to a charge of personal corruption against both Mr. Taft and yourself. I should think there ought to be some way of bringing to accountability men who make such charges without foundation . And there is a libel law which enables this to be done if invoked. The trouble is that it has got to be a universal custom for public men to submit to every kind of calumny without seeking any redress, and I suppose there would be a terrible howl if the law were to be invoked now. But a little energetic talk by Bonaparte, such as I had with Ludlow, might not be without its effect. You can determine best. As ever, your friend, W D Foulke AM P.S. The Star no longer criticises you editorily, but [professes] continues to fill its news items, from day to day, with things like the within, which I clipped from this morning's issue.[*[For 1 enclosure see 3-16-08]*][*P.F.*] [*ppf ff*] HARVARD COLLEGE CAMBRIDGE March 17, 1908 Dear President Roosevelt, I had a talk with Ted on Saturday,-the best that I have ever had. In it he showed how much has has developed. He tells me that he will keep his record clean, and there is no reason why he should not finish his courses for this year with high credit in June. Do you want him to take his degree in June "as of" 1909, or simply leave of absence until the members of his class receive their degrees? This arrangement for taking a degree in advance, as it were, was adopted by the Governing Boards in order that fellows might complete the work in three years and at the same time maintain their official records with the class with which they were socially connected. I myself think it best for the boy actually to take his degree. For example, Ted's name would appear in the Quinquennial Catalogue in the list of 1909 men, against it, however, being printed the figures 1908, showing that he did the work in three years. This would be a permanent record of distinction. This, you will observe, is just the opposite of the old practice of putting, for example, 1910 against the name of a 1909 man. Ted's grandchildren will point with pride to the fact that grandfather beat his class by one year, and not have to say that grandfather's trouble with his eyes made him a year late in taking the degree. I am very sorry that I should have bothered you with all your cares with a note about brown tails and gypsies. I somehow got the idea that the United States Government was taking up the matter. I canget Forbush's address here. Don't bother to reply to this note; Ted is all right. I know how pressed you are. May be like Micawber to your David Copperfield and say, "Go on, sir: From Port Middlebay we rejoice in what you are doing." Always faithfully yours, B. S. Hurlbut President Roosevelt H Forgive that last sentence: I didn't think that it should be sent to the President of the United States even if it is what I feel. But you don't know, unless now and then one of us says so, what a source of satisfaction and comfort it is to feel and to know that you are at the head of our nation. B. S. H.[*F*] [*Cf P*] PHILBIN, BEEKMAN & MENKEN, 52-54 WILLIAM STREET, NEW YORK. EUGENE A.PHILBIN. CHARLES K.BEEKMAN. S. STANWOOD MENKEN. March 17, 1908. The President, Washington, D. C. My dear Mr. President:- I have deferred answering your letter of the 13th inst. because of the expectation of seeing Secretary Taft, who is now in this City and is expected to attend the banquet of the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, this evening. There seems to be a misapprehension as to Bishop Hendrick's attitude, for, if I correctly understand it, he does not complain of any specific wrongs that are being done by the present administration of the Islands. The cause for complaint, if any, is based more upon the policy pursued by those in authority, and which seems to exclude that recognition which every citizen is entitled to in the preservation of his rights. I am led to this belief not only by what Bishop Hendrick has said, but from information that has come from the Hierarchy in the Philippines from time to time. This is true, notwithstanding Father Rawlinson's intimation to the contrary. The difficulty always has been that there is at times a lack of frankness in such matters when talking to those in authority, and an eagerness to speak of the causes for complaint when addressing all others. The manifestation of this characteristic has been caused no doubt by the feeling that it is so much more pleasant to say agreeable things to one in authority than tomake complaint. It should be needless to say ,Mr. President, that it is always my desire that you should be frankly placed in possession of anything that might be considered ground for complaint and not be given one impression, when an entirely different one, to the detriment of the administration, was given to others. With regard to Father Rawlinson, i think you must appreciate that his visit to Secretary Taft is not consistent with entire loyalty to Bishop Hendrick, and it would seem almost as if I would be a party to a proceeding lacking in honor if I permitted Bishop Hendrick to remain unaware of the circumstance. I frankly say that I do not believe in Father Rawlinson's sincerity, for if he had serious apprehension as to the welfare of the Church because of Bishop Hendrick's attitude, his course was very clear, and that was to submit the matter to Monsignor Falconio, or to some one else identified with the Church. I received the impression when I met him in Washington that he was suffering from egotism, and I regard this incident as caused solely by that unfortunate, but not uncommon, fault. When I see Mr. Taft to-night I will try and arrange with him for an interview in Washington on Thursday, if he thinks you would still desire to see me. With sincere regard, I have the honor to be Yours very respectfully, Eugene A. Philbin[[shorthand]] [*Ackd 3/19/08*] [*C*] THE CENTURY CO. UNION SQUARE, NEW YORK March 17th, 1908. Mr. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President, Washington, D.C. My dear Mr. Loeb:- I have received from you the [a] communication from Brazil, asking permission to translate some of the President's writings into the Portuguese language and as it comes without any comment, we presume that the President would prefer that we should deal with it as we see fit. The authors of the letter do not propose any remuneration, but, under the circumstances, I do not think that this should be required and, unless I hear from you to the contrary we will write and give them the desired consent so far as "The Strenuous Life" is concerned. Believe me, Very truly yours, Frank H. Scott[*Ackd 3/19/08*] THE AMERICAN MONTHLY REVIEW OF REVIEWS 13 ASTOR PLACE, NEW YORK ALBERT SHAW, EDITOR [*S*] March 17, 1908 Dear Mr. President: I could not find Robert Collier yesterday, but I managed to get into communication with him to-day, and he tells me that he can see no reason why your wishes should not be observed in the matter of the prompt publication of the two additional volumes of your state papers and speeches. He has promised to go into the matter and communicate with me again to-morrow, and I will, on my own part, follow it up and write to you again as soon as I have something precise to report. I was much instructed by my visit to Washington and greatly enjoyed my opportunity to confer so fully with you about matters and things. As ever, Faithfully yours, Albert Shaw. President Theodore Roosevelt The White House Washington, D.C.[*PF*] Private and Confidential. [*[Griscom]*]. AMERICAN EMBASSY ROME March 18. 1908. [*ackd 4/5/08*] My dear Mr. President; I have just returned to Rome after a five days trip to Berlin where I have been at the invitation of Mr. Tower to be present at a great farewell dinner he gave in honor of the German Emperor and Empress. The day following the dinner Mr. Tower lunched with the Emperor and here a very serious matter arose which I have to lay before you. After luncheon the Emperor asked Mr. Tower point blank to write to you and tell you that Mr. Hill was not an acceptable choice as ambassador to Berlin. Mr. Tower replied that he would of course obey His Majesty's instructions but that it was an extremely delicate matter for him to write to you about his own succession, particularly as he did not maintain a regular private correspondence with you. The Emperor then said "well it has to be done somehow. How would Griscom do, to transmit the message? Is he on close terms with the President?" Mr. Tower replied that he knew I was a friend of yours and would therefore easily be able to do what the Emperor asked. The Emperor said "That is excellent. Bring Griscom to see me on Monday and I will unbosom myself frankly to him." On Monday Mr. Tower took me into2. AMERICAN EMBASSY ROME into the presence of the Emperor and I had a conversation with him lasting about a half an hour, the substance of which I will proceed to give you. The Emperor spoke to me privately but Mr. Tower and Herr von Schoen, the German Minister for Foreign Affairs were in the room, a few feet away. The occasion was a solemn one. After making a few pleasant remarks on general topics the Emperor turned to me quite seriously and said: "Now my dear Griscom I am going to ask you to do me a great favor. I want you to bring to the knowledge of your President in the most tactful way possible the following circumstances. As you may know I have been engaged for the past few years in making every effort to build up the most friendly relations between Germany and the U.S. I have never lost an opportunity of seeing Americans of all kinds and cultivating their friendship. In all this Mr. Tower has cooperated most skilfully and has made for your Embassy a position which has never before been equalled. While ably performing the diplomatic duties of his office Mr. Tower has not neglected the social side and as a result the American Embassy has the commanding positionAMERICAN EMBASSY ROME 3. position in Berlin today. Now I dont mind telling you frankly that I have had great difficulty in making my people take up the idea that friendship with America is worth working hard for. All the prejudice of an older conservative nation make them tend to indifference and to think that Europe is the world. Mr. Tower has helped me just at the moment when I needed it, and now we have the whole of Berlin, and that means the whole of Germany, clamoring to be received at your Embassy and anxious to get to know Americans. You cannot imagine what a change this is. You have sent here for years men like Kasson, Phelps and White, who may have been intelligent men and learned Professors, but they never made the slightest impression on the German people and no one knew they were here. I myself ; the first Hohenzollern who ever dined at at the American Embassy. What I desire most of all is that it should be an Anglo-Saxon Embassy which has the ruling position in Berlin. For generations my people have been under the influence of the continental nations. It is time they looked elsewhere. The present British Ambassador is old4. AMERICAN EMBASSY ROME old and never does anything. The whole situation therefore depends on your Embassy, I can assure you that the departure of Mr. Tower is a positive disaster for Berlin, but if he is determined to go it is of vital importance that we should maintain the advantage gained. Now in regard to this Mr. Hill there has been as yet no formal agreement to receive him. I was asked about this informally, and indicated somewhat hastily that the selection was acceptable. You must tell the President that since then I have taken my informations about the man and they are entirely unsatisfactory. Mr. Hill accompanied my brother Henry about America when he was there. My brother and all his staff are unanimous in saying that he is a man utterly unsuited for the Embassy in Berlin. I have enquired at my Legation at the Hague and there again the reports are most unsatisfactory. They say he has made no impression there and is "ein ganz Kleiner mann'. Now I myself, in making diplomatic appointments of any importance, always put myself to infinite pains to find who is wanted and to send exactly the right man. (Here he intimated in words I cannot exactly recall that he5 AMERICAN EMBASSY ROME he had tried his best to send you a man you would like). Now as I take so much trouble myself in these matters I cannot help thinking that I can venture to ask President Roosevelt to do me this favor under the present circumstances. We have now a little rose bush of friendship which is sprouting but requires the most careful nursing. It would really be a most serious thing for me, and I believe for the U.S., if we should allow it to die. I am convinced that our plant will wither and our whole structure fall to the ground if a man of the type of Mr. Hill is sent here. Tell the President to send Griscom here or - if there is no man in the regular diplomatic service whom he wishes to send, let him choose some distinguished citizen, as has been done in the past. Some man who has a national position, and who has the confidence of the administration, and influence in his own country. They tell me that Mr Meyer would rather be here than where he is at present. If that is so he would do splendidly. He and you are the type of men we want. I had not seen you and Mrs. Griscom two6. American Embassy Rome two minutes before I made up my mind that you were what we want here. But in any case try to give your President an idea of what an unusually great position your Embassy has here in Berlin today, so that he will appreciate how much we risk losing. I am determined that it shall not be lost if I can help it and you must perform for me this great service of bringing it home to the President." Then the Emperor turned the subject and told me to tell you that he would like to see you after you have finished your term and that he would give you as good a shoot as he could, although not with carbines on bucking bronchos. He said that he had read with delight your last book on outdoor life. Then he shook my hand and dismissed me. Let me hasten to say that I am extremely sorry that he brought my name into the conversation. But as the main subject is so serious I see no other way than to repeat to you what he said fully and verbatim. The reference to myself makes my position exceedingly embarrassing, but I can only say that I am not putting myself forward as a candidate for the post of Berlin. I am perfectly happy here in7. AMERICAN EMBASSY ROME in Italy and feel that in holding this splendid position I have already more than my deserts. My past record will confirm that I have never applied for any post and I certainly do not propose to begin now. The Emperor's mention of me was only incidental to the main subject and it was evident that if I refused to carry his message he would simply have communicated it to you through some other channel. But it is obvious I could not refuse. He had already mentioned the subject to Tower repeatedly and his decision not to have Hill if he would help it was reached some time ago, He was only waiting for some convenient opportunity of conveying it to you. Why he did not tell Baron Sternberg to speak to you I cannot imagine, unless it be that he considered that course too official. I have the honor to be, dear Mr. President Your obedient servant Lloyd C. Griscom. [*[Griscom]*][*L*] [*Ackd 3-23-08*] CECIL A. LYON. SHERMAN. TEXAS. Colo. Spgs. Colo. March 18, 08 My dear Mr. President, Am returning to Texas this week and want to ask you to do me the favor to let me know whether or not it is your desire that I go ahead and have the delegates from Texas instructed as per my former suggestion to you or do you desire me to have them instructed straight for Mr. Taft. Ordinarily I do not ask any one to make up my mind for me but in a matter of such importance as this I know your judgement is superior to mine and therefore I rely upon you. If the Secretary can be nominated with Texas' votes, and it is your desire that we come so instructed, it shall be done. If, however, there is any doubt about2 CECIL A. LYON. SHERMAN, TEXAS. his nomination my best judgement is that some state should be instructed for you so as to form a nucleus on which your friends may rally to defeat the opposition. You may be assured that your reply will be sacredly confidential and the delegates from Texas will concur absolutely with your wishes. Pardon the pen. There is no stenographer here I care to trust. Also am sending this letter through the courtesy of Mr. Mc Ilhenny. I expect to be in Sherman about Sunday. I am, Sir, Respectfully, Cecil A. Lyon. The President, White House, Washington.[*Ackd 3/23/08*] W. H. H. LLEWELLYN UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR NEW MEXICO OFFICIAL RESIDENCE, LAS CRUCES, N. M. PRACTICE IN ALL COURTS OF NEW MEXICO AND SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RESIDENCE 'PHONE NO. 20 OFFICE 'PHONE NO. 22 CABLE ADDRESS: CRUX. March 18, 1908. My dear Colonel:-- I have to report that comrade Murry late of Troop G has killed a man by the name of German. This killing took place at a little town by the name of Kettner and the facts are briefly narated in the newspaper clipping herewith attached. I have just received a wire asking me assist in his defense, but cant do it as I am engaged in work for the Department and will not have the time. Murray was however a good soldier and is a straight man and I trust will be exonerated. This is the ninth man of my old Troop to be charged with killing since the war and I believe all were justified. I have defended a number of them who were acquitted. All of these killings have been under circumstances which preclude any idea that murder was done, that is that there was no element of assassination connected with any of the occurrences., or as they are denominated in New Mexico "Happnings". Sincerely yours, W. H. H. LLewellyn, Colonel Theodore Roosevelt, Washington, D. C.[*Ackd 3/20/08*] Confidential United States Circuit Court of Appeals For the Sixth Circuit, Judge's Chambers, Nashville, Tenn. [*L*] March 18th, 1908. My dear Mr. President:- It will be very inexpedient to make an appointment of a successor to Judge Clark until after the Chicago Convention. Neither is there a single reason for a hasty appointment, having regard to the public service. As the presiding judge of the Circuit I have already arranged to have his courts held down to July next in anticipation that Judge Clark's health would not enable him to do the work. That arrangement holds good now. This I say to you officially that you may feel that no public interest may be injuriously affected by delay. There is reason for infinate harm if an appointment is now made. Clark set a high standard as a trial judge and you will be freer to regard the qualifications of his successor by the delay suggested. I shall write Taft to same effect. I am very sincerely yours, Horace H Lurton To His Excellency, Theodore Roosevelt, Washington, D. C.[*[For enc. see Lurton 11-18-07]*][*Ackd 3/30/08*] [*R*] AMERICAN EMBASSY, LONDON. March 18, 1908. PERSONAL My dear Mr. President: The vile weather is apparently having its effect on poor Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman. Everybody seems to have given up his case, and the general belief is that he is liable to pass away soon. His death or resignation would make a number of changes in the Ministry, which, like the historic one you remember, might fairly enough be described as a "Ministry of all the talents," and yet is somewhat lacking as a coherent working force. When Sir Henry retires, Mr. Asquith will certainly have to take his place. Then the Marquess of Ripon, who is over eighty, is said to be likely to take that occasion to retire, and also Sir Henry Fowler, who is seventy- seven. Neither of them vacates a highly important place, but their retiracy will make it easy to shift some of the others about and to promote two or three. Among those booked for promotion, the foremost is your pet aversion, Winston Churchill. It seems to be generally agreed that they cannot fail to give his a place in the Cabinet now. Heretofore, as you know, he has been only Under-Secretary for the Colonies. If his chief, Lord Elgin, also an old man, should take a fancy to retire, he might claim the succession; --but personally, I don't believe Lord Elgin is likely to retire anyway, and do believe that if he ever thought of it, the suggestion of Winston as2. his successor would make him think twice before acting! The next person most prominently booked for promotion is Mr. "Lulu" Harcourt. There has been talk that his wife (a charming woman, whom you may have known as Miss Burns, niece of Pierpont Morgan) has been ambitious to have him transferred to the Lords. Nothing that I ever heard from her confirms this, and the inherent probabilities are against it. Harcourt's father, you will remember, refused a peerage; and refused it in part because he wanted to leave the road to a career in the House of Commons unobstructed for his son. "Lulu" is perhaps the most universally popular man in the present Government, and there are enthusiastic friends of his who even day that he might be a possible Prime Minister now. That, however, I take to be fantastic; but he is pretty sure to have something good. People note as a point much in his favor the smoothness with which he carried through his English Small Land Holdings Bill and the rocky road the corresponding Bill for Scotland has had under the pilotage of Mr. Sinclair. Another man who is coming to the front is Mr. Walter Runciman, now Financial Secretary to the Treasury. Mr. MacKenzie King turned up to-day. I had the good luck to get an appointment with Sir Edward Grey immediately after King's interview at the Foreign Office. Sir Edward seemed to be in good humor about it, and began the conversation with me by saying that he had just been having an interview with a gentleman whom he supposed he ought to call another American Ambassador, and added that he "also comes from your President." I took that opportunity to point out at once that he came from my President only in the sense of having gone to my President, stated the3. Canadian views, and solicited the American opinion; and that naturally he was told that we were very glad to find them taking our view of the situation as to Oriental immigration. Later on in the conversation a remark of Sir Edward's about King's having brought a message from you, gave me an opportunity to put the matter in unmistakable shape by repeating that the movement was entirely Canadian "off their own bat"; that Sir Wilfrid on his own notion sent King to you; that the proposal that King should come to London was entirely their own, and that you were glad to hear it, and in response to his suggestions, were glad to let him say what your position was. I was thus particular about it because I fancied that I had already detected in New York, on the evening before sailing, a Canadian disposition to make it out that King was going at your desire and really by your authority, and a disposition here also to treat it as your mission; and I was perfectly sure that you would not want this. I think he had made a good impression on Sir Edward, though I shall doubtless hear more about this to-morrow, when he is likely to come to see me. ---------- I hear authoritatively that, in spite of the Premier's low condition, he is still reading official papers and making notes on them--which may indicate that he has more recuperative power than anybody in or out of the Government has been crediting him with. ---------- I am to imitate everybody else who can, and run away from the bad weather here--the worst of the year--for a fortnight to take my daughter down to the South of France. I expect to be back about April 5th. Very sincerely yours, Whitelaw Reid[*PF*] COPY AM. JAPANESE EMBASSY Washington No. 21 March 18, 1908. Sir: Under instruction from His MaJesty's Minister for Foreign Affairs, I have the honor to communicate to you that the Imperial Government, having learned of the contemplated cruise of the United States battleship fleet from San Francisco to the Philippine Islands, are sincerely anxious to be afforded an opportunity to cordially welcome that magnificent fleet and to give an enthusiastic expression to the sentiment of friendship and admiration invariably entertained by the people of Japan towards the people of the United States. I am further instructed to inform you that the Imperial Government are firmly convinced of the reassuring effect which the visit of the American fleet to the shores of Japan will produce upon the traditional relations of good understanding and mutual sympathy which so happily exist between the two nations and to express to you the hope of the Imperial Government that the fleet may be instructed to call at the principal ports of Japan in its extended cruise in the Pacific. Accept, Sir, the renewed assurance of my highest consideration. K. Takahira Honorable Elihu Root, Secretary of State.3/18/08 Capt McCoy says the President wishes to send to the War Dept., for the consideration of the Board to be convened for the purpose of revising the firing regulations, an extract from Baron Sternberg's letter as the "opinion of an expert shot of a foreign service visiting Cuba" .[*[Enc . in Llewellyn, 3-18-08]*] [*[ca. 3-18-08]*]THE UNWRITTEN LAW WILL BE MURRAY'S DEFENSE Officer Gives Himself Up and Will Go to Kettner for Pre- liminary Hearing. Western justice instead of "brain storm" will be the plea of Mounted Policeman George F, Murray, when he is placed on trial for the killing of James German at Kettner tomor- row before Justice of the Peace Woods. Murray, who came to the city last night and gave himself up to Captain Fred Fornoff, of the mounted police, after an exchange of telegrams, says that German had en- tered his home at Kettner while he was away on official duties and caused the infidelity of his wife. He has employed the law firm of Medler and Wilkerson to defend him and ac- companied by Captain Fornoff and Attorney Medler will return to Kett- ner tomorrow, for a preliminary hear- ing. Mrs. Murray, who came to the city with her husband, will return with him to Kettner. The killing took place on the prin- cipal street of Kettner between 12 and 1 o’clock Sunday morning and according to Murray’s attorneys was as follows: Murray went to Thoreau Saturday afternoon to make an ar- rest and at the time he left home did not expect to return home before the following morning. Thoreau is twenty miles distant from Kettner and Mur- ray went horse back Finishing his business at Thoreau sooner than he had expected he rode home in the moonlight, arriving there about mid- night. As he neared the house he saw a man leave it and recognized German. The latter ran and Murray after him. German outran the po- liceman and hid among the logmen’s huts. Murray returned to the house and securing a Winchester went in search of German. He saw the latter coming towards him. They saw each other at about the same instant and German ran at Murry probably real- izing the futility of running away as Murray bears the reputation of being a dead shot. Murray fired several shots in rapid succession. One took effect in German’s left breast killing him instantly. Murray immediately telegraphed Captain Fornoff of the killing. Fornoff told him to come to Albuquerque, which he did. Murray has been in the mounted police service for two years, and according to Captain Fornoff is a val- uable man. He was a Rough Rider in the troop of Major W.H.H Llew- ellyn, at present special United States attorney of New Mexico, and came out of the army with an enviable record for bravery. He first gained notoriety for braveness in the capture ten years ago of Fred Jenkins, a notorious outlaw at Graham N. M.Fr [Ackd 3/19/08] 140 BEACON STREET. Personal Dear Mr. President I see you are coming here in June. If you have not accepted a more alluring invitation and will honor This house by your presence it would be a real pleasure to have you at 140 Beacon during your stay in Boston, whichI hope will be an extended one. Respectfully & ever Sincerely Yours, Louis A. Frothingham [*[Frothingham]*][*F*] Douglas Robinson, Charles S. Brown Co. Real Estate. 146 Broadway, New York, DOUGLAS ROBINSON, President. CHARLES S. BROWN, 1st Vice President. [FREDERICK WINANT, 2ND Vice President.] WM. H. WHEELOCK, 3rd Vice President Uptown Office, 570 Fifth Avenue. W.R. BUCHANAN, Treasurer. ARTHUR WEED, Secy.& Asst.Treas. Cable Address "Robur," New York. March 19/08 Mr. Loeb Secy to the President Dear Mr. Loeb, Many thanks for your letter rec'd this morning about Mr. Bacon. I cannot understand why my letter to the President was allowed to go unsigned Please present my apologies to the President. With kind regards I am yours truly, Douglas RobinsonLEGISLATION ON THE CONTINENT OF EUROPE IN REGARD TO "FUTURES," "OPTIONS," AND CERTAIN OTHER LIMITATIONS AFFECTING STOCK EXCHANGES. [*[Wareng]*] March 19. 1908. LHW.Department of Commerce and Labor Bureau of Corporations Washington March 19, 1908. The Commissioner of Corporations, Department of Commerce and Labor, Washington, D. C. Sir: I present herewith the laws of the various countries on the Continent of Europe in regard to "futures," "options," and certain other limitations affecting Stock Exchanges, with more especial reference to the legislation of the German Empire on the subject. The full text of the latter law is available in the original, though not in an English translation. It contains eighty-two sections, running into lengthy detail. If it will be of service to you, I shall be glad to translate it in its entirety. Respectfully submitted, Luther Hess Waring. Pa.LHW-FXP TABLE OF CONTENTS. Austria, 1 Belgium, 1 Bulgaria, 1 Denmark, 1 France, 2 Germany, 3 Greece, 9 Italy, 10 The Netherlands, 10 Norway, 11 Portugal, 11 Roumania, 11 Russia, 12 Servia, 12 Spain, 12 Sweden, 13 Switzerland, 14LHW-FXP. AUSTRIA. A Law of January 1903, prohibits dealings in "futures" in cereals and mill products, and imposes penalties on persons who habitually conduct such transaction, or who wilfully influence the price of quotations of cereals and mill products by bogus sales. But it is stated that the Law is, in practice, neutralized by the absence of any corresponding enactment in Hungary, and the possibility of Austrian dealers conducting their operations from that country. BELGIUM. Chapter V of the Belgium Commercial Code contains various rules for the control of the Stock Exchange, of jobbers or brokers; but there is no allusion to speculative operations. Consequently, judicial decisions in cases of options and futures have been heard chiefly upon Article 1965 of the Civil Code, which reads: "A law suit in respect of a gambling debt, or of the payment of a debt, is not recognized in law." Article 1967 reads: "In any case the loser cannot recover what he has voluntarily paid unless there has been fraud, swindling or deception on the part of the winner." BULGARIA. Options in futures are said to be practically unknown, and there is no legislation in that country specially dealing with such contracts. DENMARK. There has been no legislation adopted or proposed in Denmark respecting gambling in option and future contracts. 2 FRANCE. The existing Law of the 28th March, 1885 practically sanctions dealing in "options" and "futures", and two Bills proposed in 1896 and 1898, with the object of amending the Law in this respect, evoked general opposition and was not proceeded with. Article 1 of the Law of March 28,1885, above referred to, reads as follows: "All time bargains in public or other securities or bargains for the delivery of produce and goods are considered legal. No one can take advantage of Article 1965 of the Civil Code in order to avoid the obligation of this Law even when bargains are concluded by the payment of a simple difference." Article 1965 of the Civil Code reads: "The law allows no action for a gambling debt or for the payment of a wager." Article 419 of the Penal Code reads: "Article 419. Code Penal. - All who,by false or calumnious statements disseminated purposely amongst the public,by offers higher than the prices demanded by the sellers themselves,by union or coalition between the principal holders of the same goods or commodity,with the object of their not being sold,or only being sold at a certain price,or who,by an fraudulent ways or means,shall have operated a rise or fall in commodities or goods,or public paper and securities,above or below the prices which would have been determined by natural and free trade competition, shall be punished by at least one month,and at most one year's imprisonment, and by a fine of from 500 fr. to 10,000 fr. The guilty parties may, moreover, be placed by the decree or judgment under the surveillance of the "haute police" for from two to five years." 3 GERMANY In 1891, as a result of large financial failures following the speculative activity of the preceding years, and due to vigorous agitation for legislative interference with the Bourse, an Imperial Commission was appointed to investigate the whole question of Exchange business and to evolve some method of reform. The Commission, as finally constituted, had twenty-eight members, including bankers, merchants, manufacturers, state officials, landed proprietors, economists and jurists. The Commission held ninety-three sittings beginning April, 1892 and concluding in November, 1893, -- examining a large number of witnesses, including representatives of all the lines of trade and manufacture directly connected with the speculative market. Their report included four volumes of evidence, a volume of statistical investigations, and other material. The results of their investigation are given in a long list of proposals for legislative reforms supported by a majority of the Commission. The Bill which was presented to the Reichstag for consideration went farther in its proposals for government interference than did the report of the Commission. The amendments adopted by the Reichstag itself were still more extreme. As a result, the law as it stands follows the report of the Commission in many details of the proposed regulation. The more important and consequential Sections however are utterly opposed to the views of the majority of the Commission. The Bill was presented to the Reichstag December 3, 1895 and, with amendments, became law June 22, 1896. With the exception of a few clauses which were to become of force earlier, the law went effect January 1, 1897. This law comprises eight-two Sections, divided up into six Articles. The first part of the law contains general provisions as to Exchanges and their organization. The Exchanges are placed under the control of the governments of their respective states, which may put the immediate4 GERMANY. (Cont’d.) supervision in the hands of local commercial organizations. These bodies may turn appoint officers for this purpose. Regulation for each Exchange are to be established by the different governments, which are to prescribe rules for the organization and conduct of the Exchange, for the admission to Exchange privileges, etc. The law excludes certain classes, especially bankrupts. Some of the rules are provided in the Act itself, especially a provision that in the governing bodies of produce Exchanges the agricultural interests and the [mill] milling interests shall be represented. Generally speaking however, the form of rules is left to the government in each state. These governments appoint State Commissioners to represent them in the control of the Exchanges. The duties of this official are to keep watch of the whole course of business on the Exchange, to inform its officers if any evil is to be corrected, and to keep the government fully cognizant of the conduct of the Exchange. He is empowered to sit at the meetings of the governing committee. This Commissioner is closely associated with another new institution, a special Court of Honor (Ehrengericht) composed of members of the Exchange, which sits in judgement upon members accused of irregular business conduct. The Commissioner can initiate proceedings before this Court, take part in all hearings, and no case can be dropped without his approval. The Commissioner or the accused can take an appeal to a higher tribunal appointed by the Bourse Commission, referred to below. Aside from the powers of the different governments and their representatives, more general powers are vested in the Bundesrat of the Empire to secure uniformity among the Exchanges where uniformity is necessary. The Bundesrat 5 GERMANY. (Cont'd.) may establish rules for the official determination of prices and for the admission of securities to trading. It may forbid entirely Exchange trading in particular securities or commodities. In pursuance of the duties the Bundesrat has the appointment of a Bourse Commission which practically is its representative, and makes reports to the Imperial Chancellor. This Bourse Commission is to consist of at least thirty members, one-half elected on the nomination of the particular local bodies or officials which have supervision of the Exchange, and the other half from representatives of agriculture and industry. The second Article of the law provides for the official registration of prices. A special class of sworn brokers for quotation purposes is established and only their dealings are necessarily considered in making up the prices of the day. These brokers can deal on their own account only so far as necessary to the performance of this function. This official registration of prices, however, is optional on the part of the individual Exchange, except in the case of an order to the contrary from the Bundesrat. The third Article of the law contains strict rules in regard to the admission of securities to trading on the Board. These rules are to be first submitted for examination to a committee, one-half of whom must be persons not entered in the Börsen Register, that is, not professionally connected with the trade in securities. The Bundesrat may make special rules at any time with [the] regard to listing, and may specially forbid the listing of particular securities. Promoters are held liable for any false statement in a prospectus and for the omission of any statement necessary for a correct understanding of the nature and condition of enterprises, when such omission is the result of wilfullness or griss negligence. This liability is to all holders of the securities 6 GERMANY. (Cont'd). issued under the prospectus in question, and may be discharged by a repurchase from the holder at the price of his purchase or at the price at the time of listing. The fourth Article is the most important. This defines the "future" dealings referred to in the statute (Börsenterminhandel) as dealings for future delivery made under conditions fixed by the Exchange, and for which there is an official determination of prices. Before a commodity can be dealt in on any Exchange, a hearing must be given to representatives of all branches of industry directly interested; and admission is finally granted only on the approval of the Imperial Chancellor. This Article forbids future dealing in the securities of all mining and investment companies, and in grain. This last provision was utterly opposed to the report of the Commission and it was adopted as an amendment in the Reichstag as a victory of the Agrarian Party which engaged in an alliance with the industrial capitalists, who thought that by stopping speculative trading in industrial stocks such stocks would have a more stable value and be looked upon by real investors with less apprehension. It is asserted that the German Government, including Emperor William, was opposed to the restriction and advanced economic objections. Furthermore, future dealings are forbidden in the securities of all companies with a capital of less than 20,000,000 marks. All persons desiring to carry on Exchange dealings must be registered in the Börsen Register and pay a small license fee. Contracts between parties, either of whom is not so registered, is void. Contracts between registered parties, made under the rules, do not permit of the defence of wager. Generally speaking, the effect of the law was to place the State Commissioners7 GERMANY. (Cont'd). over the Produce Exchanges from the 1st January, 1897, whose business it was to watch over them and control them and attend meetings, etc., and report any infraction of the law. There were to be no more secret transactions of any kind. As regards Berlin, dealers in grain left the original Börse in a body, set up their Free Association in the Feenpalast, where the State Commissioner had no jurisdiction whatever -- it not being a Bourse at all in name though actually one in fact. At the end of April the Berlin Commissioner reported to the President of the Province of Brandenburg and Berlin that he considered the Free Association of Produce Dealers in Berlin to be illegal. He further declared that he was of opinion that the "Frühmarkt" was also illegal. This latter term applied to early meetings of the produce dealers (before the ordinary and legal hours of business), prior to the opening of the regular sittings in the Feenpalast. On the other hand, the Society of Berlin Produce Dealers strongly opposed this demand on the ground that the law of the 22nd June, 1896 did not apply to every kind of time bargain in grain and mill product, but only to dealings in futures in the Exchanges themselves. Steps were taken by the administration to compel the Free Associations to return to the legal Exchange. It is alleged there has ben much inconvenience in commercial circles from the want of officially quoted prices on the Exchange for agricultural products, among other things. Prices have been published but they were merely quotations given by the Press founded entirely on the private opinion of newspaper correspondents. The Agrarians, however, in the main, continued to support this law practically as it stands, but other interests, particularly bankers, brokers, and the industrial element have sought its amendment. One of the objections to the existing law is the Bourse Register. The Register practically brands a8 Germany. (Cont'd). man, whose name is entered, as a stock speculator and affects his business standing. The brokers are anxious to abolish the official Register so that anyone may gamble in stocks without advertisement of the same. It is also desired that the law may be amended so that losses can be collected from others than the registered brokers. it is also proposed in certain quarters that an exception to the prohibition of grain futures be made in case of land owners, farmers, and grain merchants so as to permit them to make future contracts for their annual business. There has been much discussion and agitation but the law has not yet been amended. It is given in fill Reichs-Gesetzblatt, 1896, pp. 157-176.9 GREECE. In this country the purchase or sale of any article never actually possessed by either buyer or seller has been held by the courts to come under the provisions of the Roman Law, still in force, against gambling; and rules to check dealings in "futures" have been drawn up by the Bourse authorities at the instigation of the Government. The Athens' Court of Appeal in 1891 held that contracts for purchase or sale at a future date, of which the only object was payment of a difference, were "gambling" within the meaning of the law, and, consequently, null and void. To prove gambling it is sufficient to prove the purchase or sale is fictitious, i. e., that the article dealt in is never actually possessed by seller or buyer. This ruling applies not only to Bourse speculations, but to dealings in agricultural products. There appears to be no gambling in metals in this country.10 ITALY. It appears, pursuant to Article 61 of the Code of Commerce, that the sale of goods is permissible for future delivery notwithstanding the fact that the seller is not in possession of the goods this sold, and for which, in accordance with the Article above referred to, he becomes responsible to the purchaser. Authorities on the Rome Stock Exchange state there is no special enactment prohibiting brokers in Rome from dealing in stocks for future delivery. Defaulters are bound to pay the difference to the purchaser on settlement day, and if they fail to do so the latter can sue them before the proper court. There are Articles in the Commercial Code referring specially to "Operazione di riporto" or carrying over of stock, exclusively affecting stocks. Stock is bought for delivery on a certain day -- settlement day -- which in Italy is the last day of the month. The purchaser who bought the stock at, say 90, is unable, for lack of necessary capital or for other reasons, to take up the stock on settlement day, assuming that the quotation on that particular stock had meanwhile fallen from 90 to 85, the purchaser is bound to pay the difference (five) or withdraw the stock. In the event of his being unable to do so, the difference is paid and the transaction is renewed for another month, and so on. The vendor, however, is not bound to the carrying over of of the transaction and can demand liquidation on settlement day. THE NETHERLANDS. No legislation in this country upon the subject of gambling in futures. Articles 1825 to 1828 of the Civil Code deal with gambling and betting in general. 11 NORWAY. A new Criminal Law that came into force on January 1, 1904 reads as follows: Section 298. "Any person making a livelihood by a game of chance, which is not permitted by a special law, or of inciting to the same, shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding one year." "If the offence be committed by the offender in the pursuit of his livelihood, the Court may deprive him of the right to continue such livelihood. Instead of forfeiting the gains won, the Court has power to direct the repayment of the same." Section 299. "All games for money, or for the worth of money, in which owing to the nature of the game or to the largeness of the shakes, a cupidity of purpose is prominent as a predominating factor, are regarded as games of chance." "Bets and speculating on difference of prices at a future date (dealing in differences) in which the same is the case, are also regarded as games for money." PORTUGAL. Gambling in options and futures have attracted but little attention in this country, and if punishable would have to be dealt with by the Common Criminal Code, as no legislation has been adopted for the regulation of such practices. ROUMANIA. No legislation in this country respecting gambling in options or future contracts.12 RUSSIA. Options in futures are said to be practically unknown and there is no legislation in that county specially dealing with such contracts. With regard to fictitious transactions in the way of time bargains, which are purchased on certain foreign exchanges, they are not recognized either by the regulations or by the practice of Russian Exchanges, and, consequently, the Imperial Government has not been called upon to resort to measures of restraint against this class of operation. Such transactions are so rare and exceptional that they may be said to have practically no existence, and when they take place, it is irregular and secretly as they are not authorized by the rules of the St. Petersburg Exchange. SERVIA. Purchases in the form of speculation known as gambling in futures are regarded as an ordinary lottery and are permissible. They are not annulled by the law as is the case with forbidden lotteries. The only legal exception is that such purchases, according to Section 790 of the Civil Code, cannot be annulled on account of loss amounting to more than half of the article or produce concerned as is the case with ordinary purchases. SPAIN. Under the Law of Spain a distinction must be made between transactions which are negotiated without the intervention of a broker (Article 74, Commercial Code) and those which are made through a broker on the Exchange. (Article 75, Commercial Code.) The former have no value except by common law; and since, according to Article 1798 of the Civil Code, the law does not permit an action to be brought to recover what may be won "in a game of chance, gambling or hazard," and according to Article 1275 "contracts made on illegal grounds have no efficacy" and the "ground of a contract is illegal when it is opposed to the laws or to morality." It follows that 13 SPAIN (Cont'd.) "future" contracts made outside the Exchange without the intervention of a broker, when they have no other object than the collecting of the difference, [as this effectively constitutes gambling,]have no legal force whatever. Transactions effected on the Exchange, and therefore through the medium of a broker, can be negotiated on the basis of immediate settlement or as a "future" contract, at a fixed date or at option, with a premium or without. It appears that all forms of transactions are admitted. This refers to public securities, stocks, and shares in industrial and commercial enterprises; that is to say, securities quoted on the Stock Exchange. In regard to other articles of trade and merchandise, time bargains are not common except in the case of the sale and leases of mines, when the option clause is frequently used, and there is no special legislation on this subject inasmuch as they are governed by the Civil Code which recognizes the validity of a contract in the form in which it is negotiated by the contracting parties. Should these transactions constitute a gamble, however, in the true sense of the word, they would be subjected to the sanction of Article 1798 of the Code, above referred to. SWEDEN No legislation in this country respecting gambling in options and future contracts. ---oOo---14 SWITZERLAND. The Federal Code contains the following provisions applicable to the whole of Switzerland. CHAPTER XXI Article 512. "No action at law can be based on a gambling or betting transaction. The same applies to advances or loans made deliberately with a view to gambling or betting, and to such time bargains, in goods or stocks, as partake of the nature of gambling and betting." Article 513. "The payment of an acknowledgment of debt or of a bill of exchange signed as covered by the principal in a gambling or betting transaction cannot be made the ground for an action at law, even when such principal has parted with the instrument in question." The Federal Court by a decree of 1st May, 1886 has interpreted the principal laid down in the Federal Code in the following way: "The law does not prohibit, in a general way, the conclusion of time bargains, but only transactions which, in the guise of time bargains, are a mask for gambling operations; this is the case when the two contracting parties have shown clearly at the time of the conclusion of the contract, either expressly or by document furnishing proof thereof, that they had no intention of buying or selling but that, on the contrary, they intended to leave out of the question any delivery of goods and that the contract should be fulfilled by the payment of any differences resulting from the changes in market prices to the benefit of one or other of the parties." With regard to the organization and control of the Stock Exchange and15 SWITZERLAND (Cont'd.) with regard to operations concluded on the Stock Exchange, all of which matters are within the province of the Cantonal Governments, a number of Cantons having enacted laws in regard to gambling, betting and operating in futures. As an illustration, the regulation in force in the Canton of Bale Ville the Law of April 8, 1897 is as follows: "The following offence will be punishable with fine or imprisonment. "Carrying on gambling in options or future contracts with impecunious or insolvent persons, and whose impecuniousness or insolvency was known at the time when the transaction was carried on, or could have been known by using proper care.”HEADQUARTERS U.S. MARINE CORPS. QUARTERMASTER'S OFFICE, WASHINGTON. Mar 19, [*[08]*] [ [[shorthand]] ] [*P.P.F.*] Dear Mr Loeb, Here is the receipt for the Presidents' white suits. Glad to hear you are well again. Always Sincerely Yrs, C.L. McCawley[*F*] G-R DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE QUI PRO DOMINA JUSTITIA SEQUITUR Office of the Attorney General, Washington, D.C. March 20, 1908. Hon. Wm. Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President. Dear Mr. Loeb: I am duly in receipt of your letter of the 19th instant, with enclosed letter and clipping from Mr. Foulke, which I have noted and return herewith. Yours very truly, Charles J. Bonaparte, Attorney General. [*see Foulke, Wm. Dudley. 3/17/08*][*Root*] [*Cf Reid*] THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON March 20, 1908. My dear Mr. Secretary: After reading the enclosed letter from Ambassador Reid and the President's reply, will you please return them to me? Very truly yours, Wm Loeb Jr. Secretary to the President. Hon. Elihu Root, Secretary of State. Enclosures [*I think this very interesting letter like a good many others from Reid shows the value of editorial training for a mind that has to grasp the significant items of the political life of a foreign country - It shows a sense for "news" ER*] [*[Root]*][*P.F.*] [*R*] AMERICAN EMBASSY, LONDON. March 20, 1908. CONFIDENTIAL Dear Mr. President: Since my note the other day, I have had a long talk with Mr. Mackenzie King. He is starting moderately and sensibly, and has already had talks with Lord Strathcona, the immediate representative of Canada, Lord Elgin, the head of the Colonial Office, and finally with Sir Edward Grey. His plan is to stay here several weeks, and try to impress his views on all members of the Ministry, as he is able to meet them. To-day he is trying to tackle John Morley. He has already realized two things. The first is that the London point of view is a wider one than the Canadian, and that the difficulties are greatly enhanced when they come to ask the British authorities to exclude from British dominions British soldiers, who have been decorated on British battlefields; and still another thing, that the members of the Ministry is not very sympathetic. He spoke of having the impression that you were somewhat apprehensive about the Japanese trouble. I thought it wiser to dissent from this. I said you had undoubtedly been annoyed by the fuss they made over the little trouble in San Francisco, and had doubtless spoken frankly, as was your custom; but I insisted that the idea of your being apprehensive of Japanese hostility was absurd. From what I have seen and heard here, I am sure it is desirable to keep them from putting you to the front as the authority really responsible for his visit and appeals. At the same time, I have takenpains, wherever the matter has been mentioned, to make clear our conviction that they were in exactly the same situation with ourselves on the subject, but involved in a great deal more trouble in consequence of the Hindu phase of it. I have a little bit of my leave of absence for this year left, and am taking advantage of the dead season here to take my daughter down to the south of France for a visit with friends there which she has promised. I shall be gone only about a fortnight, however, and I have already arranged that on my return I will have Mr. King at the house for luncheon or dinner. I shall not make it too conspicuous, however, since I do not want to create the impression that we are more interested in his mission than the British themselves are; - - but that we realize they have a difficulty similar to ours and a great deal worse. It seems quite clear now that, unless death should intervene, there will be no change in the Premiership until about Easter, when the King is expected to be back. For the moment Sir Henry seems to be gaining a little, but I can't find that any of this colleagues have a real hope of his recovery or any idea that he can continue in office after Easter. If I should see the King at Biarritz, I shall have an interesting little communication to make to him. You will remember that the King's Cup, given for the yacht races at the Jamestown Exposition, was an uncommonly handsome one. He sent it through me, and evidently took great interest in it. The Cup was won by a grandson of General Sherman--a son of Colgate Hoyt.3. He has written a brief letter to the King, explaining that he built the boat himself with which the race was won, sending pictures of it, and expressing his appreciation of the Cup. I am sure the King will be delighted with it-- especially because it has been won by a grandson of the grim old General. Very sincerely yours, Whitelaw Reid. To The President, White House, Washington, D.C>, U.S.A.AMERICAN PRESS ASSOCIATION ORLANDO J. SMITH, PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER COURTLAND SMITH, VICE PREST, AND ASST. GENL. MGR. WAYNE B. STOWE, SECRETARY WILLIAM G. BROGAN, AUDITOR MAURICE F. GERMOND, TREASURER GENERAL OFFICE 45 AND 47 PARK PLACE NEW YORK, March 20, 1908. [*cf A*] [*File carefully*] NEW YORK, 45-47 PARK PLACE BOSTON, 133 OLIVER STREET BUFFALO, 45 NORTH DIVISION STREET PHILADELPHIA, 1010 WALNUT STREET PITTSBURGH, 803 LIBERTY AVENUE CHICAGO, 88-92 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD COLUMBUS, 313-315 NORTH FRONT STREET INDIANAPOLIS, 117 WEST GEORGIA STREET ST. PAUL, 41 EAST, THIRD STREET OMAHA, 1018 FARNAM STREET CINCINNATI, 128-130 OPERA PLACE DETROIT, 24 WOODBRIDGE STREET ATLANTA, 23 EAST MITCHELL STREET DALLAS, 301 ELM STREET PORTLAND, ORE., 18-20 FRONT STREET SAN FRANCISCO, 218 SPEAR STREET CABLE ADDRESS 'AMPRESSA NEW YORK' TELEPHONE 7636 CORTLANDT William Loeb, Esq. Secretary to the President, White House, Washington, D. C. My dear Sir:- In accordance with our conversation of the other day, the American Press Association, in return for receiving the President's annual message and special messages from you, hereby agree that any paper or papers receiving the message in advance from us and using ay part of it, or any intimation of its contents, before properly released after the reading has begun in Congress, shall at once be deprived of our service in any form. For your information I will state that every paper receiving a President's message form us in advance, must first sign a pledge that the message will be held strictly confidential until released by the American Press Association. It is understood by each paper that should they make any improper use of the message, or publish it prematurely the American Press Association will withdraw its service from them. Very truly yours, Courtland Smith [*Mr. A.W. Dunn N. 244 to have (1) advance copy*]article in terms of great admiration. He had said on another occasion "il n'y pas un paysan dans toute la France au quil le nom de M. Roosevelt n'est pa bien connu" I dare say most of the enclosed article will have been telegraphed today to our newspapers but it may perhaps interest you to read it in Tardieu's excellent French. I shall be delighted to hear of you directly through him March 20th 1908 AMERICAN EMBASSY, PARIS. [*Ackd 4-1-08*] Dear Mr President - I send you herewith an article by Tardieu from last night's "Temps" newspaper about something which has filled me with delight. Your observations respecting religious toleration and the absolute necessity that all reforms must be carried out with order if they are to be attended with successwill have a [great] far reaching effect and be productive of much good here. The practical example that you gave also of religious harmony by having the two Roman Catholic [?] ecclesiastics to lunch with the Episcopal [governor] Bishop of Massachusetts will also not fail to be noted in this country where everything that you do and say is watched with the greatest interest and attention. The Temps moreover is perhaps the most influential newspaper now in France. I met Hébrard the proprietor a few days ago lunching privately with Pichon the Foreign Minister and curiously enough I had described to them both, your views in much the same way that Tardieu has in the enclosed article; Last night at the Elysée Palace Ball the President spoke to me of you in connection with the enclosedend of it, parallel with the ten windows on each side; and the reception rooms on both sides of this hall open into it by as many doors are there are outside windows thereby making hall and rooms one great reception hall when the doors are open. We had about 2000 people at one official reception and although there was a great crowd of course, there never was congestion, much less a crush at any point. The progress of the fleet is producing a greater greater impression as it proceeds on its way without developping any cripples 2 AMERICAN EMBASSY, PARIS. upon his approaching return. I enclose, thinking they may interest you four photographs of the new Embassy House with the flag flying over the front gates and the National Arms carved in stone in the wall between the[ir] iron gates. No. 1 and No. 2 represent the view from the rue Francois 1er side; the former inside and the latter outsidethe Courtyard. No 3 & 4 give the South front over looking the garden of the house and the Cours-la-Reine and the [be] river beyond, with the place and dome of the Invalides covering Napoleon's tomb in the distance. It is at the edge of the Champs Elysees, about five minutes walk from the Foreign Office which in full view across the river and about equi-distant from the rue de la Paix and the Arc de l'Etoile. I only succeeded in getting such a good house because it was in a state of great dilapidation and I undertook to restore it at my own expense - and that a pretty heavy one. But it is by far the best Embassy House that any of our representatives have ever had in Paris and it is wonderfully good for the circulation of a large crowd, owing to the fact that a large hall runs from end to[*[For enc. see 3-20-08]*] as member of Parliament. Combes foolishly talked politics and personal politics instead [p] of lauding the services of the guest of the evening, thinly striking a very false note of which Clemenceau was quick to take advantage in an admirable speech of a most impersonal nature and of great eloquence suitable to the occasion. So that a change of ministry does not seem probable in the near future. The news from Morocco is much better but it would not greatly surprise me if the state of Portugal would shortly be a cause of concern in Europe. Yours most Sincerely Henry White AMERICAN EMBASSY PARIS 3/ and I notice that the critics who were so loud in denouncing the state of our Navy when the fleet started have been pretty quiet if not actually silent for some time past. Nothing could have produced a greater impression of our naval power - and indeed power in general - upon foreign nations than this cruise. The papers announce that on the return voyage the fleet will only touch in Europe at Gibraltar. I wish it could visit Brest or oneof the French Mediterranean ports also. This Government would be thereby greatly complimented and the effect generally would be excellent unless you think it might create feeling in Germany & England if they were not similarly honored. This could not be the case however if a French Mediterranean port were visited. Politics are interesting in this country and generally in Europe. But I have already written you too long a letter and moreover I have kept the Secretary of State posted in private letters on that subject. Combes the late Prime minister who aspires to succeed Clemenceau and hoped to turn him out at an early date, has damaged his chances for the present by an injudicious speech delivered at a banquet in honor of the Veteran Republican Brisson, now President of the Chamber of Deputies, on the completion of twenty five years service[*W*] [*Ackd 4-1-08*] American Embassy, Paris March 20,1908. Dear Mr. President: I send you herewith an article by Tardieu from last night's "Temps" newspaper about yourself, which has filled me with delight. Your observations respecting religious toleration and the absolute necessity that all reforms must be carried out with order if they are to be attended with success will have a far-reaching effect and be productive of much good here. The practical example that you gave also of religious harmony by having the two Roman Catholic ecclesiastics to lunch with the Episcopal Bishop of Massachusetts will also not fail to be noted in this country where everything that you do and say is watched with the greatest interest and attention. The Temps moreover is perhaps the most influential newspaper now in France. I met He' brard, the proprietor a few days ago, lunching privately with Pichon, the foreign Minister, and curiously enough I had described to them both your views in much the same way that Tardieu has in the enclosed article; last night at the Elysee Palace Ball the President spoke to me of you in connection with the enclosed article in terms of great admiration. He had said on another occasion "Il n 'y pas un paysan dans toute La France [august] auquel le nom de M. Roosevelt n'est pas bien connu." I dare say most of the enclosed article will have been telegraphed to-day to our newspapers but it may perhaps interest you to read it in Tardieu's excellent French. I shall be delighted to hear of you directly through him upon his approaching return. I enclose, thinking they may interest you, four photographs of the new embassy, with the flag flying over the front gates and the national arms carved in stone in the wall between iron gates. Number 1 and number 2 represent the view from the rue Francois 1st side, the former inside and the latter outside the court yard. No. 3 and No. 4 give the south-2- front overlooking the garden of the house and the Cours-la-Reine and the river beyond, with the palace and dome of the Invalides covering Napoleon´s tomb in the distance. It is the edge of the Champs Elysees, about five minutes walk from the foreign office, which is in full view across the river and about equi-distant from the rue de La Paix and the Arc de l'Etoile. I only succeeded in getting such a good house because it was in a state of great delapidation and I undertook to restore it at my own expense - and that a pretty heavy one. But it is by far the best Embassy House that any of our representatives have ever had in Paris and it is wonderfully good for the circulation of a large crowd, owing to the fact that a large hall runs from end to end of it, parallel with the ten windows on each side; and the reception rooms on both sides of this hall open into it by as many doors as there are outside windows thereby making hall and rooms one great reception hall when the doors are open. We had about 2000 people at one official reception and although there was a great crowd of course, there never was congestion, much less a crush at any point. The progress of the fleet is producing a greater and greater impression as it proceeds on its way without developing any cripples and I notice that the critics who were so loud in denouncing the state of our navy when the fleet started have been pretty quiet if not actually silent for some time past. Nothing could have produced a greater impression of our naval power - and indeed power in general - upon foreign nations than this cruise. The papers announce that on the return voyage the fleet will only touch in Europe at Gibraltar. I wish it could visit Brest or one of the French Mediterranean ports also. This government would be thereby greatly complimented and the effect generally would be -3- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx excellent unless you think it might creat e feeling in Germany and England, if they were not similarly honored. This could not be the case, however, if a French Mediterranean port were visited. Politics are interesting in this country and generally in Europe., but I have already written you too long a letter and moreover I have kept the Secretary of State posted in private letters on the subject. Combes, the late Prime Minister, who aspires to succeed Clemenceau and hoped to turn him out at an early date has damaged his chan[g]ces for the present by an injudicious speech delivered at a banquet in honor of the Veteran Republican,Brisson, now President of the Chamber of Deputies, on the completion of twenty-five years service as Member of Parliament. Combes foolishly talked politics instead of lauding the services of the guest of the evening, thereby striking a very false note of which Clemenceau was quick to take advantage in an admirable speech of the most impersonal nature and of great eloquence suitable to the occasion. So that a change of Ministry does not seem probable in the near future. The news from Morocco is much better, but it would not greatly surprise me if the State of Portugal would shortly be a cause of concern in Europe. Yours most sincerely, Henry White [For enc. see 3-20-08]Enc in White 3-20-08 (1) Enc. in White 3-20-08 (2) Enc. in White 3-20-08 3 Enc. in White 3-20-08 4 [*PF*] HARVARD COLLEGE CAMBRIDGE March 21, 1908 Dear President Roosevelt, I thank you much for your letter and that of Secretary Wilson. I talked with Ted yesterday, and about him with Theodore Lyman last night. Ted wanted to go away for a journey with his mother. I told him that I could not consent to this. Professor Lyman agrees with me in my opinion of Ted's increased maturity. Professor Lyman told me also how pleased he was to find out about the reading Ted was doing outside his regular work. Sincerely yours, B. S. Hurlbut President Roosevelt HNAVY DEPARTMENT. Washington, D. C., March 21, 1908. Sir:- Enclosed herewith is the additional statement which I authorized, at my second hearing before your Committee, to submit on the subject of alleged defects in United States naval vessels. It will be seen that I have strictly complied with your ruling and have confined my statements to the alleged defects discussed by Rear Admiral Converse and Chief Constructor Capps, excepting that I have not alluded to the Navy Department administrative organization, though discussed to some extent by the latter. In the accompanying paper I have merely invited attention to certain statements and data given in the testimony of Rear Admiral Converse and Chief Constructor Capps that I am confident are in error or from which, without explanation, misleading conclusions would be drawn. My only object in submitting this paper is to establish the facts and I think it eminently fair and desirable, since the Chief Constructor has had the privilege of cross examining witnesses before your Committee who have been called to prove the existence of defects, that any errors in his testimony-2- of that of Admiral Converse should be shown in the remarks of your investigation. Very respectfully, Commander, U. S. Navy. [*[Key]*] Honorable Eugene Hale, Chairman of the Senate Naval Committee, Senate of the United States, Washington, D.C.[for 3 attachments see ca 3-21-08 S. 3335 3-21-08]3-21-08 A.L. Key[*[For enc. see 3-21-08]*] [*R*] [*F*] "BY APPOINTMENT" Hotel Bristol Paris ADRESSE TELEGRAPHIQUE BRISTOLOTEL-PARIS Private 21 March,1908. My dear Mr. President: The first thing my eye fell on this morning in The Figaro was the enclosed decidedly disagreeable article about Panama — apparently a French paean over something our fine old friend, Wm. Bigelow has been writing. Can it be that he feels the parental instinct to defend his eccentric son Poultney to this extent?extent? — At any rate it is such a curious contrast with what Col. Goethals himself was telling me that I found it an unpleasant thing to read - even if we do know that the french are under a strong temptation to see our work down there through blue spectacles. I've just seen White who is luxuriously installed in the old Ridgway house, & very happy. Yours sincerely, Whitelaw ReidDepartment of Commerce and Labor Bureau of Corporations Washington Office of the Secretary Received Mar 23 1908 Dept of Commerce and Labor March 21,1908. Sir: You will recall that you delivered to me on the 6th instant, personally, a number of papers in regards to the so-called bucket-shops and stated that the President desired "to know whether a bill should be introduced or favored by him to prohibit bucket-shops;" also "he would like to know what action has been taken in other countries, notably Germany." Among these papers was a bill purporting to prohibit bucket-shop transactions. Later I also received certain further papers referred to me by you, dealing with this bill, chiefly monographs on bucket-shops and stock exchange transactions. I divide the subject into three heads, as follows: (1) The specific bill which I received from you personally. (2) The general subject-matter involved in these papers. (3) The legislation of Germany and other countries. I. As to the first subject, to wit, the bill in question, there is nothing to indicate where this bill came from or who drew it. The bill itself is very difficult to understand, but as near as it can be interpreted it defines bucket-shops; prohibits any person or company from transmitting, by telephone or telegraph, messages relating to or facilitating bucket-shop transactions; prohibits any person or corporation from leasing telephone or telegraph wires for such purposes; prohibits the use of the mails for such purposes, and declares all material relating to or facilitating bucket-shop transactions to be non-mailable. This bill hardly merits much discussion. In the first place, its definition-2- of bucket-shops is wholly defective and very obscure, but apparently is to the effect that a bucket-shop is any place that gets its information as to prices from a board of trade or exchange which does not have bona fide transactions. Of course substantially all exchanges do have bona fide transactions, so the definition would fail wholly to describe any bucket-shop. This illustrates one of the fundamental difficulties in dealing with the whole subject, namely, the difficulty of defining what is a speculative transaction of a nature desired to be prohibited. The courts have established a theoretical definition that is perfectly logical, namely, that a contract is a wagering or speculative contract when neither party thereto, at the time of making it, contemplates the actual delivery or receipt of the goods. The trouble with this definition is that practically it is impossible to prove the existence of such a condition, because on the trial that party who desires to enforce the contract will deny that he did have such an understanding, and it is wholly a question of his mental operations, which of course cannot be examined. The second, third and fourth sections illustrate another practical difficulty with any such law. These sections are directed at the transmission of information, a thing that is almost impossible to effectively cover, without a perfectly intolerable system of mail, telegraph and telephone censorship. Cipher messages might be sent by telegraph, perfectly innocent so far as they appeared; information might be given by telephone hourly and only a constant supervision of the telephone exchanges would ever stop it. Furthermore, this particular bill makes it illegal for a telephone or telegraph company or operator to accept messages sent for the purpose of facilitating such transactions. The operator cannot know the purpose of a message without an elaborate investigation of each-3- case. In short, the simple transmission of information is so intangible a subject-matte as to be almost outside the scope of effective regulation for any such purpose. I disapprove of this bill both in principle and in detail. II. A much more important question is the general subject-matter, i.e., as to the merits of any attempt to prohibit speculative transactions. We may roughly divide the transactions on stock and produce exchanges into three classes: (1) Where the transaction is an out-and-out purchase or a genuine investment; a transfer of the actual property, the full price being paid therefor at once to the seller. (2) The so-called "hedging" transaction. This is a very common incident to regular commercial business and can best be explained by an example. Cotton mills, for instance, contract to sell their product, cotton cloth, many months in advance of the time the cloth is actually produced, sometimes as long as a year. The mill owner, or spinner, as he is called, makes his price to the purchaser of the cloth, based almost entirely upon the price of raw cotton, which is the uncertain factor. He makes his contract, say, on January 1, 1908, to sell this cloth. At this time the price of the particular grade of raw cotton which he needs ( say Middling cotton) is 10 cents a pound. If he knew that that price was to be the same a year later, when the goods are to be delivered to the purchase, say January 1, 1909, he could simply add to the cost of the cotton, to wit, 10 cents, his known cost of labor, manufacture, etc., and thus establish the price at which he sells the cloth. But cotton, like many other products, is subject in price to frequent fluctuations. It may range from 5 to 15 cents a pound. If he agrees now to sell the cloth a year hence and bases his price for the cloth on today's price for raw cotton at 10 cents, he may-4- find when he comes to spin the cotton that the price has gone to 12 cents and he will have to pay 2 cents more per pound than he had expected, which may wipe out his profit and possibly leave him a loss. He cannot afford to buy the cotton now at 10 cents because of the high cost of insurance, taxes, interest, and storage; and even if he does, the price of cotton may, on the other hand, go down, with a corresponding loss to him. He therefore "hedges," as he says. He makes his price to the purchaser of the cloth based on the 10-cent price today of raw cotton, the cloth to be delivered a year from date. His contract for this cloth will call, say, for 1,000 bales of cotton. He then goes on the cotton exchange and buys a thousand bales of future cotton, or "futures" as they are called, at 10 cents, this cotton to be delivered a year from date. Now suppose, as above suggested, that a year from date, when he wants to get the actual cotton to spin, cotton has gone to 12 cents a pound. This rise decreases by 2 cents his profit on the cloth that he sells, but, on the other hand, his purchase of futures on the Cotton exchange gains for him exactly 2 cents on the same amount of cotton in futures, so that a loss on the transaction in actual cotton is exactly balanced by his gain on the transaction in futures, thus illuminating the speculative feature in his transaction in actual cotton and his agreement to sell cloth a year from date. This, it will be observed, is a sort of insurance. Without it, it is safe to say the cotton spinner's business could hardly be carried on. It would be subject to such extreme dangers of fluctuations that his business would be speculative. Thus these hedgingtransactions, instead of being, as popularly supposed, speculations, or really the reverse of speculations and are intended simply to remove the speculative element from a commercial transaction. The same considerations are true of other forms of produce. -5- Such a hedging operation is, of course, equally necessary in the case of any one who agrees in advance to deliver cotton, either as a merchant or broker, or, in fact, as a large farmer, so that the same crop of cotton may be hedged many times in a season, all with the same purpose of removing the speculative factor from the commercial transaction. (3) The third class of transactions are those which may be called purely speculative. They consist substantially of gambling transactions on margins by persons who have no interest in any actual commodity like cotton, either as producers, merchants or manufacturers, but who bet on the probable rise or fall in the price of cotton or other products. It is in regard to this class of transactions that the most serious criticism is to be made, and here one must distinguish carefully between the effect on the individual and the effect on the community. The effect on the individual of such operations may often be evil--- just as evil as any other form of gambling---leading to all the unfortunate results of misuse of trust funds, embezzlement, etc. But the result of this speculative class of transactions on the community is quite different. There is much to be said for the need of great central markets dealing in our important staples, as well as in corporate stocks, which shall serve to render staple the prices. The exchange, when analyzed, is a great market where an indefinite number of people meet, all drawn by the motive of gain, each person endeavoring to forecast more correctly than the other, future prices of a given commodity. His success or failure depends on the accuracy of his forecast and he has the strongest possible motive to be accurate. The result is that there is thus brought to this central market, and made public through its quotations, the greatest possible amount of accurate information as to the conditions that will fix the future prices of the commodity, and these-6- conditions are there discounted and reflected in the quotations by men of the highest expert skill in estimating the value of such information. The obvious result is to maintain prices at a much more steady level than could be secured in any other way. Steadiness of price is perhaps the most important desideratum. Were it not for this discounting of future conditions in this public manner by men extremely expert and extremely interested in being accurate, the prices of our commodities would unquestionably fluctuate much more rapidly and much more extremely than they do now, with the further result that the public, and especially the producer and farmer, having no such quotations and no such central market to refer to, would be much more at the mercy of those few experts who would get and keep to themselves information as to future conditions, and make much greater profits at the expense of the more ignorant public, both producer and consumer. III Such was the experience in Germany unquestionably, and I think it almost certain that such would be the experience, for instance, in the South should the quotations of the great exchanges be shut off and the producers of cotton be left to make their individual bargains with the purchasers with no knowledge of any general market price of cotton. I have sent herewith a brief memorandum on the laws of the various European countries relating to this subject, with especial reference to Germany. The really essential point of the German law to be considered in this connection is to set forth on page 6 of said memorandum, in the sentence which reads as follows: "This article forbids future dealing in the securities of all mining and investment companies and in grain. This last provision was utterly opposed to the report of the Commission, and it was adopted as an amendment in the Reichstag as a victory of the Agrarian-7- party, who thought that by stopping speculative trading in industrial stocks such stocks would have a more stable value x x x . It is asserted that the German government, including Emperor William, was opposed to the restriction and advanced economic objections." The memorandum which I return herewith, headed "Germany's Test Proved Costly," sets forth these objections in detail, and the way in which the law worked. The rest of the German legislation on the matter dealt almost entirely with an elaborate machinery for the regulation of stock exchanges, but did not attempt to prohibit directly or restrict speculative transactions, as such. A further question in connection with the entire subject is the question of constitutional power on the part of the Government to deal with it. Three methods are open: (1) through the interstate commerce clause, which must probably be used in connection with the transmission of the information only; (2) by the prohibition of the use of the mails; (3) by the use of the taxing power. I have pointed out the practical weakness of the first two methods, dealing as they do with such an intangible subject as information. The third I think to be the one practical method, and the difficulty with this method is that it can hardly be made to apply unless to all classes of transactions, whether investment, hedging, or purely speculative. While it might therefore minimize the entire volume of transactions, it certainly would affect the good as much as the evil, because, as I have said above, I know of no practical, satisfactory statutory distinction that can be made between these three classes of transactions. Central markets seem to be an absolute essential for the necessary steadying of prices of our great products. The life of our commerce depends upon purchases for the future; every merchant makes them. Once grant these facts, and the existence of the full-fledged and perfectly organized exchange is an absolutely inevitable result.-8- Many have criticised speculation and the exchanges because they involve future transactions. Bills are often drawn forbidding the sale of articles not actually at the time in the possession of the seller. Such a position is fundamentally mistaken. Such transactions are an essential part of today's commerce and are absolutely necessary, to prevent a mere crude hand-to-mouth business. The United States Government is constantly contracting with merchants for the purchase of supplies in vast quantities which have no existence at the time of the contract. On the other hand, it occurs in the smallest affairs of life. A homely example is that of the farmer's wife, who agrees to deliver to a customer so many eggs a week for the season, a transaction in a then non-existent commodity, involving the highly speculative productivity of the American hen. These examples well illustrate the wide range and legitimate and necessary character of such future transactions. Conclusions. The foregoing considerations reduce the question, I believe, to a comparatively simple one, and I believe establish the following conclusions: (1) That it is not wise to attempt to prohibit or restrict stock or produce exchange transactions which are for genuine investment. (2) That it is not wise to attempt to prohibit or restrict exchange transactions which are for hedging purposes. (3) That it is only in the third class, to wit, those transactions which are purely speculative, that there is any possible ground for taking action. (4) That the so-called bucket-shops come under the third class. (5) That the legal distinction between bucket-shops and exchanges is probably the same as that between genuine and gambling contracts, and depends upon the intent of the two parties at the time the contract was made.-9- The bucket-shop, as generally understood, is a place where the transactions are purely speculative, where neither party ever intends to deliver or receive the goods, and where the are no regulations of any responsible body, as there are on all the responsible exchanges, requiring and capable of enforcing such receipt or delivery if either party insists on it. As I have said above, these legal distinctions are perfectly logical. The difficulty lies in the practicability of applying them. No court can determine the actual intent of the two parties at the time of transaction was entered into; nor is it possible for the Federal Government, I think, to provide for any degree of responsibility on the part of bucket-shop proprietors as to the fulfillment of their contracts. The latter matter, in fact, would seem to be more a question for local State regulation. I therefore am of the opinion that, in view of the important commercial purposes served by the genuine exchanges, it would be extremely inexpedient to attempt to prohibit or restrict the operations of these exchanges; secondly, that the possibility of establishing any workable distinction between exchanges and bucket-shops is very small; thirdly, that even if such distinction could be established, the only line of connection with these central exchanges which is vital to the existence of bucket-shops is the transmission of intelligence from exchanges; fourthly, that, as I have indicated above, any attempt to restrict the transmission of intelligence will in most cases be futile, as the subject-matter is too intangible; fifthly, that the bucket-shop is, in almost every essential, a purely local affair and one peculiarly within State police jurisdiction, and not at all a fit subject for Federal legislation as such. As to the central exchanges, one thing can be done (and this must be done by local authority), namely, to make sure that these exchanges are so run, and-10- have such regulations and contracts, that their quotations upon which the country relies are the result of supply and demand, and do not contain any arbitrary element resulting from artificial manipulation which has nothing to do with actual conditions of such supply and demand. I know of no way in which this can be accomplished by Federal regulation. The forthcoming report of the Bureau on cotton exchanges will deal fully with the question of such artificial and arbitrary factors. Very respectfully, Herbert Knox Smith Commissioner. The Secretary of Commerce and Labor.[*[For 1. enclosure see ca 3-21-08]*]CIPHER CABLE. RECEIVED AND TRANSLATED March 21, 1908, 9:15 a.m. [[shorthand]] The White House Washington. Berlin, Secretary of State, Washington. The German Emperor has exprest the hope that the President will not appoint David Jayne Hill as ambassador to Germany when this post shall become vacant. The Emperor has an unfavorable personal opinion of Mr. Hill which dates from the visit of Prince Henry to America, and he announces that he should prefer to have someone else as representative of the United States in Berlin. I am forwarding this personal communication in a letter to the President which leaves here in the mail bag to-day. Tower. [*Dr. Hill*][ca. 3-21-08] CAH Bucket-shops can not be distinguished from Exchanges. Exchangers afford a civilized way of making a good living with least amount of work Ergo no bucket no exchange OSS[attached to 3-21-08]NAVY DEPARTMENT Washington, D.C., March 21, 1908 ADDITIONAL STATEMENT BY COMMANDER A. L. KEY, U.S. NAVY, TO THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE SENATE NAVAL COMMITTEE. In compliance with your authorization at my second hearing before your committee, I beg leave to invite your attention, in the following pages, to certain statements and data submitted to you by Rear Admiral Converse and Chief Constructor Capps, relative to alleged defects in our naval vessels; statements and data which I believe to be in error or which, without explanation, I believe to be misleading. On page 3 of the statements submitted by Admiral Converse, entitled "Statement in refutation of alleged defects of naval vessels", there appears an extensive list of maneuvers performed by the Atlantic Fleet from September, 1900, to September. 1907. Of this whole list only nine days, in September, 1907, were devoted to "battle tactics" in the strict naval meaning of the term as applied to a squadron or fleet of battleships. This is the only occasion upon which the Atlantic Fleet of battleships has been exercised in the tactics that must be employed in an action between two fleets. In war our fleet much fight a fleet action and obtain command of the sea before it can be permitted to bombard forts or perform any joint operations with the Army. If it is defeated -2- in a decisive fleet action as the Russians were by the Japanese at Tsushima, which decisive defeat was mainly due to the superior tactical skill of the Japanese, our fleet will never perform any joint operations with our Army. Skill in battle tactics can be obtained only by constant practice. Our fleet has had but nine days of such practice, though we have had a fleet of eight to sixteen battleships since 1903. As the battleship fleets of the best foreign navies are given ample exercise at battle tactics, proper, it is superfluous to make comment as to our comparative efficiency in the most important factor in winning a fleet action. On page 5 of the paper of Admiral Converse, in the table comparing the height of freeboard of American and foreign battleships, no mention is made of the after decks upon which the after turrets are mounted. Of the twenty American battleships completed since 1899 ten have low decks aft, about nine feet above the water under service conditions. England has not laid down a battleship of this character since 1891 and Japan has no sea-going battleship of this description and never has had one. The above criticism applies to the table entitled "Height of gun positions", pages 6 and 7, no mention is made of the fact that half our battleships completed since 1899 have half of their "main battery" guns mounted one deck lower than the British and Japanese battleships. As the heavy turret "main battery" guns are the only water line armor piercers at fighting-3- ranges our ships would be placed at a serious disadvantage in a fleet action in a rough sea. Notwithstanding this undeniable fact the Admiral states, page 8: " From the above table it will be seen that compared with the British Navy our "main battery" guns . . . are about as high if not higher than on corresponding British ships, and the same may be said with regard to the Japanese ships." On page 12 the Admiral quotes with approval the recommendations of the "Walker board" but neglects to state that the reason our water line armor belts are too low is because the recommendations of the "Walker board," approved by the Secretary of the Navy in 1896, have been disregarded. The last paragraph, page 12, of the Admiral's paper should not be construed to mean that the battleships of the Japanese fleet went into action at Tsushima with a light supply of coal in their bunkers. On the contrary it may be safely assumed that their bunkers were full of coal. The Japanese undoubtedly cleared their ships for action, removed all equipment, fittings, boats, etc., that would be in the way in handling the guns, and also movable objects that might cause the enemy's shell to explode. Probably each ship may have removed weights that amounted to as much as one hundred tons, enough to decrease the draft of a battleship by two inches. On page 13 it is stated that the "officer noted for his professional attainments and accuracy of judgement" consulted the log books of the ships for the quantity of coal on board-4- at Rockport but trusted to his eye for the height of the armor belts above water. The log books recorded the draft of each ship as well as the amount of coal on board of each and if the officer had merely noted the draft when he consulted the log books for the amount of coal he would have known to an inch how much the upper edge of each water line belt showed above the water. The records of the log books of the ships show that the officer's vision as well as his judgement were not of a high order of accuracy when he looked at the belt armor. The Admiral admits, page 13, that when our fleet recently departed for the Pacific the upper edge of their belt armor was near the water line, but attributes their condition to the fact that they were making a "strategic" move with their bunkers full of coal and a fully supply of ammunition, stores and supplies. He states that this condition would not obtain in case of anticipated or imminent fleet action. In this opinion it is believed that the Admiral will fund but few adherents among sea-going naval officers, nor is it believed that his views can receive the confirmation of past experience. On the contrary it can be asserted with the greatest confidence that an admiral will take his fleet into action with practically full bunkers of coal, ample fresh water for steaming, and all the ammunition the ships can stow, for the coal and fresh water measure his radius of action and the ammunition measures his power to strike. When an admiral cuts loose from -5- his base of supplies with the intention of fighting a fleet action, it means that the enemy's fleet is not far distant and it will be a "strategic" move in all that relates to coal, ammunition and supplies, very similar to the recent departure of the ships from Hampton Roads. On page 15 the Admiral invites attention, in paragraphs marked b, c, d, e, and f, to the reduction in fighting efficiency of a vessel caused by increasing her draft by two feet through the introduction of water in her double bottoms. It should be noted that these five evils he mentions have already been brought about in our battleships by their over-draft under service conditions as compared with their designed draft and, in addition, the water line armor belt is approximately two feet lower than it should be at "fighting draft," -- a very much more vital defect than all the others combined. The connection with this subject it is well to remember that there is no serious reason to prevent a captain from lowering the armor belt a foot by permitting sea water to run in the double bottoms for a few minutes. The Admiral, after extensive discussion of the comparative efficiency of single stage and double stage turret ammunition hoists states, on page 21: "After an examination of the designs of turrets in foreign navies it cannot be said that the practice abroad in general is any safer than in this country." -6- An examination of the designs of turrets in foreign navies will show that they have always, both in their single stage and double stage hoists, effectively isolated their turret handling room. This is all that has been demanded by our sea-going officers, officially and unofficially, since 1902. This serious defect was brought to the attention of the Navy Department six years ago in a strong official report by a fleet ordnance officer. We have had since that date four serious turret accidents, the most recent of which was on the "Georgia" in 1907, and in every one of these accidents burning powder was hurled into the handling room. The accident on the "Missouri" in 1904 caused the death of fifteen American seamen in the handling room, in the performance of their duty. It was not till January 10, 1908, since the present public criticisms of the Navy began, that the Navy Department, through the Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance in a hearing before the Naval Committee of the House, acknowledged that the non-isolation of the turret guns from the handling room, constitutes an unnecessary danger, and requested an appropriation of $2,100,00 to correct the defect in all turret ships built or building. Notwithstanding these undeniable facts of record practically every bureau chief, ex-bureau chief and subordinate bureau officer who has testified before your committee has said that he considers our turrets and handling rooms, without serious defect and as safe as those of foreign navies. This indicates that the average bureau officer or average ex-bureau officer-7- is not capable of giving an unprejudiced opinion upon adverse criticism of bureau work and design, past or present, for there can be no question that each officer expressed, in this matter of the open turret, his honest, and what he believed to be, his unbiased opinion. On page 30 the Admiral makes his general summary. Under the heading Battle Drills it will be noticed that it is not claimed that we have had any battle drills except the nine days last Autumn, though it should be remembered that we have had assembled, in one fleet, eight to sixteen battleships since the spring of 1903. The Admiral speaks hopefully of what we are going to do in the future in the way of "the battle fleet drill begun with those ships last year." Battle fleet drills do not appear to form any part of the extensive programme, which includes considerable time and space, arranged for the fleet by the Navy Department and published in the public press.. It should never be forgotten, for one moment, that practice in battle drills is just as necessary to attain efficiency and team work by battleships in action as practice is essential to a foot ball game -- they must be absolutely familiar with every signal and every move that follows each signal, and the captain of the team must be trained to instantly detect and take advantage of a weak point or a wrong move in the adversary's line. Every school boy knows how much chance an untrained foot ball team, without practice, has against a-8- trained team that has been given ample practice. The facts, to which attention has been invited in this paper, do not appear to support the Admiral in his summary with reference to Freeboard of our ships, Height of gun Positions, Armor, or Turret designs; nor do the facts, shown in the table and diagrams submitted by the undersigned, appear to support the Admiral in one of his closing statements; "and no ship has been built by us inferior to those of any nation designed at the same time." The Chief Constructor in his paper entitled: "Concerning certain alleged defects in vessels of the United States Navy", states, under the heading Designed load displacement, that the designed normal draft of our vessels provides for two thirds of all ammunition and consumable stores and from 800 to 1000 tons of coal, except the "Idaho" and "Mississippi". He does not state why two thirds of the bunker capacity of coal is not provided for in their design as recommended by the Walker board and as directed by the Secretary of the Navy. If this recommendation and order had not been disregarded the water line armor belts would have been correctly located. On page 4 the Chief Constructor states: "The distribution of water line armor, etc., are, however, such that even should a vessel be compelled to engage in battle shortly after being provisioned and coaled, the protection of the vital portions of the vessel . . . would be -9- as thoroughly assured as possible for the particular type of design in question." The diagram submitted by the undersigned show that fifteen of our twenty battleships completed since 1899 are practically no better than armored cruisers in their water line protection when they have their full supply of coal and stores; while the 37 British battleships completed since 1899 have their water lines as well protected at deep draft as at light draft, due to the wide armor belt adopted for all battleships built since the ROYAL SOVEREIGN class in 1889. On page 5 the Chief Constructor states: "The excess draft in the cana of battleships forming the present Atlantic Battleship Fleet, amounts to as much as 11 inches in the case of one ship only, and in the majority of the vessels of the fleet averages 7-1/2 inches and under." The accuracy of this statement is not, by any means, borne out by the official records of the log books of the various ships of the fleet. From pages 7 to 14 the Chief Constructor discusses the details of the design on the British battleship "ROYAL SOVEREIGN", laid down in 1889, and copiously quotes the opinions of British sea-going naval officers which shows, conclusively, that the sea-going British naval officers thoroughly approved the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN" nineteen years ago. He does not say that the sea-going officers of the British Navy consider the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN" design a defensible design at the present time, or even in 1893. -10- when the British Admiralty laid down nine battleships of the "MAJESTIC" class with water line belt armor fifteen feet wide, whereas the belt of the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN" is only eight and a half feet in width. Nor does he state that since the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN" class was designed the British have completed thirty seven battleships, every one of which has water line belt armor fourteen to fifteen feet in width, and that the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN" class is the last of their battleships to be given a narrow, thick water line belt. The British school of battleship design did not assume, in 1889, that they had found this perenially perfect battleship in the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN". Why does the Chief Constructor of the U.S. Navy find it necessary to compare, in the most minute detail, U.S. battleships completed in 1907 with a British battleship completed in 1891? Surely he does not take the ground that the design of a battleship that was good enough for the sea-going officers of the British Navy in 1889 is good enough for the sea-going officers of the American Navy in 1907. On page 14 the Chief Constructor states: "Since . . . . . the location of the water line belt armor is necessarily governed by the probable behavior of a vessel in a seaway, and inasmuch as the behavior of the sea has in no sense changed in the past nineteen years, designs whose sea-going qualities fully satisfied the most representative officers in the British Navy in-11- 1899 should be entirely satisfactory today so far as concerned seagoing qualities." The precise part that armor protection plays in a vessel's seagoing qualities needs further explanation. The"Lusitania" undoubtedly has better seagoing qualities than any battleship afloat, but she has no armor protection whatever. It should be remembered that though the behavior of the sea had not changed during the past nineteen years that armor is incomparably better than it was nineteen years ago, guns are much more powerful than t hey were nineteen years ago, the British school of battleship design has made tremendous advances since 1889 in the vital question of water line armor belts; the sea and the American school of battleship design of water line belts and low after turrets appear to be the two elements in the problem of battleship design that have remained practically unchanged from 1889 to 1904. On page 16 the Chief Constructor states, in speaking of the report of the "Walker" board: "it thus appears that this specially selected board, a large majority of whose members were seagoing officers, recommended a vessel whose . . . . water line protection, etc., were regarded as entirely satisfactory to the seagoing element at that time." On page 17, referring to the same subject he says: "We therefore have a height of freeboard and distribution of water line belt armor in the large majority of battleships of the United States Navy, representative seagoing officers of our own service, and vessels of similar characteristics had a still have the approval of service sentiment in the British and Japanese Navies." -12- The facts placed before the committee show that the error in the location of the water line belt armor is due to the failure of the Board on Construction to comply with the recommendations of the board, "a large majority of whose members were sea-going officers. The diagram submitted to the Committee by the undersigned show that all of our battleships completed up to 1907 have narrow thick water line belts, with nearly all the belt under water and comparatively thin armor above the water, while every British battleship since the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN" class, completed in 1895, has belt armor of uniform, or nearly uniform thickness, extending from eight to ten feet above the water line and five feet below the water line. Notwithstanding these unquestionable facts of record the Chief Constructor stated in his testimony before the House Naval Committee on January 21st and 22nd, on page 136: "The distribution of armor on ships of the same date, Japanese, English, and American are very similar." And again on page 138: "As stated before, moreover, five of the battleships now on their way to the Pacific Coast have their main water-line belts more than 12 inches out of water even under abnormal conditions of loading, and in this respect probably excel any battleships in commission in the British or Japanese navies, with the sole exception of the "Dreadnought." Again on page 142, in reply to the following question: "Mr. Roberts: You spoke some time ago about the distribution of armor on the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN" and her class. Has there been any change in the English Navy since that time, in their theory of armor protection? -13- The Chief Constructor: So far as can be judged by their designs, the distribution of armor on later British ships has been a development of that first adopted on the "ROYAL SOVERIGN." The Chief Constructor then proceeds to explain how much of the British belt armor is below the water line but makes no statement of the amount of their belts above the water line. On page 20 the Chief Constructor states: "From all of the foregoing, I have no hesitancy whatever in stating that from freeboard forward on American battleships now in commission, with the sole exception of the Kearsarge and Kentucky, is ample to meet all of the requirements of the batteries of those vessels under any conditions of sea which are likely to be met with in naval actions." It will be noted that in this general statement the Chief Constructor failed to mention the freeboard aft of American battleships. The changes are 3 to 1 that in action the seas instead of being ahead will be on either beam, on the quarter, or astern. Again on page 29 of the Chief Constructor states: ".... the height of the freeboard forward provided for all other battleships (Indiana and Kentucky classes expected) is substantially the same as that adopted for every group of battleships in the British Navy prior to the design of the "Dreadnought", with the possible exception of the "Majestic" class."-14- It will be observed that the Chief of Constructor consistently concentrates his attention upon the freeboard forward, and neglects to mention the low freeboard aft of half our battleships completed since 1899. Perhaps this is not strange for no battleships of similar design, with which to compare ours, have been constructed in the British or Japanese navies since 1891. On page 53, Appendix III, the Chief Constructor given the upper edge of the armor belt of the "KING EDWARD" as three feet above the water while he gives the upper edge of the belt of the "SOUTH CAROLINA" and "DELAWARE" as eleven feet and ten feet, respectively, above the water. As the upper part of the "KING EDWARD'S" belt is of a uniform thickness of eight inches and as the upper parts of the belts of the "SOUTH CAROLINA" and "DELAWARE" taper from ten inches to eight inches in thickness at the upper edge it appears that in making the comparison the Chief Constructor should have placed the upper edge of the "KING EDWARD'S" belt at nine feet instead of three feet above the water, The errors already indicated in this paper which caused Rear Admiral Converse to reach general conclusions favorable to our battleships as compared with British battleships of corresponding date of design relative to water-line armor belts, heights of freeboard, heights of gun axes, and our turret ammunition hoists, apply with equal force to similar conclusions reached by the Chief Constructor, and also to one of his-15- final statements: ". . . . the Chief Constructor desires to go fairly and squarely on record as stating that ship for ship in its own period of design, the battleship fleet of the United States Navy compares most favorably with that of any other navy in the world. The Chief Constructor closes his paper, which forms a part of the testimony placed before your committee, with the following quotations: "There is a lot to be learned from naval history, if we can only interpret its lessons aright. And the first and last lesson to learn is loyalty to the Chiefs, whether at the Admiralty, on shore, or in command afloat." The sentiment contained in this quotation is sound if the "Chiefs", sea or bureau, stand for the welfare and efficiency of the Navy. In the question of personal loyalty it must be conceded that the American Navy takes precedence over any "Chief" of a system that gives us grave defects in our ships and persistently fails to acknowledge or correct them. Very respectfully, Commander, U.S.Navy.[*[enc in 3-31-08 Navy Dept [Key]]*][*[ca - 3-21-08]*] Existing Administrative Organization of the Navy Department. The sole purpose for which the Navy is maintained is to win sea battles against any possible enemy, and obtain command of the sea. In battle the responsibility for success or defeat is, and always has been, fixed upon the line officers in chief command. This being undeniably true, one would naturally suppose that the line officers would be given, by the organization of the Navy Department, the control, under the President and the Secretary of the Navy, in all matters that relate to the military efficiency of the fleet. In the fleet commanded by Read-Admiral Evans, if either the ships, the guns, or the personnel, including all corps, should not prove efficient in a decisive battle, the principal obloquy would rest -- and would continue to rest for all time -- upon him, his division commanders and his captains. They might insist that the Bureau of Construction had failed to correct serious errors in the ships, the Bureau of Ordnance, the Bureau of Navigation, the Bureau of Supplies and Accounts, the Bureau of Equipment, the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, the Bureau of Steam Engineering and the Bureau of Yards and Docks had failed to do this, that, or the other necessary thing -- all of which would be emphatically and plausibly denied by each bureau concerned -- with the certain results that the main responsibility and discredit for the disaster and the intense humiliation of the nation would rest, as long as history is written, upon the men in chief command who lost the battle.--2-- By the present organization of the Navy Department, the military authority and responsibility for the design, preparation and equipment of the fleet is divided among eight different bureaus, each of which is independent of the other, with no military superior except the civilian Secretary of the Navy, who makes no pretense of the possession of military knowledge or experience. Under such an organization it is necessarily impossible to place the administrative responsibility for the efficiency of the fleet, It evidently cannot be justly placed upon the civilian Secretary for he, through previous training, can know but little of the technical details of the subject, and the organization furnishes him with no military adviser who can be held responsible for his recommendations. It evidently cannot be placed on the four chiefs of line and four chiefs of staff bureaus, as their views on military questions are widely divergent and, under the organization, the advice of one is entitled to as much weight as the advice of another. Any one of them can freely offer bad advice and defend serious defects without having the responsibility placed upon him in case of disaster to the fleet in battle. Under our present system, all administrative defects developed in war will be placed upon the Secretary of the Navy, as they were placed upon the Secretary of War in 1898, who was made the principal scape-goat of the indefensible War Department organization previous to and during the Spanish war. If General Shafter had met with disaster at Santiago, he would have had to bear the principal discredit for the defeat of his troops.-3- In the Navy the military responsibility for the efficiency of the fleet in action is undeniably fixed upon those in chief command - the line - then why not fix upon them the responsibility. with the necessary authority, under the Secretary, for the preparation of the fleet for action? It is a gross injustice, and contrary to the plain logic of common sense, to place upon men a momentous responsibility and not give to them the authority that should invariably go hand in hand with the responsibility fixed upon them. Why divide the authority and the responsibility for the design and preparation of the fleet among eight bureaus, each equal and independent of the others, with no superior except the civilian Secretary of the Navy, who is without adequate military knowledge and experience? Each of the chiefs of these bureaus constantly endeavors to increase the power and influence of his bureau, and is largely affected in his official policy, advice and duties by what he considers to be the interests of his bureau or corps. The tendency of each bureau is, naturally, to defend its own work, to recent criticisms from any source outside the bureau, to hesitate in the frank acknowledgment and consequent correction of unquestionable defects. As the organization places each chief of bureau in precisely the same relation to the Secretary of the Navy each strives for a controlling influence with this only direct source of power and authority. Naturally, if the Secretary of the Navy believes that he has a chief of bureau who never makes a mistake, and who never neglects his duty, it would be strange if such a chief of bureau should not be allowed very-4- considerable freedom in carrying out his particular policies. Therefore we find that it would be a good working rule, under the present organization, for a chief of bureau who wishes, very naturally, to enhance the prestige, power and importance of his bureau of corps, not to acknowledge any mistakes or neglect in the work of his bureau -- for no responsibility is incurred by reason of failure in acknowledge and correct defects. Particular attention is invited to the fact that the foregoing are solely defects of the administrative organization of the Navy Department and are in no way intended as criticisms of individuals; these faults exist and will continue to exist, under the present organization, as long as chiefs of bureaus are human. The argument is sometimes advanced by persons ignorant of naval affairs, or persons who have special interests that are of more importance to them then the well-being of the Navy, that our present Navy Department organization has always successfully stood every test placed upon it. Nothing could be further from the truth. In every great crisis special machinery has had to be placed in operation to carry the Navy through its difficulties. At the outbreak of the Civil War, the Honorable Gideon Wells, who justly earned an enviable reputation for his ability as Secretary of the Navy, obtained by urgent recommendation to Congress, the services of Lieutenant Fox, who had resigned from the Navy, as Assistant Secretary, and made him responsible, under the Secretary, for the administration of the Navy Department in all that pertained to military efficiency.--5-- At the outbreak of the Spanish War in 1898, a board styled a "War Board", consisting of three senior officers of the line, was hastily convened by the Secretary of the Navy to perform the duty assigned to Lieutenant Fox during the Civil War. On both of these occasions the Navy was entirely unprepared with plans of campaign or with the data necessary for plans. At the present time, thanks to the faithful and intelligent work of the General Board, the essential data and general plans of campaign are on file, corrected to date. In the recent war, had the Navy of Spain been better trained, or had it been directed with more strategic ability, the glaring and inherent fault of the present Navy Department organization would have been disastrously developed. The Navy Department now stands, in its organization, precisely as did the War Department in 1898. The unhappy experience of the War Department during the Spanish War promptly led to its reorganization, by which the military responsibility for the preparation of the Army for war is centralized and fixed upon the line of the Army, the men who are responsible for its efficiency in action, they are now given the administrative authority, under the Secretary of War, to make it efficient, and if they fail in their duty they can be justly held responsible. And so it should be in the Navy Department, the line of the Navy, under the Secretary of the Navy, should be held responsible for the military efficiency of the fleet and should be given the administrative authority, under the Secretary, to coordinate and control the work of the several--6-- bureaus in all that relates to military efficiency, to promptly correct defects and to inaugurate changes when needed. Under such a system the bureaus would soon realize that ours is not a navy in which efficiency can be sacrificed to promote bureau and corps interests or prestige; that it is not a bureaucratic navy, but the American Navy, in which all hands must work for the fighting efficiency and prestige of the fleet. The present troubles of the Navy Department are due to its indefensible administrative organization, and they will not end, but will increase with the increase of the Navy, until the Department is organized on a basis of military responsibility by which, under the Secretary, the administrative authority, as well as the responsibility, are placed where they logically and fairly belong-- with the line-- the men who command and fight the ships and squadrons in action. They should, under the Secretary, control the design, preparation and equipment of the fleet, for upon the day of battle, the responsibility for the effciency of the fleet and the result of the action-- a supreme responsibility that may involve the whole future of the nation-- is absolutely fixed for all time upon the flag officers and captains in command. [*[enclosed in 3-21-08 Navy Dept.]*] [*[Key]*][*[ca 3-21-08]*] THE UNITED STATES NAVY HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE ON THE HILL (S. 3335) TO INCREASE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS OF THE UNITED STATES No. 6 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1908(No. 6.) Monday, March 9, 1908. The committee met at 10 o'clock a.m. Present: Senators Hale (chairman), Perkins, Platt, Gallinger, Burrows, Tillman, Martin, and McEnery. Lieut. Richard D. White, U.S. Navy, appeared, Rear-Admiral Capps being also present. The CHAIRMAN. I have a letter from the Secretary of the Navy, which I desire to read to the committee, but I understand that Lieutenant White has been ordered away at 4 o'clock. Lieutenant WHITE. Yes, sir; I want to get away on the 4 o'clock train. I am ordered to the Pacific coast. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no objection, before I put in the letter, Lieutenant White will be heard. STATEMENT OF LIEUT. RICHARD D. WHITE, U. S. NAVY. The CHAIRMAN. Give your rank. Lieutenant WHITE. Lieutenant, United States Navy. The CHAIRMAN. What is you present duty? Lieutenant WHITE. I am assistant inspector of target practice, Bureau of Navigation, Navy Department. The CHAIRMAN. You are the assistant of Commander Sims, inspector of target practice? Lieutenant WHITE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. The committee is examining into the question of the ships, mainly those now building. Certain defects have been alleged in reference to the location of the armor belt, and the guns, and the construction of the turret hoists. If you have any statement to make with reference to your own observation and knowledge on these matters, the committee will hear you. The committee is trying to get everything direct from parties without quoting other people. So in your own way state what you desire the committee shall know on these subjects. Lieutenant WHITE. As to ships which are now building, I have very little knowledge of them. I have only seen partial plans of the South Carolina and Michigan, and I have never seen any authentic plans--that is, official plans--of the Delaware and North Dakota. I understand that their armor belt is to be located practically on the same principle as in the case of the ships which have previously been built--that is, with reference to the designed load water line. As to the ammunition hoists, as I remember it, those on the South Carolina and Michigan are the same as those in all our previous ships, though perhaps minor details are different. Those on the 249250 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Delaware and North Dakota were originally designed the same as the old ones, but I understand they have been changed so that they will be what is known as the two-stage hoist. In fact I have seen plans showing the hoists for these latter two ships and I know that to be the case. I remember very little about the location of the armor on these four ships. On the South Carolina and Michigan, as I understand it, they have a complete belt of main armor. Above that they have a belt practically the same thickness which extends over the mid-ship part. I do not remember how far it goes toward the ends, but I am sure not all the way to the ends. I think the same is practically true of the North Dakota and Delaware. The point in question I think is the location of the main armor belt. On all of the previous ships, and I understand it will be so on these ships, it has been located with reference to the designed load water line. All my study of the question would lead me to believe that that is the correct location if the ship would float at that line when we go into action. As far as my observation of past ships and my belief as to the future policy, I do not believe that we will get into action at that draft, but at a greater draft. In fact, on the ships built, under ordinary cruising conditions, so far as my experience goes, they float lower in the water than the designed load draft. I call to mind one particular ship, the Connecticut, which was intended to have a trial run some time lately—I have forgotten when—and they had great difficulty in bringing her up to the designed load draft. In fact, they went out and made the trial at a somewhat greater draft, and that, I believe, is the reason given for her failing to make the speed they expected. The CHAIRMAN. You say her draft was not less, but greater? Lieutenant WHITE. Her draft was greater that the designed load draft, sir. The CHAIRMAN. At the trial trip? Lieutenant WHITE. At the trial trip of the Connecticut. Now, all those ships are lower in the water under peace conditions, and it strikes me that they will be still lower is the water under war conditions, because it is our policy to keep on board as much coal, as much fresh water, and certainly as much ammunition as we can possibly get in war time. The CHAIRMAN. You say fresh water? Lieutenant WHITE. Fresh water, sir. Fresh water is the equivalent of coal ; that is, you can make water by burning coal, but you would rather have the water. If you will look back to the appendix to the report of the Chief of the Bureau of Navigation, in which he details the account of our work during the Spanish war, you will see that the telegrams to admirals commanding fleets, to captains of vessels, etc., just before the war broke out, usually ran something like this: " Keep full of coal; best that can be had." "Fill up with coal," etc. In fact, it was saying, as I remember it, at that time, that coal was king. That seemed to be the worry above everything of commanding officers. They tool coal whenever they could. The Texas, I remember, when she was lying off Santiago de Cuba, coaled almost every day in order to keep coaled.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 251 SO I am led to believe that every commanding officer should keep just as much coal on hand as he possibly can, and he will get coal whenever he can. I think he would be justified in doing it in the eyes of the Department, because such as been the custom, and because he would naturally want enough coal on hand after an engagement to chase the enemy if he whipped him. Most of our ships, as I understand it, have their armor arranged according to the trial designed load displacement, which provides for, say, from 900 to 1,000 tons of coal on board. That is in addition to two-thirds ammunition, two-thirds consumable stores, and other minor weights. I believe the weights on board will be greater than these in time of war, and therefore that the armor belt will sink deeper in the water than it is designed to sink by an additional weight of stores, coal, and ammunition, and also by a certain amount that our ships are now overdraft owing to changes that are made in construction after they are designed. The CHAIRMAN. Now, Lieutenant White, are you prepared to say how much and to what extent the belt of armor should be raised from what is designed and will be put upon the ships that are now building unless it is changed? Lieutenant WHITE. I can not tell you in feet and inches how much, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Your observation and study have not led you to the extent that you can suggest how much in feet and inches the armor belt should be raised? Lieutenant WHITE. No, sir ; I do not know where the armor belt is. The CHAIRMAN. The question of the turret hoists, you have looked into? Lieutenant WHITE. Yes, sir ; I am very familiar with all of out turret hoists. The CHAIRMAN. I am very glad you are familiar with them. The committee finds a great difference of opinion in officers of the Navy who have testified as to the kinds of hoists affecting both questions of rapidity of fire and safety to the crews in the turret, in the handling room, and in charge of magazines. Some of the testimony is decidedly in favor of the open-turret hoists and some of the testimony is decidedly in favor of the two-stage or interrupted hoists, From your study and operation {and you say that you have looked into the question carefully} which do you think is the best hoist, all things considered, both in rapidity of fire and safety to the ship? Lieutenant WHITE. I consider it of great importance, both to the safety of certain men and the safety of the ships, that the turret proper be structurally separated from the handling room. There are many ways of doing this. The two-stage hoist, if properly constructed, is one way. I do not claim that that is the only way. It is possible that a direct hoist can isolate the turret from the handling room as effectually as a two-stage hoist ; but, as I said, it is of greatest importance that some structural management can be made that, in case of accident at the guns, burning grains of gun power can not fall from there into the handling room and endanger lives of the men who are working in the handling room, and endanger the magazine to explosion, and the ship itself. The CHAIRMAN. As between the two, affecting just such results as you have stated in detail, are you prepared to state to the committee,252 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. if installed in that way so that there is a separation of the turret from the handling room, so far as it can be, which you think is preferable, the open hoist, as it is called in contradistinction from the other, or the secondary hoist, the interrupted hoist? Lieutenant WHITE. I did not understand your question, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. As between the two, if they are installed in such a way that the communication is so far as it can be shut off between the turret and the handling room, which then would be the best, the open hoist or the interrupted hoist, I will call it? Some of the officers have said one and some the other. Lieutenant WHITE. The open hoist is to my mind as dangerous as the interrupted hoist can possibly be. All the plans that I have seen of the interrupted hoist are are immeasurably safer than our present open hoist. I have seen the design which I think is to be placed in the Delaware class. The officer in charge of the drafting room at the gun factory showed it to me As far as I could seen, that hoist will meet the requirements of safety. The CHAIRMAN. You think that is the best one up to date, that either has been in use or has been designed, as shown by plans? Lieutenant WHITE. Well, I can not say that there is any great difference between that hoist, the one I have just described, and the standard 12-inch hoist in the British navy, the plans of which I have seen. The Chairman. That is an interrupted hoist? Lieutenant WHITE. Yes, sir. I admit that you could design an interrupted hoist that would be dangerous, but I seen o reason for dosing it. The CHAIRMAN. Does any member of the committee wish to ask any questions of Lieutenant White? Senator GALLINGER. Lieutenant, what about shutters, concerning which we have had some testimony, as a matter of protection to the handling room? Lieutenant WHITE. I have been aboard not all, but nearly all, of the ships of our Atlantic Fleet which have been using the shutters. They are most inefficient as installed. The CHAIRMAN. You have been on board a great deal when going through target practice? Lieutenant WHITE. At every target practice since the spring of 1906 I have been with the fleet, sir. I have been aboard not all but a great many of the ships when they were firing, and I made it a point to go about and talk to the officers of the ships, either during target practice, immediately preceding it, or afterwards. I have personally inspected most of the turrets and practically all of the broadside batteries. This does not apply to the new ships, that is, the Vermont, New Hampshire, or the Kansas. I have been aboard the Connecticut, the Louisiana, the Minnesota, and others. Senator PERKINS. I understood you to say that the designs on the Delaware and North Dakota were, in your opinion, a safe and as perfect as hoists could possibly be made. It that correct? Lieutenant WHITE. No, sir; that is not exactly correct. Senator GALLINGER. I think the Lieutenant did not complete his statement about shutters. Let us et rid of that. Senator PERKINS. I thought he had completed it. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 253 Lieutenant WHITE. I was simply going to say about these shutters that they have always been, in fact, most inefficient. In the first place, a wire lift rope passes through the shutters. This lift rope is used to lift the car from the handling room to the breach of the gun. In order to make it pass free, a slot must be cut in the shutter which I should say is about 3 inches wide and probably 18 inches long. It may be a little bigger than that; likely it is; I do not remember the exact dimensions; but it is large enough to permit grains of powder to fall through if any are dropped from the breech of the gun. It has occurred repeatedly and it will probably continue to occur. The CHAIRMAN. You do not think, then, that the shutter is a feature of much value or of any value? Lieutenant WHITE. On the contrary, I think the shutter does a great deal of good, sir. But it is very imperfect; that is, it is far from perfect. If a hundred pounds of powder fell on the shutter, probably only a pound or two would get through. However, a pound or two would certainly be enough to cause great destruction below, should there be any powder exposed. The CHAIRMAN. And that feature would not apply in the well constructed secondary or interrupted hoist? Lieutenant WHITE. It does not apply in the interrupted hoist. I speak of the one whose designs I saw. Senator PERKINS. I should like to ask Lieutenant White if he has any recommendation to make as an improvement on the design he has seen that has been prepared and is now being built for the Delaware and North Dakota. Have you any recommendation to make in relation to those hoists that you believe would be an improvement in the handling of ammunition or in the protection of the men in the turret or in the room below? Lieutenant WHITE. I can not think of any improvement at the present moment. The CHAIRMAN. We are very much obliged to you, Lieutenant. LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY. The CHAIRMAN. I have received a letter from the Secretary of the Navy, and he asks me to present it to the committee this morning. As it is not long, I will read it. I may say that I saw the Secretary on Saturday and he made certain statements which I thought were so important that I asked him to put them in writing and submit them to the committee. His letter is as follows: "NAVY DEPARTMENT, March 9, 1908. "MY DEAR SENATOR HALE; Referring to my conversation with you on Saturday, I consider it advisable that the Naval Committee should be clearly advised as to the actual circumstances under which the plans for the Delaware and North Dakota were officially approved by the Department and the unanimity with which the salient features of these vessels were approved by the board on construction, the special board on designs, the Chief of the Bureau of navigation, and the commander in chief of the Atlantic Fleet. "As you may recall, the plans for these vessels were prepared in competition with those submitted by naval architects not connected 254 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. with the Navy Department, this competition having been provided for, specifically, by the act of Congress approved June 29, 1906. "After the designs had been thoroughly considered by the board on construction (more than twenty tentative designs having been considered by that board preliminary to the selection of the one finally approved) these plans and all other plans submitted to the Department in competition were referred to a special board under the presidency of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Hon. Truman H. Newberry. The other members of this board were Rear-Admiral Merrell, Captain Rodgers, and Captain Wainwright, who were at that time members of the general board, the chief constructor, the engineer in chief, and the Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance, so that a majority of the members of the board had nothing whatever to do with the designs of the vessel submitted by the board on construction. "The features of the various designs submitted were carefully examined by this board, and my predecessor, Mr. Secretary Bonaparte, in his report for the fiscal year 1906, stated as follows: "'In accordance with the proviso attached to the last naval appropriation bill, the plans for the battle ship authorized by the said bill are, simultaneously with this report, transmitted to Congress. These plans were selected by a board of officers, under the presidency of the Assistant Secretary, after a very careful consideration of various designs submitted by different naval constructors in the United States and one in England and by the board on construction of the Department. The type of vessel selected has a length of 510 feet. In the language of the board: "It will carry as heavy armor and as powerful armament as any known vessel of its class; it will have a speed which is believe to be the the highest practicable for a vessel of this type and class, in the present state of knowledge; it will have the highest practicable radius of action, and can be built within the limit of cost fixed by the act of Congress." This plan, therefore, complies in all respects, in the judgment of this highly competent board, with the terms of the authorization, and the Department has no hesitation in approving the report of the board.' "In due course, the report of this special board and the approved plans of the Delaware and North Dakota were transmitted to Congress, and the naval appropriation bill approved March 2, 1907, contained the following proviso: "'That, for the purpose of further increasing the naval establishment of the United States, the President is hereby authorized to have constructed, by contract or in navy-yards, as hereinafter provided, one first-class battle ship to cost, exclusive of armor and armament, not exceeding six million dollars, similar in all essential characteristics, and additional to, the battle ship authorized by the act making appropriations for the naval service for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and seven, plans and specifications for which last-named vessel have already been prepared and submitted by the Secretary of the Navy for the information of Congress, as required by the provisions of the aforesaid act.' "It is thus obvious that the designs of these vessels received the fullest consideration and were, in effect, approved by Congress. "Shortly after my assumption of the duties of Secretary of the Navy, however, it was brought to my attention by an officer attachedPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 255 to the general board that, in his opinion, the armor belt on the Delaware and North Dakota should be raised 30 inches. This officer subsequently made a formal statement to that effect. His communication was referred to the board on construction and was given most careful consideration, and the board on construction promptly and unanimously submitted its report recommending, in the most definite terms, that no change whatever be made in the designs as approved, since, in their judgment, the armor belt was properly placed. "The officer making the original statement that the location of the armor belt was in error, was permitted to see the report of the board on construction and made rejoinder thereto. While the Department has no doubt whatsoever as to the correctness of the judgment of the board on construction in this instance, it was deemed advisable to obtain the opinion of the then Chief of the Bureau of Navigation, Rear-Admiral Brownson, and the present commander in chief of the Atlantic fleet, Rear-Admiral Evans. Rear-Admiral Brownson, after carefully looking into the matter, stated specifically that the location of the water-line belt armor of the Delaware and North Dakota, as decided upon by the board on construction, was entirely correct; and that, in his judgment, no change should be made. Rear-Admiral Evans, who had previously made a statement that, in his judgment, the armor-belt was too low, entirely changed his mind after fully considering the plans of those vessels, informing me, in effect, that he had previously been misinformed as to conditions; and that after actual examination he entirely approved of the armor protection of the Delaware and North Dakota and its location as determined by the board on construction. Admiral Evans, so I am informed, made substantially the same statement to Rear-Admiral Converse, the president of the board on construction, and to Rear-Admiral Capps, the chief constructor, as he did to me in reference in his concurrence in the opinion of the board on construction with respect to the location of the water-line belt on the Delaware and North Dakota. "I also submitted the question of the location of the water-line belt armor and armor protection of the Delaware and North Dakota to many other officers of the service, and, with but one exception, they all informed me that these ships, namely, the Delaware and North Dakota, were amply protected; in fact, better protected than the ships of any other service, the only criticism being that if the water-line belt armor was raised a few inches it would reduce the weight of the armor and increase the carrying capacity of coal and ammunition, an obviously impossible gain since all available space had already been devoted to such purposes. "While the Department can not for one instant permit the assumption that such vital questions affecting ship design can be determined by popular vote among the officers of the service, and while the Department is most strongly of the opinion that its highly trained and legally appointed official advisers should have the dominating influence in all matters connected with the design of naval vessels, it appears to me that in this question of the location of water-line armor belt the Department has gone out of its way to obtain opinions from the highest possible authorities among the seagoing branch of the Navy, and that there is really no ground for further contention with respect to the matter of the water-line belt armor on the Delaware256 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. and North Dakota or on the South Carolina and Michigan, whose armor belts are very similar in location and character. "It also seems proper in this connection to note that the officer who has taken the most active interest in agitating this subject of alleged erroneous location of water-line armor, originally recommended in his letter of June 15, 1907, that the water-line belt be raised 30 inches. In a subsequent letter he recommended that it be raised 20 inches. In his recent testimony before your committee he recommended that it be raised 10 inches. I think no better illustration could be had of the unreliable character of recommendations of this kind, since the original proposition of 30 inches is, within less than a year, reduced to 10 inches. "As the only point criticised in the designs of the Delaware class is that of water-line armor distribution, and since this criticism has been disposed of by the unanimous opinion of the most competent authorities upon whom the Department must rely in matters of this kind, I am convinced that there is no ground whatever for further criticism or justification for any change in the essential seagoing and military characteristics of the vessels of the Delaware class. "In view of my recent conversation with you, I think the above statement very important, and request that it be laid before your committee at such time as you may consider proper. "I also deem it necessary to point out that practically none of the unfavorable criticism which has recently been directed at certain vessels of the United States Navy is applicable to battle ships designed during the past four years, and, so far as concerns location of water-line armor, is really inapplicable to those designed since the Virginia class, the contracts for which were signed more than seven years ago. The reports of Rear-Admiral Converse and the chief constructor give extensive and detailed comparison between the battle ships of the United States Navy and those of foreign navies of the same period of design, and, after a careful perusal of these reports, I am wholly convinced that the battle ships of the United States Navy are in no sense inferior, type for type, in their own period of design to those of any other nation in the world: but, on the contrary, I concur in the opinion of certain foreign critics that our battle ships have a certain measure of definite superiority. "In conclusion, and as indicating the character of work performed by the board on construction, I invite your attention to the performance of a new type of vessel whose designs were wholly prepared by that board. I refer to the recent trial of the U.S.S. Chester. This vessel was designed to meet certain requirements of the general board for a vessel of high speed and great endurance which could be used for scouting purposes. The Chester, Birmingham, and Salem were, in a measure, an answer to foreign vessels of that class which had been designed to make 25 knots speed. The American designers insisted on having a vessel sufficiently large to maintain a good average speed in all ordinary weather, and that she should have a much larger coal endurance than any foreign vessels of this type. In the recent official trials to scout cruiser Chester maintained an average speed of 26.52 knots for four hours, and had in her bunkers during that trial an amount of coal practically equal to that carried by the fastest foreignPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 257 scout cruisers when their bunkers were full, and the Chester actually had on board during the trial three times the amount of coal carried by the largest and fastest of her foreign rivals at the time of their speed trials. "Very truly, yours, V. H. METCALF, "Secretary. "Hon. EUGENE HALE, "Chairman Committee on Naval Affairs, "United States Senate." The CHAIRMAN (continuing). Now, the Secretary has directed certain officers of the Navy, whom he has selected, to appear to-day before the committee. I will say to the officers who are here that Lieutenant White was examined first, because he had been ordered to California, and desired to complete his examination early to-day. So we did not take officers in the order of their rank, but will do so now. The Secretary of the Navy says that these officers have been suggested to him by the officer who is referred to in the Secretary's communication, Lieutenant-Commander Sims, and the committee will now hear the statement of the ranking officer present, Rear-Admiral Remey. STATEMENT OF REAR-ADMIRAL GEORGE C. REMEY, RETIRED, U. S. NAVY. The CHAIRMAN. Admiral, you know something about the controversy that has arisen? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes; I have read about it in the papers. The CHAIRMAN. And the letter which I have just read from the Secretary refers to some evidence and we have taken a good deal of testimony upon it. The main things are the location of the armor belt, the location and kinds of turret hoists, and the position of the guns. I suppose I may say that while the committee is not confining itself to that, the subject was first brought in a definite way to the mind of the public and of the Department by an article in the January McClure's Magazine. Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes; I saw that. The CHAIRMAN. And while as I say we are not confining ourselves to that, you are an old and valued officer of the Navy and have had great experience, and the committee would be glad to have your statement on the subject, and the best guide I can give you is to state what you desire on these subjects, not in quotation from others, because the committee is trying to get direct testimony from officers. Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. State in your own way what you desire to present for the information of the committee on this question. Rear-Admiral REMEY. Mr. Chairman, I will preface my remarks by stating that I have been on the retired list four years and a half, under operation of law. During that time there have been vast strides in the construction of battle ships, and being on the retired list I have not had the opportunities for familiarizing myself with the details of construction that I would have had otherwise. Having that in view, after a long experience at sea, my judgment as to the location 258 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. of the armor belt is this (I have entertained this idea for years) : I would locate the armor belt with reference to the probable load line of the ship when she went into action. I regard it as the duty of the commanding officer of the ship or of the commanding officers of fleets, before going into action to have, if possible, their full supplies of stores and ammunition aboard. I would not say the full supply of coal, because that is not the probable condition of the vessel, but I would say about three-quarters of the full supply of coal. Now, with that load line, three-quarters of the coal and practically a full supply of provisions and ammunition, I would locate the armor belt with reference to that draft, for the reason that that would be the probably position of the water line when the ship went into action. I would not care to go into any further details, but with that in view I would leave it to the constructors. The CHAIRMAN. Now, let us see. I think I can see, and the members of the committee can see as well as I can, what you have in view. You say it should be the water line when going into action. If you were at the head of the Bureau of Ordnance, that has to deal with the armor, or the Bureau of Construction, or the Board of Construction, which must settle the location of this armor and place it before there is any battle, and must provide for future contingencies, how would you get at that so that you would have the armor plate so that it would be the best protection to the ship when she got into a fight? Rear-Admiral REMEY. As I say, I would put it with her supply of stores and ammunition and three-quarters her capacity of coal. Now, I do not know of my own knowledge, but as I understand it the armor belt is now located with reference to a much less quantity of coal, and also of stores and ammunition. Personally I do not know that to be a fact, but I have so understood it. But regardless of that fact, in my judgment it ought to be located as I have stated. That is my opinion, for whatever it is worth. The CHAIRMAN. For the apprehension of the lay mind, the question of how much coal weight and other weight you shall have aboard when a battle is fought must depend, must it not, somewhat upon the length of time the ship has been cruising, the length of time that has elapsed since the coal and other supplies were put aboard, before you reached the scene of battle? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Quite true, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You can not say that absolutely? Rear-Admiral REMEY. You can not say it absolutely, but as near a guide as you can go by is to take what would be the probable case. The CHAIRMAN. Supposing we started a fleet out to meet the fleet of an enemy that was 1,500 or 2,000 miles away. Now, would not the weight that was carried--of stores, supplies, and coal--depend somewhat upon the number of miles that the vessels had run and the amount of those articles that had been consumed before they struck the enemy? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Oh, indeed it would, sir. The CHAIRMAN. So that you can not absolutely say how much a ship will be loaded and where the water load line will be when you get into battle? Rear-Admiral REMEY. That is very true, sir. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 259 The CHAIRMAN. Are you prepared, Admiral, to state to the committee, taking the situation just as you have put it, and in answer to my question, what change you would make in the location of the armor belt, either of the Delaware and North Dakota, or the South Carolina and Michigan, or the Louisiana and Connecticut, because the Secretary states that they are substantially the same? Are you prepared to say, when it is decided that armor shall be put upon these ships, or upon any new ship, what change should be made from the present design? How much would you raise it, or can you say that? Rear-Admiral REMEY. No, sir; not as to details. I believe those ships Connecticut class, those ships that are in commission and the other ships, are good ships. I do not believe in the spirit of the criticism of that article that has been referred to in the magazine. The CHAIRMAN. You have read that article? Rear-Admiral REMEY. I have read that; yes, sir; and in fact my name is alluded to, unknowingly to me, in part of the report. But my idea would be, if you are building other ships of the same class, to make them even better, if it is possible, that is all. The CHAIRMAN. You do not subscribe to the sweeping statements made there? Rear-Admiral REMEY. No, sir; and I would not confine the naval constructor or the or the Ordnance Bureau to details, because I do not profess to be able to work out those details; but I have my own opinion and my own judgment about what water line the armor ought to be located on, and that is what I have stated. The CHAIRMAN. While you were in the service, were you ever in command of one of these battle ships? Rear-Admiral REMEY. No, sir; they have all come up since my time. There were two battle ships under my command in the east, but I was not personally in command of the ships. The CHAIRMAN. What do you say about this controversy as to turret hoists? There are two schools of thought, so far as the committee have found it, about these hoists. Which do you think is the preferable one, the open hoist with or without shutters properly installed, or the interrupted or I think they call it secondary hoist? Rear-Admiral REMEY. May I answer that in my own way? The CHAIRMAN. I want you to answer it exactly in your own way. Rear-Admiral REMEY. I am not familiar with the hoists as they exist to-day, but I do not believe now, and I never did believe, in the open turret. I believe that they gun part of the turret should be separated absolutely, with the exception of the hoists that have to come up. The CHAIRMAN. When you say the hoists, you mean the open turret? Rear-Admiral REMEY. I mean the open turret; the apartment itself should have a platform or deck, which ever you choose to call it, isolating the guns completely from the handling room so far as the hoists will allow it to be, merely on account of safety. There is no officer in the Navy who believes in the accuracy and rapidity of fire more than I do; but if it is necessary to slacken the rapidity of fire a little in order to maintain absolute safety to the crew and the ship, I would do it. I have been and am to-day a great advocate of accuracy and rapidity of fire; next to accuracy, then rapidity, by all260 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. means. But I think the guns, in handling them, ought to be entirely separated from the handling room. The CHAIRMAN. This is an interesting feature. What would you do in the direction you have indicated to change the turret and give this protection? What would you install in the turret which they do not now have? Rear-Admiral REMEY. That is a matter I would turn over to the designing and navel constructors and the ordnance officers. The CHAIRMAN. Foreign nations have generally adopted the turret of late years, have they not? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Oh, I understand so. They isolate the guns from the handling room. Personally, I do not know how they do it, but I understand that that is a fact. The CHAIRMAN. Have you seen models and plans of the late hoists, the interrupted hoists, which the British have and which the new vessels have? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes, sir. I have not seen them, but I have read of them. The CHAIRMAN. Do you think they are safe and good, as far as you know, in your judgment? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Mr. Chairman, when it comes to the question of parts, I am not very familiar with them, but I should say on general principles that the break in the hoist, with the isolation of the guns, would be the safest. The CHAIRMAN. Does any member of the committee desire to ask any questions? Senator GALLINGER. Admiral, from your investigation or reading, it is your judgment that the safety of the men and the ship have to some extent been endangered by this desire to secure more rapid firing than was the habit in the Navy when you were directly connected with it? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Well, Mr. Senator, there have been accidents, not entirely due to rapidity of fire. That is, according to my judgment. If they had isolated the gunroom from the handling room, some of these accidents would not have happened. In my judgment they can not fire too rapidly if they are accurate; but I would not sacrifice safety, because it is bad enough to have an enemy's shot come in and start a fire, to say nothing about doing it themselves. Senator GALLINGER. In other words, you consider the safety of the men and the ship of much greater consequence than the matter of rapid firing? Rear-Admiral REMEY. I think so, decidedly, but I think we can have both. I think we can have the rapid fire, and we can also have the safety; at least I have not heard of similar accidents, we will say, in the British navy. Doubtless they have their accidents, but they have not been in this line—that is, not to my knowledge. Senator PERKINS. Admiral, we have all been very interested and instructed, by the reason of your lifetime devotion to the Navy and the experience you have had. One question has suggested itself to me, while you were describing the proper draft of a vessel going into action, her consumption of coal, and the quantity of stores on board. Is there any practical way other than by trimming the ship with the ballast tanks filling them or emptying them, in which the armor belt can be brought into about the right position to enter an engagementPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 261 such as you have described? Is that the only practical way in which it can be regulated? Rear-Admiral REMEY. You mean the only practical way that they themselves have on board the ship? Senator PERKINS. Yes. Rear-Admiral REMEY. Well, to some extent, Mr. Senator. To a limited extent you can put water in your double bottoms and bring the ship down. Of course you can not bring her up, except by throwing things overboard. Senator PERKINS. You can bring her up by emptying the tanks, if they were filled when you left port, or she was below her ordinary depth? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. The less water you have in those tanks, the higher she will float? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes, sir. Senator PERKINS. And then the density of the water has also some bearing on it, has it not? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes, sir. Senator TILLMAN. All fighting water will be salt water, will it not? Senator PERKINS. Not necessarily. Hampton Roads was not very salt water. Senator TILLMAN. That was a different proposition. I have not had the pleasure of hearing all that Admiral Remey had to say. I have just come in. I heard him say we could have both safety and rapidity. will you tell us, Admiral, what, in your judgment, is the best form of hoist to secure those conditions? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Mr. Senator, as I said before, I am not familiar with the hoists, but, in my judgment, you can have rapidity of fire and safety, too. Senator TILLMAN. Undoubtedly, and you mean we ought to get them by whatever means are necessary? Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes, sir; exactly. Senator TILLMAN. Keep on experimenting and trying. Rear-Admiral REMEY. Yes; it is vital, in my opinion. The CHAIRMAN. The Admiral has already stated that he has had no experience in battle ships, but that from what he has seen of the designs, he thinks the interrupted hoist the best. STATEMENT OF REAR-ADMIRAL C. F. GOODRICH, U. S. NAVY. The CHAIRMAN. Admiral, you have been here this morning, and you have learned what we are trying to get at, as well as we can. Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. I may say that what the committee has been trying to get is direct testimony. The committee has not been willing (and this has not pleased everybody) to receive secondary testimony, or to have officers go on and state what other officers have written and said before; but the committee is trying to get at everything on both sides, if there are two sides to these questions, and to get it from the officers themselves. The Secretary of the Navy has made out a list of some of them, others perhaps being suggested by Lieutenant-Commander Sims, and we work and operate through the Secretary, and I think he directed you to appear here. You are now on duty in New York? 262 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. And the Secretary of the Navy directed you to be here? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. Will you please state your rank and present duty? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Rear-admiral, and my present duty is commandant of the navy-yard at Brooklyn, N.Y. THE CHAIRMAN. You are a rear-admiral in active service? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. How long have you been in the service, Admiral? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Over forty-six years, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. Land and sea? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. What command have you had in the way of battle ships? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I had command of the Iowa in 1899 and 1900, at the conclusion of my captain's term of service afloat. THE CHAIRMAN. How long have you been at the Brooklyn Navy-Yard? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Nine months. THE CHAIRMAN. Now, Admiral, just as we have requested the other witnesses, will you present to the committee your statement on these controverted matters which seem to be mainly the armor-belt location and the hoists by which the ammunition is brought, as it must be in some way, to the guns, and give us the benefit of your long and valuable experience? If you choose, first, you may take up the armor-belt matter. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. In the first place, Mr. Chairman, I want to repeat and emphasize the remarks of my immediate predecessor in this chair, Rear-Admiral Remey. Like him, I believe that our ships are good ships, very good ships. I think it is possible in some respects to improve them, in order that we may have still better ships. And I think it is the duty of every officer to do what he may legitimately to help toward the end which we all, line and staff equally, have very close at heart. THE CHAIRMAN. You would not quite agree with this article, which says that if our ships got into battle they would be no better off than the Russian fleet was in its battle, would you? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Oh, no, sir. In regard to the water-line armor I do not think I could express my own opinions better than by adopting the words of Admiral Remey, and I ask you to accept those words as my interpretation of where, as a seagoing officer. I think the armor belt should be placed. It can not be a matter of very close fixing. It is only a fair general judgment, and in that respect his judgment and mine agree. THE CHAIRMAN. You would agree, then, with him in the statement he made in answer to a question of mine, that while you would so far as possible have the armor in relation to the load line at the time of battle, you can not get at that absolutely, but it must depend upon conditions? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. That must depend upon conditions. THE CHAIRMAN. The length of the cruise and everything of that kind? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 263 THE CHAIRMAN. Have you had any service in the Bureau of Ordnance that prepares the armor? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I have not had any duty in the Bureau of Ordnance in a good many years. THE CHAIRMAN. Do you think the armor that we are putting on our ships, and that we have put on them from time to time, has kept pace with modern improvements and is as good as any armor of its kind that is put onto ships? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Speaking not as an expert, but simply as an officer who studies his profession, I say yes. THE CHAIRMAN. There have been great changes in armor. It is not necessary now to have it so thick? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. No. sir. THE CHAIRMAN. The Navy has kept up those changes, has it not, so far as your observation goes? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. So far as I know, yes, sir. You ask me as regards the ammunition hoists. THE CHAIRMAN. Leaving the other, I wish you would go into that fully. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. There again I think Admiral Remey expressed the views of the older officers of the service. Regarding the larger features rather than the details, I think he expressed our opinion very well, that there should be a floor of some kind under the guns. That would seem to be very reasonable. Personally I have always thought that. As regards the hoist itself, provided the hoist is safe and rapid enough, I care nothing about the details. There has been talk about a two-stage hoist and also about the direct hoist. I have no preference for the one over the other, provided we have safety combined with rapidity. THE CHAIRMAN. What kind of hoist did you have on the Iowa, which you commanded? That hoist was put in, I suppose, ten or twelve years ago. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Oh, yes. She went into commission in 1897. THE CHAIRMAN. What kind of hoists did you have in her? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. It was a car that traveled on a vertical railway and was lifted by means of a wire rope. THE CHAIRMAN. An exposed car? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. So that it had not the interrupted hoist, but what is called the open hoist? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. That was the open hoist. The Iowa has the open hoist. THE CHAIRMAN. You had no shutters? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. No, sir; that was before the introduction of shutters. THE CHAIRMAN. By direction of the Department, most of the ships now have shutters. You had nothing of that kind? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. No, sir. The shutters have been introduced quite recently in order to obtain this safety in handling ammunition and the cutting off of the gun chamber from the handling room, to which Admiral Remey referred. 32301-No. 6-08-2264 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. THE CHAIRMAN. From your observation, and knowing about the hoists, do you think the shutter improves the hoist, so far as safety goes? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. You think it does? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Oh, yes, sir. Of course I do not think that absolute safety has been secured by the application of the shutter to the present hoists. I think much has been gained, but not entire safety. Perhaps entire safety can not be secured, but there is still a measure of safety, I think, within reach. THE CHAIRMAN. What would you think as to the comparative merit of the two- that is, the open hoist with the shutter applied and the secondary hoist with the interrupted stage, which I call the interrupted hoist? Which of the two, considering both the rapidity of fire, which is desirable, and safety, do you think is the better? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I can only speak as a student, you know, but not an expert. And if you will accept the opinion subject to that qualification, I should say that the interrupted hoist would be the better, if the choice lay between those two forms. THE CHAIRMAN. Have you seen in the British navy their interrupted hoist, which seems to be very much the same as ours, designed for the late ships? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I have not seen it, sir. I know of it. THE CHAIRMAN. Well, now, Admiral, you practically accepted the statement of Admiral Remey. Is there anything further that you want to present to the committee as the result of your very long and distinguished service and accurate observation? Because the committee is trying to get at first-hand all it can in the way of information; and if there is anything further beyond what Admiral Remey has stated, we should be glad to have you state it to the committee. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Are you confining your question to those two points? THE CHAIRMAN. Anything in reference to the structure of these ships. We are not going into other questions outside of those at this time. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I do not think I have anything further to say, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. If the Admiral has nothing further to say, then has any member of the committee any question? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I have nothing further to say in this direct line; no, sir. Senator Perkins. You have had such a varied experience, having recently been in command of the squadron on the Pacific coast, and having also visited the ships of foreign nations. I look upon your opinion as of great value to the committee, and therefore I want to ask you if you do not consider our ships of the Navy, especially those built within the past ten or fifteen years, in every respect equal to those of any navy of any foreign country, ship for ship? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I think you are leading me into a technical question, Mr. Senator, and I do not profess to be a technical expert. Senator Perkins. Then may I ask you this: Would you as soon take command of a ship of our Navy, any one of them, with the same tonnage and the same guns, as a similar ship of any other navy? PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 265 THE CHAIRMAN. One witness said that in battle he would take his chance on one of our ships against any ships in the world. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. What I want to say is that necessarily ships built at the same time and of the same class in different parts of the world will vary in their features, and one seafaring nation will emphasize one feature of a battle ship and another another; and I might think that some French feature was better than something that we had on board my own ship, or I might think that what we had was better than what the English had; but as to the balance of advantage, and taking it by and large, I do not think we have very much to apologize for. As I said, we have very good ships. My only hope and desire is that we shall have the best ships in every respect, even in those small details wherein perhaps there may be a little room for criticism. Senator Perkins. I should like to ask you, although it is not a subject that we are inquiring about now, which do you consider the better gun, the 11-inch or the 12-inch gun? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I think the 12-inch gun is a better gun than the 11-inch, and I think the 13-inch gun is a better gun than the 12-inch. Senator Perkins. The 12-inch gun has superseded the 13-inch gun, has it not? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. yes, sir. Senator Perkins. Can you tell us why that is? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I believe it is because as you diminish the caliber you increase the life of the gun. Take a 3-inch gun, and it can be fired several thousand times, whereas the life of a 13-inch gun is only a few hundred shots. You see as you increase the diameter of the chamber, you increase the cubical contents of that chamber, and so you burn an enormously greater amount of powder in the large gun than you do in the small gun. The erosion of guns and the shortening of their lives is due largely to the extreme heat generated by the burning of the powder, which softens the metal, and therefore as the projectile leaves the gun, it flattens the grooves. That is one reason why, if you can do the same work with a smaller gun. it is always well that you should adhere to the smaller gun. Senator Tillman. How many discharges will a 12-inch gun usually stand before it becomes defective or worthless as a weapon? Has that ever been found out? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Oh, yes, sir. An ordnance expert would tell you that very differently; but it is a few hundred rounds. With a 13-inch gun you may have to knock off a hundred rounds. In other words, you probably could fire efficiently a 13-inch gun a hundred rounds less than a 12-inch gun. THE CHAIRMAN. It has what you call a shorter life? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. Senator Perkins. But that gun can be replaced for 20 per cent of its original cost by new tubes? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Oh, yes; it can be relined, retubed. Senator Tillman. Commander Sims the other day cited Admiral Goodrich as one of his witnesses, and proposed to quote from some reports that he had made, as I understood it. Is that your recollection? THE CHAIRMAN. I do not remember whether he did or not.266 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Senator Tillman. He called his name, and he had a list of what he alleged were reports, protesting against certain defects, in battleships and other matters in regard to the Navy, and we told him we did not want him to bring in any secondary evidence, and did not let him read it. Now, Admiral, have you made any report criticising or objecting to existing conditions in the Navy in any respect, or suggesting betterments or improvements, as was your duty? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I have. Senator Tillman. Will you tell us, please, what they were. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. In effect, that the armor belt is too low, in my judgment, and I think it should be raised. Senator Tillman. That is in general. Did you specify as to the degree or the amount of elevation to which you would lift it? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Very nearly what Admiral Remey said. Senator Tillman. I was unfortunately absent, did not get notice of this meeting, nd was not there when Admiral Remey was testifying. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Admiral Remey said that of course it is impossible to have the belt right at all times, and therefore- Senator Tillman. We know that the amount of coal in the vessel and the amount of water in the tanks will give it a higher or lower depth in the water; but what I am speaking of is the general average which we would find under service conditions, if we were cruising in search of an enemy. Is the present position of the armor belt such as under ordinary conditions would make it sufficiently high, and if not, how much higher ought it to be? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Of course, it is my opinion that it is not high enough. I do not think it is high enough. Senator Tillman. Admiral Capps has an opinion and you have one. We are getting nobody's absolute knowledge. We can only get opinions from those who ought to know and who have a right to express an opinion. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I have adopted Admiral Remey's expressions, because they are almost identical with my own opinions, and he said that he would put the armor belt so as to be properly placed when the ship was full of ammunition and full of stores and with about three-quarters of her coal on board. That he thought would be a fair average condition and a most probable condition. Senator Tillman. Would that not be the fair condition to test them in when we are going to accept them for speed? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I do not think it makes any difference abut that. Senator Tillman. It does if we are paying for speed and the ship is trimmed or loaded to give a number of knots which she will never attain afterwards as a fighting machine, does it not? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. If you take all ships under the same conditions, you can then have a comparison between the ships, and the you know whether you are improving or falling back in their construction. Senator Tillman. The point I want to bring out, at least that I want to get an opinion on, is this: In making our contracts with the shipbuilders there are certain conditions imposed under which that ship shall make its trial trip over a given length of course, with such and such a load, and all that.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 267 Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. Senator Tillman. Have you ever known a ship to attain that speed afterwards when she was loaded and ready for business? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Well, rarely but at the same time- Senator Tillman. Did you ever know a single instance? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. The Georgia did, sir, and the Kentucky did. Senator Tillman. In other words. The Kentucky and the Georgia, after they were full loaded and ready for a vovage, made the same speed as they did on their trial trips? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. Senator Perkins. I think the California has. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Possibly. Senator Tillman. I think that is very important, because I can not understand why the Government should make a contract and allow the contractors so to arrange matters and so to load the vessel as to give the contractor every possible advantage. Some of them have got bonuses or premiums, you know. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. They do not get them now. THE CHAIRMAN. We do not pay them now. Senator Tillman. But they did, and we have had this favoritism, or lack of very careful safeguarding of the Government's interests. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. You are dead right on that, Mr. Senator. Senator Tillman. It is fortunate that we have at last given that up. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. You are dead right as to the past. I think that was the general spirit through the service, that we felt we were paying for that which we really did not get; but nowadays, as we do not give a bonus, it is entirely immaterial. Senator Tillman. Nowadays if we merely contract for a given speed, without a bonus for excess, is there any reason why the contract should be so drawn that we will not have the ship loaded on her trial trip in a proper way to secure that actual result afterwards when we go out on her for business purposes? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I should prefer that- Senator Tillman. Can you see any reason why we should not have that? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. If you do, then you can not draw upon the past, you know, for your experience in future designs; that is all. You have got to start in afresh. You are getting a fresh set of experiments. Senator Tillman. You mean that the old methods would not work out any more? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. No; all your past experiments would be subject to a correction, to change the former terms to the present term. Senator Tillman. Is that a very material matter? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes; because you would then be introducing an estimate or a mathematical computation in place of an absolute, determined fact. We now know that under certain conditions certain ships have done certain things. and in order to make use of that data you would have them to enter into a computation to determine what that ship would have done under certain other conditions.268 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Senator Tillman. If we have changed the practice of granting a bonus, finding that that was injurious to the interests of the Government, why should we not take a new start in the way of loading the ship when she is to make her trial trip, to give us the best results and safeguard our interests? Let us begin over and start with new data, rather than hold onto the same old error that is away back yonder, or the same old cheat, or whatever you may term it, and have a contract so drawn that in all future ships we will have the advantage of having the ship loaded in the best way for the interests of the Government. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. That might be desirable, but I think that we would be giving up a very valuable lot of evidence; just exactly as if, Mr. Senator, you were to start on a new scheme of law. You would have to abandon all the precedents, and establish a new set of precedents. Now, I am not a lawyer and you are, but the law, as they tell me, is really a question of precedents. Senator Tillman. I am a farmer. I do not know as much about law as you do. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. May I illustrate in this way? You buy a ton of coal. If you buy a long ton, you pay so much for it. If you buy a short ton, you pay so much for it, but in either case you pay for the pounds of coal. It amounts to the same thing, being merely a question of the standard of measurement. Senator Tillman. Bu that, it seems to me, would be the result in loading the ship to her fighting capacity, in making her trial trip, as compared with loading her along a certain line of mathematical precedents, to give the contractor an advantage. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. No, sir; it does not give the contractor an advantage now, but it does give the designer of the ship very valuable information. I think it is quite right to have a certain fixed standard. Senator Tillman. Why not have two trial trips? Let us have the technical trial trip, based on all past experience and precedents, and then after that is completed and we find out how many knots the ship makes, and whether she is built according to the conditions, and whether the contractor has earned his money, why not let us then load that vessel for another trial trip, over the same course, just as she would be loaded when she goes to sea for fighting purposes? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. There could not be a better idea, sir. Senator Tillman. So that we will know exactly how many knots the ship will make when she is really cruising for a fight. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Well, as matter of fact, the captain finds that out, you know. Senator Tillman. Still it would not be bad idea to have it? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. No, sir. Senator Tillman. Mr. Chairman, if you will permit me, I asked Admiral Capps to bring some copies of the contracts under which our battle ships are being built, and I suggest, with your permission, that we insert those right here for the information of those who may have the same interest or curiosity about this matter that I have. THE CHAIRMAN. We can determine later the proper place for the insertion of the contracts. Senator Perkins. As to the ship you have described, in fighting condition, with a three-quarter supply of coal- that is, three-quartersPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 269 of what her bunkers will hold, with her stores and ammunition on board, what should be the maximum width of the armor belt below the water line? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. Well, it depends on the beam of the ship, for one thing. Senator PERKINS. What should be the minimum width of the armor belt below the water line in its ideal condition, or in which you would be willing to take that ship into action? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I should say that the ships we have in our service, on their theoretical draft, have a very good immersion. I should say that the water line should approximately divide the armor belt into two equal parts. A little more or a little less would not make much difference. Senator PERKINS. That is, if it is 8 feet in width it should be 4 feet below the water line? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I think so. Senator PERKINS. In the ideal fighting condition which you have described? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. That is what I should like; yes, sir. Senator TILLMAN. Is it not true that the motion of the waves and the wind, and one thing and another, will expose the bottom? Senator PERKINS. How many degrees will she roll? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I am not quite sure, but my impression is that that particular feature is determined by assuming a roll of 10°; that is, with a roll of 10° the lower edge of the armor belt is not exposed. Senator TILLMAN. That is a belt how deep—4 or 5 feet? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. The wider the ship the deeper you have got to have the belt, because the same number of degrees of roll would expose a greater number of inches of the belt. Senator TILLMAN. Still, you would take into consideration the factor of safety involved in not having the skin of the vessel exposed above the surface by the roll of the ship, so that if a shot should happen to strike at that moment it would not have the opportunity of going through the unprotected skin, where there was only an inch or two of steel. Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I understand that has been considered in the location of the belt. Senator TILLMAN. But you and others say that the belt is too low now? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I am speaking of the belt, assuming the ship to be on the theoretical line of flotation. Then when the ship rolls 10° the lower edge of the armor belt, as I understand it, is under water; in other words, the bottom of the ship is not exposed. You have got to make some assumption—— The CHAIRMAN. You have got to take some chance as to what the sea will be when the fight is on? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. The whole naval life, Mr. Senator, is a chance. Senator TILLMAN. To get back to what I said a moment ago, I believe you said you had written some protests or suggestions or criticisms—— Senator PERKINS. Recommendations.270 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Senator Tillman. Recommendations, or any other term you choose. You can use the most euphemistic term you see fit. I do not want to have the Admiral admit any of my phraseology, but I want him to use his own. You have criticised, suggested, or done something. When and to whom did you write, sir? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. I wrote to the Secretary of the Navy last August, in response to his general order, and what I had in mind at the time is practically what I have said here. Senator Perkins. You were invited to do so at the time? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Oh, yes; there was a general order sent out, inviting suggestions from all officers. Senator Perkins. And you, in your capacity as an admiral in the Navy, sent in these suggestions? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. Admiral Converse stated that officers had been invited to make those criticisms. Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. Senator Tillman. Did those relate to the armor belt alone? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir; as far as construction was concerned. There was another matter in my letter, which I understand your chairman does not care to take up now. THE CHAIRMAN. We are dealing now with the ships. Senator Tillman. I will suggest that if we examine all these witnesses it will be a long while before we get through with them, if they appear twice, and perhaps we might shorten it by having an officer put into the record as he goes along anything which he may have written. It would facilitate our getting to the end of this sooner. Of course I defer to your judgment, Mr. Chairman, because we have all agreed that we do not want to go into the personnel now, but I suggest that the Admiral might furnish us with a copy of that if we ask the Secretary of the Navy for it. THE CHAIRMAN. The Admiral has made his complaint, not outside, but, as was perfectly proper, by documents which he has submitted to the Secretary of the Navy. Senator Tillman. We do not want Reuterdahl to run the Navy, but if Reuterdahl has a certain basis of naval opinion behind him, we want to get out those who agree with him. THE CHAIRMAN. I should suggest, before we leave this subject, that the committee will send to the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of the Navy will send us the documents we desire. Senator Tillman. Let him send the Admiral's statement. We need not put it in, anyway. We can read it ourselves. The main thing is to get hold of it. THE CHAIRMAN. It is on file at the Department? Rear-Admiral Goodrich. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. There is no trouble to get hold of it? Senator Tillman. You remember that Commander Hill proposed to read a good many statements of criticisms and suggestions which he said had been turned down, and we would not allow him to do it, but you have this statement that we can get. THE CHAIRMAN. Yes; we will have this and can get any others. Senator Tillman. That is what I am trying to reach. Commander Sims had the documentary evidence, as he claimed, the other day, and PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 271 we would not let him bring it out. Some newspapers have seemed to think we were trying to suppress some of the witnesses. The CHAIRMAN. I do not think the committee has been put in the right light about that. Senator TILLMAN. Undoubtedly. I have resented those criticisms, because, in my judgment, they were absolutely false. The CHAIRMAN. The committee has not sought at all to suppress any opinion that is first hand. Senator TILLMAN. I do not charge that these reporters here have done it, but I think somebody else has seen some other reporter somewhere else, and that the impression has gone abroad from other sources that we were trying to whitewash somebody down here or to suppress something. The CHAIRMAN. Now if the Senator will allow me to finish my statement, the committee has only sought from the beginning to get at first-class testimony—that is, first hand or direct testimony from officers themselves—but I think the committee are unanimous on the proposition that they have not permitted witnesses to go into general statements of criticisms that other officers have made, and refer to them, because the committee have preferred to get the documents from the Department itself, or the statements from the witnesses themselves, as we have this morning in these very excellent statements that have been made by Admiral Remey and Admiral Goodrich. We do not want anybody else to quote them when we can have their own statements. Senator TILLMAN. We would perfer to have them make their statements to us, rather than take any second-hand statements from somebody else. The CHAIRMAN Yes; but some of the newspapers have built up the theory that certain officers in the Navy have been made victims, have not been allowed to testify, and have been put down and snubbed. The committee is not dealing with this very big question in that way. Senator TILLMAN. Of course not. The CHAIRMAN. No officer who has been here has any complaint to make of his treatment. Now, Admiral, is there anything further on this that you desire to say? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. Still relating to construction? The CHAIRMAN. Yes; relating to construction. When we come to the question of organization, we will want you then. You are one of the old and valued and distinguished officers of the Navy, and you know as much about that as anybody does. Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I have nothing more to say on the subject of the construction of ships, because that is the only point on which I felt I was justified in making a definite criticism. Senator TILLMAN. There is one point I would like to ave you give us your experience on. The assertion has been made that the Navy Department, as a Department, is averse to receiving suggestions, and that it seems to pigeonhole them. has that been your experience? Have you any light on that subject? Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I have made several suggestions in the course of my experience, Mr. Senator, but I do not think they have borne any fruit. Would you like to have a definite case? Senator TILLMAN. Yes; I would like that. For instance, you may have been wrong and the other fellow may have been right. 272 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. Oh, yes. Senator TILLMAN. We will not discuss that : but if we could get at some fact, some concrete proposition, we could then judge for ourselves whether your suggestions were, according to our judgement, wise and proper to have been adopted, or whether they should have been turned down. Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. In 1902, I think, I addressed a letter to the Navy Department, calling attention to the practice of putting what they call military masts with fighting tops on board our battle ships. I stated in this letter that I knew of no instance where the fighting tops aloft were of any use in actual service, and I suggested that as they were very heavy, and represented a weight carried far above the plane of flotation, it would be highly desirable to do away with the military masts. I pointed out in this letter that a battle ship ought to have two masts of light construction, to form the vertical members of heavy derricks, by which weights could be lifted in and out of the ships, and thus the great, heavy boat cranes could be dispensed with, which, in time of action, form a source of danger through breaking up into small pieces under the action of projectiles. That letter bore no fruit, although within recent years, I am glad to say, the ideas conveyed in that letter have been adopted, as I am told. I have not seen the plans, so that I can not speak with absolute accuracy, but I believe that the heavy military masts and fighting tops do not find a place in the very latest designs. The CHAIRMAN. No, I think they do not, and they ought not to, either. I agree with you about that. Senator TILLMAN. That was one suggestion which did not bear immediate fruit, but which did not fall absolutely on dead ground. Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I can not flatter myself, Mr. Senator, that my letter had the slightest influence in the abolition of military masts. I wish I could. Senator TILLMAN. But as you made the suggestion you can still have the immortal satisfaction of saying "I told you so." Rear-Admiral GOODRICH. I come from the same part of the country as the chairman of this committee, and I have what we call a "New England conscience." May I say one word, sir, before I go? This is not a concrete case, but at the same time it may be of interest to you. In 1895 I was a lecturer at the War College, and in discussing the various features of the different types, I condemned the armored cruiser. I think I was alone in that at the time. I think almost everybody in the service, certainly all those with whom I had occasion to communicate, had something to say about the armored cruiser, and thought that the armored cruiser was a desirable type which we should have in our service. I took the ground then that the armored cruiser was in the nature of a luxury, that after we had all of the fighting line supplied, we might possibly then have some need of the armored cruiser; but I began then, and have persistently since then, although I think not in official letters to the Secretary, but in conversations and in articles contributed to our service forum, so to speak, the naval institute, always condemned the armored cruiser. I have fought against it and pointed out that the armored cruiser cost as much as a battle ship, very nearly, and sometimes more, and that I regretted to see that money spent in cruisers instead of in battle ships;PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 273 and I should like to say that if my opinions then had been followed out, we should have a dozen more excellent battle ships now, instead of a dozen tin clads. Senator Tillman. I suggest that Admiral Capps prepare the copy of the contracts that I have asked for, and that he accompany it with such statement or caption as he sees fit. At 12 o'clock noon the committee adjourned until Tuesday, March 10, 1908, at 10 o'clock a. m. Tuesday, March 10, 1908. The committee met at 10 o'clock a. m. Present: Senators Hale (chairman), Perkins, Gallinger, Burrows, Tillman, and Martin. Capt. Cameron McR. Winslow appeared, Rear-Admiral Capps being also present. STATEMENT OF CAPT. CAMERON McR. WINSLOW. The Chairman. Captain, state your rank and present duty. Captain Winslow. Captain; assistant to Bureau of Navigation. The Chairman. You are with Rear-Admiral Pillsbury? Captain Winslow. Yes, sir. The Chairman. You were here yesterday? Captain Winslow. Yes, sir. The Chairman. I do not need to tell you the field we are going into and the main questions that are controverted. The two subjects we are investigating more than anything else are armor plate and hoists. Captain Winslow. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Now, as we have done with other officers who have appeared, we would like you in your own way to go on and give your experience and observation. Take first, if you choose, the question of armor plate, as we have generally gone into that first, and state everything you want to say about it, more particularly of course as it applies to the later ships, because they are the ones that we are dealing with now. Anything that you have to submit yourself, which is direct testimony and which we are getting, the committee would be very glad to hear. Captain Winslow. In considering the question of water-line belt armor the ideal situation as regards that armor would be to protect all water lines from the light load to the deepest load. If you could accomplish that, then it would not make any difference, so far as the integrity of the ship is concerned, as regards a water line, whether you had a hundred tons of coal in the ship or full bunker capacity. Anyone can see that that would be the best arrangement for waterline armor. As you have heard quite frequently lately, a battle ship is a compromise, and we can not get those conditions. We are coming nearer to it now because we are getting better armor, and therefore there is not so much weight. The Chairman. We are getting lighter armor? Captain Winslow. We are getting better armor, and therefore we can use lighter armor. Therefore we can have a larger area of armor, which has not been the condition in the past.274 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. It was therefore necessary to decide where you would put this belt armor. In designing a ship there is no difficulty in working out by formula what the water which a ship displaces will weigh. That is a very simple proposition, although it is not in my line. It is not so simple to determine whether the ship will weigh what we want her to weigh, because that is dependent upon what you put in the ship. If you could assemble all that material before starting to build the ship, as the Dreadnought was assembled, or nearly so, and weigh all that material before you put it in the ship, you would know what the ship would weigh. But as you assemble this material and put it into the structure of the ship before your ship is completed, due to changes or perhaps due to the miscalculation, or many causes, the ship may weigh more or less than was anticipated. I think probably I am correct in that statement. I am not speaking as an expert on shipbuilding, but Mr. Capps will probably tell you that I am correct in that. Rear-Admiral Capps. No, I am sorry to say, and I will just show in a second. You speak of the Dreadnought, and so forth. The Dreadnought is from 1 to 3 feet overdraft. In none of our ships do we get up to as much as 11 inches. Captain Winslow. No, I did not say she was at draft. I said if we assembled all the material, as they did in the Dreadnought, or nearly so, and weighed it before it would be put in the ship it would be easier to decide what the ship would weigh. The Chairman. What the displacement would be? Captain. Winslow. What the displacement would be; that is, by weighing everything before you put it together, you would know what the ship would weigh. I know the Dreadnought was well overdraft. The Chairman. You did not go into the question of overdraft in what you said. Captain Winslow. No; I just spoke of it as leading up to the question--- Read-Admiral Capps. Everything gives weight as a matter of fact. Captain Winslow. I know, but when you weigh the material as it comes along after the ship is built you find--- Rear-Admiral Capps. Of course to weigh everything before the design is made is wholly impracticable. Captain Winslow. That is what I said, and I said it was more nearly practicable in the Dreadnought. The Chairman. You were only leading up to another statement, and it seems to me that what you were saying is very reasonable. Captain Winslow. I am leading up to errors that may come about unavoidably, or some of them are avoidable possibly. What I am leading up to is to the place where you should put the armor belt. There is a term used called the normal water line. I believe it is used in all countries. I do not see that it has a very definite meaning, because the weights are not always the same. I do not understand that we put the same weights in our ships that the English do or that other nations do. The Walker Board recommended that there should be two-thirds coal, two-thirds ammunition, and two-thirds stores, as I remember it. Now, we have not followed that recommendation, and as far as I can see we have not a normal water line; that is, a usual water line.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 275 For instance, I will take the Alabama class. I think she was supposed to have something like 800 tons of coal in her for a normal water line. The Kearsarge was supposed to have something like 400 tons in her for her normal water line. I understand the under-water body of those two ships to be similar. The coal capacity of the Alabama is a little less than that of the Kearsarge. The Alabama carried something like 800 tons of coal and the Kearsarge carried something like 400 tons of coal. Senator Gallinger. Why was there that difference? Captain Winslow. I do not know, sir. I assume that ships on their trial trips are not tried on their weight, but on their draft of water, which of course is the weight of water which is displaced; that is, I assume that before you have a trial trip you bring the ship to a given draft of water and you do not put these weights in her. I assume that, because if you did have her below her draft the contractor would have to develop more power in order to get the speed. If she drew more water she would be heavier, and it would be more difficult to get her speed. The Chairman. Which ship do you say had the most coal, the Alabama or the Kearsarge? Captain Winslow. The Alabama had something like 800 tons; the Kearsarge 410 tons. Senator Tillman. Was that on the trial trip? Captain Winslow. I quote that as being the normal water line. I do not know that she had that on her trial trip. It may have been other weights. I imagine that she was at her normal water line on her trial trip. The Chairman. I do not want to interrupt you, but I might forget it afterwards. The Kearsarge is with the Kentucky? Captain Winslow. They are like ships. The Chairman. They had superposed turrets? Captain Winslow. Yes, sir. The Chairman. Did the Alabama have superposed turrets? Captain Winslow. No, sir. The Chairman. Did not the superposed turret add something to the weight? Captain Winslow. I do not know. The Chairman. One would suppose that it would, but I do not know. Captain Winslow. The two ships are entirely different ships above the water line. Under water I understand the body is the same. They steam very differently. The Chairman. The Kearsarge and Kentucky had superposed turrets? Captain Winslow. They had superposed turrets. Now, the Oregon class, the Indiana class, carry something like 400 tons of coal at the normal water line. The Chairman. They were old ships? Captain Winslow. They were old ships. They carried something like 1,300 tons in the bunkers. Therefore I say it seems to me we have not adhered to any definite proportions. Where one ship carries one-third of her coal another ship will have half her coal—for some reason, I do not know what— at the normal water line, and that ordinarily means the usual.276 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. The Chairman. The usual and natural? Captain Winslow. The usual and natural line. Therefore while "normal" may mean something to naval constructors, in this matter it does not mean much to other people. Now, when we come to get the ships in service, it has been my observation, and I think the observation of most people, that they do not float on this normal line. They float on the normal line only when they are very light with coal. The log book seems to show that. Cruising with the fleet we observe that most of the time the water line, the armor belt, is very low down, which shows that the so-called "normal water line" is not a normal, usual line, but it is an abnormal line when you use the term in its ordinary sense, not when you use it for purposes of comparison in designing. Now, if you are going to place that armor belt for use in time of water, as you can not place it to cover all water lines, you should place it in such a position that it will be in the right place when you fight, as nearly as you can determine what your displacement will be when you do fight. That is also an impossible proposition. You can not tell what the displacement of the ship is going to be when you fight, because strat- egy and tactics govern that. I have seen statements that Rojestvensky made a mistake in having 3,000 miles of coal on board when he only had 900 miles to run. The Russian admiral had great difficulty in getting coal at any time. He did not know how far he would have to run. He knew that he was going to meet the hostile fleet. If he were going to meet that hostile fleet with the purpose of fighting to a finish, and if he had known positively within a short period of time when the battle would take place, it might have been good strategy, good tactics, for him to have gotten his ships in the best trim for that fight. But he did not know when that fight was going to take place, and as far as we can judge his object was to reach Vladivostok. I do not know whether he wanted an engagement before he arrived there or not, but you can not bring on an engagement whenever you want it. The time of that engagement is dependent to a large extent on when your enemy wants to fight. You can not have an appointed hour to fight. I think the Kearsarge and Alabama came pretty close to it, because that was practically a challenge and it was accepted. They knew pretty well when they were going to fight. The Chairman. You mean the old wooden Kearsarge in 1864? Captain Winslow. Yes, sir. Senator Tillman. At Cherbourg? Captain Winslow. Yes, sir; at Cherbourg. It is a well-established principle in strategy and tactics to surprise your enemy; that is, to bring on an engagement when he does not expect it, if you can. That is good tactics on land and it is good tactics at sea. I do not know what Rojestvensky wanted to do, but it was not a known fact that he might have only 900 miles to steam. He might have had a partial engagement or they might have held him off for days before he had an engagement. He might have had a partial engagement and then steamed for Vladivostok in a crippled condition. He might have found the enemy in the vicinity of Vladivostok and he would have had to have gone to sea again. If he had had only 900 miles of coal, they would have caught him without any coal. As a matter of fact, one of his ships steamed all the way toPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 277 Manila. If he had had only a limited amount of coal, she could not have done that. Under conditions of that kind I think most commanders of a ship would want a lot of coal on board, and under any war conditions you always want a lot of ammunition on board. My experience in the Spanish war was that we took all the ammunition we could get at any time. We overloaded the ships with it whenever we could get ammunition. You will always do that, because you want to fight as long as you can, and you want to fight as often as you can. As regards coal, the strategic conditions of the war have a good deal to do with that. If you have a base close under your lee, where you can get coal at any time and you are sure you can get in under your own guns, and you expect to fight the enemy there, as the Japanese did, you may limit your coal on board ship and put your ship in the best trim for fighting. A ship is in the best trim for fighting when she is comparatively light. Her guns are higher, she will steam faster, she will handle better, and she is quicker. Anyone would probably rather fight with his ship light than deep. But no commander wants to be short of coal, nor does he want to be short of ammunition, because he can not tell when an engagement will come on. He can not tell how long he will have to wait, and he is always fearful that he may be coaling when he wants to fight the enemy. The CHAIRMAN. Now, Captain Winslow, taking just these uncertainties which you have stated, about when and where and in what condition a battle should be fought, uncertainties which have appealed to me heretofore, considering all those things, will you tell the committee how you think the water load line, normal or established, with relation to the armor, should be placed? How would you fix that, because that is the real question, and that is all done before you go into battle? Captain WINSLOW. Yes, sir. What I was leading up to, Senator, was to show that the chances are that you will go into battle not very light, but pretty deep. Now, if you accept that, then you must dispose your armor about that water line. The CHAIRMAN. Now, how would you do that? Captain WINSLOW. There another question comes in. If we dispose our armor about that water line, then we have got to look at the situation and see what will happen in an emergency, if we have to go into an engagement with the ship very light, abnormally light, or if we have to go into an engagement with the ship abnormally deep. It is a difficult problem for a naval constructor. I should say that on our ships—I am speaking of the older ships—we have placed that armor belt at a water line which it is very improbable we will ever have when we fight. Senator TILLMAN. It is too low? Captain WINSLOW.. I mean that the ships will be deeper. The CHAIRMAN I do not think we need spend much time upon the older ships; but take the modern ships, say of the Connecticut class and the Louisiana, the South Carolina and Michigan, the North Dakota and her companion ship, and the ships that we have built since we had this better armor, and therefore could have lighter armor---what about them? That is the real question, because we shall not change the armor on the older ships anyway. 278 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Captain Winslow. I do not know what they would do about that. The Chairman. These later ones, how do you think it is with regard to them? Captain Winslow. I think in the ships of the Connecticut class the armor belt is low. The Chairman. You think the armor belt of the Connecticut class is low. Then the next are the South Carolina and the Michigan. Captain Winslow. I have only glanced at the drawings of those ships. If they are going to float near that normal line, as it is called, why, the armor belt would be all right; but, as I said before, the chances are that the ships will be deeper than that. They are frequenly deeper than that. They are overdraft. That is, they do not float at the normal line when they have their supplies on board. They float deeper. The Chairman. How would you fix this line in a new ship? Senator Perkins. I will ask the chairman to ask him to state what in his opinion should be the width of the armor belt and the minimum width below the normal water line in order to insure the safety of the ship. The Chairman. I suppose Captain Winslow will state that, of course. What troubles me is how this line should be fixed. According to the suggestions you have made, it should be so fixed that the armor would be higher. And then, of course, as Senator Perkins has suggested, when you get it fixed as you think it ought to be, how much of it would be below the water line and how much above? Captain Winslow. I do not think there will be much trouble about that in the future, because the armor has improved so much that you do not ave to carry such heavy weight of armor. You get the effect without using plates of such thickness. I think it should be disposed about a water line where the ship has certainly all her ammunition and practically all her stores aboard (I do not think the stores weigh such a tremendous lot), and a large proportion of her coal; but, as I said before, the problem the constructor then has is whether there will be sufficient protection in extreme cases, or nearly sufficient. It is an easier problem now, I should say, than it was formerly. Senator Tillman. Let me suggest to Captain Winslow that he give us a general rule something like this: How much coal and ammunition and stores would you consider as the proper quantities on board to locate the water line? Captain Winslow. I should state that very closely to what Admiral Remey said. I think the chances are that is about what you would have when you go into battle. Senator Tillman. Two-thirds of each? Captain Winslow. More than that, I should say. I should say a full ammunition supply and at least two-thirds coal, or probably three-quarters coal. Senator Tillman. That would be the general rule? Captain Winslow. I should say that would be. Senator Tillman. And with that rule—that is, with that amount of stores governing the draft of the ship—you would then have the armor half and half, half below and half above the water line? Captain Winslow. Well, they run the armor a good deal higher than that now. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 279 Senator Tillman. I was thinking of the heavier armor. Of course they have thinner armor, which goes up 10 or 12 feet. Captain Winslow. It is not so very much thinner in these new ships. It is an inch thinner. That goes well up on the ship's side. Senator Burrows. How far up? Captain Winslow. I do not remember the height of that but I should say 9 feet high; but Chief Constructor Capps can tell you. Rear-Admiral Capps. About 8 feet. Captain Winslow. That is on top of the other. Senator Burrows. And only 1 inch difference in thickness? Captain Winslow. Only 1 inch difference in thickness. Senator Tillman. Still that is not supposed to be the armor belt that protects the vitals? Senator Burrows. That is above the armor belt. Senator Tillman. That is the armor for the protection of the men, mainly; whereas the armor belt that is supposed to protect the magazine and the vitals of the ship is the one which is above and below the water line- the thickest armor. Captain Winslow. Yes; the heaviest armor. Senator Tillman. I do not want to ask you any leading question, but with the amount of coal, stores, and ammunition which you have thus indicated, where would you have that thickest armor located- half above and half below? Captain Winslow. Not necessarily in that proportion: no, sir. Senator Tillman. You would have to be sure to get enough of it below not to have any of the lower edge exposed when the ship tilted from the action of the waves? Captain Winslow. That is a question- how much that would be exposed. Senator Tillman. That depends on the motion of the water? Captain Winslow. It depends on more than that. Senator Tillman. And the width of the beam? Captain Winslow. It depends on more than that. I have seen the bilge of the ship well down. I have seen it from another ship. You may roll a ship well over, so that her bottom is exposed, but you may have a sea a couple of hundred yards farther out which would stop any projectile coming. Senator Tillman. Still there might be a chance for a shell to get in there just at that second. Captain Winslow. Well, there might be. Some people say there is not. THE CHAIRMAN. That is a disputed position. Captain Winslow. It might be. Senator Tillman. Those are chances that naval officers have to take. Captain Winslow. Yes, sir. Also when a ship is steaming at speed, the wave she creates frequently leaves a hollow close alongside the ship, but a little bit farther out from the ship the sea must necessarily assume its normal level. So I do not know that even that would allow a shell to get in. Projectiles come now with high velocities, and so they approach a ship or target at a a very small angle- somewhere around 4,5, or 6 degrees, which is a very small angle with the horizontal, So, as the projectile approaches the ship it comes 32301-No. 6-08-3280 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. very close to the water, and some little distance out from the ship the sea is liable to catch it. Senator Perkins. Reverting again to my question, we have agreed, I think, that there is a normal water line for the ship. Now, what should be the minimum width of the armor belt below that normal line, in order to insure the safety of the ship below the water line? Captain Winslow. That is dependent on a good many things. In the first place it has been stated that the minimum depth of the lower part of the belt should be 5 feet. I rather think that the opinion abroad is that it is not necessarily 5 feet, because they have put a good many of their belts at 5 feet on their normal line. If that is the minimum depth, then if they become lighter than that the ship is in a dangerous condition. Senator Perkins. You think it should be placed 4 feet below, do you? Captain Winslow. I think that must have been determined by experiment, and I am not familiar with the experiments. I can not imagine that all nations have gone to work and placed armor belts on their ships without knowing how far down a projectile will go. Senator Perkins. Ships roll from 6 to 10 degrees, do they not? Captain Winslow. They very seldom roll to 10 degrees. I do not know about foreign ships, but our ships are very steady gun platforms. Any ship will roll sometimes. I was reading not long ago of a trip that the Georgia made where, in apparently a very smooth sea, she rolled more than 10 degrees---I think something like 15 degrees; but that does not signify. Senator Perkins. What is the beam of the Georgia? Captain Winslow. Her beam must be about 76 feet, I should say. Senator Perkins. If she had been only 60 feet she would have rolled more? Captain Winslow. Yes; but that was a very unusual sea. That sea fitted her, and any ship, if she gets the right sea, a sea that fits her, will roll. Anybody who has crossed the Atlantic in these big ships knows that they roll at times; but normally our ships are very steady and they roll very little. But I can not say what that depth should be. I only know what I see in drawings of ships, that the English place the bottom of that belt about 5 feet below what they call their normal line. Now, they must assume that the ship may be lighter than that at times. Therefore they do not require 5 feet below for their protection. Senator Perkins. I am only a layman, but it seems to me that here is the normal water line of the ship. Now, we must take that as a base to start from. What is the minimum width that it is necessary to go below that normal water line in order to insure the safety of the hull of the ship below the water line? You have testified that you think about 4 feet. Then, of course, when the ship is loaded for an engagement, as you have so graphically stated with reference to the Japanese and other vessels, that depends upon conditions, and the conditions may be unfortunate for our ship if she meets the enemy close at home when she expected to meet her two or three thousand miles away, after a consumption of considerable of her coal? Captain Winslow. I do not doubt somebody who is familiar with the experiments abroad and in this country can give us very accurate information about that. I should say, from looking at the drawingsPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 281 of ships, that we ought not to bring the lower edge of that armor belt closer than 4 feet from the water line; that is, regardless of your normal line, when you get the ship light it ought not to come up higher than that. I know a great many people who might say it ought not be lower. Senator Perkins. Then, Captain, is not that the correct basis for us to reason from in the construction of the ship, in protecting the ship by armor? Is not that the correct initial point to reason from in placing the armor? Captain Winslow. It is correct if the experiments, with which I am not familiar, will bear out that statement. Mind you, at 4 feet below the water line you would at times be taking a risk on account of the rolling of the ship. THE CHAIRMAN. The less the risk the lower the armor is? Captain Winslow. The farther down you go; and you would eventually get where there is no possibility of a shell reaching. Senator Tillman. You have got to consider protecting the lower edge, or the skin of the vessel, below the armor, as well as not getting the top of it so low that it will be right at the edge of the water, and let water get in if you perforate it? Captain Winslow. Certainly, sir, you have got to consider your below-water line protection of more importance than your above-water line. THE CHAIRMAN. In engagements, the lower part of the belt may be of more importance than the upper part, may it not? Captain Winslow. I say in extreme cases, with 4 feet below the water line, you might run a risk if the ship rolled, of a chance shot getting down there. A projectile will not go far under water. I am told that the experiments bear that out. THE CHAIRMAN. Are there any statistics, as far as you know, that show what took place on the Russian ships, where they were hit and what took pace in their turrets? Captain Winslow. A good may of them were sunk. I do not suppose you could get very accurate information. We have a certain amount of information about those ships. THE CHAIRMAN. Generally speaking, what would you say about the comparative efficiency of our ships? One officer said he would take his chance in one of our ships against any navy in the world. Now take it with the improvements we are making, this lighter armor and all that, comparing our ships with foreign ships of the same kind and size built at the same time, how do you think they would compare with foreign ships? Captain Winslow. Well, I do not know foreign ships as well as I know ours. THE CHAIRMAN. If you were going into battle, if you were an officer commanding a ship, or commanding a part of a fleet, how would you feel about that, from your observations? We have very little knowledge, but I suppose you officers are thinking about the thing all the time. Captain Winslow, Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. As I say, one of our officers said he would take his chances in our ships as against foreign ships. Do you think they would be inferior to foreign ships?282 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Captain Winslow. I should probably take the chance, even if I thought they were. THE CHAIRMAN. Undoubtedly, but would you go in with the expectation of being equal with them? How do you think they compare with foreign ships? Captain Winslow. You would have to make a very detailed comparison. Take the Lord Nelson class of ships that the English have just brought out, of course I have not seen the drawings of those ships. They came out at about the same time as our Connecticut class. From what we know about gunnery at the present time, they would look to be more powerful ships than the Connecticut class. THE CHAIRMAN. What is their size? Captain Winslow. They are 16,600-ton ships, or something lke that, but they carry a battery of four 12-inch and ten 9.2-inch guns, as compared to our 8-inch guns. Their 9.2-inch guns are in turrets except two, and those guns outshoot our 8-inch guns. They shoot faster with them than we can shoot with our 8-inch guns. All the battery of the Nelson class are mounted on the upper deck. THE CHAIRMAN. Is that a matter of the weight of guns? Captain Winslow. No; they should be slower, but as a matter of fact they are faster. Senator Tillman. How do you account for that? What is the defect in our guns that their guns shoot more rapidly than ours? Captain Winslow. The difference is probably in their hoist. Senator Tillman. Are they using a two-stage hoist? Captain Winslow. Not for that kind of gun. Senator Tillman. What hoist do they use? Captain Winslow. They use a tube. THE CHAIRMAN. Before you leave I want you to go into that matter of hoists. Captain Winslow. Of course I do not know what the reason is, but our records show that we are faster than the English in some other cases; but the Senator was speaking about these two ships, and the fact that they have a battery of 9.2-inch guns where we have 8-inch guns, and that the 9.2-inch guns throw heavier projectiles, and throw them oftener, naturally gives them an advantage. Senator Tillman. Theoretically, then you think that vessel is superior to anything we have got? Captain Winslow. I think she is superior-- Senator Tillman. I say theoretically. I am not taxing your patriotism, because I think you would take the best we have and go out and do the best you could. Captain Winslow. I would take one of our ships, of course. Senator Tillman. Theoretically, you would feel at a disadvantage? Captain Winslow. I should say that their ship was more powerful. THE CHAIRMAN. More powerful than the Connecticut? Captain Winslow. Yes, sir. I would say this, that this question of big guns has come up, not very long ago- the question of fire control, whereby you can make ships which have one caliber of gun more efficient in shooting than ships which have many calibers. We have in the Connecticut class three calibers; 12-inch, 8-inch, and 7-inch. The Lord Nelson class has only two calibers. In comparing those ships we would have to put the 7-inch guns as being of very littlePERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 283 importance. The 9.2-inch guns in the Lord Nelson class are mounted on the upper deck, the same height practically as the 12 inch. THE CHAIRMAN. Take the South Carolina and the Michigan; they have more large guns, have they not? Captain Winslow. Oh, yes. THE CHAIRMAN. They are an improvement on the Connecticut and Louisiana? Captain Winslow. Oh, yes; I should say so; although I have not examined the plans very closely. I should say they were not only an improvement on the Connecticut and Louisiana, but an improvement on the Lord Nelson class, and possibly an improvement on anything that is built. THE CHAIRMAN. They go in that way, do they not, from time to time? One navy builds a set of ships that in certain ways are superior to corresponding ships that we have, as in this case, taking the Lord Nelson type compared with the Connecticut. Then we have the South Carolina and Michigan type which you think are superior to the Lord Nelson type? Captain Winslow. Yes, sir; and the English are building ships that are superior to the Lord Nelson type also. THE CHAIRMAN. And then we have again the North Dakota and the Delaware. Captain Winslow. Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN. Is not that the way it goes? Captain Winslow. That is the way it goes, but you were asking me about contemporary ships. THE CHAIRMAN. Yes, exactly; but when one power, seeing what another has done, develops a better ship, she has not a contemporary ship that is her equal until the other fellow gets something better. Captain Winslow. Of course, England has been in this business a long time. She has been ahead of us in many things, but we are building much faster now than we used to build. England has built very rapidly. Our last ship, the New Hampshire, is pretty well on her contract time, and I heard Mr. Bowles say that he could build a ship much quicker than that at the present time. THE CHAIRMAN. Well, we build quicker than we used to. Captain Winslow. We build quicker than we used to. THE CHAIRMAN. Now, on this question of armor plate, I think we can see what your idea is, as to how it should be established. Now come to the question of hoists -- Senator Burrows. Before going to that, may I ask a question? THE CHAIRMAN. Certainly, any member of the committee may ask any question that he desires to. Senator Burrows. It may not have any bearing, but I wish to ask it for my own satisfaction. Are you familiar with the construction of our modern battle ships? Captain Winslow. Do you mean those which are not built? Senator Burrows. No, the ones that we recently built and completed. Captain Winslow. I have served in two of them. Senator Burrows. What two? Captain Winslow. I served in the Indiana and Kearsarge. Senator Burrows. Are you acquainted with any others of the modern ships?284 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Captain Winslow. I am only acquainted by being in the same squadron with them, and seeing them from time to time. Senator Burrows. Taking all possible conditions which these ships may be under, will you state on which one of these ships is the armor belt misplaced? Captain Winslow. Which one of those old ships? Senator Burrows. No, sir; I am speaking of the modern ships. Captain Winslow. You mean the fleet in being now at the present time? Senator Burrows. Yes; on which one of those ships is the armor belt misplaced? Captain Winslow. I should say on all of them. Senator Burrows. They are all misplaced? Captain Winslow. I should think so. I should say the armor belt was too low on all of them. Senator Burrows. They are misplaced in the armor belt being too low? Captain Winslow. Being too low. Senator Burrows. How much too low? Captain Winslow. I can not say that. They are different in different ships. Senator Perkins. In order to be misplaced, it must be more than 4 feet below the normal water line. If it was shown that the armor was not more than 4 feet below the water line, then it would not be misplace, would it? Captain Winslow. The armor belt might be of the wrong width. Mind you, some of these armor belts are very narrow, 7 1/2 feet, or something like that. What I mean to say is that the water line is not sufficiently protected, from the fact that the armor does not come up high enough. Senator Perkins. If I understood you correctly, in answer to a former question you stated that the minimum width that the armor belt should be below the water line should be in your opinion be at least 4 feet in order to protect the vitals of the ship. I do not know anything about it above the water line, but you stated that, as I understood you. Captain Winslow. I said that was the qualification, if the experiments bear it out, and I assume that they do, from looking at the figures in reference to the ships. Senator Perkins. Then if it should be shown to your satisfaction, by a plan of the displacement of the ship, that the armor belt on those ships which you have designated as being wrongly placed was not more than 4 feet below the normal water line, you would be mistaken, would you not? Captain Winslow. What do you call the normal water line? That is what it depends on. Senator Perkins. That is the basis which you stated that we had all agreed upon, that there was a normal water line of the ship in the water, and that this armor belt should be placed below that not to exceed 4 feet, its minimum width? Captain Winslow. No, sir; that is not it. You may have misunderstood me. I said I thought it would be dangerous for the ship if it brought the lower edge of the armor belt closer to the surfacePERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 285 than 4 feet. I say with the normal water line it probably would be lower. Senator Perkins. The only object I have in asking you, Captain, is that you stated it is wrongfully placed on these ships. Now, it is a part of the duty of the committee, if I understand it correctly, to ascertain what the distance is below the normal water line, and what the width of it is above the water line. Captain Winslow. I should say of course you know what the distance below the normal water line is, as given by the drawings, but that is not the normal water line in service. If you will take the log books of our ships in cruising, you will find that the ships are habitually deeper than that. In other words, the bottom of the armor belt is more than 5 feet below. The top of the armor belt comes down to a foot or less than a foot, or something like that- a foot and a half. Senator Tillman. Is it not right awash, right level with the water? Captain Winslow. I think it is in many of the ships. Senator Tillman. I have a photograph of the ships when they left Hampton Roads, and none of them showed any armor. They were very deep down. Captain Winslow. They were very deep down. THE CHAIRMAN. Very heavily loaded. Captain Winslow. I have no doubt that if you put two-thirds of the ammunition, two-thirds of the stores, and two-thirds of the coal aboard those ships, they would be below the normal water line, as shown in those drawings to be the normal water line. That is, they will be deeper than that. For that reason I think that the probability is that any engagement would find you with that armor belt too low. Now the Oregon was undoubtedly-- THE CHAIRMAN. She is a very old ship. Captain Winslow. Yes, she is an old ship, but you take the Iowa, her armor belt is pretty much the same as regards that. She has 4 inches above her armor belt, and so has the Oregon. THE CHAIRMAN. When did you come to the conclusion, Captain Winslow, that the armor belt on our ships is too low? Captain Winslow. Why, I have cruised in two of them. I cruised in the Indiana just after the Spanish war, and I cruised in the Kearsarge in 1901 and 1902. THE CHAIRMAN. And you believed then, as you do now, that it was too low? Captain Winslow. Oh, yes, sir. My opinion has nothing to do with these newspaper articles. In fact, I have not read them very attentively. Senator Tillman. There comes up the other question which has been involved in this investigation; Have you ever communicated with the Navy Department officially, under the authority of the section which authorizes it, making recommendations or suggestions or giving criticisms of the armor belt or other matters which you believed to be defective? Captain Winslow. In regard to these things? Senator Tillman. Yes sir. Captain Winslow. I do not think I have ever done so in regard to the armor belt. Senator Tillman. About anything else?286 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Captain Winslow. As captain of the ship, I have written to the Navy Department. Senator Tillman. Oh, necessarily, making your reports; but have you ever officially communicated to the Department any criticism or suggestion in regard to battle ships which you thought were defective and which you considered as needing change? Captain Winslow. Not in regard to battle ships, but I know it has been done. I have written in regard to the Charleston. Senator Tillman. That is an armored cruiser. Captain Winslow. Yes; practically an armored cruiser. Senator Tillman. What is your opinion about the armored cruiser as compared with the battle ship? Captain Winslow. I would rather have battle ships. Senator Tillman. You agree, then, with Admiral Goodrich, that we have wasted some money on armored cruisers? Captain Winslow. I do not say we have wasted it altogether, but I think if we had put that much money, into battle ships we would have gotten more for our money. THE CHAIRMAN. Captain Winslow, will you tell us about these turret hoists, which are very important parts of the vitals of a ship? We have had a good deal of testimony, as you know. You have heard some of it. There are two theories about it. Which do you think is the best hoist, considering safety and rapidity of fire? Captain Winslow. As regards what two hoists? THE CHAIRMAN. The open hoist and the secondary or interrupted hoist. Captain Winslow. As regards speed, I do not know which is the better. THE CHAIRMAN. You mean rapidity of fire? Captain Winslow. As regards rapidity I do not know which is the better. It has been stated that the two-stage hoist is the faster of the two. I do not know that to be a fact, and I do not see exactly how it would be faster. In fact, I think we shoot much faster with our 12-inch guns than the English do with theirs. THE CHAIRMAN. In what way? Captain Winslow. Now, that may be due to the hoist. It may be due to a good many things. It may be due to the speed of the personnel. Perhaps we may be a little faster with our men than they are with theirs. It may be due to the rammer; it may be due to many things; but, so far as we know, we shoot faster than they do with the 12-inch guns. THE CHAIRMAN. We fire faster? Captain Winslow. We fire faster. With their 9.2 gun they beat our 8-inch. This matter of hoists is not a question of a direct hoist or a two-stage hoist; it is a question of a safe hoist. I do not think any of our turret officers care especially whether it is a two-stage hoist or a direct hoist. The English direct hoist is not like ours, nor is the French direct hoist like ours. The fact that they have direct hoists does not mean that they have the same kind of hoists that we have. They are different. What our officers want is a rapid hoist and a safe hoist. Senator Tillman. We,, have we got it? Captain Winslow. I have not seen this new arrangement, the shutter. I state very positively that we have not had it.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 287 Senator TILLMAN. From your experience on the battle ships? Captain WINSLOW. From my experience in the Indiana and in the Kearsarge and my experience as judge-advocate of a court-martial which tried the officer who was in command of the division at the time they had the accident on the Massachusetts. The CHAIRMAN. The Massachusetts is one of the old ships. Have you been on a ship since they had this shutter fitted? Captain WINSLOW. Why, no: I have never seen that shutter. The CHAIRMAN. Have you ever seen, on any ship, either ours or a foreign ship, the operation of the secondary or interrupted hoist? Captain WINSLOW. No, sir; never. The CHAIRMAN. Have you seen the plan of the interrupted hoist as compared with the corresponding hoist in the British navy, which some of the officers have testified to? Captain WINSLOW. You mean the plan in this country? The CHAIRMAN. The plan in this country as compared with the English. Captain WINSLOW. I have not seen our plan. I have seen the English. The CHAIRMAN. That is the interrupted hoist? Captain WINSLOW. I have seen the English plan of interrupted hoist and the direct hoist. The CHAIRMAN. Which do you think is the better of those? Taking the direct hoist with the shutter, which do you think is the better? Captain WINSLOW. I do not know that they could apply the 9.2 hoist to a heavier caliber. That appears to be a very satisfactory hoist, but I do not know that they could apply it to the larger calibers. I do not think they do in the British service; but, as I said before, I do not think anybody cares whether it is a direct hoist or an interrupted hoist. What we want is a safe hoist and a fast hoist. The CHAIRMAN. Of course that is what they are after all the time, and what has got to be considered is how you are going to get that. Which is the best, to get safety and rapidity? Or are you not prepared to say which you think is the best, insuring both rapidity of fire and safety? Captain WINSLOW. I think you can make a safe hoist with the direct hoist and a fast hoist, too. Senator TILLMAN. You do not seem to agree with other officers, that there is danger of the burning powder dropping down into the handling room or magazines, or near the magazines. Senator PERKINS. That is a leading question. Senator TILLMAN. He can say yes or no. I just want to know whether he agrees with that proposition or not. Captain WINSLOW. I have not seen this new shutter arrangement. From what they tell me, it is possible for powder grains to fall down through the slot. Therefore to that extent it is dangerous. Now, I would say more than that. We are pretty apt to judge these turrets under target-practice conditions rather than under battle conditions. Now, it seems to me that the powder charge, from the handling room up to the gun, ought to be protected from accident. It now, as I understand it, passes through one floor, the shutter opens before the charge of powder reaches it, and it closes after the charge of powder has passed through. During the time that the shutter is open there288 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. must be direct communication from the turret chamber to the handling room. Now that would seem to me to be an interval of danger. In the event of a small projectile coming into the turret and exploding, it might set fire to that powder charge, or there might be fire in the turret from other cause, and extend the fire down into the handling room and magazine while the powder is passing through that trapdoor or shutter, or whatever you choose to call it. Senator Tillman. You speak about a small projectile entering the turret. Do you mean through the top of the turret or through the portholes? Captain Winslow. It might come through the portholes. Senator Tillman. One of the charges in Reuterdahl's article is that our portholes are unnecessarily large. Captain Winslow. There is no question but that the portholes in the Kearsarge and Kentucky type of turret were very large. You could get plenty of projectiles in there. THE CHAIRMAN. That does not apply to the ships that have been built since? Captain Winslow. Oh, no; they have much smaller portholes. I do not know how you might get a fire in action. The turret might possibly be perforated. THE CHAIRMAN. You were stating what would be the danger if a projectile entered the turret, that fire might be communicated below, and be destructive to the ship. How would you remedy that? Captain Winslow. You could build a hoist that would remedy that. THE CHIARMAN. How? Captain Winslow. Well, you can have a trunk hoist. You can have an arrangement by which when one door is open another one is closed. For instance, you put a storm door on your house in the winter time. You open the outside door and close it again before you open the inside door. THE CHAIRMAN. That is, you mean you would have more shutters? Captain Winslow. You might have to have more shutters. It is a mere mechanical detail. It can be done. Senator Burrows. You have spoken about a trunk hoist. Captain Winslow. They use a trunk-- that is, in the two-stage hoist I think they use a trunk. They carry the ammunition up through a trunk all the way. It is protected all the way in that manner. Senator Burrows. They do not open it until they get ready to use it? Captain Winslow. It is opened in the operation of loading, at the right time. THE CHAIRMAN. They claim that makes a safer hoist? Captain Winslow. But mind you, there have been a great many people claiming that our hoist was safe without this shutter, as the hoists were originally built. What I say is that in the past they have been distinctly unsafe; unsafe for the men in the handling room and unsafe for the magazines. THE CHAIRMAN. In times of gunnery practice, did not the officers ask the Department to suspend the operation of the shutter and allow them to go on without it?PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 289 Captain Winslow. I have heard that they did; that they asked to have it opened. In fact some of them have said that the fact of the shutter being there made it more dangerous, on account of the sparking of the wire rope or something of that kind. The Chairman. And that it hindered rapidity of fire, too? Captain Winslow. Very likely it may have hindered rapidity of fire, too. Of course men will take any chances if you let them. on the last ship that I commanded, the Charleston, we did the best shooting on our record practice with every caliber of gun we had that had ever been done in our Navy; but I repeatedly instructed the officers, in fact I went and superintended the instruction very often myself, and repeatedly instructed them that I would take the last place in the record practice rather than unnecessarily endanger any man's life. Now, we managed to do the fastest shooting that had ever been done in the Navy up to that time, and we never hurt a man, and we took every possible precaution. You have got to have some risk when you are dealing with powder and with instruments of war, even in time of peace, but you should never subject men or officers to unnecessary risk for speed of fire or for any other cause. I was judge-advocate of the court which tried the officer who co9mmanded the division on the Massachusetts when they had that explosion. As I remember it, all the men in that turret were killed. This was not a flare back; it was from another cause. The only one, as I remember it, who survived was the officer of the turret. He survived because the ship was short of officers, as we are at all times, and he had more than one turret under his command. Therefore he could not be in both turrets at the same time, and he happened to be looking into this turret instead of being in it when the explosion occurred, so he was saved. But in that explosion the burning powder dropped out of the turret down below. It had been reported to the Department before that, that this would happen. In my opinion the turrets should have been changed at that time. Senator Tillman. Right there. Captain, you said it had been reported that this would happen. Who had predicted that> Captain Winslow. I understand that Commander Sims had reported it to the Department. Senator Tillman. Had predicted that the accident would happen just as it did happen? Captain Winslow. He had reported that these turrets were unsafe, and that burning powder would fall down into the handling room and endanger the men there and endanger the magazines. The Chairman. When was this accident? Captain Winslow. This accident occurred in January, 1903. I received a personal letter from Commander Sims in 1902, in which he criticised the Kearsarge and Kentucky class of ships, and I think that was one of the criticisms. Now, the practice went on with those turrets in that condition. I do not know what individual you can put that responsibility on, because there is no force in the Navy Department to compel that change, unless you are going to hold the Secretary of the Navy responsible, which is a distinctly unfair responsibility to put on any civilian who goes in as the Secretary of the Navy goes in. He goes into an entirely new business, and he can not assume that responsibility. Anything is liable to be presented to him to decide—290 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. THE CHAIRMAN. Now, Captain Winslow, we are not going into those questions. Captain Winslow. Well, I was only leading up-- THE CHAIRMAN. We are not going into the question of the responsibility of the Secretary of the Navy. We have not reached that point. We want what you have given us-- your experience and knowledge about these hoists and about the improvements. As to the responsibility, that is not the question which we are considering now. Captain Winslow. I was only leading up to the explosion on the Missouri, sir. If you do not want me to take up that line, I will stop. THE CHAIRMAN. We have had the commander of the Missouri here, Admiral Cowles, who has given us the full account of that; but if you want to go into that, as he has, if you want in any way to contradict his statements- Captain Winslow. I have never seen his statements. I know nothing whatever about his evidence. THE CHAIRMAN. Then you need not go into that. Senator Tillman. You were not on the Missouri? Captain Winslow. No, sir. Senator Tillman. And you are giving your opinion as you have received it from the official reports of the board of investigation? Captain Winslow. Well, I have not given anything about the Missouri. Senator Tillman. I know, but you would. Captain Winslow. I would give what I have heard of the accident on the Missouri, and probably I read the whole thing at the time it occurred. I do not recall it now, but I was in the Navy Department and probably read the whole report. THE CHAIRMAN. Well, I think, unless there is something further, Captain Winslow, Commander Key is here, and we wish to complete his examination this morning, unless you have something further. Captain Winslow. Then I have nothing further to say. Mr. Senator, except that as to what I have given you I would say, I do not pretend to keep thoroughly posted on all the technical details which belong to the naval constructors and other people. I am merely giving you my views as a seagoing naval officer who has spent the greater part of his career in the Navy at sea. THE CHAIRMAN. Well, we are very much obliged to you. STATEMENT OF COMMANDER ALBERT L. KEY, U.S. NAVY. THE CHAIRMAN. Will you please state your rank? Commander Key. Commander. THE CHAIRMAN. And your present duty is what? Commander Key. I am detailed to command the scout cruiser Salem when she goes into commission. My present regular duty is as her general inspector at the Fore River Ship Building Company, Quincy, Mass. THE CHAIRMAN. Commander Key, you have been here, and you have seen the limitations under which the committee is conducting this examination. It is getting direct testimony, direct statements; not what others have said or what others' reports have been; notPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 291 criticisms, but statements. The main things that we have been considering are with reference to the armor belt, the placing of it, the water-load line, and the hoists. Now state to us what you wish in regard to your knowledge of the subject, your experience and observation; not what you get from other reports, but your knowledge and observation with reference to the location of the armor belt. We ask that first because we have taken that first. Commander Key. Before I proceed with my testimony I should like to say, sir, that it is not an agreeable duty to come before this committee and criticise our ships as an officer of the Navy; but I expect to prove to the committee that there are unquestionable defects of design in several of our battle ships now in commission; that these defects have been avoided in British battle ships of corresponding date of design. Now, as I have said, this is not an agreeable duty, but, nevertheless, I think it is a duty; for I believe that if there are defects in the ships it is better for us to point them out now and correct those that are susceptible of correction, and enable you to take steps to prevent their recurrence in the future. And I think the testimony that I will give to you on these points will be generally approved by the officers of the fleet. I do not think my criticisms will be approved by the Navy Department. There is a difference of opinion. I think the officers of the fleet in general will approve the testimony that I shall present to you. The Chairman. Then you may go on. I will say here, unless the committee feel differently, that I would not spend much time on comparisons as to those very oldest ships that we have in the Navy, because all that relates to their construction is past and gone, and we are dealing more with the ships that we are building now, under modern methods. Commander Key. Yes, sir. The Chairman. I do not conceive it to be of much use to go back and compare the Massachusetts, the Oregon, and ships of that time, but we are vitally interested and can do something with regard to the ships which are now building. Commander Key. Yes, sir. The Chairman. So I think that will appeal to you as much more important. Commander Key. I have written down just what I expect to show in my testimony to-day, sir, and perhaps it will be well if I read it. It is only a few lines. I propose to confine myself, with your permission, to-day to the location and distribution of the water line belt armor, height of freeboard, and the height of the 12 and 13 inch guns of the 37 British battle ships completed between 1895 and 1897 and the 18 American battle ships completed between 1899 and 1907. You see they are corresponding dates. During that interval of time, between 1895 and 1907, the English Admiralty completed 37 battle ships and during the interval between 1899 and 1907 we completed 18. I have selected this comparison because it includes all the battle ships in the fleet now under Rear-Admiral Evans, and because the chief constructor has stated in his testimony before this committee (pages 5 and 6) that the American and British naval construction are of the same general school of design. Before completing my testimony I request to be permitted, briefly but specifically, to invite the attention of the committee to certain292 Personnel of the Navy and Marine Corps. Portions of the testimony presented by Rear-Admiral Converse, and the chief constructor relative to the water line belt armor, height of freeboard, and height of the 12-inch and 13-inch guns—the particular portions of this testimony that I believe to be radically in error, or from which wrong inferences would be reached if taken at their face value. I am also prepared to state the reasons for the belief that the open turret ammunition hoist, which can be found in our Navy only (that is, in which the handling room is not separated from the turret) introduces an entirely unnecessary danger, both to the powder magazine and to the men in the handling room, during the rapid firing of the turret guns. Furthermore, when I have completed my testimony as to the defects I should deem it a privilege to specifically state the one reason, in my opinion, for their existence. The Chairman. You need not spend any time and criticising what other officers have stated, but you may give what you think should be the location of the water line, and how it should be established, and how it is faulty. Commander Key. Mr Chairman, I hope, before I leave, that I might point out what I believe to be errors, which I think I can show you are errors in the evidence before the committee. The Chairman. The committee will have an executive session and will decide after the general hearing what, in the nature of contradiction and criticism of evidence already given, the committee desires to hear. You need not go into that now until the committee desire it. Commander Key. The chief constructor and I are old personal friends. You will find in this matter, I have no doubt, that our views are very different, and as I discuss the defects already indicated I am perfectly willing that he should ask me directly any questions he wishes instead of asking them through Senators, and I'm ready to answer any questions and to be cross-examined at any time. The Chairman. Go on and make your statement from your own observation and knowledge, and then as you reach any emergency of that kind the committee will decide. Commander Key. In connection with the water line belt armor the first thing I wish to present is a very short extract from the report of the Walker board. The Chairman. You need not read that. That may be put in the record. Commander Key. I can not make my statement understood unless I can refer to this. It is a very short statement. The Chairman. Well, read it. Commander Key. It was quoted both by the chief constructor and Admiral Converse. At page 4, under the heading "General considerations," article 16, it says: A battle ship's "normal" draft should be her fighting draft— otherwise the term is inaccurate and misleading -- not her maximum draft with all the ammunition, coal, and stores that she can carry, but her draft with a large percentage of these supplies—nor less than two-thirds of her full capacity of each—on board. And the position of the belt armor should bear its proper relation to this actual load line, not to a fictitious lost line seldom realized under service conditions. On page 5, it says, under the head of "General considerations," article 23:PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 293 First. That a battle ship when fully equipped for service and containing not less than two-thirds of her full capacity of ammunition, stores, and coal, should not be deeper than her "normal" or designed draft, upon which her speed is based. At page 11, under the heading " Conclusions and recommendations,” article 1, it says: That the new battle ships, when fully equipped for service, and containing not less than two-thirds of their full capacity of ammunition, stores, and coal, should not be deeper than their " normal " or designed draft upon which their speed is based, and that their weights of armor and armament should be restricted accordingly. The indorsement of the Secretary of the Navy was: After conferring with the Chiefs of the Bureaus of Construction and Repair, Steam Engineering, and Ordinance, I approve the general recommendations of the within report, and it is hereby referred to said bureaus with instructions to proceed at once to prepare plans for battle ships 7, 8, and 9, in accordance therewith. The CHAIRMAN. What is the date of that report? Commander KEY. June 11, 1896. The CHAIRMAN. Eleven years ago. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Now, that was, as you will see, a very short report, only 11 pages long, and the main thing they dwelt on in that report was the importance of arranging it so that in the construction of our ships the water-line armor belt should not be distributed around a fictitious line that was seldom attained in actual service, but that it should be placed around a line which should be near the line of flotation of the ship when equipped with coal and stores, ready for service. The CHAIRMAN. Will you state to the committee how you think that should be established? You need not go into the history of what has taken place since that report, but state to the committee how you think that water line should be established, Command KEY. I think, sir, that it should be established precisely as this board recommended, and as the Secretary of the Navy directed. So far as I know, that order has never been rescinded. The CHAIRMAN. How is that? Commander KEY. Just as I read it to you there. The CHAIRMAN. Will you state in detail what you think should be done to establish the water line, and to fix the location of the armor? You need not to into the old history that has taken place since that. Commander KEY. No, sir The CHAIRMAN. If the committee want that in the way of criticism afterwards, and want to recall you, the committee will decide upon that. Senator GALLINGER. Can you conveniently tell who the members of that board were? Commander KEY. Rear-Admiral Walker was the president, and he was considered one of our ablest officers. Senator GALLINGER. That is Admiral John G Walker? Commander KEY. Yes, sir: a very able officer. Senator GALLINGER. And who were the other members? Commander KEY. Commodore R. L. Phythian, Chief Engineer Edward Farmer, Capt. George C. Remey, Lieut. S. A. Staunton, 294 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. and Naval Constructor J. J. Woodward. The latter was considered and especially able constructor. They all signed that report. They all thoroughly believed in it. That finding has been quoted both by the Chief Constructor and Admiral Converse, in their reports, and I think, from reading their reports, you would imagine it had been carried out, but it has not been carried out. They do say, incidentally, that they have changed the "normal" load of coal, which they arbitrarily fix at any amount. Now that is directly contrary to the recommendations of the board and the directions of the Secretary of the Navy. The order of the Secretary specifically required not less than two-thirds of coal, stores, and supplies under service conditions. Admiral Converse said in his testimony that he approved of this, but he thought there ought to be a full supply of ammunition, instead of two-thirds of the ammunition. The Chairman. Now, will you state to the committee (for that is the pertinent point to be considered) how you would establish this line? Will you state to the committee, as Admiral Remey and Admiral Goodrich and Captain Winslow have stated, what you think should be on the ship in establishing this water line, or this load line? That is what we want to know. Commander Key. I think, sir, that that order of the Secretary of the Navy should have been carried out, just, as I have quoted it, that the draft line under service conditions should have been the designed "normal" line. You know the constructor has a speed trial with the contractor. The constructor makes certain estimates about the load displacement, and so on, and fixes the draft of the ship, on which he is to have her trial trip, say 23 feet 6 inches, and that draft is obtained by putting a certain amount of coal and water into the ship. She has not stores or ammunition, but they fix that draft very accurately. For instance, off the coast of Main they will put in a certain amount of coal, and then let water into her double bottoms until she gets say 2 inches above that draft, and then both the contractor and the constructor, the Government representative, watch this very closely, so that she will be at exactly 23 feet 6 inches. Then the ship runs the trial at that draft. But there is no fixed amount of coal aboard and no ammunition, stores, or supplies on board. The Chairman. Now, Commander Key, you are dealing with exactly what we want to know. You are dealing with this practical questions. Commander Key. Yes, sir. The Chairman. And I think the committee would like you to state exactly how you think the loading of the ship, either in supplies or in coal or water, before her trial trip or before establishing her water line, should be done, and how that differs from what is done now? That is first-class testimony; that we want. Commander Key. I think that trial trip is all right. It does not matter to the contractor what draft he has to run the ship provided it is fixed in the specifications upon which he submits his bid. If he has to make a certain speed, he makes his bid, and in the contract they fix it, we will suppose, at 23 feet 6 inches or 24 feet 6 inches. It makes no difference to him, only if they are going to run her at 24 feet 6 inches draft the constructor must not make the speed quite so great.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 295 Senator Tillman. Right there; why not make it so great? Does not that mean that the vessel is going down to 24 feet 6 inches when she is loaded and equipped for business? And why should we have one trial at an absolutely unsuitable depth when she will have another depth when she is in fighting trim? Why should we not have the vessel loaded and the sea trial made with the draft that she will carry when she is finished and loaded for a cruise? Commander Key. That could be done, but I think it would be difficult to do. It would cause some trouble. They have two trials, Mr. Senator. They have this contractor's trial, and then afterwards they have what they call a final acceptance trial, after the ship is in commission. In my opinion, at this final acceptance trial the work of the constructor ought to be overhauled and that at this trial they ought, as recommended by this board, to have at least two-thirds of her coal aboard and at least two-thirds of her ammunition, or, I should say, her full supply of ammunition, because when we need the water-line belt armor, we need and will have a full supply of ammunition and two-thirds of her stores, and as much water in her tanks and double bottoms as she would ordinarily require under service conditions, and then have this Navy board that makes this inspection test the work of the constructor and see how well that ship is designed, whether she is overdraft or not, and if she is overdraft, take steps so that the next ships that are built will not be overdraft. The Chairman. But you do not think there is the necessity of going into that when she has what is called her sea trial? Commander Key. Her builder's trial? The Chairman. Her builder's trial. Commander Key. No, sir. The Chairman. Other witnesses have thought that was not desirable. Commander Key. I do not think it is necessary. The Chairman. You do not think that any injustice is done either to the builder or the contractor or the Government, or that the present method of conducting that preliminary trial in any way affects the value of the ship, considering that she is afterwards to have this other trial? Commander Key. No, sir; there is only one suggestion I would like to make in that connection, Mr. Chairman, and that is that I would make the designed "normal" draft deeper, to correspond, as nearly as could be estimated, with her "fighting" draft under service conditions. It is unfair to the officers and men of the Navy, in a way, that a ship is run on the builder's trial and makes a big speed at light draft, because people outside the service will naturally say, "After she gets into commission why should she not keep up that speed under service conditions?" As a matter of fact, in the service she will probably be a foot and a half or two deeper in the water. Senator Tillman. And a knot or two slower? Commander Key. Yes; because, of course, the more water she displaces the more horsepower you must have to maintain the same speed. Senator Tillman, Is not that a question of requiring the builders to furnish engines of sufficient strength to give us horsepower, when she is loaded for business, rather than when she is stripped for a little pleasure run, to get a profit for the builder? 32301 - No. 6 -08----4296 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Commander Key. It certainly means that they get a fictitious speed. Senator Tillman. Why should we buy fictitious speed? Commander Key. There is no question of buying a fictitious speed. It makes no difference to the contractor whether the specifications state that she is to be run on her speed trial at 23 feet 6 inches at a certain speed, or at 24 feet 6 inches at a certain speed. He merely wants the specifications, upon which he submits his bid, to state the speed required for a certain mean draft. Senator Tillman. But why bamboozle the country with what you call fictitious speed, by having a contract entered into which enables the contractor to have the ship tried when she is a foot more out of water than she will be when equipped for business? Commander Key. That is a point that I think is wrong. I think that ought to be changed; it enhances the reputation of the designer and builder at the expense of the officers and men of the Navy, who must run speed trials at a deeper draft. Senator Tillman. You think we ought to have the trial trip with the vessel loaded just as she will be when she is going to work? Commander Key. Yes; as nearly as that load line can be estimated, just as this board recommended, precisely. The "designed normal load line" should be the fighting draft line, under service conditions, recommended by the Walker board. Senator Tillman. Did they recommend that? Commander Key. They recommended that. The failure of the board on construction to carry out the recommendations of the Walker board, approved by the Secretary of the Navy, is the cause of the error in the location of our water-line belt armor, not only with our ships in commission, but those now building. Senator Tillman. Where is the report of that board? Commander Key. It is in the Navy Department. I have quoted extracts from it. Senator Tillman. Can we not have that report put into our record? Rear-Admiral Capps. It is quoted already in my testimony. Senator Tillman. The report of the Walker board? Rear-Admiral Capps. Yes, sir. Senator Perkins. Who was Secretary of the Navy at that time? Commander Key. Mr. Herbert. Senator Gallinger. If that should be done, would the Government require as great speed as the do now on the trial trips? Commander Key. I presume they would have to cut down the speed somewhat. Senator Tillman. They would have either to cut down the speed or increase the horsepower of the engines. The Chairman. If you had the contractor's trial trip with the same load that she has when she is fully equipped and coaled and manned, would it not be the natural result that they could not make the contract for such a high nominal rate of speed? Commander Key. No; they would have to cut it down some. I have a little extract here from a German naval constructor on the subject of our trials, if you would like to have it. The Chairman. You can leave that with the committee. We are not going into that now.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 297 Senator GALLINGER. Is there any special difference between our requirements and those of foreign navies, so far as you know, in reference to the trial trips so far as the loading is concerned. Commander KEY. This German naval constructor points out the difference between our trials and the English and his own. Senator TILLMAN. I should like to have him read that. The CHAIRMAN. Let us have that. You can read it now. Commander KEY. This is by Mr. G Neudeck, naval constructor, instructor of shipbuilding at the naval academy, a part of the German navy department. It is taken from the manual for instruction in naval architecture, published by the inspector of education in the navy, and it says: On the subject of trial trips in general we may here add that the results of German trial trips are calculated with the greater exactness, the ship being fully equipped with all armor, armament, ammunition, full coal bunkers, and all supplies on board, over the measured mile, not with patent log, and without current (in still water), so that comparisons with foreign trial trip results do not appear to be acceptable. The CHAIRMAN. Is not that the same kind of trial trip that we have in the second trial? Commander KEY. No, sir: that. I think, is one grave criticism on our second trial, that they do not weigh the ship down to an particular point. They run the trial when she is in commission, but as far as putting two-thirds of the coal aboard and two-thirds of the stores, or corresponding weights, they do not do it. The CHAIRMAN. What I am getting at is whether this comment which you are reading is not intended to apply, not to our contractor's trial, but rather to this second trial that we have when she is fully loaded? Do you know whether the Germans have any preliminary trial? Commander KEY. I am not so sure about that. His main criticism, I notice, is as to the fictitious speed that he says we get. Senator TILLMAN. You had not finished reading it? Commander KEY. He says further: Especially are the English and American trial-trip results, especially those of the great private firms, to be regarded with the greatest mistrust. A "coach system" obtains, which consists in getting a very high speed with the ship as lightly loaded as possible with the assistance of all available means. How little such results are to be compared with actual performance is shown in English ships (for instance, the Powerful and Terrible). which are to said to have made from 21 to 23 knots on their trials, and have been carried in the lists with these speeds, but which, under service conditions, even if it really depended upon it, can actually make not more than 17 to 18 knots, while the older German ships (for instance, the Kaiserin Agusta and Geflon) have actually attained their trial-trip speeds, 20 to 21 knots, even under service conditions, when it was ordered for service purposes, and without any special preparation. American ships were for, a time looked upon as the fasted ships in the world, The results were published in the press as though they had been attained in fully equipped condition. A the same time there was shown a photograph of the ship during the trials, from which could be seen that the entire battery, battery armor, etc., was lacking. For the foregoing reasons, German trial-trip results should only be compared with the English and American ones after 3 to 4 knots have been deducted form the foreign data. The data as to the very moderate coal consumption and great radius fo action of foreign ships are likewise to be judged with great care after most critical examination. The CHAIRMAN. I doubt whether the Germans have the light preliminary trial which we have. 298 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Commander KEY. I think they probably have something of the sort, but we have no trial of the armor efficiency of the ship, to show whether she is overdraft or not. To put that as the Walker Board recommended, and as the Secretary of the Navy approved, if we had a trial and called for two-thirds of the coal, stores, and so forth, and full ammunition aboard, and showed then how much armor belt was out of water, and what speed the ship made, that would be a valuable trial. The CHAIRMAN. Do we not have that in this subsequent trial, the final acceptance trial: and if not, how would you chance that from what is it? That is a very pertinent question. What more would you have? Commander KEY. In making that final acceptance inspection I would have it so that they loaded the ship with at least two-thirds of her coal and supplies and full ammunition, and everything under service conditions, as the Walker Board required, and a report made upon how much the vessel was overdraft or underdraft, and the height of her armor belt about water: that would give you valuable data. When I began investigating this question of overdraft and the height of the armor belt, I went to the board of inspection to see if there was any data in the files of that board that would assist me, and I found nothing of value with respect to the highly important questions of overdraft. There was not data to be obtained, except that they had the mean draft of the ship and the amount of coal aboard. I could not get any other information. The CHAIRMAN. This bears right upon he question of the armor belt and load line. If you know, state to the committee what the Department fails to do, or has in these late years failed to do, in respect to these late ships, that would show that the ship was weighted down as she would be in actual service? What do they leave out? Do they put in the proper amount of coal, do you think? Commander KEY. I think they have apparently paid very little attention to it, as far as official inspections or official reports go. There have been reports from commanding officers and from the commander in chief of the North Atlantic Station, Admiral Evans, that his vessels were overdraft, but the matter does not seem to have attracted any attention. The last official investigation of the subject, so far as I know, is contained in the report of the Walker Board, which I have just read to you. The CHAIRMAN. Do you know whether they have full ammunition or its equivalent weight on board at the time? Commander KEY. Our ships carry from 500 to 600 tons of ammunition; some of the older ships, I think, about 450 tons. But on these final acceptance trials they do not make any note of the stores or supplies on board. Of course, the log book shows the coal abroad, but they make no special examination of that to see if it is exactly correct, and there is no note of how much ammunition and stores are aboard. The CHAIRMAN. You do not know whether they do actually have on board in these final acceptance trials the proper amount in weight of ammunition and stores or their equivalent? Of course, we can find that out by inquiring, but you do not know do you? Commander KEY. I have asked unofficially the board of inspection for that information and they said they did not have it. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 299 Senator PERKINS. Are not you, as a commander of a ship, obliged to make a weekly or monthly report showing the amount of coal, ammunition, and stores on board to the Bureau of Navigation? Commander KEY. We send in regular quarterly reports. Senator PERKINS. Is it not oftener than that? In the merchant service we are required to report every week and every voyage, and I supposed that the Navy was certainly as strict as the merchant service. Commander KEY. We make quarterly reports. The point I was making, Senator, was that this ought to be an official report from a board, not from the constructor or captain of the ship, but from a board whose special duty is it to make the inspection. The CHAIRMAN. That is, you think when you come to this acceptance trial that there ought to be a report upon all of these features, ammunition, stores, water, and everything, and an official report made to the Department, so that its files would show when any ship goes out and is accepted just how much she is loaded? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; and how much she is overdraft. As the chief constructor has told you, our ships are all overdraft. That is, they are designed to draw so much and they draw more. He says that it comes about from extra weights going aboard, and so on. I think this board of inspection ought to report how much they are overdraft, so that it can be corrected in the next ship, because the amount they are overdraft with respect to their "fighting" draft is the precise error in the distribution of the water-line armor belt. The CHAIRMAN. Now the Secretary of the Navy can require that, or the committee in their report to the Senate can recommend that that be done. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. That is a matter of departmental action. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And you think that ought to be done? Commander KEY. Yes; and I think it is highly important, because I have been astonished, in working out the location of our armor belt, how little official information can be obtained from the Department on the subject. Senator PERKINS. Have you been an inspector yourself on any of these trial trips? Commander KEY. No; I never have. Senator PERKINS. I have been in the merchant marine service for a number of years, and one of our captains was detailed by the contractor, acceptably to the Department, to go on one of these trial trips, and he informed me that they had as much as 800 or 1,000 tons of ballast in the ship to bring her down to the proper load line, and I should like to know if that course is generally pursued? Command KEY. Yes; they do that. I thought I made that clear in my testimony. They bring her down to their designed "normal" line, but their design "normal" line is a fictitious line. It is not the one used when the ship goes into action. We, the officers who will be held responsible for the ship's efficiency in action, do not care how much above the water the armor belt showed at the builder's trial. We want to know how much above water it will show when we need it, when the ship goes into action. Senator PERKINS. I asked him why they had in 800 or 1,000 tons of ballast, and he said it was to make up for the ammunition and guns300 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. that would be on the ship when she was ready for fighting service. Therefore your statement is so antagonistic to this information that has been given to me about the ships that we have tried on the Pacific coast that I could hardly recognize it. Senator TILLMAN. Perhaps they have a different regulation over there. Senator PERKINS. The same orders come from the Navy Department. Commander KEY. The chief constructor is here, and I think he can tell you what they do on the trial trip. They will bring her down to the designed "normal" draft, and they put enough coal in her to do it. They bring her down to that, and then they regulate it by the water. But they do not put so much coal and so much stores and so much ammunition aboard; all they do is to bring her down to this designed "normal" draft. They call it the normal draft, but it is not the normal draft under service conditions. It is a fixed draft, 23 feet 6 inches, or whatever may be the designed "normal" draft. The CHAIRMAN. You have brought out what has not been brought out before, as to the differences between these two trials, which I think is very important. Now, it is almost 12 o'clock. Can you very briefly go into this question of turret hoists this morning? Commander KEY. Mr. Chairman, I have a lot of data on the defects I have previously indicated that I am sure will be very valuable to you. The CHAIRMAN. We will not have that put in now. You can leave it with the committee and then if we want it we will put it in afterwards, but there is no time to have that read now. Commander KEY. I should like, then, to say that I have a very important lot of testimony to present to this committee, testimony that is very radically different from that testimony that has been given to you by the chief constructor, and I would like an opportunity to present it. The CHAIRMAN. Well, the committee will decide about that. Commander KEY. It is the result of some work of my own, and I think it ought to be of very great value to you. Senator TILLMAN. In what shape is that? Commander KEY. I have it in a table, in diagrams, and also typewritten memoranda. Senator TILLMAN. Prepared by yourself! Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator TILLMAN. You are not giving us any hearsay? Commander KEY. No, sir; it is direct and correct information. Senator PERKINS. I think we ought not to exclude anything that will bring light on this subject. The CHAIRMAN. I was going to say, that is for the committee to decide in executive session. If we bring testimony and criticism, aside from direct statements or opinions, and then allow that criticism to be recriticised, and the recriticism again criticised, there will be no end to it. Senator TILLMAN. We will have to stop somewhere with this battledore and shuttlecock business. Senator PERKINS. I think if he has prepared data and facts of his own knowledge, which he is ready to stand by as all his own testimony, I think the committee had better let it go in, and then we can read it. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY ANS MARINE CORPS. 301 Senator TILLMAN. I think so too. The CHAIRMAN. I have no objection to its going in. Have you got it prepared, Commander Key? Commander KEY. No, sir; I have just notes of the testimony of the chief instructor that I want to show is not correct. Senator MARTIN. That is a different proposition. I do not understand what we gain by his undertaking to review the testimony of somebody else; but we ought to hear any facts he has. The CHAIRMAN. If we go into a review or criticism of testimony that has already been given, we shall not get through with this part of the inquiry in a very long time. Commander KEY. I think I can finish in a couple of hours. Senator PERKINS. I think if he can show that the testimony given by Admiral Converse and Admiral Capps is incorrect and erroneous, it is our duty as committee here to investigate that phase of it. Senator TILLMAN. Why can he not put in writing what he wants to say on that line, and then it can go into his printed testimony, and we can read it; and then Admiral Capps and Admiral Converse can cross-examine him later if we find the time. Senator MARTIN. What I had in mind was this, that Admiral Capps has testified on certain matters. The witness can testify on these same matters, but I have never known any judicial proceeding in which the testimony of one witness was just taken up to be reviewed and criticised by another witness. The facts adduced by the witness will be answer to anything that Admiral Capps has said. If he has facts about turrets, let him give them. Let him give all the knowledge he has about the load line or water line or armor-belt line; and where his experience and his calculations or scientific investigations develop things different from what Admiral Capps has presented, that is the answer to it; but I must say again that I have never known any judicial body where a witness took up the testimony of another and undertook to review him and criticise him. Commander KEY. I only want to say to you that the chief constructor has been present at all these hearings, and he has cross-examined other witnesses, and I think it is only fair that his testimony should be reviewed. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Capps has been present at the request of the Secretary of the Navy, and Admiral Converse would have been here if he had been able, because they made the original investigation. Nobody has been present aside from the witnesses unless the Secretary has requested that they be present. Commander KEY. Senator, I should like to make a statement to the committee. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will now have an executive session. At 12 o'clock m. the committee went into executive session, and, after some time spent therein, adjourned until Wednesday, March 11, 1908, at 10 o'clock a.m. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11. 1908. The committee met at 10 o'clock a.m. Present, Senators Hale (chairman), Perkins, Gallinger, Burrows, Tillman, and Martin. Commander Albert L. Key appeared, Rear-Admiral Capps being also present. 302 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. STATEMENT OF COMMANDER ALBERT L. KEY - Continued. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Key, you may go on, and, under the rule of the committee, you will confine yourself to statements from your own knowledge and observation. We were considering when we adjourned the question of the location of armor plate before going to the question of turret hoists. You will confine yourself to your own knowledge and observation: but it is not a part of the practice of the committee for one witness to take up the testimony of another and criticize it or decide whether it is or is not misleading. That, under the decision of the committee, you will not go into. Nobody can appreciate better than you what that order is. I will say that we will. be very glad to hear your observation and your knowledge upon the subject. I was very much interested, and the committee was, yesterday in your statement about the acceptance trial. It brought to my mind some matters which had not been called to my attention before. There is a great deal in your observation and your knowledge that you can communicate to the committee, but you will not be permitted to take up the statements of any witness and state that they are misleading, and in that manner criticise them, because there would be no end to that. You may state on those subjects, as I have said, anything that come within your own knowledge and observation. Commander KEY. Mr. Chairman, if I may do it, I have some diagrams here and a tabular statement that I would like to explain. The data is authentic, and I should like to present it before the committee. It will not take me long. The CHAIRMAN. You may present the diagrams. Commander KEY And later, if I may, as I think you yourself suggested, I would like to submit a written communication to the committee. The CHAIRMAN. Yes; you may submit a written communication, and the committee in executive session will consider what part of it or whether any of it will be made a part of the record. But you are entirely right about anything you have here that is authentic. That is allowed because that is observation and it informs us. Commander KEY. That is right, Mr. Chairman. I should like to say that I do not know that I made myself very clear yesterday, and that was really my main reason for wishing to appear before you this morning. I have diagrams and a table that I think will be of very great assistance to you. I do not think I could have explained it in writing, but I will deliver these to you. [Exhibiting diagrams.] The CHAIRMAN I think the committee would be glad to see them. Senator Tillman. Certainly; we want all the light that we can get, and that is light. Commander KEY. I thought I would go over the table first. There is one for each member of the committee. Senator TILLMAN. If you could hang up the diagram on the screen there, it would be better. The CHAIRMAN And then stand and explain it. Commander KEY. It is better for two or three to look over the same one. I will go over the tables first. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 303 Mr. Chairman, I have taken a great deal of pains with this question. I want to make it plain to you, sir, and to the committee, that my only object is to get the facts before the committee so that you may be able to arrive at correct and just conclusions about the matter. With reference to the table you will see that I have compared the British and American battle ships of the same period of completion. For instance, in the first column headed "Battle ships Kearsarge and Kentucky, completed in 1899, "they are compared with the Majestic class of battle ships. The CHAIRMAN. That is in the upper left-hand corner? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. I think I had better take this table first, and go over it. The diagram I will go over a little later. I have compared there the Kearsarge and Kentucky, completed in 1899, with the Majestic class of battle ships, nine ships, completed from 1895 to 1898/ Now, that column goes down that way, comparing altogether four periods of naval construction of battle ships between America and England. The column headed "Completed" gives the year and date of the completion, and under the general heading "water-line belt armor" is given the same data about the armor, in regard to the width of belt, the thickness amidships, and so forth, the lower edge below and upper edge above water at fighting draft, the draft found by the Walker Board. I will not go into that because I can explain it better by the diagram. The next column gives the height of 12 and 13 inch guns above water at fighting draft. The CHAIRMAN. That is in the middle of the shield? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. That was the draft found by the Walker board and approved by the Secretary of the Navy in 1896. I should like to invite your attention to the fact that nowadays the battle ranges are considered to be between about 5,000 and 7,000 yards. It is considered that this will be the probable battle range on account of the great increased power of the torpedoes now in use, 4,000 yard torpedoes, and we have to keep the battle ships out of their range. Consequently we have come around to the all big-gun ship, and 12 and 12 inch guns have become the important battery in ships, because they are the thick-armor piercers at long ranges. They are guns that really punish the other ships. I also want to invite your attention in that column to the fact that Admiral Evans's squadron has seven ships with low after-turrets mounted on decks that at "fighting" draft are only about 9 feet above the water, and that such ships since 1891. We are now completing to of that class which have just gone into commission. Senator TILLMAN. Which two? Commander KEY. The Mississippi and the Idaho. The Japanese never have built such a class of ships. So in this matter we are about twelve years behind the English in that part of the school of design of battle ships. The CHAIRMAN. Built in 1891? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; that was the last ship they laid down of that character. I have served as executive officer of the Wisconsin, and she is one of that class, and in a fairly heavy sea we had to batten down everything aft. It is plain that there must be at sea a good 304 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. deal of weather in which you could fight turrets that are placed on deck, say, 17 feet high and that you could not fight on a deck 9 feet high. In that respect the Japanese and English are both ahead of us. Senator Tillman. That means, if it means anything, as I understand it, that we could not fight these low-placed guns in any kind of weather but fair weather? Commander Key. We could fight them in moderate weather, but not in what we call a rough sea. Of course the trouble with having ships of that type is that if the action should happen to be fought in rough weather, or if the enemy could put off the action until he had rough weather, we would be at a decided disadvantage. I mean, for instance, if Admiral Evans had 7 of this type of ship in his fleet, and he had higher freeboard ships, he would postpone the action until he had rough weather if he could. Of course a sea fight is like a fight on shore. It takes two to make it; and if an admiral wants to put off an action he is generally able to do it. History shows that sea actions under steam take place when both admirals are ready for it. For instance, Rojestvensky deliberately engaged the Japanese. He knew he was going to find the Japanese somewhere along the Japanese coast waiting for him. Cervera came out of Santiago deliberately. He knew of course the Americans were waiting for him. If the fleets are on the high seas, as they have about the same speed, one can keep clear of the other just as with two armies ashore, one can retreat and the other fellow. The stronger seeks the fight, the weaker avoids it until he is ready to bring off the action. The Chairman. I see in the middle column "fighting draft." Commander Key. Yes, sir. The Chairman. You carried out the fighting draft in the different classes where you have instituted a comparison? Commander Key. Yes, sir. The Chairman. You carried out the fighting draft of our ships, and, as far as I see, you have not carried out the fighting draft of the contemporary British ships. Commander Key. No, sir; I could not get any data for that. But I will show you later that it makes little difference to the British ships with their type of water-line belt armor whether they are overdraft or not. I will bring out that point very clearly a little later. The next column to which I should like to invite your attention is one of normal or builders' trial displacement. That is of no real use in this comparison, but I put it there for your general information. There is one clerical error. The Alabama, Illinois, and Wisconsin type tonnage is about the same as the Kearsarge and Kentucky type. That is a clerical error. Twelve thousand one hundred and fifty in that column should be about 11,500. In the next column is the designed normal or builders' trial draft. The committee no doubt by this time appreciate that there are several names for that line, the line I have called a fictitious line; that is, it is fictitious, as far as actual service conditions are concerned . It is sometimes called the normal load line, the designed normal load line, or the normal line, or the builders' trial draft line; and it is the draft at which the ship is run when it has the trial that must take place in order for the Government to accept the ship from the contractor.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 305 The CHAIRMAN. That is not what is called the acceptance trial? Commander KEY. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. This is the first trial? Commander KEY. It is the first trial. The acceptance trial is after the ship is in commission and is more of a military trial. In that column I want to call your attention to the large difference in the designed draft of the American ships and the English ships. You will see that they differ generally about 3 feet in most cases. As we get down the column to ships practically of the same tonnage, the eight ships of the King Edward class and the Louisiana and Connecticut class, the King Edward class is 16,350 tons and the Louisiana has about 16,000 tons. The King Edward, as I remember that class, is about 11 feet shorter than the Louisiana and about 1 1/2 feet wider. But you notice that there are a difference in the designed normal load of 2 feet and 3 inches. There is a difference in the shape of the underwater body of the two ships. I am inclined to believe that the figures these tables show that the English must design at a heavier normal load line than we do; that is, if their water-line belt armor is placed in the same relative position of their designed normal load time, they carry it higher than we do. I am inclined to think that from the figures shown in the tables. The CHAIRMAN. Where do you get these figures? Commander KEY. These are taken from Jane, who publishes this book. He is an Englishman and is generally considered very accurate. This book was used by the Chief Constructor in his testimony. The CHAIRMAN. We have the book here. Commander KEY. I have also corroborated it, is for as possible, by the latest information on file in the Navy Department. Senator TILLMAN. Where were these sheets prepared? Commander KEY. I prepared them myself. Senator TILLMAN. Do you mean by hand? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; I prepared this table by hand and had it typewritten, but the diagrams were made by a draftsman from rough drawings. The next column is the "fighting" draft, and that is given for two- thirds of supplies and coal, just as required by the Walker Board. I want to explain to the committee how I got that. I found, as I explained to you yesterday, Mr. Chairman, that I could get no accurate data as to the overdraft of our vessels and how important I thought it was that it should be thoroughly established at the final acceptance trial by the Board. In order that my data might be above any possible suspicion of being what might be called selected data, I directed two clerks in the Navy Department to get the log books of these ships and to pick out, if they could find them, ten successive entries of going in and out of port in salt-water ports. I told them they must not use any ports where there was brackish water, because it was claimed that the brackish water allowed the ships to sink deeper and therefore to give more overdraft than if in salt water. I told them to note the date, name of port, whether the ship was going in or out, the amount of coal, and the draft forward and the draft aft. I told them to put it down on a slip of paper and bring it to me and I would work it out, which I have done. I con- sidered that in ordinary service the ships carried on the average about two-thirds stores and two-thirds ammunition. I suspect, as a matter of fact, they carried a little over two-thirds of ammunition. 306 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Taking the battle ship Kearsarge as an example, on August 11, 1905, her log shows she left Bar Harbor, Me., and had 1,180 tons of coal aboard, and her mean draft was 25 feet 6.5 inches. On August 24 she went into Newport with 746 tons of coal and with a mean draft of 25 feet 0.5 inch. On August 25 she left Newport with 712 tons of coal and a mean draft of 25 feet. On August 29 she went into Provincetown with 495 tons of coal aboard and with a mean draft of 24 feet 7.5 inches. On September 12 she left Provincetown with 1,253 tons of coal and a mean draft of 26 feet 0.5 inch. On February 6, 1906, she went out of Culebra with 1,128 tons of coal and with a mean draft of 26 feet 3 inches. February 19 she went into Guantanamo with 607 tons of coal and a mean draft of 24 feet 11.5 inches. On April 1 she went into Cape Cruz with 975 tons of coal and a mean draft of 25 feet 4 inches. Those were eight observations. I added up the total of coal and divided it by 8; and if there is any error in ups and downs, the error is divided by 8. I added up the mean draft and got the average at 25 feet 4.2 inches. So the average coal for the eight observations is 762 tons of coal aboard and a mean draft of 25 feet 4.2 inches. Senator Tillman. What was her normal draft? Commander Key. Her "normal" draft is shown here in the table; 23 feet 6 inches is her normal designed draft. Senator Tillman. Then she was over 2 feet deeper in the water on an average than her normal draft called for? Commander Key. Yes, sir; that is, under service conditions. Senator Tillman. What ship was that? Commander Key. The Kearsarge. Senator Tillman. Is that the deepest ship we have got? Commander Key. Yes, sir; she is more overdraft. Senator Tillman. More overdraft than was ever calculated? Commander Key. Very much. Senator Tillman. And therefore her armor is much deeper than that of any other vessel? Commander Key. Yes, sir; that is correct. It is not so very much deeper; it is somewhat deeper. The Chairman. I see that you do not carry out on this table the corresponding figures of British ships with which you institute comparisons. I suppose the reason for that is, as you have stated in the other case, that you have not that data. Commander Key. No, sir. If I could get at their logs, it would be very valuable information. They would probably object to that, because the navies abroad are not very liberal about giving us information. So we have to be rather careful about coming to conclusions based on information we get from abroad. The Chairman. Now we must finish. Commander Key. Yes, sir; it will not take me long. The Chairman. The members of the committee are pressed with other matters, and we must finish. Commander Key. The two-thirds bunker capacity is 1,000 tons. The difference between her average draft and that is 238 tons, which calls for an increase of 5 inches, because every 47 tons put abroad her makes her go down 1 inch. So her fighting draft as determined by the rules of the Walker Board is 25 feet 9 inches, and her builders' trial draft 23 feet 6 inches. Therefore, the excess of fighting draft over the builders' trial or normal designated draft is 2 feet 3 inches.PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 307 Senator TILLMAN. That means that the Navy Department ignored the Walker Board's recommendation and the indorsement of the Secretary of the Navy? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; as far as I can see the Board on Construction did it. Senator TILLMAN. The Navy Department? Commander KEY. Yes sir; the Navy Department. I do not know just where to place it. Senator TILLMAN. Do you know when the discovery of this blunder in construction was first made? Commander KEY. The Walker board Senator TILLMAN. I say "blunder;" you allege it to be a blunder. The board on construction denies that it is a blunder. I want to know when the discovery was made. Commander KEY. There have been Senator TILLMAN. When did you discover it ? Commander KEY. I never really went into the matter particularly until after you started this investigation. I have known our battle ships are overdraft: there have been letters about it; I have heard what other officers in the Navy Department have said ; the captains of ships have reported vessels overdraft. Admiral Evans has reported them overdraft and suggested that some weights be removed, but nothing has been done. Senator TILLMAN. Are there any weights that can be taken off without destroying the efficiency of the ship? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; I think so. Senator TILLMAN. You can not get rid of the coal, because you are obliged to have it to run the machinery? Commander KEY. That is a point I should like to mention this morning. The idea of a ship going into action without her bunkers full of coal seems to me preposterous. You gentlemen yourselves in every bill authorizing a ship require that she shall have the greatest radius of action of any vessel of her class. The CHAIRMAN. You agree with Captain Winslow? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And with Admirals Remey and Goodrich? Commander KEY. Absolutely. The CHAIRMAN. There is no necessity for you to go over that. Commander KEY. The telegrams in the Spanish war show that. All the telegrams from the Department at the beginning of the Span- ish war began "Fill up with coal and keep filled with coal of the best quality." Senator TILLMAN. Would it not be the proper naval policy to keep the bunkers as full as practicable of coal, both as a matter of common sense and necessity? Commander KEY. Otherwise you run— Senator TILLMAN. Otherwise you run a great risk. Commander KEY. Certainly. If a ship measures the radius of action— Senator TILLMAN. What is there on a battle ship of this class that we can take off, so as to bring the vessel up out of the water, that would not injure her as a fighting unit? Commander KEY. There are some guns hat are of no use to battle ships now, at the long ranges at which they fight; that could be taken off.308 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Senator TILLMAN. Are not those guns comparatively light? Commander KEY. I think in some cases they could take off the superposed turret guns. Senator TILLMAN. Why not take off the superposed turret itself? Commander KEY. I mean that. Senator TILLMAN. Why not take the whole thing off? The CHAIRMAN. We are not building those superposed turrets now? Commander KEY. No, sir. Senator TILLMAN. What I am trying to get at is whether or not these older ships of ours, which are in a manner acknowledged to be defective in some respects, can be repaired or changed so as to make them reasonably decent battle ships. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator TILLMAN. Fairly good fighting units? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; and I think they are fairly good fighting units now. Senator TILLMAN. Oh, yes; they would handle themselves very nicely, and be formidable to an ordinary enemy. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator TILLMAN. The man behind the gun has a great deal to do with that. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. We need not trouble ourselves about superposed turrets. I think there is no likelihood of their ever being adopted again. Commander KEY. I think that question is settled, because the question of one large caliber is settled. Senator TILLMAN. What I was reaching after, Mr. Chairman, was this: We have twenty-nine battle ships in commission or building. There is a clamor in some quarters for more. Now, fi those older vessels can be made efficient by certain changes, we want to know it. We want to know whether the present ships can be overhauled and certain changes made in them, which will lift them up and make them less vulnerable and continue them in the Navy. I notice here in the Naval Register that certain vessels, four or five of them, the Oregon among them, are marked "obsolescent;" that is, about to become obsolete already. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator TILLMAN. But what I am leading up to is this: You have brought out the fact that Admiral Walker in 1896, and the board of which he was chairman, recommended certain things which have been disobeyed since. Now, who is responsible for that disobedience? Commander KEY. Well, sir, I should say the board on construction. Senator GALLINGER. Is "disobedience" the right term? Is it not a matter of judgment? Senator TILLMAN. I would not say that "disobedience" is a proper term, but failure to observe those recommendations. The CHAIRMAN. The recommendations were disregarded. Senator TILLMAN. "Disregarded;" that is a better word. I thank the chairman for the suggestion. Commander KEY. Overlooked. Senator TILLMAN. No; not overlooked. It was cold-blooded, not malice, but belief in their own superior wisdom, that caused the change, undoubtedly. Personnel of the Navy and Marine Corps. 309 Commander Key. Of course, those other ships, the Alabama, the Illinois, and the Wisconsin, were built by the direction of that Walker board, and the are built in compliance with that, but they were very much overdraft. They were 1 foot 8 inches overdraft. The Chairman. Although built in compliance with the recommendations of the Walker board? Commander Key. Yes, sir; but the important element of overdraft is the extra weights placed in the ships during construction. The Chairman. The point is whether you can remove any weights from these old ships that will lighten them. Senator Tillman. The board of construction, or Rear-Admiral Capps, perhaps, could tell us what could be removed without destroying the efficiency; but I am trying to get at another point. How many Secretaries of the Navy have we had in the last ten years? Commander Key. I will have to take a paper and pencil to answer that, there have been so many changes. Senator Tillman. Does it not follow that with the constant changes of the civil head of the Navy Department, he can not become acquainted with his duties? Commander Key. That is absolutely true. Senator Tillman. Does he not have to depend on the naval officers? Commander Key. Yes, sir. Senator Tillman. He has to depend on the chiefs of bureaus? Commander Key. Yes, sir. Senator Tillman. And they are selected by the President? Commander Key. No, sir; selected by the Secretary of the Navy. Senator Tillman. Do you imagine that has been the case in the last seven or eight years? Commander Key. I think so, sir; as far as I know. Senator Tillman. Of course you will only have to guess, although your intimacy and familiarity along certain lines would lead me to suppose you might guess otherwise. Commander Key. No, sir; really I do not absolutely know, strange as it may seem to you. Senator Tillman. We have had very frequent changes in the Secretary's office? Commander Key. Yes, sir. Senator Tillman. Necessarily leaving no man there long enough to become sufficiently acquainted for himself with conditions to act as a check on the incompetency or inadequacy, or whatever you might call it, of the heads of bureaus. Commander Key. Yes, sir. Senator Tillman. Very well. Now, with the facts staring us in the face that the ships that have been built, even as far back as six or seven years ago, had these blunders continued in the face of the recommendation of a board of naval officers and the indorsement of the Secretary of the Navy, and in view of the fact that there is no guaranty that we will not have the policy of continued frequent changes in the Navy Department, and with the acknowledged or alleged defects, what reason has Congress to continue to order battle ships? How do we know that they will not be badly constructed and inadequate when they are finished, although they cost us eight or ten million dollars apiece?310 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Commander KEY. I think you ought to make some officer under the Secretary of the Navy responsible to the Secretary that his orders are obeyed and the work of the several bureaus properly coordinated and supervised. Senator TILLMAN. Ah, but he might not be any good himself. Who is going to appoint him? Commander KEY. The Secretary of the Navy. Senator TILLMAN. But you have just said that the Secretary of the Navy appoints these boards- Commander KEY. They are not responsible under the law. They are irresponsible. Senator TILLMAN. That goes into the question of the personnel and the reorganization of the Navy Department and the conditions up there; but I am trying to get at our duty here. We are all trying to investigate the alleged defects in the ships of the Navy, and I am trying to reach this conclusion, and I ask your opinion about it as the expert. What is the duty of Congress, in the face of these failures of the Navy Department to give us good fighting units for the money? Are we going to order four more battle ships, or two more battle ships, or even one more? Senator GALLINGER. You mean the alleged failures. Commander KEY. Some one ought to be made responsible. Senator TILLMAN. How can we make them responsible? We can only pass general laws, and if the Navy Department runs to politics, or something else, and puts incompetent men in charge of these bureaus, what guaranty has Congress or the Senate that we are going to have the $10,000,000 which we put into a battle ship reasonably well spent? Commander KEY. If you, by law, place a technical officer under the Secretary of the Navy, and make him directly responsible- Senator TILLMAN. What would we do with him; suppose he should give orders to have a ship built in a defective way? Commander KEY. He would not do it. The CHAIRMAN. That is only a scheme for transferring authority? Senator TILLMAN. Of course. The CHAIRMAN. That does not change anything. Senator TILLMAN. I have no reason to believe that any man selected by the Secretary of the Navy will be superior to Admiral Capps. Admiral Capps has done the best he knows how, and believes he is right, and he has come very near proving he is right in many instances. Commander KEY. He is not responsible under the law. There is nobody responsible except the Secretary of the Navy. Senator MARTIN. Don't you think every naval officer is responsible, under his oath? I do not see why they are not as much responsible as anybody that we could put there. Commander KEY. Of course, we are responsible as far as our authority goes, but our authority does not go there. We are not responsible for ships over which we have no authority as to the way they are to be designed. Senator MARTIN. The supreme authority must be in the Secretary of the Navy and the President. Commander KEY. If you give the authority to some officer to say how these ships shall be designed, to supervise and coordinate the technical work of bureaus and boards, then you can hold him responsible to the Secretary. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 311 Senator TILLMAN. Why should we give it to one officer rather than to a board who will have the consensus of opinion in the Department? The CHAIRMAN. Of course we understand this scheme, which is a proposition that some one man should be put in, who will be over the Secretary and over everybody else in reference to these matters. We will consider that when we consider the other parts. We understand that. The point you have made, which is a thing of importance to us, is this: If these statements are true, and these ships are being built in a wrong way, and would be comparatively useless in war, what sense is there in our going on and piling up three or four ships, or two ships, or one ship? The one thing that the Commander is brining out, if the conditions are as he says they are, is the lack of necessity under present conditions, of any more naval programme of big ships, until things are straightened out. Senator TILLMAN. We want to straighten them out before we build any more ships, because otherwise we have no guaranty that they will not be built along obsolescent lines, like these others. The CHAIRMAN. Congress will take notice of that, undoubtedly. Senator TILLMAN. There is another point that I should like to ask about. Commander Key, you have been naval aid to the President? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator TILLMAN. What were your duties? Commander KEY. My duties, mainly, were to attend functions at the White House. Senator TILLMAN. And be in uniform, and an ornament to the line? Commander KEY. No, sire; I was aid to the President. I attended those receptions officially in uniform, and then when he would go to any official ceremonies, or on official occasions, I usually attended him also. Senator TILLMAN. You had really then no official association or connection- you were not an intermediary between the Navy Department and the President? Commander KEY. No sir; not in any way. Senator MARTIN. Commander, let me understand that, please. Suppose you had been congnizant of what you believed to be defective construction about to be commenced or in progress on a battle ship, do you not think it would have been your duty, or would it have been your duty, to call the attention of the President to it, and would he not have been expected, in the exercise of his constitutional duty, to intervene and see that it was investigated, and stopped if it was wrong? Commander KEY. No, sire; that would not have been part of my duty. Senator MARTIN. A naval aid then has only social duties, but has no duties so far as the welfare of the Navy is concerned? Commander KEY. No official duties. He is merely a personal aid. Senator MARTIN. I take it that an aid, ordinarily, is to aid his chief in the betterment of the service. Commander KEY. I think that if the President had a young officer in any such capacity as that it would be very much resented by the older officers. The CHAIRMAN. It is not very essential, but did you not take a great interest in the so-called personnel bill in the last Congress, and while you were an aid to the President did you no communicate 32301--No.6--08----5312. PERSONNELL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. with a great many officers with regard to that bill, and were you not very earnest in pushing that bill? Commander KEY. Yes; I was very earnest about that bill, and I still am. I think it is very essential to the efficiency of the Navy. That was purely personal on my part. The CHAIRMAN. But still you were then aid to the President? Commander KEY. Yes; I was aid to the President. I did not consider that because I was aid to the President I lost my independence of action. The CHAIRMAN. You did not consider that being aid to the President gave you and less influence in your recommendations and suggestions with reference to that bill, did you? You did not think that lessened your influence? Commander KEY. My work on that bill was practically entirely with the public and officers, and very little with Congressmen. Senator MARTIN. Let me thoroughly understand the proposition. I want information about it. I had supposed that a naval aid to the President had some duties relative to the welfare of the Navy. Commander KEY. No, sir; they are purely personal. Senator MARTIN. As I understand it, then, his duties are purely personal and social? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; you are correct. Senator MARTIN. It is not your duty, then, to direct the attention of the President to anything that concerns the welfare of the Navy? Commander KEY. Not unless he directs me to look up the subject- not voluntarily. Senator MARTIN. And have you never held any conversation with him about naval affairs? Commander KEY. Oh, we have discussed naval affairs, yes, sir; of course; more of less. Senator MARTIN. Did you ever discuss this question of battle-ship construction with him? Commander Key. No, sir; I never did Senator TILLMAN. In that connection, that Senator Hale just brought out, about your interest in the personnel bill, I have seen it stated somewhere, I do not know where-I remember receiving a circular letter from one of my cadets, and heard of it in other directions- the letter beginning "My dear father," and so forth. Do you know anything about this letter? Commander KEY. I have seen it stated in the papers that I had something to do with that letter, but that was absolutely false. That letter, as I found out afterwards, was gotten up entirely by the midshipmen. The midshipmen were very much interested in the line personnel bill submitted by the Department, because they saw and still see that their promotion is going to be absolutely blocked unless Congress takes some action on the present Navy list. So they were intensely interested, and they got up the letter entirely among themselves. Senator TILLMAN. It did not originate with the board which was lobbying the personnel bill through? Commander Key. No, sir; not at all. There was never any board that was lobbying that through, so far as I know. Senator TILLMAN. I may be mistaken about that. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 313 Commander KEY. The Navy League, which is all over the country, took an interest in it. The CHAIRMAN. When you are through with this part of it, I wish you would take up these diagrams, because we must finish by 12 o'clock. Take up the question of turret hoists---- Senator PERKINS. Before you reach the subject of turret hoists I should like to ask the Commander what is the capacity of the ammunition magazines, in tons, on the vessels of the Kearsarge and Kentucky class? Commander KEY. I have not that data here exactly, but I think it is between four and five hundred tons. The CHAIRMAN. Now we must ask you to spend no time on non-essentials. Commander KEY. By this diagram which I have here the fighting draft is shown in all these ships; that is, the fighting draft recommended by the Walker board to be the designed normal draft. In the ships of the Kearsarge class----- The CHAIRMAN. We have those diagrams before us. You need not go into that. Chairman KEY. Now, in that column of two-thirds bunker coal, there is only one point that has not been presented to the committee that I should like to call attention to; we all know now that a war between two naval powers means the concentration of their battle-ship fleets, and when they are both of them ready for a fight, the action will take place and the question will be settled, probably by one big fleet action, which is to have command of the sea. Of the ships in Admiral Evans's fleet, those that have the least coal are the Alabama, Illinois, and Wisconsin, 1,250 tons; the Kansas and Vermont have about 2,400 or 2,500 tons; when the Admiral finds that the Alabama, Illinois, and Wisconsin are about down to half their coal supply, that is, when their radius of action is cut in two, when it is reduced to about one-half, he is going to stop and coal his fleet. He is either because no admiral will voluntarily go into action with his radius of action of any of his ships cut down more than half. When he stops to coal any of his ships he is going to coal all of his ships. He will fill up all the bunkers. The CHAIRMAN. You do not suppose that these old ships can be taken and their capacity for coal as they are constructed can now be very much enlarged, do you? Commander KEY. No, sir. The reason I wanted to bring out that point was to show you that the constant tendency always will be for the admiral to keep his ships full of coal. He is going to fill up with coal as soon as the shortest one gets short and he will then fill up the whole fleet. The CHAIRMAN. The officers pretty much all agree on that. Now, if you will take your diagrams and proceed----- Commander KEY. Now I will go to the diagram. I think the committee has been under the impression that our water-line belt armor was about as the English water-line belt armor is and that it was based on the Royal Sovereign. That is true. It is based on the Royal Sovereign, which was laid down in 1889, but that is the last ship that the English ever built with the thick, narrow belt; and although the British naval officers approved the Royal Sovereign in 1889, they do not approve that class of ships in 1893, because they314 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. then laid down the Majestic class with an entirely different belt armor, and they have never built any ships like the Royal Sovereign since, so far as belt armor was concerned. The Kearsarge is shown there as she is at what we call fighting draft, as she will probably go into action. The CHAIRMAN. This sketch represents what a landlubber would call the side of the ship? Commander KEY. That is a sectional view, just as if you cut the ship in two in the middle, and looked at one end of her, and that shows you that at fighting draft the Kearsarge has only a foot and three inches of her belt above water, and then right above that is the 5-inch armor. Now, it is plain that any number of shells would go right through that 5-inch armor, and with any sea on at all she would be in a bad way. The CHAIRMAN. Do you think you can change that? Commander KEY. Yes; I think a great deal can be done. The CHAIRMAN. On that ship? Commander KEY. I think a great deal can be done. For instance, the superposed turrets can be taken off, but that would be a matter that would have to be taken up with a board of officers, and it would take them months to go through. You will see that the Majestic, of the corresponding date, has 9 inches of belt armor, and instead of having a narrow belt, she has a belt 15 feet wide and 9 inches thick. Now, it does not make any difference if she is overdraft even 2 or 3 feet. I do not know how much she is overdraft, probably not more than a foot, if that much; because the best information I can get is that the English ships are very close to their designed draft, but you can see that if she is overloaded, the only result is that the lower part of her armor goes down and becomes useless, but she still has 8 or 9 feet of good solid armor above the water line. The CHAIRMAN. Take the next, please. Commander KEY. The next class is just the same. The CHAIRMAN. Now, right here, these diagrams in each case repre- sent, if you look at a section of the ship, that our ships have a thicker armor up to a certain point, and then it is much less above? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. While the British ships, the ships to the left, as the committee will see, the corresponding ships, the Canopus and the Formidable, have perhaps not as thick armor as the thickest of ours, but they run it up very much farther and make it rather a continuous belt from the bottom of the ship. Now, is that the way these ships have been constructed and are constructed now? Commander KEY. That represents the existing conditions, yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. This diagram? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator PERKINS. There seem to be six ships in the Canopus class with only 6-inch armor. Commander KEY. They were a class of ships which, as battle ships, I do not think have been very much approved in the British navy or anywhere else. They are considered to have too light armor; but they are built more for speed, I think, and they have not heavy enough armor for a first-class battle ship. The CHAIRMAN. The heavier armor, as I was going to point out, in the Canopus class, seems to be only half an inch thicker than thePERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 315 upper part of the Alabama above the 16 1/2 inch; that is, 5 1/2 inches, and 6 inches for the Canopus. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. So that there would be no real comparison between the two ships. Commander KEY. No, sir; you will see that I have a little sum- mary down in the right-hand corner. As you look along you will see that we gradually approach the English types; that is, that our upper belt comes closer to what it should be. The next class is the Maine class. You see her upper belt is 6 inches. She is getting a little nearer. She is a half inch better than the Alabama. Senator PERKINS. The Duncan class is only 7 inches? Commander KEY. Yes; the Duncan is only 7 inches, but you will see that we have no ships with 9-inch armor. Senator PERKINS. The London and Queen class are only 9 inches. Commander KEY. There is a great deal of difference between 9-inch and 6-inch armor. That means a lot. What I think is interesting, as shown by these diagrams, is that we have actually approached the English ships--that is, in our upper belt, nearer and nearer the thick- ness of the lower belt--and it took just about twelve years for our school of design to catch up with them. The CHAIRMAN. If we have caught up, that is a good deal. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. We have caught up. Senator PERKINS. The Maine class were built from 1902 to 1904. It seems to me that is not twelve years. Commander KEY. The Maine has only 6-inch armor above her main belt, and 6-inch armor can be punctured by a 9.2 shell. Senator PERKINS. The Canopus has only 6-inch armor. Commander KEY. That class stands by itself. Senator PERKINS. There were six of these ships in that class? Commander KEY. That is true, Mr. Senator, but the point is that she has a wide belt. She has a 15-foot uniform belt. They put rather light armor on her for some special reason--they probably wanted to put the weight on the machinery, or make a very fast battle ship out of her--but right alongside of her, at the same time, they were building three ships with 9-inch armor. In the South Carolina we have finally caught up with the English. We began doing in 1906 what they have done ever since 1893. The CHAIRMAN. We are up with them now. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. In fact, that upper belt that has been put on above the main belt is as thick as the main belt, within 1 inch. Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The only criticism now, that I can see, to which I think your attention ought to be invited, about that armor, is that we continue to distribute the water-line belt on that wrong line, a fictitious draft line. All the ships so far constructed are overdraft, their "fighting" draft is greater than their designed "normal" draft. The ships that are under construction will be overdraft like their predecessors, and we will be losing about 20 inches of armor, that should be placed where it will do some good. Senator PERKINS. As an educated, experienced naval officers, do you not think it is of more importance that the vitals of the ship shall be protected--that is, below the water line--than the part of the ship which is above?316 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Commander KEY. I believe in protecting them absolutely, but I do not believe in throwing away any armor. Senator PERKINS. The part below the water line is the heart of the ship, so to speak? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator PERKINS. And if a shell pierces below the water line, she is gone? Commander KEY. Perhaps. Senator PERKINS. Above it there are 8 chances out of 10 that she may survive? Commander KEY. Of course she will get hit eight times as often above the water. In fact, I never have heard of a ship in action being sunk by a shell below the water line. We know of plenty of them that have been sunk by shells above the water line. We propose to look out for the under-water body of the ship, but we do not want the armor wasted. The armor is now put on for a draft line that never exists in action, that we do not propose ever to have exist in action, and we waste a strip about 2 feet wide of very thick armor, which is absolutely thrown away. We want that armor used to the best advantage instead of hanging as a dead and useless weight to the ship. The CHAIRMAN. Right there, I do not want to interrupt you, but we have asked other officers, are you prepared to state how much you think this armor should be lifted? Commander KEY. I can only state, Mr. Chairman, after their "Lighting" draft has been precisely determined by the rules laid down by the Walker board. I believe these tables show it very closely. The CHAIRMAN. You need not go over that again. Are you prepared to state how much you think the armor that has not yet been put on should be raised or lifted? Commander KEY. Yes; I can tell you that exactly in this way, that judging from the data that we have, as far as it can be determined at this time, the overdraft will probably be about a foot and 8 inches. That is, the designed line differs about that much from the Walker board's recommendation. The CHAIRMAN. As I understood you to say, you think it ought to be lifted something like 2 feet, or perhaps a foot and 8 inches, and the reason for that is that the water load line should be reckoned in another way? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator PERKINS. I should like to ask the question in another way: What, in your opinion, should be the minimum width of the armor belt below the normal water load line of the ship in order to protect the vitals of the ship? Commander KEY. Well, sir, I would never consider her normal draft at all as we now have it. Senator TILLMAN. Considering the draft that you have told us you would suggest as the proper normal draft? Commander KEY. If you had that, then I would say 5 feet. Senator TILLMAN. You would then load the ship according to the recommendations of Admiral Goodrich and Admiral Remey, with full ammunition and stores and two-thirds of the coal supply, and let that PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 317 determine the draft line instead of the so-called fictitious draft line. Then you would have 5 feet of thick armor below that line? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; I would have 5 feet of armor below. Senator TILLMAN. And as much above as the weight of the armor would permit? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; I would not throw any away down below 5 feet. Senator PERKINS. Then after you had burned out a thousand tons of your coal, the ship comes up 1 inch for every 63 tons, and she would then be exposed to danger below the armor belt, would she not? Commander KEY. I would coal that ship a good while before that, if it were war time. The CHAIRMAN. You would if you could. Commander KEY. But you see, your feet is all together. You do not have battle ships scattered around. They are bound up together, and you must have access to coal. If you do not have it, you stay at home. You do not go out to sea without you know where you are going to get coal. Fuel is the life of the ship; without it she is a helpless bulk, a danger to navigation. The CHAIRMAN. Before our fleet went out we had to get our coal long beforehand. Commander KEY. Yes; all the arrangements had to be made beforehand, just as an admiral in time of war must have his coal supply arranged beforehand. The CHAIRMAN. We had to get foreign colliers. If there had been any danger of war after the fleet had started, we could not have got one of those foreign colliers, and could not have moved a mile, for the very reason that we could not have coaled. That is where the fleet is lacking, not in the number of big fighting ships, but in the auxiliaries. Commander KEY. We need a good merchant marine that will provide, us, for use in war, with an ample number of fast scouts and other vessels that may be used as transports or colliers. Senator PERKINS. We chartered 28 foreign bottoms to carry coal to these ships. The CHAIRMAN. If we had started completely equipped and there had been any danger of war we could not have gotten one of those foreign colliers, because they would not have been allowed to lease them to us, and we could not have gone 500 miles. Senator TILLMAN. Not long ago, Mr. Chairman, I recollect quite a debate in the Senate, in which the practicability of coaling at sea was absolutely disputed. Senator MARTIN. That difficulty is overcome now. Senator TILLMAN. I know we have got away from that, but if we have to fight, defective as our fleet is alleged to be, we still have a very good fleet. Commander KEY. Yes, sir; I want to be on record as subscribing to that statement. Senator TILLMAN. We need auxiliaries if we are going to have this war which is in the air, which somebody is always talking about up the avenue, and we are threatened with dire consequences unless we get four more battle ships immediately, and all that king of thing. Hadn't we better be providing for coaling stations somewhere, or colliers?318 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. Commander KEY. I think some colliers are in the programme, sir, but of course we need all the good fortified bases we can get. There is no question about that. A good merchant marine would be of the greatest assistance to us in war. The CHAIRMAN. Now, if you will come to the turret hoists? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Incidentally, Mr. Chairman, there is just one point I should like to call to your attention. Those four best battle ships of the Russians that were sunk had narrow belts. They had a main armor belt 6 feet 9 inches wide and 10 inches thick, 5 feet of it or more below the water. They had only 6-inch armor above that, and that 6-inch armor can be penetrated by 9.2 shells. Now, in regard to the open-turret ammunition hoists-- The CHAIRMAN. Right there, Commander, you have been here and have heard some of the testimony. You know there are two theories about that. I admit that I am in a condition of doubt about which is the best. As you have studied this matter and observed it, I think the committee would like to have you state; because it is a question of installing them now in the ships that we are building, and possibly changing those that are in. Considering rapidity of fire and safety, tell us which you think is the best hoist, and why you think it is. Commander KEY. The one thing that the seagoing officers of the Navy have been demanding since Commander Sims wrote that letter in 1902, pointing out the dangers of the open turret, has been merely the isolation of the turret proper, where the guns are, from the handling room. The handling room is a sort of reception room to the magazine. That is all we have contended for, the isolation of the guns from the handling room. Senator TILLMAN. Right there, whom do you mean by "we?" Do you mean you and Commander Sims? Commander KEY. No, sir; I mean the seagoing officers. Admiral Clark and many others have written letters about it. The Chairman. You have got to have some means by which the gun will receive the ammunition? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Now, which is the best, in your view, if you have any view about that? Commander KEY. About that point, Mr. Chairman, I think, as far as safety is concerned, that either is equally safe, as long as the turret is isolated from the handling room, and it is only a question of the comparative rapidity of the two types of hoist, and I should think the best way to settle the question would be for a board, or the Bureau of Ordnance, to determine which is the better type for rapidity. That is the only question involved, as one is just as safe as the other. The only reason the present open turret is unsafe is in case of a flareback or other accident. That causes a charge of powder which is about to be placed in the gun to be ignited, and there is a holocaust of powder grains, blown all through the turret, and a lot of grains go right down into the handling room, in the present form of turret, even with the shutters now installed. The CHAIRMAN. Admiral Converse, and I think Admiral Cowles, thought that the danger of any more flare-backs had been almost entirely obviated. What do you think about that? Senator TILLMAN. By the air jet. PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 319 Commander KEY. So far it has not obviated it. We had the air blast with the Georgia, but we had that accident just the same. And besides, we have had so many accidents of that nature, there does not seem to be any necessity of running an unnecessary risk that involves the safety of the ship and the lives of the men in the handling room; an unnecessary risk that no other Navy in the world is running. Senator TILLMAN. The other navies, as I understand it, are using the two-stage hoists, most of them. Commander KEY. No, sir; they have single-stage hoists. The English Navy have a number of single-stage hoists. Senator TILLMAN. What is the means of separation between the turret and the handling room in that scheme? Commander KEY. In the English Navy they have a tube running up through the center of the turret, or somewhere near the center, and that has a carrier inside. It is a closed tube, with an opening at the top and bottom. This carrier inside has a tight-fitting joint at the upper part, and also at the lower part. The CHAIRMAN. Is that what they call a trunk? Commander KEY. A sort of trunk arrangement. Senator TILLMAN. What is the means of lifting-a rope? Commander KEY. They run it up by electricity or by hydraulic power? Senator TILLMAN. Is it a piston, like teh elevators in some places? Commander KEY. Something like that. It is within this closed trunk- Senator TILLMAN. It has either got to be pulled up or pushed up. Which is the method? Commander KEY. I do not know the exact arrangement they have for working it, but the information is on file at the Department. The information has been on file since 1900, but the only points I looked into are the safety arrangements. By having this tight-fitting joint on the carrier at the bottom and top, the tube is absolutely closed. Senator TILLMAN. And the burning grains of powder do not come in contact with the bags of powder? Commander KEY. No, sir. You see, it is absolutely isolated. The CHAIRMAN. Your method would be for the Bureau of Ordnance to take this thing in hand and thoroughly investigate it, and settle upon the type and king of hoists? Commander KEY. Yes sir. The CHAIRMAN. You are not confident, in your own mind, which is the best? Senator TILLMAN. Suppose they made a recommendation, like the Walker board or their successors. Would not a new Secretary of the Navy just pigeonhole that? Commander KEY. I think you will find that you must have some change in the form of the Navy Department organization. The CHAIRMAN. You can not get any change that will not leave somebody who will be to blame. Senator TILLMAN. The President, the Secretary of the Navy, or their appointees. The CHAIRMAN. You do not have to change Secretaries of the Navy, unless the President desires it. 320 Personnel of the Navy and Marine Corps. Senator Tillman. As long as we have political promotions, I do not supposed it matter if the Navy does suffer. Senator Perkins. Where are there to be found men in this country better educated and better qualified to design ships properly than the men who, after having had thirty or forty years of expereince, are designated as members of these respective boards? The Chairman. I do no know. Senator Tillman. Here are some officers nearly as old as Commander Sims, and some of them older, and educated in the same way, and on the fighting line, who have designated ships that we told are defective and out of gear. The Chairman. And yet they want more battle ships. Senator Tillman. More battle ships, to be constructed by the men who have made these awful blunders. Commander Key. On this questions of the safety of the turret, you will find in the testimony of Admiral Mason, Chief of the Bureau of the Ordnance, before the House Naval Committee, on January 10, that he asked for $2,100,000 to make turret changes under two heads: (a) For the supply of ammunition as rapidly as it could be fired. (b) To effectively separate the turrets from the handling room below, so that the effect of any incidental ignition of powder in either place may be localized. So that he evidently considers the two things. The Chairman. He sates substantially the same thing here. Commander Key. Yes, sir. And he states in effect that the present turrets are dangerous. The was January 10, 1908. This glaring danger was first officially and specifically called to the attention of the Navy Department in 1902, and we have since had four accidents, by one of which 15 men were killed in the handling room. The Chairman. Are you able to state whether there is any consensus of option in the navies of the world on the subject of the ammunition hoist, as to which form is the best? Commander Key. All of them except ours isolate the turret from the handling room, so if there is an accident it will be confined to the turret. You see, it is six years since this matter was called to the attention of the Department, and we have had four turret accidents, 15 men killed in the handling room, since that time. Senator Tillman. In other words, you have hung on to the type which has been condemned, during a length of time one year less than President Roosevelt has been in office, and before that he was in the Navy Department as Assistant Secretary, and in full touch and control. Now, who is responsible that we have not corrected it? Commander Key. The Navy Department, of course, is responsible, and it was first called to their attention in 1902. The President has nothing to do with it. It is the Navy Department. Senator Gallinger. You say all foreign navies have a method of protection to the men, so far as the hoist is concerned, that we do not have? Commander Key. Yes, sir. Senator Gallinger. What is that method? Commander Key. Simply in isolating and dividing the turret proper from the handling room; the floor upon which the turret guns are mounted isolates the turret guns from the handling room below, so that if any accident happens in the turret - this is, if you have aPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 321 flare-back or other accidents which ignites a fresh charge of powder, the grains of which are blown through the turret, probably killing everyone in the turret—none of the grains of burning powder can drop below into the handling room and ignite charges of powder there. Senator GALLINGER. Then they just have a flooring to the turret? Commander KEY. A flooring, and have everything absolutely tight. The CHAIRMAN. Would you like to have the Commander tell us more fully about the floor? Senator GALLINGER. Yes, indeed, I would. Commander KEY. The only openings they have in the flooring are simply for the ammunition, and the ammunition is run up in a tube or trunk. Now, I am not an expert on this question, and probably could not explain it to you anything like as well as the Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance, or some one who has made a critical examination of the subject, but in a general way I know that they have tubes or trunks that run up to deliver the ammunition, and inside of them is simply a carrier that runs the ammunition up to the guns, carries the charge, and, as I have said before, there is a tight joint at the upper part and at the lower part of the carrier. If you consider one of these cash carriers in one of the department stores, that carries the money from the counter to the cash office, and consider the trough a closed tube, you put your money in the carrier, you have a tight joint at the end of the carrier, you see that it would deliver the money at the other end, and the tight joint in the rear would close that tube so that nothing could get through. Senator TILLMAN. And as soon as it got through it would close at the top? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. What I am interested in just now is not the tube, but the flooring. How does that differ in ours from other navies? Commander KEY. That does not differ at all now, generally speaking. Formerly our turret floors were much more open than now. They are closed now, expect for the opening where the ammunition carries comes through, which is closed by a shutter, but there is a rope goes through an opening in that, which permits the burning powder grains to go down in the handing room when they are blown through the turret. The CHAIRMAN. Then it is not a fact that in any of the modern shops that we are now building it is all open, but it has all been closed? Commander KEY. After the Missouri accident, after those fifteen men were killed, they put on the shutters, but they have not been satisfactory, because they permit grains of powder to fall below, and if one grain goes below, it is just as bad as a thousand grains, if you have a powder charge ignited. Not quite as much burning powder goes into the handling room, but the destructive effect is just as great. Senator MARTIN. Could those fifteen accidents to which you refer have been prevented by isolating the turret from the handling room? Commander KEY. No, sir; by isolating the turret from the handling room the safety of the magazines and the lives of the men in the handling room are insured. The CHAIRMAN. There were not fifteen accidents, were there? 322 Personnel of the Navy and Marine Corps Commander KEY. No, sir; fifteen men were killed by not doing as Commander Sims officially requested the Navy Department to do. Senator MARTIN. That accident was on the Missouri? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Senator MARTIN. I thought thirty-three men were killed on the Missouri. Commander KEY. I mean the fifteen men who were killed in the handling room. Those men's lives were unnecessarily sacrificed. Senator MARTIN. And that resulted from the failure to isolate the turret from the handling room? Commander KEY. Yes, sir. Now the Chief of Ordnance has asked for $2,100,000 to make changes on all these ships, on all the armored cruisers and all the battle ships, down to and including the South Carolina. Senator TILLMAN. And yet those which are designed and not yet built have all these alleged defects? Commander KEY. I do not know whether they are changing the ammunition hoists or not. Senator TILLMAN. I should like to ask the commander one more question. It has been alleged that the Navy Department are very reluctant to receive suggestions and recommendations from outside. Commander KEY. They are very ready to receive them, sir. Senator TILLMAN. But they pigeonhole them-- is that it? Commander KEY. Yes, sir; they apparently do. Senator PERKINS. Without consideration? Commander KEY. I think the testimony has certainly shown that. Senator TILLMAN. Have you any experience along that line, any facts of your own knowledge? Commander KEY. I have never sent in any recommendations. Senator TILLMAN. If you know of any you might give us a list of names. Commander KEY. I think Commander Sims can give you the most complete testimony on that subject. Senator TILLMAN. You do not mean to say that they do not consider them? You mean they do not adopt them? Have you any evidence that they have refused to give them careful consideration? Commander KEY. I think the history of this turret question is a complete answer to that. Senator TILLMAN. You mean that circumstantial evidence would convict them? Commander KEY. I think so. Mr. Chairman, I should like to make one statement before I leave. I do not want you or the committee to misunderstand me, sir, about these criticisms that I have made of our ships. I have tried to point out defects, simply with a view to the betterment of the Navy. The CHAIRMAN. You have stuck to your text very well this morning. Commander KEY. And also I wish further to say that I consider every ship that we have in Admiral Evan's fleet to be a good ship. They have all fine batteries and would all render a good amount of themselves in a fight. Senator TILLMAN. Even if some of them did go to the bottom. Commander KEY. Even if some of them did go to the bottom; and, moreover, as Admiral Farragut said, the best protection to any shipPERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 323 is a well-directed fire from her own guns. Now we have that. We can deliver a well-directed fire. We have a fine commissioned personnel, except in one most important particular. Our captains and admirals reach their grades too late in life and have so little experience that they are not equal to those of the best foreign navies. Our enlisted men are the most intelligent and efficient in the world; our shooting, for which I give Commander Sims the credit, has been brought up to a standard equal to that of any navy. We can give that protection which Admiral Farragut has said is the best protection that a ship can have, and his axiom is as true to-day as it was on the day he gave utterance to it. I do not consider these ships by any means ready to go on the scrap heap. Senator TILLMAN. They are not all obsolescent? Commander KEY. No, sir; not by any means, but I think they can be improved. The CHAIRMAN. I have seen that epigrammatic statement-- that the best protection to a ship is the fire of her own guns. It was Admiral Farragut who said that, was it? Commander KEY. It was Admiral Farragut. It is wonderful that under our present system of target practice we can take a young farmer boy from the West and train him aboard ship three months, and he can then take one of those big 13-inch guns and make a hit about every forty seconds on a target 12 feet high and about 20 feet long a mile distant and the ship going at 12 knots speed. Senator TILLMAN. He has been accustomed to sight down a shotgun barrel at prairie chickens and jack rabbits, I suppose. At 11 o'clock and 20 minutes a. m. the committee went into executive session. After some time spent therein, the committee adjourned. (Diagram omitted in this print; will appear when printed as a document.) Data for obtaining fighting draft of battle ships. BATTLE SHIP KEARSARGE.) (Tons per inch, 47.) Date. Place. In or out. Coal. Mean draft. 1905. Tons Ft. In. Aug. 11 Bar Harbor, Me..................................... Out...... 1,180 25 6.5 Aug. 24 Newport, R. I.......................................... In......... 746 25 .5 Aug. 25 .....do....................................................... Out...... 712 25 Aug. 29 Provincetown......................................... In......... 495 24 7.5 Sept. 12 .....do....................................................... Out..... 1,253 26 .5 1906. Feb. 6 Culebra...................................................... Out..... 1,128 26 3 Feb. 19 Guantanamo........................................... In........ 607 24 11.5 Apr. 1 Cape Cruz.................................................. In........ 975 25 4 Total.................................................................................. 6,097 202 9.5 Average coal and draft, 8 observations....................... 762 25 4.2 Two-thirds bunker capacity........................................... 1,000 ........ Difference in coal and draft............................................ 238 5 Fighting draft, carrying two-thirds bunker coal................... 25 9 Builders' trial draft................................................................... 23 6 Excess of fighting draft over builders' trial draft................. 2 3324 Personnel of the Navy and Marine Corps. Data for obtaining fighting draft of battle ships - Continued. Battle Ship Alabama. [Tons per inch, 48.] Date Place. In or out. Coal. Mean draft. 1906. Aug. 8 Newport, R.I........................ Out............. 1,172.5 25 7 Aug. 18 Rockport............................... Out............. 771.5 25 1.5 Aug. 26 Boston.................................. Out............. 1,290.5 25 11.5 Aug. 29 Rockland.............................. Out............. 1,171 25 10 Aug. 30 Camden. Me........................ Out............. 1,143 25 9 Sept. 2 Smithtown Bay, L. I............. Out............. 944.3 25 4 Sept. 4 Oyster Bay........................... Out............. 880 25 1.5 Sept. 24 Provincetown..................... In................ 981.3 25 2.5 Sept. 27 ........do................................. Out............. 902 25 1 _________ _________ Total ...................... ................... 9,256.1 229 _________ _________ Average coal and draft, 9 observations ...................... 1,029 25 5.3 Two-thirds bunker capacity .......................................... 850 ............. Difference in coal and draft .......................................... 179 3.7 _________ Fighting draft, carrying two-thirds bunker coal .... ............. 25 2 Builders' trial draft ......................................................... ............. 23 6 _________ Excess of fighting draft over builders' trial draft... ............ 1 8 ======================================================================= Battle Ship Maine. [Tons per inch, 51.] 1906. June 5 Provincetown....................... In............... 1,060 25 5.5 June 6 Rockport............................... In............... 987 25 2 June 9 ........do.................................. Out............ 834 25 1.5 July 16 ........do................................. In............... 1,364 25 5 July 30 ........do................................. Out............ 810 24 8 July 31 Newport, R.I......................... In............... 702 24 6 Aug. 8 ........do................................. Out............. 1,609 26 Aug. 9 Rockport............................... In................ 1,480 25 9 Aug. 18 ........do.................................. Out............. 1,002 25 3.5 Aug. 29 Rockland............................... Out............. 877 25 1 _________ _________ Total ...................... ................... 10,725 252 5.5 _________ _________ Average coal and draft, 10 observations ..................... 1,073 25 3 Two-thirds bunker capacity .......................................... 1,250 ............. Difference in coal and draft .......................................... 177 3 _________ Fighting draft, carrying two-thirds bunker coal .... ............. 25 6 Builders' trial draft ......................................................... ............. 23 10 _________ Excess of fighting draft over builders' trial draft... ............ 1 8 ======================================================================= Battle Ship New Jersey. [Tons per inch, 61.] Mar. 22 Cape Cruz....................... In............... 1,074 25 6 Apr. 6 ........do.................................. Out............ 628 24 9 Apr. 7 Guantanamo...................... In............... 542 24 7.5 Apr. 10 ........do................................. Out............ 1,782 26 3.5 May 16 Boston................................. In............... 457 24 5.5 _________ _________ Total ...................... ................... 4,483 125 7.5 _________ _________ Average coal and draft, 5 observations ...................... 897 25 1.5 Two-thirds bunker capacity .......................................... 1,332 ............. Difference in coal and draft .......................................... 435 7.1 _________ Fighting draft, carrying two-thirds bunker coal .... ............. 25 8.6 Builders' trial draft ......................................................... ............. 23 9 _________ Excess of fighting draft over builders' trial draft... ............ 2PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. 325 Data for obtaining fighting draft of battle ships—Continued. BATTLE SHIP CONNECTICUT. [Tons per inch, 63.] Date Place. In or out. Coal. Mean draft. 1907. Tons. Ft. In. Jan. 13 Culebra............................................... In........... 1,548 25 11 Jan. 21 ........do................................................ Out........ 1,375 25 6 Jan. 28 ........do................................................ Out........ 1,271 25 10.5 Jan. 31 Guantanamo..................................... In.......... 1,067 25 2.5 Feb. 12 St. Thomas (Danish West Indies).... In.......... 1,645 26 0.5 Feb. 15 St. Thomas......................................... Out........ 1,544 25 11.5 _________ _________ Total ....................................................... 8,450 154 6 _________ _________ Average coal and draft, 6 observations ................................ 1,408 25 9 Two-thirds bunker capacity .................................................... 1,516 ............. Difference in coal and draft .................................................... 108 2 _________ Fighting draft, carrying two-thirds bunker coal ....................................... 25 11 Builders' trial draft ............................................................................................ 24 6 _________ Excess of fighting draft over builders' trial draft.................................. 1 5 BATTLE SHIPS MINNESOTA AND KANSAS. [Tons per inch, 63.] MINNESOTA. Sept. 7 Rockport......................................... In......... 969 25 2 Oct. 11 Provincetown................................ Out....... 1,846 25 11 Oct. 12 Newport......................................... In.......... 1,654 25 9.5 KANSAS. Sept. 7 Provincetown................................ In.......... 1,071 25 5 Sept. 13 Barnstable..................................... In.......... 527 24 10 Sept. 21 ........do.......................................... Out....... 811 24 11 _________ _________ Total ......................................................... 6,878 152 .5 _________ _________ Average coal and draft, 6 observations ................................... 1,146 25 4.1 Two-thirds bunker capacity ....................................................... 1,600 ............. Difference in coal and draft ....................................................... 454 7 _________ Fighting draft, carrying two-thirds bunker coal .................................... 25 11 Builders' trial draft ......................................................................................... 24 6 _________ Excess of fighting draft over builders' trial draft................................. 1 5[*[Key]*] [*[enc. in 3-21-08 Navy Dept.]*] 326 PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS. AMERICAN AND BRITISH BATTLE SHIPS COMPLETED SINCE 1899. Comparison of width and thickness of water-line belt and the height and depth of upper and lower edges of belt above and below the water line at "fighting draft;" also the thickness of side armor and the height of 12" and 13" guns above water at "fighting draft." Battle ships. Completed. Water-line belt. Side Height of 12" and 13" Normal Designed Fighting Excess Two-thirds Normal Tons Width. Thickness At fighting armor guns above water at or builders' "normal" draft of bunker coal or per amidships. draft. (lower "fighting draft" trial or two-thirds fighting coal. coal on inch. Lower Upper deck) displacement. builders' coal draft builders' edge edge thickness. trial and over trial. below above draft. supplies. designed water. water. draft. Feet. " " ' " ' " " Kearsarge and Kentucky 1899 7.5 16.5- 9.5 6 3 1 3 5 { 2 13" at 18 feet 2 13" at 15 feet 8 inches Majestic class (9 ships) 1895-1898 16 9 9 { 2 12" at 27 feet 9 inches 2 12" at 26 feet Alabama, Illinois, and Wisconsin 1900, 1901 7.5 16.5-14 5 6 3/8 1 11 3/8 5.5 { 2 13" at 25 feet 2 13" at 16 feet 4 inches Canopus class (6 ships) 1900-1902 15 6 6 { 2 12" at 22 feet 6 inches 2 12" at 22 feet 6 inches Formidable class (3 ships) 1901, 1902 15 9 9 (a) Ohio, Main, and Missouri 1902-1904 7.5 11 - 7.5 5 10 5/8 1 7 3/8 6 { 2-12 at 24 feet 11 inches 2-12 at 16 feet 0 inches Duncan class (6 ships) 1903, 1904 14 7 7 { 2-12 at 23 feet 6 inches 2-12 at 23 feet 6 inches London class (3 ships) 1902 15 9 9 { 2-12 at 26 feet 2-12 at 26 feet Queen class (2 ships) 1904 15 9 9 (a) Virginia, New Jersey, Georgia, Nebraska, } 1906 8 11 to 8.5 7 0.5 1 0 6 { 2-12 at 23 feet 4 inches and Rhode Island. 2-12 at 23 feet 2 inches King Edward class (8 ships): 5. 1905 } (a) 9 8 { 2-12 at 22 feet 6 inches 3. 1907 2-12 at 21 feet 6 inches Louisiana an Connecticut 1906 9.25 11 to 8.5 6 5 2 10 6 { 2-12 at 25 feet 2-12 at 25 feet Kansas, Vermont, and Minnesota 1907 9.25 11 to 8.5 6 5 2 10 7 { 2-12 at 25 feet 2-12 at 25 feet Lord Nelson class (2 ships) 1907 (a) 12 7 { 2-12 at 26 feet 2-12 at 21 feet a Not known. Report of the Walker board, May 18, 1896, and approved by the Secretary of the navy: "A battle ship's normal draft should be her fighting draft; otherwise the term is inaccurate and misleading—not her maximum draft with all the ammunition, coal, and stores that she can carry, but her draft with a large percentage of these supplies—not less than two-thirds of her full capacity of each on board. And the position of the armor belt should bear its proper relation to this actual load line, not to a fictitious load line seldom realized under service conditions."[*Enc. in Goodkind 12-12-11 3-21-08*]SATURDAY, MARCH 21, 1908. AN OPEN LETTER. Dear Mr. Roosevelt, On the day following your election in 1904, I sent to my friend, Judge Alton B. Parker, the following telegram: "Four years more of "Teddy" will make countless thousands mourn." This telegram eminated from no intended disrespect to you, but was prompted because of my thorough knowledge of your temperament and make up. I knew that millions must have been spent in bringing about the unprecedented vote that you received. I assume that promises of protection, immunity and favor constituted "the goods" that were to be delivered upon demand to the "purchaser." I knew that "the goods" would not be delivered and that friction would be the result. I knew that this friction would ultimately mean "a lesson" for somebody. When the masses voted for you they little anticipated that the "Anti-Trust" "boomerang" would hit them! Everybody is in favor of a reform so long as that reform does not encroach upon them! Everyone is jealous of the other fellow's graft. When we yelled hallelujah to your sentiment that the Trusts must be curbed we did not realize that "prosperity" is a manufactured commodity and that it is made by the "Trusts." Now that the manufacturers of Prosperity have "shut down for repairs," those who have been hit the worst are looking around for someone to blame- and you are that someone. you have given the American people exactly what they have been crying for, and now they do not want it. We wanted reforms that would ultimately lead to the general betterment of the condition and opportunities of the masses. You agitate and the people repel. Yous insist and the Octopus recoils and becomes obstreperous! Every reform in the history of the world has cost some self-sacrifice and was achieved only at the cost of some self denial. The trouble is not with the "Trusts," not with the President, but with the People! We lack the true American spirit! If the "Boston Tea Party" had consisted of present day Americans they would have sat down and drunk the tea instead of throwing it overboard. I am a Democrat but the more I see of the Trusts and Corporations the more I like Roosevelt! What Roosevelt had begun someone must sooner or later finish. Because the Trust retaliate "by putting the screws on," because they make their power felt is all the more reason why a "Trust" ought to be controlled by proper legislation! When a King becomes despotic, and a "Power" a menace it is time for action! We want honest prosperity or none! We gain nothing by a condition that advances wages twenty per cent and the cost of living sixty per cent. Somebody gets the other forty per cent! If you don't like the Beef Trust, quit eating beef! Starve out the Trust instead of allowing it to starve you! Thats Americanism! Organization, and concerted action is your remedy. Fight back that's the answer, and some day in the near future the American people will begin to realize that we need a few more Roosevelts!- Dear Mr. Roosevelt,or none! We gain nothing by a condition that advances wages twenty per cent and the cost of living sixty per cent. Somebody gets the other forty per cent! If you don't like the Beef Trust, quit eating beef! Starve out the Trust instead of allowing it to starve you! Thats Americanism! Organization, and concerted action is your remedy. Fight back that's the answer, and some day in the near future the American people will begin to realize that we need a few more Roosevelts! ---Dear Mr. Roosevelt, please quit "butting in"; please allow Wall Street to continue to put its hands in the people's pockets and help themselves! Please allow the present system of getting money no matter how it be gotten to prevail! Please close your eyes to the fake "mark down" sales of the Department Stores, and to the queeer doings of the Insurance Companies. Please grant a special privilege to the Banks to play poker and otherwise gamble with the people's money. Please issue a proclamation relegating to the Trusts the prerogative of soaking the public as much as they please providing they restore and maintain prosperity (?) Please do all these things Mr. Roosevelt and millions of dollars will be ready to back you as the American (?) people's choice, and you will be the next President of the United States. Continue in your wayward ambition to make of the American people and American enterprises, examples of honor, patriotism and consistency and you name is "Dennis." A Socialist is a man whose ideas differ from those of the man who has a sinecure! Yours, MILT. GOODKIND. N. Y. City, Friday, March the 13th, 1908.[*Enc. in Reid 3-21-08*]Panama LES AMÉRICAINS ET NOUS Une brochure a paru récemment à New-York, dont le titre suffit à marquer les préoccupations du vénérable et éminent homme d'Etat par qui elle fut écrite : The Panama canal and the daughters of Danaus ; « le Canal de Panama et les filles de Danaüs ». La brochure est signée John Bigelow. John Bigelow fut ambassadeur des Etats-Unis chez nous, sous Lincoln. C'est aujourd'hui un robuste et souriant vieillard de quatre-vingt-douze ans, qui consacre ses loisirs à publier de temps à autre d'utiles pages sur les affaires de son pays. Sa brochure n'est point un pamphlet, mais une étude apprefondie et, çà et là, un peu injuiète, de la colossale entreprise, du « travail de Danaïdes » dont ses compatriotes assumèrent la charge quand — il y a eu juste quatre ans ces jours-ci — fut signé à Washington entre la République des Etas-Unis et celle de Panama le traité Hay-Bunau-Varilla qui assurait l'exécution du canal français de Panama, et, du même coup, la définitive défaite de son rival américain, — le canal de Nicaragua. Quatre ans ! Cet anniversaire-là marque pour nous aussi une date intéressante : celle du terme qu'assignait M. Bunau-Varilla à la réalisation du canal à écluses provisoires, grâce auquel devait s'opérer la jonction des deux mers. Nous avons à plusieurs reprises indiqué en quoi consistait le plan proposé par notre éminent compatriote ; il comportait la construction dun premier canal à écluses provisoires, rapidement exécuté, mais qui déjà suffisait aux premières années d'exploitation ; puis se poursuivaient — sans qu'un instant le trafic en fût interrompu — les travaux d'élargissement du canal ; et ces travaux aboutissaient en dix années à ce résultat : suppression des écluses, ouverture du détroit libre de Panama, large comme la Tamise à London Bridge, cinq fois plus large à la ligne d'eau que l'ancien canal à niveau de M. de Lesseps à Panama... C'était la solution complète du problème. Les Américains ont reculé devant l'audace de cette conception. Ils ont préféré le canal à écluses perpétuelles parce qu'ils étaient pressés d'aboutir et attribuaient à cette solution imparfaite l'avantage [*Read next slip & then close of article on reverse side of this.*] 2 compensateur d'une plus grande facilité d'exécution. Ont-ils vu juste, ou se sont'ils trompés ? Quelque chiffres empruntés à la brochure même de M. John Bigelow vont nous renseigner. L'ancien ambassadeur dit, en résumé, ceci : — Nous sommes partis sur un programme qui comportait une dépense en travaux de 600 millions, et, en frais accessoires, de 12 millions par an, pendant dix ans. Le 30 juin prochain, plus de quatre années se seront écoulées depuis le jour où les Etas-Unis ont commencé leur œuvre. Ce jour-là, nous aurons dépensé 440 millions. Les frais accessoires, aux termes de notre programme, devraient avoir, sur ce total, absorbé 48 millions, et les travaux proprement dits 392 millions, soit les deux tiers de la somme totale affectée à l'entreprise. Par conséquent : Du grand barrage en terre de Gatun, long de 2,300 mètres, haut de 40 mètres, un kilomètre et demi devrait être achevé : il n'est même pas commencé. Des douze grandes chambres à écluses à construire, huit devraient être terminées : il n'y a pas encore un seul mètre cube de maçonnerie dans une seule d'entre elles. Sur 43 millions de mètres cubes à enlever à sec de la Culebra, 28 millions devraient en avoir disparu : il en avait été enlevé exactement 9,700,000 mètres cubes, au 1er janvier de cette année. Supposons même, au cours du présent semestre, un enlèvement moyen de 700,000 mètres cubes par mois : cela nous mènera, au 30 juin, à un total de 14 millions de mètres cubes environ, au lieu de 28... Voilà les faits. Et M. John Bigelow ne les emprunte qu'à des documents officiels. Ce révélations, auxquelles l'opinion n'était nullement préparée en Amérique, y ont produit une sensation énorme. On sait que l'exécutiou du canal de Panama a été confiée par les Américains au département de la guerre. L'ingénieur en chef des travaux est le colonel Gœthals. Invité par le Sénat à s'expliquer sur ces chiffres inquiétants, le colonel Gœthals a montré la plus déconcertante franchise. Il a déclaré : « Oui, sans doute, nous avions prévu, en travaux et frais accessoires, une dépense totale de 720 millions. Mais cela pourrait bien aller à deux milliards et demi... » Quel vacarme un pareil aveu n'eût-il pas soulevé chez nous, il y a vingt ans ! Et cependant, à mesure que se poursuit cette passionnante expérience, on est bien obligé de reconnaître que, tout de même, nous n'avons pas travaillé là-bas aussi mal que l'ont cru et que l'affirment encore quelques-uns. Aujourd'hui nous pouvons comparer ce que nous avons fait à Panama avec ce qu'y font les autres. Instructive et, malgré tout, réconfortante leçon ! Rappelons-nous d'abord dans quelles conditions nous allions à Panama. C'était la forêt vierge à transformer en un chantier ; c'était la fièvre jaune et la fièvre paludéenne, qui décimaient nos travailleurs ; c'était le tâtonnement dans l'inconnu ; — dans l'inconnu du terrain, du climat, des ressources et des conditions de la main-d'œuvre. Il n'y avait rien qu'on n'ignorât, et que jour à jour il ne fallût apprendre, au prix de quels sacrifices et de quels efforts, et de combien de deuils ! Aujour'hui, rien n'existe plus à Panama de ces difficultés et de ces périls. On marche sur un terrain qu'on connaît; on poursuit une entreprise dont l'expérience a permis de fixer les conditions et les règle. Les fièvres même ont disparu ; la science en a eu raison. On va à Panama comme à l'usine ; on y allait, « de notre temps », comme à la guerre. Pourtant, en moins de huit ans, la Compagnie française a exrait du sol de détroit 55 millions de mètres cubes de terre et de rocher ; et elle a dépensé pour cela 782 millions [?janvier] [1?]NAVY DEPARTMENT Washington, D.C., March 22, 1908. [*Ackd 3-24-08 Navy*] My dear Mr. President:- As I expect to leave for Quincy, Mass., to-day, I have decided, notwithstanding that I know you are exceedingly busy, to send you my printed testimony before the Senate Committee and a copy of a written statement that they authorized me to submit to them. I hope that you may soon find the time to read them. In connection with this whole subject I wish to specifically state to you that I have persistently and consistently taken the ground that the most desirable and feasible manner of bringing about the changes that many of us believe to be essential to the well being of the Navy was to get all the facts before you and the Secretary and trust to your interest and ability to obtain the desired results. I had never heard of Reuterdahl or had anything to do, directly or indirectly, with the article he published; I never have had anything to do, directly or indirectly, with the articles published in the Navy, in fact as a member of the Navy League I objected to them as being detrimental to the interests of the organization; I never had anything to do with the discussion of a change in the command of the Atlantic Fleet, in fact never even hear of it till weeks after2. the discussion took place; during the two years I was attached to the General Board and while I was serving as your Naval Aide, I several times attempted to persuade individual members of the General Board that Manila and not Subig bay was the place for the proposed naval base but they were thoroughly committed to Subig, thoroughly believed in it, and were only irritated by my arguments and efforts to convince them that they were wrong. I have never used the press, directly or indirectly, except to help on personnel legislation, in which I have been deeply interested for many years, long before I first knew you, as President of the Personnel Board in 1897. I state these matters to you, specifically, for I find reports that would lead one to believe that I am more or less an irresponsible agitator are being circulated about the Navy Department and such reports do me a grave injustice. When press criticisms, with which I have had nothing whatever to do, brought about the present discussion and Senatorial investigation concerning defects in naval vessels and departmental organization I determined to do what I could to bring out the facts, for I believe if the country once grasps the facts that we will obtain reforms immediately, which otherwise will take years to bring about. Within the past month I have investigated the alleged defects as thoroughly as the limited time would permit. My investigation has been independent lines, entirely my own without consultation or advice from any one. As3. I have never done any bureau work in my whole naval career I have no bureau associations or record to defend; as I had not heretofore criticised the results of the bureau system I had no recorded statements to confirm. The results of my investigation are contained in my testimony. If there are any errors in my facts or conclusions it is not because I have failed in the effort to be absolutely honest, frank, unprejudiced and to avoid exaggeration. You may, perhaps, think I have exaggerated the importance of "battle drills" with the fleet. If you have any doubt about that subject please call up on the Office of Naval INtelligence for a report as to the amount and kind of fleet battle drills of the British Navy. If they have not the information on file they can easily obtain it from our Naval Attaché at London. In my opinion our neglect of this most important work in preparing the fleet for action is absolutely indefensible, yet, under out departmental organization, if you attempted to fix the blame you would fail in your effors, or you would, more probably, be given such plausible reasons for our failure to have the drills that you would be convinced that we had made strenuous efforts but could never find the time. In our departmental organization I merely claim that you will get better results with an indifferent man, made responsible for his advice to the Secretary, and made responsible for the proper coordination and supervision of the4. work of the several bureaus, under the Secretary, than you can possibly have under the present organization which holds no one responsible and which, so far as I am able to learn, is without parallel in the organization of any naval or military establishment in existence. Trusting that eventually you may be able to turn the present public agitation and interest in the affairs of the Navy into channels that will lead to an increase in its efficiency, I remain, with great respect, Sincerely yours, A.L. Key The President N.B. I enclose a copy of the short discussion I wrote on the "Existing Administrative Organization of the Navy Department". I think Captain Hobson has the copy that I originally submitted to you. [*[FOR ENCLOSURE SEE 3-26-08]*]TELEGRAM. The White House, Washington. 1 WU.G.KQ. 53 dh - 5:25 p.m. Silver City, N. M., March 22, 1908. Hon. William Loeb, Jr., White House, Washington. The Territorial convention adjourned here late last night. It was large and enthusiastic. Spiess, Bursam, Catron, Otero, Fall and myself elected delegates to National Convention. Iron-clad instructions for Taft. Strong resolutions passed endorsing The President. Luna endorsed for National. All proceedings carried by acclamation. Please advise the President of action of convention. W. H. H. Llewellyn.Ambassade de France A Washington [*Ackd 3/23/08*] [*Cf J*] March 23. 08 Dear Mr. President, Here is the true appelation of Col. Mazel, as I find it in the official "Almanach National". (Monsieur le Colonel Mazel Commandant l'Ecole d'Application de Cavalerie) Saumur I shall forward your letter and portrait by the next diplomaticmail, Wednesday week, or if you prefer, by post this Wednesday. You may be assured that such a testimony from such a horseman - to mention only what relates to the horse - will be highly valued by all. As for Captain Fitzhugh Lee's being included among Capt. Feline's pupils, I consider, having thought of it, that it would be too much for the President to go into such details, and crabbed minds, if any there be (God forbid) might think that this is the occasion of your letter. Better leave that to Major Fournier and myself who ought to be able to manage it. Believe me, dear Mr. President Ever yours Most respectfully and sincerely JusserandWednesday. If you will name an hour on that day which will suit the President's convenience, I will communicate with Browne at once and bring him up. Browne claims that if the anti-administration group had taken the method he took for looking into the question, they would not have gone into the fights in the first place; & that, per contra, if the administration's [*11.30 Wed*] Department of the Interior, Office of Indian Affairs, Washington. March 23, 1908 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER Dear Mr. Secretary: Certain professional engagements of Mr. Herbert Janvrin Browne, the man I told the President had given me some suggestions on the Brownsville Episode, have prevented my making arrangements for calling at the White House tillsupporters had adopted that matter, they would have broken up the opposition in short order. I do not hold myself responsible for the wisdom or correctness of Browne's views on this subject. I think, however, they are offered in good faith, and are at least worth the President's trouble to hear and judge for himself. One element of value - if it is soundly based - is the evidence he believes he has got that the plan was discussed during the day preceding the fateful night, this showing that the shooting-up was the result of us suddenly hatched scheme of vengeance under the influence of a passing wave of feeling. To digress a moment, I hope Brother Taft has the right sort of answer ready for the Labor catechists? Sincerely yours, Francis E. Leupp To Hon: Wm Loeb, Jr.[*F*] [*Ackd 3/24/08*] THE AMERICAN MONTHLY REVIEW OF REVIEWS 13 ASTOR PLACE, NEW YORK ALBERT SHAW EDITOR March 23, 1908 Dear Mr. President: I have just now had a further report from Robert Collier saying he is conferring with his father and that they will do their best to get out those additional volumes of your state papers and addresses without delay. He seemed not to be perfectly sure about the question of copy and editing, and I told him that that was not a matter I had gone into and that I had somehow got the impression that the material was already in their hands. Faithfully yours, Albert Shaw President Theodore Roosevelt The White House Washington, D. C.March 24, 1908 [* Ackd & Enc retd 3/24/08*] 1733 N. Street Dear Mr. Presidential Brother Will you read the enclosed & give me through Mr Loeb an answer that I can quote to Lady Maitland. I suppose of course you will refuse as such a request through me & from Lady M - might I should think be usedas she will be absent care to come next Sunday at 8 let Mr Loeb tell me if you prefer being alone or in case you wish friends let him tell me who you want. [*[A. R. Cowles]*] in any strange way - They belong to good people but I don’t care for her & could not the least count on what she might do - needless to say we wish more than anything your taking supper with us on Sunday when Edith is away. Should you [*Ackd 3/25/08*] [*Thurs Mch 12*] [*[3-24-08]*] 422 MADISON AVENUE Dear Mr Loeb My friends Mr & Mrs Frederic Coats are very anxious to take their 12 year old son Archie, to shake hands with the President - they will arrive at the Shoreham on March 28th, will be there a week. I know how hard itWill you give him the enclosed note? With kind regards Sincerely yours Corinne Roosevelt Robinson March 24th 1908 Kindly answer to “The Homestead”. Hot Springs Virginia is even for him to give the few minutes necessary for the handshake, but on account of the boy & his name I felt I must ask - Will you let me know if he is able to accord them this privilege, and also whether Mrs Archibald Alexander of whom I wrote you a fortnight ago, did lunch with him -March 25 1908 [*Ackd 3-25-08*] 1733 N. Street. Dearest Mr P. The letter for Louis is perfect I return it because I suppose it is to be enclosed to Louis - I will answer Lady Maitland - We would love to have the Howards & Fournier perhaps you would get Mr Loeb to let me know if this means I am to askthem - I will see the Howard’s tonight - I like the Howards & Fournier greatly Yours Ever Anna Roosevelt Cowles [*[Cowles]*]CIPHER CABLE. RECEIVED AND TRANSLATED The White House, Washington. STATE DEPARTMENT March 25, 1908. Tower, Berlin. Yours twenty-first. The Department is much surprised by your announcement regarding appointment of Mr. Hill, as the agreement of the Emperor to that appointment was communicated to the President by the German ambassador here on the sixth of November last, and the appointment of Mr. Hill to the anticipated vacancy was publicly announced immediately thereafter, as well as the appointment to fill Hill's place, it is not now perceived how this can be changed. We will, however, await the letter to the President to which you refer. Root.[*Ackd 3/25/08 Enc retd*] [*[Ca 3-25-08]*] Department of State, Washington. Do you see any objection to this telegram? I thought there better be a spoke put in Towers wheel at least without delay ER The President [Root[For attachment see Ca 3-25-08]March 25, 1908. Gentlemen: Complaint has been made to me by various reputable colored people in the South that they do not receive the accommodations to which they are entitled on the railroad. The decision of your Commission has been that there is nothing in the law of the states which have enacted such laws, which prohibits separate accommodations for the white and colored races, but that these accommodations must be equal. The principle of equality of accommodation is set out explicityly in, for instance, the code of the State of Alabama, which provides that there shall be "equal, but separate accommodations for the white and colored races, by providing two or more passenger cars for each passenger train, or by dividing the passenger cars by partitions." I entirely agree with the notion of your Commission in insisting that the accommodations be equal in convenience and comfort, for the same money, wherever separation is made. The principal grounds of complaint alleged are that the cars are often filthy, the compartments for colored people not only filthy but in many instances too small and lacking proper ventilations that on some of the roads, all the colored people, including women and children, are required to pass thru the white man's smoking compartment in order to the part of the coach reserved for colored peoples that no separate toilet arrangements for colored men and women are provided as in the cars for white passengers that in many other cases as smoking room whatever is provided for colored peoples and that the waiting room provided for colored people are often filthy and poorly lighted and heated and kept in good order. Will you please have a thoro investigation made into these complaints, and take any action which may be necessary to secure the treatment for the same money for white and colored people wherever separation is made? March 25, 1908. Gentlemen: Complaint has been made to me by various reputable colored people in the South that they do not require the accommodations to which they are entitled on the railroad [*I am informed*]. The decision of your Commission has been that there is nothing in the law of the states which have enacted such laws, which prohibits separate accommodations for the white and colored races, but that these accommodations must be equal. The principle of equality of accommodation is set out explicitly in, for instance, the code of the State of Alabama, which provides that there shall be "equal, but separate accommodations for the white and colored races, by providing two or more passenger cars for each passenger train, or by dividing the passenger cars by partitions." I entirely agree with the action of your Commission in insisting that the accommodations be equal in convenience and comfort, for the same money, wherever separation is made. The principal grounds of complaint alleged are that the cars are often filthy, the compartments for colored people not only filthy but in many instances too small and lacking proper ventilation; that on some of the roads, all the colored people, including the women and children, are required to pass thru the white men's smoking compartment in order to get into the part of the coach reserved for colored people; that no separate toilet arrangements for colored me and women are provided as in the cars for the white passengers; that in many other cases no smoking room whatever is provided for the colored people; and taht the waiting frooms provided for colored people are often filthy and poorly lighted and heated, and not kept in good order. Will you please have a thoro investigation made into these complaints, and take any action which may be necessary to secure the same treatment for the same money for white and colored people wherever separation is made?2/ I am informed that there are some roads as to which there is no complaint, and others as to which there is grave complaint. Sincerely yours, The Interstate Commerce Commission, Washington, D. C.[For Enc. see 3-25-08][*[ca 3-25-08]*] [*Suggested ¶¶:*] We have been seeking to see that there is no discrimination in the transportation of freight from one state to another; we should be even more careful to see that there is no discrimination in the matter of conveying human beings from one state to another. We should be just as careful to see that there is discrimination in transportation of human beings from one state to another as we are in seeing that there is no discrimination in freight rates.[Enc in - 3-25-08]March 25 1908 [*Ackd 3-25-08*] 1733 N. Street. Dearest Mr P. The letter for Louis is perfect I return it because I suppose it is to be enclosed to Louis - I will answer Lady Maitland - We would love to have the Howards & Fournier perhaps you would get Mr Loeb to let me know if this means I am to askthem - I will see the Howards tonight - I like the Howards & Fournier greatly Yours Ever Anna Roosevelt Cowles [*[Cowles]*]CIPHER CABLE. RECEIVED AND TRANSLATED The White House, Washington. STATE DEPARTMENT March 25, 1908. Tower, Berlin. Yours twenty-first. The Department is much surprised by your announcement regarding appointment of Mr. Hill, as the agreement of the Emperor to that appointment was communicated to the President by the German ambassador here on the sixth of November last, and the appointment of Mr. Hill to the anticipated vacancy was publicly announced immediately thereafter, as well as the appointment to fill Hill's place, it is not now perceived how this can be changed. We will, however, await the letter to the President to which you refer. Root.[*Ackd 3/25/08 Enc retd*] [*[Ca 3-25-08]*] DEPARTMENT OF STATE. WASHINGTON. Do you see any objection to this telegram? I thought there better be a spoke put in Towers wheel at least without delay ER The President [Root[*[For attachment see Ca 3-25-08]*][*A*] [*[3 -25-08]*] There is of course some unpleasant feeling and it is quite evident that it would be a relief to the German government if the awkwardness of the situation were to be relieved by your leaving Berlin quietly & upon your own initiative without waiting for the first of June when your resignation takes effect. I think it advisable that you should do this by applying for & taking a leave of absence [*[Elihu Root]*][*[attachment to Root 3-25-08]*][*Ackd 3/28/08*] [*Gef.*] OTTO GRESHAM, ATTORNEY AT LAW. 100 WASHINGTON STREET, TITLE AND TRUST BLDG. TELEPHONES: CENTRAL 5637. AUTO. 8821. PERSONAL. CHICAGO, March 26th, 1908. My Dear Mr. President:- Two or three weeks ago, S. Shimizu, the Japanese Consul located in this city, called on me, as he said, for information. He asked me about the men who owned the Chicago Tribune, Record-Herald and Inter-Ocean, asking if I thought they were disposed to lash the people of this community into anger against the Japanese, and said that he had had intimation that the Chicago Tribune might be so disposed, because Miss Patterson, whose parents had an interest in the Tribune, had married a Russian nobleman. It so happened that I thought I knew the views of Mr. Hinman, Mr. Lawson and Mr. McCormick, which I told him I was sure (aside from a disposition to be reasonably sensational in their publications), were very pacific, and that they did not wish any war; and that Miss Patterson's marriage to a Russian nobleman would militate against the influence of the Tribune in this community, should it attempt, as he had been informed it might, in the interest of Russia to engender bitterness here against Japan. I then told him that while the American people felt grateful to Russia for the aid extended us during the war of the rebellion, the marriage of Miss Patterson to a nobleman of that country did not commend the noblemen of that class, or the institutions of the countries whose noblemen come to this country for wives to support them; that such men are looked upon by true Americans, in a measure, as are men who live on a certain class of women not mentioned in good society; that Lord Curzon came here a couple of years ago for more money from the Leiter Estate, and while he received the money, accompaniedOTTO GRESHAM, ATTORNEY AT LAW. 100 WASHINGTON STREET, TITLE AND TRUST BLDG. TELEPHONE: CENTRAL 5637 AUTO. 8821. CHICAGO, March 26th, 1908. (Page 2). with a feeling of constraint Lord Curzon might have perceived, since his departure it has been said he wanted more than his share; and that on the occasion of this visit, Lord Curzon stated a number of times in this City, that the Japanese would take the Phillippines from us. He expressed his astonishment, both that Lord Curzon came here for money, and that he made the statement as to the purpose of Japan, and declared that as he knew his government and his people, they wanted the United States to hold the Phillippines. His manner and questions all indicated that it was more than a mere casual inquiry he was making, so I am sending this to you on the theory that the slightest straw is sometimes valuable. I then told him that so far as I was concerned, and there were some like me, our pride was not so great that we would be greatly offended if Japan did take the Phillippines; that from a lawyer's standpoint, if you wished to get rid of something which you never should have possessed, and another was disposed to take it, let him have it, and aid him in getting it; but that, in view of his inquiries, it seemed to me my duty to tell him that such was not the view of the majority of our people, although the day might come when they would share my view; that the talk of Lord Curzon and the representatives of other foreign nations in this country, that Japan was going to take the Phillippines, was not without effect on the people here; that on his invitation I was a guest at the dinner given to General Kuroki a year ago, and then and on other occasions saw, what some of our people thought they perceived, a disposition, which was not unnaturalOTTO GRESHAM, ATTORNEY AT LAW. 100 WASHINGTON STREET, TITLE AND TRUST BLDG. TELEPHONE: CENTRAL 5637 AUTO. 8821. CHICAGO, March 26ht, 1908. (Page 3). in some of the younger aides of General Kuroki and the younger aides of the older Japanese statesmen who visited this country, to be just a little heady over their success against Russian, which might mean a disposition to fight, but of course every sensible man in this country knew that was not the disposition of the real leaders and the great body of the people in Japan. That I did not offend him is manifest by the fact that he has been more cordial, and I believe sincere, since the interview that he ever was before, and has stated, as he intimated then, that the views of the people of this country as to Lord Curzon and the foreign princes and potentates who come to this country in search of women to support them, satisfied him that such alliances would not give the countries from whence these men come any influence with the American Government or American people. Faithfully yours, Otto Gresham[*P.F*] March -26-[*[08?]*] U. S.SENATE CHAMBER, WASHINGTON, D.C. Dear Theodore - I hope that you will dine with us every night that you can & that you want to while Edith is away - But especially I hope that you can dine here Saturday for on that day wedelight to him if he could see you. So come on Saturday, also on as many other days as you can. Ever Yrs H.C. Lodge Shall have Russell Sullivan & his wife no one else except family. He is a cousin & life long friend - one of the best of fellows. a writer of tales you may have read & of plays you probably have not seen. He is a staunch unswerving Republican. I want you to know him. It would be a greatB-R CONFIDENTIAL. March 27, 1908. William R. Harr, Esq., Peyton Gordon, Esq., Special Assistants to the Attorney,General, Idenha Hotel, Boise, Idaho. Sirs: It is the desire of the Department that, in any new indictment which may be prepared, United Sates Senator Borah shall not be named as one of the persons connected with the conspiracy. Of course, he could not be included in the indictment, because he could plead his acquittal, but it is desired that his name be omitted so as not to awaken needless prejudice against the prosecution, and also for further reasons of public policy. Very respectfully, Attorney General. [*[Bonaparte]*][*[enc. in Bonaparte 3-27-08]*]Confidential Baltimore, March 27th, 1908 601 PARK AVENUE. 8.30 P.M. Dear Mr. President, There are two or three matters as to which I could find no moment to either see or write you this afternoon, and with which I therefore venture to trouble you now. After leaving the Cabinet, I thought of what Senator Borah undoubtedly meant by his suggestion of a temporary appointment: this is the appointment by the Court; you will remember that Heney was thus appointed U.S. Attorney in Oregon for a short time. I regret to say there are serious objections in my opinion, to such an arrangement, perhaps the most serious being the extraordinary attitude said by Ruick to have been adopted by Judge Dietrich with respect to the feuding prosecution. It is fair to say that Harr and Gordon have wired he has abandoned his intention of charging the Grand Jury not to indict, in consequence of the respectful but earnest remonstrance Please pardon this long and ill written letter, dear Mr. President. And believe me as ever Yours most truly, Charles J. Bonaparte The President The White House.2 601 PARK AVENUE. (Praeses) I ordered them to submit on behalf of the Department; but until I understand better the circumstances of the present situation, I shall feel (although, of course, not express) grave misgivings as to both him and Judge Whitson. When I saw Senator Borah yesterday he expressed himself unequivocally preferring to wait until after the adjournment rather than take up the subject with his colleagues and as agreeing with me that this would be the wiser course. Personally I think it improbable that Ruick will do or say anything scandalous until he thinks he is about to lose his place: in my opinion, he will try to hang on to this just as long as he can; but as soon as he is out, or knows he must soon go out, he will become both offensive and mischievous. Cooley told me today you wished a colored man named Williams appointed an Assistant Attorney for Naturalization proceedings In Chicago. Booker Washington had already recommended him strongly to me and I had asked Sims for a report about him. Cooley said Sims reported favorably, so I told him to make the appointment at once.3 601 PARK AVENUE. (Praeses) Woodruff called to see me this afternoon, with the draft of a bill introduced by Mr. Mondell to amend the coal-land-laws, the last section of which confirmed all fraudulent or irregular titles, including, of course, those of the Union Pacific and other Harriman Corporations. W. said neither Sec'y Garfield nor he could approve this provision; but he submitted a substitute which, with some qualifications, gave an amnesty to all these land thieves, big and little; saying this was the only way to secure the passage of the bill, which he regarded as a very great improvement on existing laws. I told him I entertained very grave doubts as to the expediency of granting an amnesty to these criminals even to secure such desirable legislation, and that I had ever more serious misgivings as to the effect on public opinion of abandoning all efforts to punish them at this particular time. I did not tell Woodruff, but I do feel very strongly that, in view of Sec'y Hitchcock's course, of the fact that all amnesty for the trusts is contained in the Civic Federation’s bill and of the further fact that many of both classes of offenders who will profit by these acts of oblivion are wealthy and more or less influential, the auction of this measure at this time by the administration deserves most serious and careful previous consideration[*F*] [*J*] G-R DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE QUI PRO DOMINA JUSTITIA SEQUITUR Office of the Attorney General, Washington, D.C. March 27, 1908. The President, The White House. I enclose herewith a copy of a letter which I have just sent to Messrs. Harr and Gordon. Yours very respectfully, Charles J. Bonaparte, Attorney General.[for enc. see Atty Gen 3-27-08][*F*] [*Navy*] FORE RIVER SHIPBUILDING CO., QUINCY, MASSACHUSETTS, March 27, 1908. My dear Mr. President: Your note of the 24th instant, as well as the copy of your note of the 23rd instant to the Secretary of the Navy have given me much gratification. The more consideration I give to the matter the more firmly I am convinced that the most desirable administrative arrangement that can be made would be to have but one Assistant Secretary of the Navy and he should be a line office not below the grade of captain, appointed for four years, as are the chiefs of bureaus, and must remain acceptable to the President and the Secretary of the Navy or vacate his office. He would be, essentially, the Chief of Staff to the latter, and the duties of his office would be, under the Secretary, to supervise and coordinate the technical work of the various bureaus on general lines only, not to interfere with the details of their work but to be the right arm of the Secretary in all that relates to the military efficiency of-2- the Navy, in the correction of defects and in the inauguration of desirable changes: Such an officer should be provided with all the boards, official and clerical assistance necessary to efficiently and intelligently execute the important duties of his office. It would give to the Secretary a legally responsible naval adviser, a compelling and coordinating military force that is now utterly lacking in our administrative organization. It cannot be denied that under our present system the Secretary is practically at the mercy of the bureau chiefs or other legally irresponsible advisers. It would, as far as our system of government will permit, give the Navy Department the same system of administration that we have on board a battleship. On a battleship we have a captain, who is held responsible for the military efficiency of the ship and he is provided with an executive officer whose duty it is under the captain, to enforce the regulations of the Navy, to see that the orders of the captain are promptly executed, to coordinate -3- and supervise, in general, the work of the seven bureau representatives found on board the ship. Every bureau of the Navy Department is represented except the Bureau of Yards and Docks. There is practically no friction on board ship, the work is coordinated and goes along smoothly and effectively toward one common end,-- military efficiency. To compare the battleship administration with the proposed departmental administration, it is only necessary to consider that an admiral is on board, with supreme power and authority, who is held, under law, responsible for the military efficiency of the ship but who, from his previous training and education must necessarily be guided, in the details and technicalities of his adminstration by the advice of the naval officers he finds on board. How is it plain what would happen to that ship you removed the captain and the executive officer and told the non-technical admiral that he must administer the affairs of the ship, in all technical matters, according to the advice of the seven bureau representatives on board, the advice - 4 - of each, under the law, to be given equal weight. It is plain that when the day comes for that ship to fight an efficient enemy she is going to prove inefficient and will be terribly handicapped, with no one prepared to take command. Such a ship represents our present departmental system of administration. However if the captain of the ship is left on board, as the responsible official adviser of the non-technical admiral and is given, under the admiral, the power to supervise the work of the seven bureau representatives, and is held by the admiral, responsible for the military efficiency of the ship and knows that when the ship goes into action he will have command of her, and will be held responsible under the general direction of the admiral, then you have a ship from which you have a right to expect good results. One thing about this discussion of Navy Department organization astonishes me and that is the popular notion that the power of the Secretary would be curtailed if he were provided with a responsible technical adviser and executive officer. Even a- 5 - captain of a ship, who is essentially technical and who is given and freely uses his autocratic power, must have an executive officer to execute his orders, to coordinate the work of the various departments, and look after details. A successful captain never inaugurates any important changes in administration without consulting his executive if he has any kind of an opinion of his professional ability; the executive's reputation depends upon the efficiency of the shop, not of any particular department of the ship, to precisely the same extent as does the reputation of the captain. No captain would attempt to administer the affairs of a battleship unless he were provided with an executive officer. Although he freely consults with the executive he knows his presence on board, instead of contracting his authority extends and enforces it in every corner of the ship, rids the captain of all the details of administration and enables him to devote his attention to the larger problems involved in the responsibilities of his command. The argument is sometimes advanced that the Secretary may choose some particular officer as his- 6 - personal technical adviser. But such a plan does not at all meet the problem. In the first place advice that is not lawful is not responsible and we all know that in any administrative work there is nothing so effective in bringing out the best efforts of a man, entirely free of self interest, as absolute responsibility. Another serious objection to a personal or private technical adviser is that he has no power to supervise or coordinate the work of the bureau chiefs, a power that is essential to the efficient work of an executive officer. A third serious objection to a private or personal adviser, not recognized by either regulation or law, is that the bureau chiefs, as soon as any real coordination is attempted, will become jealous and resentful, and will consider that the business of their bureaus is being improperly interfered with by an irresponsible adviser. Whereas, if by regulation or by law, an officer of the Navy is made responsible, under the Secretary, for the execution of his orders and is made his legal technical adviser and is given, under the direction of the Secretary, the- 7 - authority to supervise and coordinate the work of the bureaus in all that relates to military efficiency the bureau chiefs will become as amenable to supervision and coordination as are their representatives on board ship for they are bound to recognize authority when it is coupled with responsibility. I believe if this one most important missing link were supplied in the departmental organization it would tremendously increase the effectiveness of the authority and administrative possibilities of the Secretary. He would be provided with an organization that he could direct in war as well as in peace. Under such a system of administration I believe it would soon become apparent that economy and efficiency would result from the consolidation of the bureaus of Construction and Steam Engineering, so that ship construction should be under one bureau chief, but the head of ship construction should remain a bureau chief. He should not be an assistant secretary of the Navy, for the responsibility for the military efficiency of the Navy, under the Secretary, cannot be divided. Neither the President or the Secretary can hold- 8 - two men responsible for the same thing at the same time, nor can any attempt be made to divide it, without inviting the complications and friction that invariably accompany divided responsibility and authority. I have suggested that the Assistant Secretary of the Navy be a line officer because I am convinced that the most effective administrative organization of the Navy Department demands that the technical affairs of the Navy should be administered, as far as practicable, by naval officers. The Secretary has the supreme power and the supreme responsibility and he gains nothing by having non-professional men to assist him in administering the most technical department of the government. The presence of non-professional assistant administrators tends toward divided responsibility and complication. If another civilian representative is needed for the direction and control of civil matters connected with the Navy Department, he could have the title of Controller, or Financial Secretary and should not, in my opinion, in the absence of the Secretary, perform the duties of Acting Secretary. All that I have said in this letter pertains only to the administrative organization without any- 9 - reference to individuals. The present Assistant Secretary, from all I have been able to learn, has always taken a great interest in naval matters, and is particularly industrious and efficient in the performance of the duties assigned to him by the Secretary. I have written you this long letter because you have taken up with the Secretary the question of having a line officer as an Assistant Secretary and I want to try to make it plain to you precisely what seems to be needed from the point of view of those line officers who are clear of the Navy Department and bureaus and who are able to concentrate their vision on the singe object to be attained-- the efficiency of the fleet. Trusting that you will not consider this letter an imposition after my recent voluntary promise not to bother you about naval matters for a long time to come, I remain Faithfully yours, A. L. Key. The President, White House.MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF WAR. 3/27/08 SUBJECT: Urgent need of an increase of about $1,500,000 in Fortification Bill and proposed plan for coordinating an effort to obtain it. 1. The current estimate for fortifications is $38,443,945.36. The amount carried by the fortification bill as it passed the House is $8,210,611. It was expected, as a matter of course, that the House would cut down the estimates very greatly, but in a few cases very deep cuts have been made in certain important items for the Pacific Coast and Insular fortifications, and it is urgently recommended that a well coordinated effort be made to get the Coast Defense Committee of the Senate to restore these items. 2. The fact that the battleship fleet will ordinarily be stationed in the Atlantic demands that the fortifications on the Pacific Coast and in the Insular Possessions in the Pacific, to be of any value whatsoever, must be prepared to withstand the attack of a hostile fleet until the arrival of the battleship fleet, which would probably require not less than 120 days. There will therefore be required for these fortifications a reasonable armament and the accessories, such as fire control installation, searchlights, power plants and ammunition, which are absolutely necessary for the efficient service of the armament. 3. In order to complete the most essential features of the foritifications on the Pacific Coast and in the Insular Possessions an effort should be made to have the following amounts restored to the Fortification Bill, details concerning which are found in the accompanying statement: Items. Additional amount recommended. Continental United States. To complete fire control on the Pacific Coast. $195, 213. Power plants for principal forts in San Francisco Harbor and Mouth of Columbia River. $248,888. Insular Possessions. Mortar battery and 3" batteries, Queen Emma's Point and Honolulu, $269,400. Guns and carriages for same. $229,400 Reserve ammunition for Insular Possessions, $200,000 Submarine Mine Structures, Hawaiian Islands $59,000 Submarine Mine Material, Phillippine Islands and Honolulu, $189,614 Launches for Honolulu, and torpedo planter and launches for Phillippine Islands, $199,00 Total $1,590,515--2-- 4. There is such a great disparity between the estimates and the amounts carried in the Fortification Bill that it is believed to be essential that the Secretary of War should decide upon definite policy as to what the War Department will urge to be restored; otherwise, there would be no prospect of coordination in this matter before the committee. It is therefore recommended that if the Secretary approves the plan proposed herein, he direct the several chiefs of bureaus concerned to present to the committee in their hearings the necessity of restoring the particular items mentioned herein. Arthur Murray Brigadier General, Chief of Artillery. O. C. A., March 27, 1908For encl see 3-27-08]JOHN F. OLTROGGE GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN M. HENNESSY ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT SUPERINTENDENT'S OFFICE Collier's THE NATIONAL WEEKLY 416-424 WEST THIRTEENTH STREET TELEPHONE, 800 CHELSEA NEW YORK, N. Y., March 27, 1908. My dear Mr. Loeb: I am sending you to-day by express, prepaid, twelve indigo hand proofs which I had made from the two half-tone reproductions of your pictures. Please accept them with my compliments. They look very fine to me, and I hope you will like them. Your signature I had reproduced from one of your letters. I have retained one of each for myself, and I hope you have no objection to this. Sincerely yours, John F. Oltrogge[[shorthand]] [*Cf C*] [*ackd 3/28/08*] JOHN F. OLTROGGE GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN M. HENNESSY ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT SUPERINTENDENT'S OFFICE Collier's THE NATIONAL WEEKLY 416-424 WEST THIRTEENTH STREET TELEPHONE, 800 CHELSEA NEW YORK, N. Y., March 27, 1908. My dear Mr. Loeb: We have pushed the manufacture of the two volumes of the President's address and State papers, and they will be shipped to you tomorrow, March 28th, by express. There will be in the neighborhood of 540 sets. I hope the President will be pleased with them. Sincerely yours, John F. Oltrogge[*PF*] In REPLY REFER TO (L) FILE NO. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON. March 27, 1908. Dear Mr. President: I acknowledge your letter of March 25th regarding Sunday work in the Department. I shall see hereafter that such work is confined strictly to the Secretary and Assistant Secretaries. Would it be deemed improper if we were to do work on Sunday regarding the affairs of the Far East where it is already Monday, and transfer our labors as Monday comes around and Sunday recedes, westward through the Near East and Europe? Faithfully yours, Elihu Root [*Dear Nannie, This is a characteristic Rootian note. TR*][*F*] [*S*] The Spectator 1, Wellington Street, Strand, London, W. C. Telephone: 12494 CENTRAL. Telegraphic Address, "SPECTATOR LONDON." Confidential. Friday March 27th, 1908. My dear Mr. President, Just a line to thank you very heartily for your most kind letter and the leave it gives me to dedicate my book to you. When I say that I am proud to do so I am not using the language either of convention or mere politeness. The Unemployed Bill was an act of madness and I am glad to say that the Government in the end condemned it, but I know from Mr. Burns' own mouth that nothing but his threat of resignation induced them not to give it a kind of tepid support. Please regard this as confidential. Burns is a really fine fellow and one of the very few true Conservatives left in the country. As a working man he knows what misery and degradation Socialism would bring upon the working classes. Happily for you socialism is no danger in America, but it is a very real one here. Yours very sincerely, J. St Loe Strachey 6 P Ste 75Root Burbank See Bourne at once.TELEGRAM. RECEIVED IN CIPHER. The White House, Washington. Berlin, (Received March 27, 1908, 1:00 p.m.) Secretary of State, Washington. In view of the newspaper discussion of the Hill affair I have decided to telegraph you that portion of my letter to the President which relates to Mr. Hill ,as follows: " During the course of this conversation the Emperor touched also upon the subject of an American Ambassador in Berlin, and expressed with such earnestness the hope that you will not appoint Mr. David J. Hill to this post when it becomes vacant. To which I replied that I know nothing officially of your intention nor have I been otherwise informed in the least as to that beyond the fact that I have seen Mr. Hill's name published in the newspapers as that of the future ambassador. The Emperor declared then:" But he is not the kind of many we ought to have here and I do not want him. I think something ought to be done and that the President ought to know this." I inquired whether the Emperor wished me to make this an official communication to you as coming from him in which case I should of course not fail to do so immediately. Whereupon he answered that while he did not wish to proceed to a formal official declaration he felt sure that you would meet his wishes if they were presented to you personally which is what he would prefer to have done. He said "My brother, Prince Henry knew this Mr. Hill in America and he tells me that he will not do at all for Germany. Admiral von Tirpitz and Admiral von Muller, who know him, have said the same thing and all my reports from the Hague are unfavorable." I did not conceal from the Emperor the embarrassment that I found myself in or the extreme delicacy that I felt in treating personally a question of this nature which relates to myTELEGRAM. CIPHER. Berlin Mar.27. The White House, Washington. 2. own post and to my own immediate successor which indeed he admitted at once that he understood fully. It happened however, that just at this time Lloyd Griscom had come up from Rome for a few days to make me a visit and it occurred to the Emperor that he might make this personal communication to you through him. He asked me what Mr. Griscom's relations are with you, to which I replied that you are a personal friend of his, whereupon the Emperor said "Very will then I shall make a clean breast of it to Griscom." He talked with him for a long time afterwards and sent you a message which I think Mr.(Griscom?) who is leaving for Rome will write to you from there within a few days." Tower. --JMRAFD--[*[3-27-08]*] DETAILED STATEMENT TO ACCOMPANY MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF WAR UPON THE SUBJECT: "URGENT NEED OF AN INCREASE OF ABOUT $1,500,000 IN FORTIFICATION BILL AND PROPOSED PLAN FOR COORDINATING AN EFFORT TO OBTAIN IT." - FIRE CONTROL - $270,256 for Fire Control was included in the Fortification Bill as passed by the House. This amount was estimated to cover the Fire Control Installation of the Artillery District of the Columbia. It is hoped that Puget Sound and San Francisco will be covered by money already appropriated. To finish the Pacific Coast will require an addition for Fort Rosecrans of $99,635. The Chief Signal Officer of the Army estimated that $145,578 was necessary for the care, preservation and maintenance of the Fire Control Installation. Last year $120,000 was allotted for this purpose from the general fire control appropriation. The Bill as passed by the House only provides $50,000 for this purpose. Unless additional funds are appropriated it will be necessary to withdraw the difference of about $95,000 from the general appropriation of $270,256 in order to pay the expenses (salaries of employees, &c.) of the Signal Corps, incident to the installation of the Fire Control System which is not included in the estimates of any particular harbor. Therefore if the fire control of the Pacific Coast is to be completed from the appropriations made this year, it will be necessary to have additional amounts as follows: Fire control at Fortifications........................$ 99,635 Care, preservation and maintenance of Fire Control Installation....................................................... 95,578 Total - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------- $195.213 - - - $195,213 In this connection attention should be invited to the fact that although only 5 of the 27 defended harbors of the United States have so far been given a complete Fire Control Installation, the appropriation this year, even with the additions recommended herein, will be the smallest made in seven years, and a little more than one-half of the average for the last five years.- 2 - POWER PLANTS. The following table shows the capacity of the plants on hand, and the capacity and cost of additional plants required most urgently at forts on the Pacific Coast: Kilowatts of Kilowatts of additional plants Post. present plants. required for Cost. existing batteries. Casey………………………………… 20 ……………………………. 150 ……………………..$83,730 Stevens…………………………….. 10 ……………………………. 100 ………………………. 54,029 Barry…………………………………. 0 ……………………………. 50 ………………………. 36,930 Baker……………………………….. 18 ……………………………. 35 ………………………. 54,709 Scott………………………………… 56 ……………………………. 200 ………………………119,490 -------------- Total - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $348,888 Passed by the House - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - $100,000 -------------- Amount in addition necessary to provide power required by existing batteries for the above mentioned forts - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $248,888 - - - $248,888 NOTE: - The following table gives the same information for the remaining posts on the Pacific Coast. While the power plants required according to this table are necessary, their need is not considered as urgent as those given in the preceding table, and therefore are not included in these additions now recommended: Kilowatts of Kilowatts of additional plants Post. present plants. required for Cost. existing batteries. Ward…………………………… 0 ……………………………. 50 …………………….. $46,127 Middle Point………………… 0 ……………………………. 15 …………………….. 3,590 Flagler…………………………. 235 ……………………………. 150 …………………… 50,000 Worden………………………… 225 ……………………………. 150 ………………….. 50,000 Canby…………………………… 0 ……………………………. 20 …………………… 6,078 Columbia………………………. 28 ……………………………. 35 …………………… 51,200 McDowell.…………………….. 9 ……………………………. 25 …………………… 35,234 Mason…………………………… 3 ……………………………. 15 …………………… 3,590 Miley.……………………………. 30 …………………………… 50 …………………… 44,452 Rosecrans.…………………….. 60 …………………………… 50 ………………….. 17,358 -------------- Total - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $307,629 Adding the total of the preceding table- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - $348,888 -------------- Gives a grand total of - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - $656,517 which would provide central power plants for all existing batteries of the Pacific Coast. -3- CONSTRUCTION SEACOAST BATTERIES IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. 8 - 12" Mortars.........................$225,000 4 - 3" Rifles ........................... 44,400 Total - - - - - - - $269,400 - - - $269,400 The project for the defense of Honolulu and Pearl Harbor as approved by the Joint Army & Navy Board calls for 8 mortars; 2-14"; 2-6", and 2-3" rifles to be located to the east of Honolulu, and 8 mortars; 2-12"; 2-6", and 2-3" rifles to be located to the west of Honolulu at Queen Emma's Point on the eastern side of the entrance to Pearl Harbor. As may be seen from the map, Honolulu is situated, in so far as its defense from the sea is concerned, practically on the seafront, and coast fortifications provided for its defense cannot be located in front of the city, as they are in the cases of all but one of the cities of the United States for which such defenses have been provided, but must be located on the flanks. As the distances are too great to permit of fortifications located on one flank of the city protecting it against an attack on the other, fortifications must be constructed on both flanks. The best site for fortifications for the defense of Honolulu against naval attack from the west is at Queen Emma's Point; this regardless of the question as to whether or not Pearl Harbor is to be defended. It is believed that these facts were not presented clearly to the House of Representatives' Committee. Of the defenses projected for the eastern side of Honolulu, there is now under construction the mortar battery, funds for which have been provided heretofore, and the present Fortification Bill as passed by the House carries the funds for the construction of the 14" battery. Of the defenses projected for the western side, funds have been provided heretofore for the construction of the 12" battery, but no provision for additional batteries on this side has been made in the present Fortification Bill. In order that the strengthening of the defenses on both sides of the city may proceed pari passu, funds for the construction of a mortar battery at Queen Emma's Point should be appropriated-4- this year. It is pointed out that no funds have been appropriated heretofore or are carried by the present Fortification Bill for the construction of any rapid fire batteries on either side of the city. These batteries are necessary for the defense of the mine fields and for protection against attacks by torpedo boat destroyers, and provision should be made this year for the construction of a battery on the eastern side of Honolulu and one at Queen Emma's Point. To provide for these batteries there will be required an increase under this item in the appropriation carried by the House Bill of the amount shown above. PURCHASE, MAINTENANCE AND TEST OF SEACOAST CANNON, &c. (INSULAR POSSESSIONS) 8-12" Mortars & carriages....$200,000 4- 3" Rifles...................................29,400 Total........................................$229,400 - -$229,400 This additional amount will be required for the additional seacoast batteries for Hawaii asked for under the item "Construction of seacoast batteries, Hawaiian Islands". See note under that item. RESERVE AMMUNITION FOR INSULAR POSSESSIONS - - - - - - - - - - $200,000 - -$200,00 The amount carried by H. R. Bill under this item is only $50,000. The amount estimated under this item was $250,000 and this amount is needed urgently. At the time the original estimate was submitted the rapid progress in the completion of the armament now being made was not anticipated, and the full amount of the estimate ($250,000) is the minimum that should be appropriated. Attention is invited to the fact that there has been appropriated the sum of $4,520,360, including $250,000 for ammunition, and that the amount carried by the present H. R. Bill for this purpose is $3,168,500, including $50,000 for ammunition, making a total of $7,789,860 of which only $300,000, or-5- about four percent of the total is for ammunition. The accompanying table shows in detail the amounts of ammunition now available, the total amounts required for a full battle reserve, &c. Attention is invited to the fact that the amounts now available will be sufficient as a rule for an engagement of only a half hour's duration, while in the case of mortars only a 15 minute engagement can be fought. Thereafter during the continuance of an investment the fortifications would be valuless, as they would be shut off from the receipt of ammunition from the United States and their capture could be accomplished readily. SUBMARINE STRUCTURES, HONOLULU & PEARL HARBOR. The submarine mine structures for Manila Bay and Subic Bay are covered by existing appropriations. To complete these structures for Honolulu there is required............$68,000 and Pearl Harbor..............................61,000 Total - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -$129,000 Committee recommended - - - - $70,000 This should be increased by - - - $59,000 - - - -$59,000 Aside from whether Pearl Harbor is to be a naval base or not, the gun and mine defense herein recommended for that place is necessary to protect that flask of Honolulu. SUBMARINE MINE MATERIAL; MANILA, PEARL HARBOR & HONOLULU. The submarine mine material for Subic Bay is now installed. To purchase the necessary material for:- Manila Bay there is required............$328,620 Pearl Harbor " " "....................................38,031 Honolulu " " "..........................................22,963 Total - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -$389,614 The Committee recommended - - - $200,000 This should be increased by - - - - - -$189,614 - - - $189,614 TORPEDO PLANTERS & LAUNCHES. There should be at least one torpedo planter provided for the Philippines at this time; the extensive project contemplates the -6- planting of 494 mines in Manila Bay, and 209 for Subic Bay. Next to the material the rapidity of planting is the most essential element of a submarine mine defense, for if it can not be placed in the water on short notice it is of no use whatever. This applies particularly to the Philippine Islands. One planter is provided by the Bill for the Hawaiian Islands....................$175,000 It is urgently recommended that there be added two (2) launches for the Hawaiian Islands - - - - -$6,000 and for the Philippine Islands:- 1 torpedo planter.........$175,000 6 launches........................18,000 Total - - - - - - $193,000 - - -$193,000 ---------------- Total amount recommended to be added to Fortification Bill - - - - -$1,590,515 TABLE SHOWING THE SEACOAST AMMUNITION NOW AVAILABLE FOR THE GUNS OF BATTERIES NOW CONTSTRUCTRED OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN THE INSULAR POSSESSIONS, AND THE AMMUNITION IT IS PROPOSED TO PURCHASE FROM THE AMOUNT, $250,000, OF THE ESTIMATE FOR THIS PURPOSE SUBMITTED TO CONGRESS THIS YEAR. Cal. of Guns. No. of guns in batteries constructed or under construction. Ammunition now available. Rounds per gun. Necessary for a full battle reserve. Rounds per gun. Additional ammunition to be provided from amount of estimate $250000. Rounds per gun. Cost of ammunition given in preceding column. Total that will be available columns 3 & 5, if amount estimated is appropriated. Rounds per gun. Percentage of full battle reserve now available. Percentage of full battle reserve that will be available if amount estimated is appropriated. 3 –inch R. 12 108 400 52 $10,200 160 27.0 40.0 6 –inch R. 9 66 250 34 19,300 100 26.4 40.0 10–inch R. 4 27 120 27 31,500 54 22.5 45.0 12–inch R. 6 36 90 9 24,100 45 40.0 50.0 12–inch M. 20 12.6 100 37.4. 164,900 50 12.6 50.0 Total ………….. $250,000 NOTES: 1. With one exception all the batteries included in the above estimate are either completed or will be completed during the current calendar year. 2. If the amount appropriated is only $50,000, as carried by the House of Representatives' Fortification Bill, the additional ammunition purchased will be limited to 11.4 rounds of mortar ammunition per mortar, which would give 24 rounds per mortar or 24 percent of the full battle reserve. This amount of mortar ammunition would exhaust the appropriation and no ammunition could be provided for other guns. 3. The total amount that will be required to complete the full battle reserve for these batteries is $810,000.[*[Encl Murray 3-27-08]*][*F*] UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE PHILIPPINES Personal. March 28, 1908. Dear Theodore:- Many thanks for sending me the quotation from Wordsworth which I return herewith. Ever yours, H. C. Lodge To the President. [*See John Baltzyley 3/24/08*][*F*] Fort Riley, KA March 28, 1908 Dear Cousin Theodore, I would like to bring to your attention the case of 1st Lieutenant Clarence N. Jones of the 3rd Field Artillery, who has recently examined for the second time for his promotion to captain. The first board that examined him over a year ago found him on moral ground, which finding was approved by the War Department. The second board that examined him in February I have good reason to believe did the same thing. Considering the facts in his case I don't see how they could have done otherwise. From what I hearJones is now bringing influence to bear on the department to have the proceedings of the last board set aside and thus obtain his promotion. Jones moral character is low beyond description, and as for his actions, well they are too disgusting to even mention in a letter. Suffice it to say that he is a moral degenerate of the worst kind. Now what I would like you to do is to send for the proceedings of the two boards that examined him, see why they found him morally, and then settle the question yourself. Thus [tha?] the settlement of this case away from political or other influences. You will find a full description of his moral deficiencies in the proceedings of the board. I am very much interested in this case, because in the natural course of events if he is promoted he will cometo this regiment, and after you have read the proceedings you will understand why I do not want a man of such character placed in a promotion where he could associate with any member of my family, or for that matter with the family of an other officer. Please give my best love to Cousin Edith. Affectionally yours Dan T. MooreDan[iel] Tyler Moore W Tuskegee Normal & Industrial Institute BROOKER T. WASHINGTON, PRINCIPAL TUSKEGEE INSTITUTE, ALABAMA. March 28, 1908 Personal President Theodore Roosevelt, White House, Washington, D. C. My dear Mr. President :- I thank you very much for letting me see the draft of your letter to the Interstate Commerce Commission. Enclosed I am returning the draft to you just as you sent it, also another copy with some suggestions which I have underscored in red ink. If in some way you could bring out the fact that you want to be just as careful in seeing that justice is done in regard to human beings as in the matter of freight, it would be a strong point, I think. I attach herewith two paragraphs which may convey the sense of what I am trying to say. I am not sure that I express the though very clearly, but I think it might be well if the suggested paragraph could be used in some way. Several of the roads in the South really strive to do justice tothe colored people, and I note that you give them credit for doing so, but this sentence appears at the bottom of your letter and there is opportunity for the newspapers to leave this sentence off if they desire. Could it not be woven in in some way into the body of the letter so that it could not be left out? Yours truly, Booker T. Washington [*[Washington]*] H I think your letter to the Interstate Commerce Commission is an admirable one from every point of view. B. T. W.Jacob A. RiiS, 524 N. Beech Street Richmond Hill, Bor of Queens [*R*] [*Ackd 3/31/08*] New York, March 29, 1908 My dear Mr. President I think you must be in need of a big laugh now and then. If you feel at any time that you must have one, let me advise you to send for Miss Agnes Haine Donaldson, who recites Drummond's "habitant" verses as I did not suppose it possible they could be recited. She came to our settlement the other night and I have never enjoyed anything as I did her recitations, especially the habitant poems and Mr. Dooley's account of the grip. She's a marvelous actress when she recites. Miss Donaldson is not oneof my protegees. I just thought when I heard her that nothing that is likely to come your way could give you such unadulterated pleasure, and Mrs Roosevelt too. If you ever want her, I will find her for you. I did everlastingly rejoice in your advice to the mother to let the children run their own play. It has been in my mind some time to say that. We are too bound to be [everlastingly] always teaching some one. Your advice was sane, as your advice always is - hence the hysteria in some quarters. Always yours Jacob A RiisCIPHER CABLE. RECEIVED AND TRANSLATED March 29, 1908. 9 p.m. The White House, Washington. Berlin, March 29, 1908. Secretary of State, Washington. I have had a long interview to-day with the German Minister for Foreign Affairs, who is greatly arlarmed at the turn which public opinion has taken in the United-States in regard to the Emperor's action in sending word to the President that he did not wish Mr. Hill to be ambassador here. While the Foreign Office has been issuing official denials to the German press during the last four or five days, German Minister for Foreign Affairs has admitted to me freely and without reserve that he knew perfectly well that the Emperor objected to Mr. Hill personally and had so intimated to the President. The truth is that the storm of disapproval in the American press frightened the people at the Foreign Office here so that not knowing what to do they lay down helplessly and repeated their denials, hoping that this would blow over and that they would be able to escape somehow or other. In the meantime I insisted that the German Minister for Foreign Affairs should telegraph to the Emperor, who is in Venice, and receive instructions from him. German Minister for Foreign Affairs did this and the Emperor has telegraphed him to-day from Venice, confirming fully his conversation with me as I reported it in my letter to the President of March 16th. The Emperor informs the German Minister for Foreign Affairs (by name) that as I had asked to be excused from treating personally a question relating to the rejection of my immediate successor, he had then addressed himself to Griscom and sent the message to the President thru him. All this is perfectly clear, but as the Foreign Office considers that the objections to Hill were only personal, the Minister for Foreign Affairs is nowCIPHER CABLE. RECIEVED AND TRANSLATED The White House Washington 2. groping about for an excuse to declare that they have been examined into more fully and have been dispelled. The Foreign Office will issue an official statement to-day, which it will telegraph to Sternburg and give to the press. In this statement the Minister for Foreign Affairs will base his disclaimer upon the ground of the misunderstanding, and he tells me that this arose from the fact that he had himself forgotten that the official agreement to Mr. Hill's nomination had ever been sent from here. Consequently he will declare that the whole trouble has arisen from misapprehension upon the part of the newspaper press and, that altho it is true that doubts have been entertained in Germany whether Mr. Hill would be the right man here or whether he would be likely to find himself comfortable as ambassador at this post, these doubts have now been overcome, and that if Mr. Hill is sent here he will be received as any other American citizen would be if nominated by the President. The Minister of Foreign Affairs asks me to say to you in consequence of this that the Emperor’s message to the President, conveyed thru Griscom and from me, may be treated as never having been sent. Tower —JM—[[shorthand]] [*F*] Private Secretary STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA GOVERNOR’S OFFICES CHARLESTON March 30. 1908 Hon. WM. Loeb Jr. Secretary to the President Washington D.C. [*W*] My dearest Sir: Governor Dawson directs me to acknowledge the receipt of your valued favor of March 28’ enclosing the President’s check for one hundred dollars, to be applied to the Monongah Relief Committee. Your letter with enclosure has been forwarded Mr. Jos. E. Sands, Fairmont, Treasurer, who will forward receipt. The Governor wishes to thank President Roosevelt for his generous contribution. With assurances of respect I am, Very Truly Yours E. L. Boggs Private Secretary[*Ackd 3-31-08*] SCRIBNER’S MAGAZINE CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS, PUBLISHERS, 153-157 FIFTH AVENUE. NEW YORK March 30th, 1908. Dear Mr. President: We have sent you to-day with our compliments six copies of the new edition of "Outdoor Pastimes", bound in the half pigskin binding of the previous limited edition. There has been some delay in completing the binding (there always is in a special job of that kind.) We hope that you will like the appearance of the books. With best wishes, I am Faithfully yours Robert Bridges The President.[*Ackd 4/2/08*] GROTON SCHOOL GROTON, MASS. March, 30, 1908. My dear Theodore, Quentin is registered for 1910 only. I see that his birthday is put down as November 19, 1897. He will, therefore, be a trifle under twelve years of age in 1909. In a good many cases, however, we have taken boys when they were as near to twelve as this, and if you like, I will gladly add his name to the 1909 list, assuming that you would have put him down for that year, as well as for 1910, had that fact that he would be considered eligible in that year had been brought to your notice. He would have a good chance for 1909; the chances indeed are that we should reach him, but I could not be absolutely sure of this until February or March of next year. It occurs to me just at this moment that he would have a chance as a brother, as well as his own chance, and so we should almost certainly be able to take him if you say so. All that you say about Archie is very pleasant. He is a delightful member of the school, and I rejoice to know that he is being helped by out new general master to get hold of his work very much better. I hope that the boys will have a good time on the the Vicksburg trip. With kindest regards for Mrs. Roosevelt, and love for the lads, I am Ever sincerely yours, Endicott Peabody The President, White House, Washington, D.C.[*H.9.*] [*F*] G. P. Putnam's Sons Publishers, Booksellers, and Stationers 27 and 29 West Twenty-third Street New York Mar. 30th 1908 [*P*] Wm. Loeb, Jr. Esq. Secretary to the President, The White House, Washington, D.C. Dear Sir:- As we cannot at present procure in the city a copy of "Campaigns with the Army of the Potomac" by de Trobriand, translated into English, we have ordered a copy to be sent direct to the President from the out of town publishers, and he will doubtless receive it shortly. Trusting this will be satisfactory, we remain, Very respectfully, G. P. Putnam's Sons. [*K.W.*] [*F*] [*War*] [*see War 3/27/08.*] WAR DEPARTMENT WASHINGTON March 30, 1908. [*Enclose to Prest of Senate*] My dear Mr. President: I transmit herewith a statement by General Murray, the Chief of Artillery, with reference to the deficiencies in the amount of money appropriated by the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives toward the completion of defenses on the pacific Coast mainland, Honolulu, Hawaii and the Philippines. This has been submitted to the Chiefs of the other Bureaus, and they all agree that proper expedition requires the increase of the present appropriation bill as suggested in General Murray's memorandum. It is true that with respect to one item, to wit, the mortars and 3-inch guns, the Appropriation Committee of the House defend their failure to make provision therefor on the ground that the Naval Committee is not making proper provision for the dredging of the channel into Pearl harbor. I respectfully urge that this is not a sufficient reason for delaying prompt completion of the defences. I believe these additional appropriations to be of the utmost importance, and I venture, therefore, to suggest that either by special message or personal conference with the members of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, and especially the sub-committee on Fortifications, these items be [put in] recommended [the bill as] as amendments [there] to the bill. Very sincerely yours, Wm H Taft The President, The White House. Enclosure. TELEGRAM. RECEIVED IN CIPHER. The White House, Washington. Berlin, ( Received March 30, 1908, 12:55 p.m. Secretary of State, Washington. Confidential. I have had another interview with the Minister for Foreign Affairs who requests me to declare to you that while certain objections to the nomination of Mr. Hill have been entertained heretofore in Germany, these objections have never been considered by the Imperial Government as sufficient grounds upon which to base a refusal to receive him as American Ambassador. All such objections are [now] regarded as of no importance and hereby formally withdrawn. I have the honor to announce that if Mr. Hill is nominated by the President he will be welcomed in Berlin. Tower. -jm-ra-Montreal 30th March 1908 513 SHERBROOKE STREET WEST Dear Baron Sternberg - I am sorry that I did not know of your visit to Cuba in time to make some special arrangements for your comfort and convenience and to send my car to Havana to meet you. I was away in Europe and the first knowledge I had of your visit came to me in your letter of the other day. I hope you will soon give me an opportunity to make amend.I am much pleased at what you said to the President concerning the Cuban situation. I am sure your diagnosis is the correct one. Instead of two political parties Cuba now has half a dozen or more factions and the jealousies and hatred which have grown up in the last two years make a successful Cuban government impossible for a considerable time to come unless controlled and upheld by the U.S. through a protectorate or something of the kind. One danger I see is that a third intervention may be resisted and that would mean a guerilla warfare and the loss of many lives - not, perhaps, by bullets but by favor & - a repetition to some extent of the experience of Spain. To set up a Cuban Government and leave U.S. troops to support it for a time, as has been suggested would be absurd for a government so started would not stand a week after the withdrawing of the military support. [*[Enc in Speck ca. 3-30-08]*] While I am following events in the Far East with much interest I would not venture an opinion to you on the subject- to you who know infinitely more about it than I do. I only venture to express my fear that the Japanese are vastly more exhausted by their supreme effort than they themselves yet realize. I hope you will come again and see the Canadian Pacific. The change since your last visit has been marvellous Most sincerely yours W C Van Horne His Excellency Baron Speck von Sternberg Washington [*Ackd 3/31/08*] Tho's L. James, President. E. V. W. Rossiter, Vice President. J. R. Van Wormer, Secy & Genl. Manager. W. C. Reid, Warehouse Supt. Lincoln Safe Deposit Co. and Burglar Proof Vaults and Fire Proof Storage Warehouses Cold Storage Silver Storage 32 to 42 East 42nd St. & 45 to 55 East 41st St. The Holland Society of New York New York March 30 1908. Dear Mr. President: Another piece of Dutch impudence! Please send me your check for $10 dollars, so that I can report your subscription to the Van der Capellen Fund at the Annual Meeting of the Holland Society next Monday night. Cordially V. W. chm. [*[Van Wormer]*] [[shorthand]] Thos. L. James, President. E.V.W. Rossiter, Vice President. Telephone Connection. Cable Address Linsafedeco. J.R. Van Wormer, Secy. & Gen. Manager. W.C. Reid, Warehouse Supt. Lincoln Safe Deposit Co. Sales in Burglar Proof Vaults for Securities, Silver Plate stored under Guarantee. Fire Proof Warehouses for Household Furniture, Moth Proof Cold Storage for Furs, Carpets, Clothing, etc. 32 to 42 East 42nd St. & 45 to 55 East 41st, St. The Holland Society of New York. New York. March 30 1908. Theodore Roosevelt of New York. President of the United States, and Member of The Holland Society of New York. The White House. Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. President, Friend and Brother Dutchman:- Enclosed is a circular communication which as Trustee of The Holland Society of New York and Chairman of the Committee on a Tablet to Baron Joan Derck van der Capellen, of Holland, in the Netherlands: the brave resourceful and steadfast friend of the struggling North American Colonies of America in the Revolution. I sent out March 2nd. 1908. to our fellow members of this splendid Race Society of which we are members. I know how busy you are and my heart is with you but I want you read the Circular through every word of it; I want you to note on the first page the last paragraph having the 2 President Roosevelt by General Washington the allusion to the letter of Commendation written to Baron Van der Capellen, after the struggle of the Revolution was over. Observe that the letter reposes in the the “Archivist” Museum at Zwolle in the Province of Overijssel. Now this is my point: In June next I am going to Zwolle, Overijssel, as Chairman of this Committee and as the representative of the Holland Society of New York, whose loyal and useful work in exalting the Dutch traditions, tendencies and purposes you and I and thousands of others appreciate and are still helping to promote. Further, in a sense, I want to represent a Dutch President, but in this sense only: I would be thankful on behalf of our Society if you would write me a letter as Chairman of the Baron Van der Capellen Committee, commanding the Holland Society in thus paying late but deserved tribute to the Hero: not only the friend of Colonial America, but of suffering humanity everywhere! If you will do it, and you will allow me I shall take the letter to Zwolle and when I have read it, at the Tablet Installation Ceremonies, I am going to present it to the “Archivist” Museum to repose with Washington’s Van der Capellen epistle! If you could send me the letter in question so that I could read it to our fellow3 President Roosevelt at the Hotel Astor [in evening] fellow Dutchmen on the evening of the 6th of April, the Date of the “Beggars” March to lay the grievances of the Dutch Nobles and people in the lap of Margaret of Parma, the Regent of the King of Spain our annual meeting, five hundred lusty Dutch throats would bellow cheers! Mr. President and Friend. Please excuse any apparent presumption there may be in the communication for none was meant, but the Holland Society men are wild with enthusiasm over the project. What state of mind they will be in if I and they get a letter of approval from you the good Lord only knows! Will you telegraph a day soon when I can come to you for luncheon and meet my old friend Elihu Root and talk to you twenty minutes about this matter. Yours Cordially and in the memory of long Friendship John R. Van Wormer Chairman [*1 Enclosure*][*P.F*] REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE 12 EAST 30th STREET [*W*] NEW YORK, March 30/08.1908 For a Straight Ticket Mark Within This Circle TIMOTHY L. WOODRUFF, Chairman LUTHER B. LITTLE, Treasurer LAFAYETTE B. GLEASON, Secretary RAY B. SMITH, Assistant Secretary [*Of course you may show this letter to Cong. Cocks. I would write directly to him except for the fact that you & I have discussed this matter & corresponded about it to the extent that we have.*] Mr. William Loeb, Jr., White House, Washington, D. C. My [d] dear Loeb: I duly received your letter of the 27th inst. on Saturday in which you said you had gone carefully over the situation in the 1st District with Congressman Cocks and that he was going on that day (Friday) to Long Island to go into the matter thoroly. I have had a talk with Mr. John J. Bartlett of Suffolk, the State Committeeman. He has just returned from Florida where he went some time ago, secure in the belief that the professions of support of him made by Lewis of Nassau could be relied upon. The first thing he struck when he got back was a delegation from Nassau County, consisting of Smith Cox and Doughty, who claim to represent many others, proposing to Bartlett that he should join with them to defeat Congressman Cocks for renomination. They offered to be for him (Bartlett) for State Committeeman if he would enter into this agreement. He positively refused to have anything to do with such a plan, saying that Suffolk County was for Congressman Cocks and suggesting to them that he did not believe they could carry Nassau County against Cocks. He even went so far as to say that he and his people in Suffolk County, who absolutely control that County, would be for Cocks' renomination even if the rest of the Congressional District-2- was against him. They then said that they would be with Lewis of Nassau in whatever he wanted because it was evident they could not get anything out of Bartlett. You will see that it is due to Bartlett's loyalty to Cocks, that there is opposition to him on the part of Cocks' enemies in Nassau County. I have just telephoned to Cocks' house in Old Westbury in the hope of having a talk with him or making an appointment to see him, but I find that he returned to Washington last night. Mr. Bartlett is in my office now and knows of my writing this letter to you. Bartlett feels perfectly sure that Cocks can handle the situation in Nassau County. There has been some talk of a man named H. Homer Moore of the 4th Assembly District of Queens being the State Committeeman from the District, but I understand that he as well as Lewis and Faber have been in consultation with Odell at the Fifth Avenue Hotel. A friend of Bartlett's was in the Fifth Avenue Hotel when these four men, Moore, Lewis, Faber and McKnight, had a conference with Odell and when they came from the conference, they told this friend of Bartlett (not knowing that he was a friend of Bartlett) that they had agreed upon Moore as State Committeeman to succeed Bartlett and had fixed things so that he was to have the six votes from Queens and the nine votes from Nassau, which, of course, would out-weigh the twelve votes from Suffolk. It is perfectly evident that unless the Nassau County situation has been taken hold of (which I hope is the case) by Congressman Cocks, that we will lose a State Committeeman in that District. I think I will call you on the telephone about noon tomorrow in the hope, that after the receipt of this letter in the first-3- mail tomorrow morning, you will have seen Congress Cocks. If you have not see him, then I can call you up again later in the day. I think this matter is an extremely important one at the present time. Yours very sincerely, Timothy L. Woodruff P.S. It is perfectly evident to us all here that if they should elect any one in that district other than Bartlett, in view of the claims which they have made, it would be construed as an anti-administration victory. For several days I have heard each day from some one that Faber and Lewis had claimed that they would elect a State Committeeman who would be against the President. [*I had thought that we could expect the support of Shore as he is in the employ of the Board of Elections. He only gets $1300 & I have arranged with Fuller & Page to raise him to $1800 before long. I think pretty well of him. He has done good work in the 4th Dist of Queens & is entitled to consideration for it. But I can't help feeling, not only from what Bartlett says, but from what De Bragga told Parsons the other day & from other indications that Shore is in affiliation with Odell through Faber & Lewis. Anyway a change from Bartlett to anyway will be hailed by Odell as a defeat of the President in his own district.[*[3-30-08]*]Mr. Roosevelt and American Opinion. Few things in contemporary politics are more remarkable than the great change that has taken place in the attitude of the political parties in the United States towards President Roosevelt and the policies he advocates. We may put aside the objurgations of his political opponents at the beginning of his campaign against corruption. Their condemnation was mingled with glee at the thought that he was weakening the position of the Republicans, and their open indignation as well as their less candidly avowed satisfaction may be accounted for on ordinary partisan lines. The attitude of the Republicans was more remarkable. Even the very good friends of the President shook their heads sadly and opined that he was going too far and too fast. Many others, not so particularly the friends of the President though following hi as their leader, were more plain-spoken, and condemned his action in indignant language. When the abuses he denounced ore their natural fruit in a financial crisis, men of all parties joined in attributing the mischief to the destruction of confidence caused by his outspoken attacks upon wrongdoing. Few public men in any country have been more bitterly and ungenerously assailed, or have suffered a greater amount of personal detraction. But the President held on his way quite unmoved by the political storm, and strong in his belief that his action would appeal to the conscience of his countrymen at large. That conscience was in need of awakening, but he was confident alike in its existence and in his power to rouse it from its condition of despairing acquiescence in evils that seemed incurable. Now the President has his reward. All the party calculations have gone to the wall, and the one thing that stands out clear and strong is the result of his appeal. His critics clung to the last to their belief,or their pretended belief, that he was only playing a bigger "bluff" than usual, and that in spite of all disclaimers he would at last be unmasked as an aspirant to a renewed lease of power. No doubt their confident predictions had a great effect in keeping large numbers of voters in a state of doubt and perplexity. That was the best card in the hands of his opponents, but it failed them when it became clear beyond denial or doubt that Mr. Roosevelt had meant all along just what he said, and would not be put in nomination for the Presidency. His reward is one of the most remarkable personal victories ever won n public life. There is no policy before the people of the United States except his policy. Party lines, nowhere more strongly insisted upon, have been completely obliterated, the ordinary tactics of party "bosses" have been suddenly superseded, and politicians are vying with one another in eagerness to be identified with the policy not long ago regarded by party leaders with fear and distrust. Naturally they do their best to wear their rue with a difference. Little variations in method are eagerly parade, because there is nothing else to parade, since neither party can afford to go to the people upon any policies other than those which Mr. Roosevelt has made popular. The three candidates ow before the country are politically indistinguishable, the programmes are all of one colour, and that a colour new in American politics; so that all that remains for the nation at the Presidential election is to determine which man is best fitted by capacity, training, and associations to carry out the measures to which all are alike pledged. That is a very curious and interesting situation. It revives one's faith in individual worth and ability proving that under the most democratic forms a man may still impose his personality upon the conduct of a nation's affairs. All that iscondition of despairing acquiescence in evils that seemed incurable. Now the President has his reward. All the party calculations have gone to the wall, and the one thing that stands out clear and string is the result of his appeal. His critics clung to the last to their belief, or their pretended belief, that he was only playing a bigger "bluff" than usual, and that in sprite of all disclaimers he would at least be unmasked as an aspirant to be a renewed lease of power. No doubt their confident predictions had a great effect in keeping large numbers of voters in a state of doubt and perplexity. That was the best card in the hands of his opponents, but it failed them when it became clear beyond denial or doubt that MR. ROOSEVELT has meant all along just what he said, and would not be put in nomination for the Presidency. His reward is one of the most remarkable personal victories ever won in public life. There is no policy before the people of the United States except his policy. Party lines, nowhere more strongly insisted upon, have been completely obliterated, the ordinary tactics of party "bosses" have been suddenly superseded, and politicians are vying with one another in eagerness to be identified with the policy not long ago regarded by party leaders with fear and distrust. Naturally they do their best to wear their rue with a difference. Little variations in method are eagerly paraded, because there is nothing else to parade, since neither party can afford to go to the people upon any policies other than those which MR. ROOSEVELT has made popular. The three candidates now before the country are politically indistinguishable, the programmes are all of one colour, and that a colour new in American politics ; so that remain for the nation at the Presidential election is to determined which man is best fitted by capacity, training, and associations to carry out the measures to which all are alike pledged. That is a very curious and interesting situation. It revives one's faith in individual worth and ability, proving that under the most democratic forms a man may still impose his personality upon the conduct of a nation's affairs. All that is needed is a man big enough, and the democracy may still produce the man big enough to sway it by energy, faith, and force of character. Now that the victory is won, there will be plenty of people eager for a good place in the procession that follows the conqueror. Some of the fiercest cavillers at the PRESIDENT'S policy will now be foremost in pretending that it has commanded their allegiance ever since they left school. Many people of that kind will need careful watching, for a new coat does not always imply a new heart. However, they are beginning to discover that after all there is nothing to very dreadful or revolutionary about the PRESIDENT'S proposals. Even Congress, which does not respond too easily to new demands, is slightly bestirring itself, so there there seems to be a possibility of the session not being so absolutely barren as it has promised to be. When it makes not difference which way the cat is going to jump, why not gain a little credit by anticipating the movement? It is now being rediscovered that British railways, for instance, have always been under Government control at least as stringent as anything that the PRESIDENT has proposed for American railways. No doubt out system is due to the fact that railways came into an old and thoroughly settles country, in which they had to encounter all sorts of well-established interests. So the American system sprang up because railways entered upon a wide country very sparsely populated, and were first in the field over vast areas in which multitudes of rival interests have since established themselves. But just because the American conditions are now approximately what ours were when the first railway opened, the time has come when some control very similar to ours is imperatively demanded. What applies to railways applies to many other undertakings, in which there is no longer the room that there once was for the magnate to disport himself with complete irresponsibility ; whether the magnate be a great capitalist or the head of a great labour organization. ("The Times". March 30.08.)[*[Enclosed in Lee, 3-31-08]*]Enc in Reid 4-1-08 3-30-08Mr. Roosevelt and American Opinion. Few things in contemporary politics are more remarkable than the great change that has taken place in the attitude of the political parties in the United States towards PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT and the policies he advocates. We may put aside the objurgations of this political opponents at the beginning of this campaign against corruption. Their condemnation what mingled with glee at the thought that he was weakening the position of the Republicans, and their open indignation as well as their less candidly avowed satisfaction may be accounted for on ordinary partisan lines. The attitude of the Republicans was more remarkable. Even the very good friends of the PRESIDENT shook their heads sadly and opined that he was going too far and too fast. Many others, not so particularly the friends of the PRESIDENT though following him as their leader were more plain- [*London Times:*] MONDAY, MARCH 30, 1908. spoken, and condemned his action in indignant language. When the abuses he denounced bore their natural fruit in a financial crisis, men of all parties joined in attributing the mischief to the destruction of confidence caused by his outspoken attacks upon wrongdoing. Few public men in any country have been more bitterly and ungenerously assailed, or have suffered a greater amount of personal detraction. But the PRESIDENT held on his way quite unmoved by the political storm, and strong in his belief that his action would appeal to the conscience of his countrymen at large. That conscience was in need of awakening, but he was confident alike in its existence and in his power to rouse it from its condition of despairing acquiescence in evils that seemed incurable. Now the PRESIDENT has his reward. All the party calculations have gone to the wall, and the one thing that stands out clear and strong is the result of his appeal. His critics clung to the last to the their belief, or their pretended belief, that he was only playing a bigger "bluff" than usual, and that in spite of all disclaimers he would at last be unmasked as an aspirant to a renewed lease of power. No doubt their confident predictions had a great effect in keeping large numbers of voters in a state of doubt and perplexity. That was the best card in the hands of his opponents, but it failed them when it become clear beyond denial or doubt that MR. ROOSEVELT had meant all along just what he said, and would not be put in nomination for the Presidency. His reward is one of the most remarkable personal victories ever won in public life. There is no policy before the people of the United States except his policy. Party lines, nowhere more strongly insisted upon, have been completely obliterated, the ordinary tactics of party "bosses" have been suddenly superseded, and politicians are vying with one another in eagerness to be identified with the policy not long ago regarded by party leaders with fear and distrust. Naturally they do their best to wear their rue with a difference. Little variations in methods are eagerly paraded, because there is nothing else to parade, since neither party can afford to go to the people upon any policies other than those which MR. ROOSEVELT has made popular. The three candidates now before the country are politically indistinguishable, the programmes are all of one colour, and that a colour new in American politics; so that all remains for the nation at the Presidential election is to determine which man is best fitted by capacity, training, and associations to carry out the measures to which all are alike pledged. That is a very curious and interesting situation. It revives one's faith in individual worth and ability, proving that under the most democratic forms a man may still impose his personality upon the conduct of a nation's affairs. All that is needed is a man beg enough, and the may still produce the man by energyof was confident alike in its and in his power to rouse it from its condition of despairing acquiescence in evils that seemed incurable. Now the PRESIDENT has his reward. All the party calculations have gone to the wall, and the one thing that stands out clear and strong is the result of his appeal. His critics clung to the last to their belief, or their pretended belief, that he was only playing a bigger "bluff" than usual, and that in spite of all disclaimers he would at last be unmasked as an aspirant to a renewed lease of power. No doubt their confident predictions had a great effect in keeping large numbers of voters in a state of doubt and perplexity. That was the best card in the hands of his opponents, but it failed them when it became clear beyond denial or doubt that MR. ROOSEVELT had meant all along just what he said, and would not be put in nomination for the Presidency. His reward is one of the most remarkable personal victories ever won in public life. There is no policy before the people of the United States except his policy. Party lines, nowhere more strongly insisted upon, have been completely obliterated, the ordinary tactics of party "bosses" have been suddenly superseded, and politicians are vying with one another in eagerness to be identified with the policy not long ago regarded by party leaders with fear and distrust. Naturally they do their best to wear their rue with a difference. Little variations in methods are eagerly paraded, because there is nothing else to parade, since neither party can afford to go to the people upon any policies other than those which MR. ROOSEVELT has made popular. The three candidates now before the country are politically indistinguishable, the programmes are all of one colour, and that a colour new in American politics; so that all that remains for the nation at the Presidential election is to determine which man is best fitted by capacity, training, and associations to carry out the measures to which all are alike pledged. That is a very curious and interesting situation. It revives one's faith in individual worth and ability, proving that under the most democratic forms a man may still impost his personality upon the conduct of a nation's affairs. All that is needed is a man big enough, and the democracy may still produce the man big enough to sway it by energy, faith, and force of character. Now that the victory is won, there will be plenty of people eager for a good place in the procession that follows the conqueror. Some of the fiercest cavillers at the PRESIDENT's policy will now be foremost in pretending that it has commanded their allegiance ever since they left school. Many people of that kind will need careful watching for a new coat does not always imply a new heart. However, they are beginning to discover that after all there is nothing so very dreadful or revolutionary about the PRESIDENT'S proposals. Even Congress, which does not respond too easily to new demands, is slightly bestirring itself, so that there seems to be a possibility of the session not being so absolutely barren as it has promised to be. When it makes no difference which way the cat is going to jump, why not gain a little credit by anticipating the movement? It is now being rediscovered that British railways, for instance, have always been under Government control, at least as stringent as anything that th PRESIDENT has proposed for American railways. No doubt our system is due to the fact that railways came into an old and thoroughly settled country, in which they had to encounter all sorts of well-established interests. So the American system sprang up because railways entered upon a wide country very sparsely populated, and were first in the field over vast areas in which multitudes of rival interests have since established themselves. But just because the American conditions are now approximately what ours were when the first railway was opened, the time has come when some control very similar to ours in imperatively demanded. What applies to railways applies to many other undertakings, in which there is no longer the room that there once was for the magnate to disport himself with complete irresponsibility; whether the magnate be a great capitalist or the head of a great labour organiza-3-30-08 ENC. IN CARTER 4-3-08THE TIMES, MONDAY, MARCH 30, 1908. Mr. Roosevelt and American Opinion. Few things in contemporary politics are more remarkable than the great change that has taken place in the attitude of the political parties in the United States towards PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT and the policies he advocates. We may put aside the objurgations of his political opponents at the beginning of his campaign against corruption. Their condemnation was mingled with glee at the thought that he was weakening the position of the Republicans, and their open indignation as well as their less candidly avowed satisfaction may be accounted for on ordinary partisan lines. The attitude of the Republicans was more remarkable. Even the very good friends of the PRESIDENT shook their heads sadly and opined that he was going to farr and too fast. Many others, not so particularly the friends of the PRESIDENT though following him as their leader, were more plain-spoken, and condemned his action in indignant language. When the abuses he denounced bore their natural fruit in a financial crisis, men of all parties joined in attributing the mischief to the destruction of confidence caused by his outspoken attacks upon wrongdoing. Few public men in any country have been more bitterly and generously assailed, or have suffered a greater amount of personal detraction. But the PRESIDENT held on his way quite unmoved by the political storm, and strong in his belief that his action would appeal to the conscience of his countrymen at large. That conscience was in need of awakening, but he was confident alike in its existence and in his power to rouse it from its condition of despairing acquiescence in evils that seemed incurable. Now the PRESIDENT has his reward. All the party calculations have gone to the wall, and the one thing that stands out clear and strong is the result of his appeal. His critics clung to the last to their belief, or their pretended belief, that he was only playing a bigger "bluff" than usual, and that in spite of all disclaimers he would at last be unmasked as an aspirant to a renewed lease of power. No doubt their confident predictions had a great effect in keeping large numbers of voters in a state of doubt and perplexity. That was the best card in the hands of his opponents, but it failed them when it became clear beyond denial or doubt that MR. ROOSEVELT had meant all along just what he said, and would not be put in nomination for the Presidency. His reward is one of the most remarkable personal victories ever won in public life. There is no policy before the people of the United States except his policy. Party lines, nowhere more strongly insisted upon, have been completely obliterated, the ordinary tactics of party "bosses" have been suddenly superseded, and politicians are vying with one another in eagerness to be identified with the policy not long ago regarded by party leaders with fear and distrust. Naturally they do their best to wear their rue with a difference. Little variations in method are eagerly paraded, because there is nothing else to parade, since neither party can afford to go to the people upon any policies other than those which MR. ROOSEVELT has made popular. The three candidates now before the country are politically indistinguishable, the programmes are all of one colour, and that a colour new in American politics; so that all that remains for the nation at the Presidential election is to determine which man is best fitted by capacity, training, and associations to carry out the measures to which all are alike pledged. That is a very curious and interesting situation. It revives one's faith in individual worth and ability, proving that under the most democratic forms a man may still impose his personality upon the conduct of a nation's affairs. All that is needed is a man big enough, and the democracy may still produce the man big enough to sway it by energy, faith, and force of character. Now that the victory is won, there will be plenty of people eager for a good place in the procession that follows the conqueror. Some of the fiercest cavillers at the PRESIDENT'S policy will now be foremost in pretending that it has commanded their allegiance ever since they left school. Many people of that kind will need careful watching, for a new coat does not always imply a new heart. However, they are beginning to discover that after all there is nothing so very dreadful of revolutionary about the PRESIDENT'S proposals. Even Congress, which does not respond too easily to new demands, is slightly bestirring itself, so that there seems to be a possibility of the session not being so absolutely barren as it has promised to be. When it makes no difference which way the cat is going to jump, why not gain a little credit by anticipating the movement? It is now being rediscovered that British railways, for instance, have always been under Government control, at least as stringent as anything that the PRESIDENT has proposed for American railways. No doubt our system is due to the fact that railways came into an old and thoroughly settled country, in which they had to encounter all sorts of well-established interests. So the American system sprang up because railways entered upon a wide country very sparsely populated, and were first in the field over vast areas in which multitudes of rival interests have since established themselves. But just because the American conditions are now approximately what ours were when the first railway was opened, the time has come when some control very similar to ours is imperatively demanded. What applies to railways applies to many other undertakings, in which there is no longer the room that there once was for the magnate to disport himself with complete irresponsibility; whether the magnate be a great capitalist or the head of a great labour organization.THE TIMES, MONDAY MARCH 30, 1908. IMPERIAL AND FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE THE UNITED STATES. MR. ROOSEVELT'S POLICIES. (BY MARCONI'S TRANSATLANTIC WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY.) (FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.) NEW YORK, March 29. Mr. Roosevelt and his policies still occupy the centre of the political stage. The President has not only the satisfaction of seeing them endorsed by the three candidates for his succession most prominently before the people, but now Mr. Williams, leader of the Opposition, as you were informed by telegraph on Friday, declares that some of the measures proposed by the President in his recent Message are so immediately important to the country that he is willing to drop partisanship and help by Democratic votes to enact the recommendations. Surely a man who is thus able to obliterate party lines must, in spite of what his enemies say, have a moral force behind him which appeals to the people of the United States apart from party politics. While Mr. Roosevelt is very frank in discussing public questions with accredited visitors and representatives of the American and foreign Press, he dislikes a record of his observations to go forth to the world in quotation marks. An inaccurate statement fathered on him by this means from correspondents of French journals to whom interviews were given has moved the President to state his objection to being quoted, an objection which has been respected in the following impression of a recent visit to him. In your leading article of March 10 you pointed out the difficulties the President has encountered in the reforms he has endeavored to carry out. Mr. Roosevelt is fully alive to these difficulties and to the fact that much work still remains to be done. There is no doubt in his mind that the American people will find means of doing it and of continuing the policy which has been initiated with what vigour and ability he has had at command. Few Presidents have been more venomously attacked than Mr. Roosevelt, and these attacks have come thick and fast during the last six months. It is surprising to find that through it all he has lost none of his enthusiasm, courage, and astonishing power of endurance. He discussed the perplexing questions which have arisen from the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and with which he has so long been dealing, with a buoyancy and hopefulness indicating no loss of interest. Congress is a difficult body to move. The President admits that to Senators, Congressmen, and statesmen in conversation, as he did on Thursday to your Correspondent; but then, he adds, the Americans are a practical people, and now that the national conscience is awakened the reforms will be carried out. RAILWAY REFORM PROPOSALS. And what are these reforms? asks the President. Are they really so Radical and Socialistic as some interested people try to make out? Mr. Roosevelt thinks no, and points to the fact that more than half a century ago England practically settled in principle nearly all the railway legislation which he has advocated, and since then it has become the law and practice of Great Britain. On the President's desk was a volume of the Gladstone's report of 1884 on the railways of Great Britain. Mr. Roosevelt thinks that some of the conclusions in that report apply with equal force to conditions in the United States to-day - for example, the railways were of a national rather than of a local character; that, as they multiply, the collision of interests between them becomes sharp and violent, and where the combatants on all sides are so powerful and opulent a more than ordinary vigilance and firmness is demanded for the protection of the public interest. Fully agreeing with the opinion of that Commission, that any general interference by the Government in the management and working of railways is dangerous, with regard to railway legislation Mr. Roosevelt is convinced by reasoning and experience that "it should henceforward be subjected to an habitual and effective supervision on the part of the Government." These words are Gladstone's, but the President thinks they are as true to-day, when applied to American conditions, as they were 64 years ago, when applied to British conditions. From that time to the present British railways have been subjected to an "habitual and effective supervision" on the part of the Government, while, until recently, American railways have pretty much been a law unto themselves. Higher wages, shorter hours, cheap workmen's trains, lower rates, and greater facilities have all been pressed upon British railways. Employers' liability is an old story, and last year was extended to domestic service, while both your political parties are committed to old-age pensions. Compared with the heavy programme of advanced Radicals in England, Mr. Roosevelt believes that the measures he proposed are ordinary safeguards demanded for the protection of the public interest, and in the end will be beneficial to labour, to shareholders, and to capital. The functions of the British Board of Trade are more far-reaching than those of the Inter-State Commerce Commission even should all the recommended legislation be enacted. Mr. Roosevelt's railway policies involve nothing more Radical than has long been accepted by the law of Great Britain governing such enterprises, while much of the proposed reform has long been embodied in the practice of the Railway Commission of the State of Massachusetts. CAPITAL AND LABOUR COMBINATIONS. The President appreciates the importance and necessity of combinations of capital and of labour, and of united action among farmers. His aim, therefore, in the proposed amendments to the Sherman Act, is to make these combinations effective without being mischievous. He is not willing to accord to labour all it seeks or thinks it is entitled to, any more than he proposed to let capital continue the debauch which has brought upon the country so much suffering and disgrace. He firmly believes that the situation can be remedied by legislation, so that legitimate trades may flourish, honest labour may prosper, and vicious combinations and lawless labour organizations may be retrained. To this end his Message of Wednesday was directed. If only a spirit of reasonable compromise prevails, theTHE TIMES, MONDAY, MARCH 30, 1908. desired and may be achieved during the present session of Congress. To legalize boycotting is as repugnant to Mr. Roosevelt as it would be to legalize the irresponsible acts of the so-called trust magnates, and the sooner the true friends of labour recognize this fact the sooner will come a satisfactory settlement of the question which is absorbing the attention of the people in the country to the exclusion of all others. In brief, Mr. Roosevelt recognizes a moral movement in what he is doing, the aim of which is decent politics and decent business. He considers it as much of an outrage, and is not afraid to say it, for a labour union to elect a criminal as its head as it would be for a great trust or business organization to elect another type of criminal to control its destinies because business might be disturbed by not doing so. CRITICISM OF THE NAVY. My Washington correspondent telegraphs:- "Several developments have occurred this week which tend to bring the already inconclusive investigations of the Senate Naval Committee to naught, and reopen the whole question with regard to the armour belts of American battleships. On Wednesday the New York Evening Post, an outspoken critic of the Navy Department long before the Reuterdahl incident, published from its Washington correspondent a despatch stating that much important information bearing upon the armour belt question was suppressed in the recent inquiry. In the first place, it states, a ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– letter written by Admiral Evans last summer to the effect that the armour belt of the battleships was practically awash at low draught was received by the Senate Committee, but never published at the recent inquiry. The Post says that its publication would have borne out the criticisms which various naval officers were called before the committee to sustain. Secondly, it will be remembered that the famous Reuterdahl article stated that the American ships were in the same condition as those of Russia when destroyed by the Japanese in the battle of Tsu Shima. This was denied by the authorities. It appears. according to the above-named correspondent, that the General Board of the Navy used exactly the same comparison in 1906, and that the report was forwarded to the Senate Committee, in whose pigeon-holes it remained during the inquiry. The same fate is stated to have overtaken other recommendations passed by the General Board for the alterations of the present system of armour belts, which, if published would have been greeted by many critics as strengthening their case. "In addition, Admiral Evans, responding to Mr. Metcalf's inquiries, is said to have forwarded a report, based on exhaustive practical observations during the cruise, in which he recommends a drastic lightening of the vessels in order to render the armour belts serviceable. This testimony critics who realize the prestige of Admiral Evans's name wlcome as lending weight to their cause. As reflected by the statements of the journal named, the whole incident is widely canvassed here generally in a sense uncomplimentary to the Navy Department and the Senate Committee. Admiral Evans's report has been submitted to Mr. Roosevelt, and there is a possibility of legislative action." NEGRO SHOT BY A CONGRESSMAN. The shooting of a negro by a Southern Congressman on Friday night in Washington street car may awaken the slumbering racial antipathy in the national capital. Over 90,000 persons, about one third of the population, are black. Yo say the least, it was a deplorable occurrence, especially as Mr. Heflin was on of the President's violent critics for inviting Mr. Booker Washington to the White House, and is the author of a Bill for the introduction of "Jim Crow," or separate, cars for the coloured people of the District. It is said that he carried a revolver because he had incurred the animosity of the negroes by his action and had received threatening letters. He had been released on bail and has received many messages of sympathy and support from the Southern States. The question is being seriously asked, Would Mr. Heflin, who was on his way to deliver a temperance lecture, have admonished a white man for drinking whisky from a flask and using offensive language in a street car as he admonished the negro? A few weeks ago I was riding in a Washington street car and four or five white rowdies entered and behaved in a similar way. Neither the conductor not the passengers paid the slightest heed. The occurrence comes immediately after the mass meeting in New York, which showed that the differences of the negroes with the Republican party over the Brownsville affair are causing them to drift towards the Democrats. Now the negroes will be more than ever in doubt which way to turn. THE CURRENCY PROBLEM. (By Cable.) Later. The Aldrich Currency Bill emerges from the Senate mountain a very little mouse. But if it is really a step in the right direction, even a small step, it will serve, though that is disputed. Mr. Aldrich's definite promise to bring in a Bill to constitute a commission to investigate the entire banking system of the country is a far more hopeful sign of practical reform. The passage of the Aldrich Bill by the Senate probably means the defeat of the more satisfactory Fowler Bill in the House this session, but, with the appointment of a commission, the way will be paved for the whole subject to receive more permanent adjustment. I asked Mr. Andrew Carnegie last night his opinion, and he replied that the Bill might act "as a composing draught for the nerves of financial interests, and, should it pass the House, it is doubtful if much more use can ever be made of it." BOMB EXPLOSION IN NEW YORK. A bomb explosion at a meeting of unemployed in Union-square yesterday furnishes excitement for the newspapers, and concern is manifested as to whether it really portends the revival of Anarchism, of which so much has been heard lately. The missile is said to have been intended for the police, but it exploded prematurely in the hand of the thrower, mortally wounding him and killing his companion. The cry of the unemployed is loud in New York just now. The meeting is likely to have attracted the usual fanatics imbued with Anarchist ideas, who ascribe their misfortunes to society, and it is assumed that the injured man Silberstein is one of these. The Socialists repudiate the act, and probable personal vengeance against the police is the real explanation of it. The police, safe from the danger, maltreated the crowd according to some accounts, using their clubs, and riding roughshod over them. Doubtless the occurrence will disclose the machinations of the Anarchists if Silberstein is found to have acted in concert with them. HAITI. Affairs in Haiti appear to be quieting down. According to the New York Herald, President Nord Alexis is doing his utmost to restore law and order. The German cruiser Bremen has sailed for Jamaica with the remaining refugees from the German and French Legations. The authorities at Washington are satisfied as to the THE TIMES, MONDAY, MARCH 30, 1908. safety of foreign property in the Republic. As one official remarked:-" The bark of the Haitian politician is worse than his bite. There have been many revolutions there, but, as far as I know, foreigners have never suffered severely from them. The late crisis seems to have been no exception from the rule." Nevertheless, it has been decided to keep for the present a war vessel in Haitian waters in order to be prepared for any contingency. I understood that the other foreign Powers interested mean to do likewise. PLAY CENTRES FOR CHILDREN. Mr. and Mrs. Humphry Ward are being shown a great deal of attention during their stay here. The Playground Association of America, in recognition of the splendid work which Mrs. Ward has done in promoting play centres for London children, are giving a dinner in her honour on Tuesday at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel. Mr. Richard Watson Gilder will preside, and the Duchess of Marlborough, who leaves for England on Wednesday, and Miss Jane Addams, of Chicago, will be among the speakers. As a social movement, children's playgrounds have taken a strong hold on this country. Mr. Roosevelt is honorary president of the society. In Manhattan neary three millions sterling have been spent on playgrounds, and £800,000 in Chicago. It is more as a sociologist than a novelist than Mrs. Ward is welcomed here, and it is noticeable that her work in this direction has inspired greater interest than her writings, which have so greatly influenced American religious thought. During her visit Mrs. Ward will speak publicly here and in other cities for the purpose of raising funds for London play centres. NEW YORK, MARCH 29.* The police have discovered at the house of Silberstein, the man who is believed to have thrown the bomb yesterday, letters from Alexander Berkman, an Anarchist who attempted to murder Mr. Henry C. Frick at Pittsburg some years ago, and who is now the husband of Emma Goldman, the notorious Anarchist leader. The police declare that the letters contain details of extraordinary plots against financiers and money interests. MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA, MARCH 28.* According to a decision given by the United States Court to-day, the Alabama railway laws are unconstitutional. __________________ THE VOYAGE OF THE AMERICAN FEET. WASHINGTON, MARCH 28.* It has practically been decided by the Navy Department that the battleship fleet shall visit Auckland on its way from Samoa to Sydney. There is an ample supply of good coal at the New Zealand port, and it is felt that the visit of the fleet will also show the appreciation of the United States of the prompt and cordial invitation extended by the New Zealand authorities. ___________________ THE UNITED STATES AND VENEZUELA. CARACAS, MARCH 25.* Three pouches of the official mail for the American cruiser Tacoma having been opened in La Guaira post-office, Mr. Russell, the American Minister, demanded an explanation of the incident from the Venezuelan Government, characterizing the affair as very serious. Dr. Paul, the Venezuelan Minister for Foreign Affairs, replied that the pouches were opened in mistake for the ordinary mail, and added that only a prejudiced mind could call the occurrence very serious. The above incident, coupled with the return of the Tacoma to La Guaira to-day, has caused the greatest excitement here. An inspired article in the journal El Constitutional under the title "What does Roosevelt want?" declares that Mr. Root is acting under the influence of Americans holding claims against Venezuela, and is following a premeditated plan to create a conflict with this Republic. The journal adds:--" The United States purposes to raise the flag of conquest in South America." _________________ CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES. THE FISHERIES AGREEMENT. (FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT.) WASHINGTON, MARCH 29. The following details concerning the agreement at which the British and United States Government have arrived with regard to the American and Canadian fresh water fisheries may be of interest. It has been decided to appoint a joint commission of two persons to regulate all questions arising out of the fisheries in the frontier waters from Passamaquoddy Bay, New Brunswick, on the east, to Puget Sound, on the west. The commission is to have final authority on all questions regarding the catching and preservation of fishes killed for food and the administration of the fisheries. The treaty creating the commission is to last four years from the date of ratification, after which either party is to be free to abrogate it upon one year's notice. In coming to this agreement the negotiating parties have practically followed the recommendation of the Joint High Commission which was appointed to study the subject in 1892. The commission made a report in the shape of a draft treaty in 1898, but the treaty was never put into force. _________________ CANADA. THE IMMIGRATION QUESTION. (FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT.) OTTAWA, MARCH 29. The error in the Government regulation under which Mr. Justice Clement of Vancouver recently justified the non-deportation of a large number of Indians has been remedied by a new order of the Cabinet, which provides that the Governor in Council may prohibit the admission into Canada of all immigrants unless they come on a through ticket direct from their country of origin or adoption. The original order assigned the power of prohibition to the Minister of the Interior, which the Judge held to be irregular. An early spring is predicted throughout the Canadian North-West Seeding is under way in Alberta, and the ground is being prepared in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. There will be a largely increased acreage under crop in the three provinces. The immigration movement from the United States continues with unabated vigour. ___________ THE QUEBEC BATTLEFIELDS. OTTAWA MARCH 29.* Earl Grey, the Governor-General, has received a telegram announcing that the boys at Eton have subscribed £100 towards his scheme for the nationalization of the Quebec battlefields. Lord Northcote, the retiring Governor-General of the Australian Commonwealth, has contributed £50. TELEGRAPHIC ADDRESS “OPTIMISTIC LONDON” TELEPHONE 1835 MAYFAIR [*P. F.*] [*Ackd 4/8/08*] [*L*] 10, CHESTERFIELD STREET, L0NDON, W. March 31, 1908 Dear Mr. President Your kind note of the 21st has just come in, and in addition to being delighted that Laszlo’s has been has so successful with your portrait I am much relieved to know that you apparently bear me no ill will for having exposed you to the ordeal of sitting! I know well what an infliction it is, and that your friendship for me should have stood the strain shows that it has all the staying-power that I could wish for. I am of course immensely anxious to see the portrait and am hoping that Laszlo will be will be back here with it by about April12. I know that it will be a good picture, technically speaking, because he is a master of his craft, but what I am waiting to see is whether his genius has enabled him to catch and portray your personality. That is what I want, and I sent Laszlo over because I felt that he was the only man who might succeed where Sargent so totally failed. At any rate you and Mrs Roosevelt are (2) pleased, and that is a high test because no one is so critical as the sitter who has suffered, and the person knows him best. I am very glad, too that Laszlo has painted Mrs. Roosevelt’s portrait also, and I shall look forward to seeing it someday - if not at the White House or at your next home; wherever that may be. In the meantime your picture will occupy the place of honour in my house here and I can only thank you again - - more than I can say - for complying so cheerfully with my troublesome request and for helping me to pursue what I so greatly desired. By the way I hope you liked Laszlo himself. Quite apart from his work, I have a great liking for him and find him a very interesting companion. He will go far, I think, if he does not get spoiled, but I shall endeavor to play the part of the slave by the chariot and save him from the blandishments of British society. Now as regards Mackenzie King. As far as I can judge he has been very successful in his mission and has certainly created an excellent impression over here. I did everything I could to prepare the ground for him, and I think he has now seen pretty well everyone, on both sides of politics, who has any influence. As no doubt he has reported to you, he has so far found no [material] difference of opinion as to your main principle there - a (3) complete halt should be called in the immigration of labourers into English speaking countries from Japan, or any other oriental country, and vice-versa, and that, if necessary, the English-speaking communities, should cooperate to make this exclusion effective. That is, I believe, the view of practically every responsible person over here, and if by any chance the subject should come up for discussion in Parliament I do not think that [???] the Japanese, or any other foreign observer, would be able to detect any real joint in our armour. Of course those cranks whose blood is always boiling for every country but their own, would limit their usual shrieks, but we always have them with us, & whilst there is an an unusual crop of them in the present Parliament, they are appraised at their true value. What definite steps the Govt., and Sir E. Grey, are prepared to take at the present moment I do not know - but Grey (when I spoke to him) expressed himself as more anxious to cooperate with you, and no doubt he has said a good deal more to Mackenzie King. But the latter will probably have reported fully to you and it is therefore unnecessary for me to say anything more, except that I shall be only too glad, of course, to do anything in my power to assist him in meeting the right people and in helping [them] to keep the opposition leaders fully acquainted with your views. If there is any particular thing that you would like me to do in this connection, (4) at any time, you will of course let me know. I shall see King again before he leaves London and if there should then be anything further for me to report to you I will of course do so. / I handed your letter to Balfour and he was really delighted with it. No doubt he has already written to you and it has given me great pleasure to bring you and him into contact. May I say how greatly interested I was also, in your views on “Decadence “, particularly in the pre-historic wars between the Fauna on the American continent. How on earth you can find time to know all these things, & still more to write about them, passes my comprehension, and sometimes I come to the conclusion that; of all my friends, you are the only one who appears to have time for everything. I should hasten to add that this was not in my mind when I asked you to sit to László, and I must not make it the excuse now for wearying you with a longer letter! With kindest remembrances to Mrs. Roosevelt Yours very faithfully Arthur Lee. P.S. / The enclosed leading article from yesterday’s “Times” pleased me very much, and may perhaps interest you - if you have not seen it. [For 1. enclosure see 3-30-08][*F*] [*(F)*] House of Representatives U. S. Washington, D. C. Personal. Elmlra, N. Y. March 31st, 1908. Hon. William Loeb, Jr., Washington, D. C. My dear Will : I wired you yesterday with reference to Mr. Prangen. You may recall that before I permitted him to be elected Chairman of the Committee I had an interview with you, and you thought it was well to let him go on and be elected and wait for developments. Of course Gen. Grandfield knew nothing of that. Mr. Prangen would have made an ideal Chairman for Steuben county, and it would not have interferred with the efficiency of his administration of the office; but he sees, and I see, that we ought not to embarrass the President, and so he has arranged to resign at the earliest possible moment. It will be done right off; and I wish you would inform Grandfield that it is not necessary to push any further. I would not like to have the sense of Philistines triumph. Prangen will remain a member of the Committee, and if that should also be objectionable to the administration he will resign that. I think you have concluded wisely with reference to Woodruff, under all the circumstances. Did you see what an idiot Stewart L. Woodford made of himself at Utica the other day? Of course it was not to be expected that he would be otherwise; and that man Hardman, of the New York Press, did not do much better. Mrs. Fassett starts for New York to-day, and I shall follow tomorrow or the next day, and will be in Washington next week. I feel Mr. Loeb, #2. so if I could not get braced up to do it, but I know it is the only thing to do. So I will try and come in and see you. With best greetings, Yours very truly, J S Fassett[*F*] [*H*] MA TEL VINEYARD UPPER LAKE, LAKE COUNTY CALIFORNIA Tuesday, March 31st, 1908 The President Washington D.C. My dear Theodore:- I thank you ever so much on both Hattie’s and my account for your note of introduction to the admirals and captains of the Battle Fleet. it is just what we wanted, and, armed with it, I think that they will let usgo any where we wish, though you may be sure that we shall not abuse the privilege. The state is looking forward with much pleasure to the Fleet's arrival, and I expect to have the time of my life for a fortnight, as I do not suppose that my duties on the Governor's staff will be very arduous. Thanking you again, and wishing that you could have arranged to have been here on May 6th, I am most sincerely yours, Charles Mifflin Hammond.Acnd 4/11/08 TELEPHONE 12494 CENTRAL. TELEGRAPHING ADDRESS "SPECTATOR, LONDON." The Spectator 1. Wellington Street. Strand, London. W.C. March 31st. 1908. Dear Mr. President, I send you a copy of a paper which I am to read months hence at the Pan-Anglican Congress on "The Ethics of Journalism." I think you will agree with a good deal of what I say in defense of my trade. Yours sincerely, J. St.Loe Strachey pp. JB [For enc. see 3-31-08][ca 3-31-08] S.B. 22 PAN-ANGLICAN PAPERS Being Problems for consideration at the Pan-Anglican Congress, 1908. THE ETHICS OF JOURNALISM By J. ST. LOE STRACHEY Editor of "The Spectator" There is a story of Delane, the editor of the Times when the Times was at tis greatest, which should never be forgotten by the critics of journalism and journalists. Some one had been taking Delane to task over and incident connected with his newspaper, and Delane replied: " You forget that my business is publicity." If the public would not forget this essential fact in regard to newspapers they would attain to a much clearer and juster understanding of the problems of the Press. We must always remember that the journalist's business is publicity. At first the plain man may be inclined to say that Delane's words have nothing to do with the matter, or rather he may feel inclined to reply in the spirit of Talleyrand's answer to the man who said he had to live—" I do not see the necessity." A very little reflection, however, will show the necessity of publicity, will show, I mean, that publicity has a real and very important function in the State, and that it is literally true that the modern world could not live and progress without the newspaper. The newspaper is indispensable to progress, and to progress in the right direction. Unless we know, day by day, what people are doing, in our nation, in our country, in our town, in our village, we should be like men wandering about in the dark, and we should find it far more difficult than we do now to obtain the co-operation of others for good and worthy objects. We should fail also to get that encouragement, moral, intellectual and social, which is obtained by knowing that others are thinking the same thoughts and entertaining the same aspirations that we are. It is good to know of the righteous work which is being done by others. It is even good to know, within reasonable limits, the evil that is being done under the sun in order that we may lay our plans and bring up our forces to check that evil. Without that daily report on the world's doings, which is the modern newspaper, we should for the most part be blind and deaf, and if not dumb, at any rate hardly able to speak above a whisper. This view may a first sight seem the presumptive claim of a journalist for his trade. Let ay of my hearers, however, try to imagine a newspaperless world and he will soon realize that I am not exaggerating. It is not merely a desire for amusement that makes the leaders of men in a besieged town, or even in so narrow a filed as an Arctic expedition, encourage the foundation of a newspaper. They want it as a means of illumination quite as much as of entertainment. I never myself so fully realized the utility of the Press as when I happened to do a week's marching with a large body of troops under conditions which made2 THE ETHICS OF JOURNALISM it very difficult, nay, almost impossible, to obtain a newspaper. I was trekking with one of the armies that took part in the great autumn manoeuvres of 1903 in Wiltshire and Berkshire. As the troops moved long before the newspapers had penetrated into the villages, and as we were, as a rule, out on the open downs all day and pitched our camps at an hour too late for any wandering paper-boys to reach us, we for the most part had to do without the aid of the Press. The result was that we felt very acutely the fog of war, though only of mimic war. I don't mean by this that we felt being deprived of telegrams as to what was being said or done in France or Russia or America, or as to what plays were being acted in London or Paris. What we hungered for was first, of course, information as to the enemy, and, next, as to the movements of our own troops. Here again our desire was not to be let into the secrets of our own general, or to learn details which would have exposed his plans, but for all sorts of information which there would have been no harm in our knowing, but instead would have been very useful both to officers and men. In a sense, no doubt, Divisional, Brigade, and Regimental orders and reports are news, but there is no method of publication. To put the matter shortly, I realized how useful it would have been, though of course the thing was impossible, if an active and enterprising field newspaper could have followed us in a couple of automobile vans, and if a resume of what had happened the day before could have been struck off during the night and placed in our hands at Reveille. Thought it would not have been convenient to tell the troops everything, there was, as I have just said, an enormous amount that they might not only have known without injury, but which it would have been exceedingly useful for them to know. People sometimes talk of men's distinctive desire for news, but like many other instincts, this one is founded on convenience and the law of self-preservation. Readers of Stevenson's Kidnapped will remember how after the Appin Murder the fugitives on the heather obeyed, even at very great risk to themselves, the sacred duty of the Highlands to "pass the news". In savage countries and in troubled times a man is looked upon as a wild beast rather than a human being if he does not pass the news. Asian travellers dwell upon the way in which the Bedouin observe the duty of passing the news and describe how, if a solitary Arab is encountered, the news is, as a matter of course, passed to him. The seclusion of women even yields to this imperative law of the desert, and an Arab man and an Arab woman may be seen with their horses, tail to tail, and so themselves back to back also, giving and receiving the news over their shoulders. I am tempted, before I pass on, to give a modern example of the advantage of news in the purest sense. In the course of the brave attempt which has been made and is still being made, to clean the Augean stable of municipal politics in San Francisco, the editor of the chief newspaper engaged in the campaign of purity was kidnapped in the streets of San Francisco, hurried off in a motor car and placed under restrain in a train at a suburban station, the plan being to THE ETHICS OF JOURNALISM 3 carry him some 500 miles away. It happened, however, that a reporter caught sight of the editor's face in the reserved portion of the Pullman car where he was imprisoned, and telegraphed to a San Francisco evening paper the fact that the well-known Mr. So-and-So was "on the ----- train going North". The reporter had not the slightest notion of the romantic circumstances of the kidnapping, and thought he was merely telegraphing an item of social news. One of the editor's colleagues, in the campaign against corruption, happened, however, to see this item in the evening paper and at once realized what it meant. He instantly telephoned to the proper authorities at a town halfway between San Francisco and the kidnappers' destination, with the result that the train was stopped, and the kidnapped man brought before a judge on a warrant of habeas corpus and promptly released. No doubt mere publicity can occasionally serve the evildoers equally well, but here, at any rate, is an instance of its utility which may be regarded as proof of the advantage of collecting and transmitting news even of the most unimportant, or apparently unimportant, kind. Thought I hold that publicity is a function of very real utility to the State, it must not be supposed that I think it can be practised without limitations, or that I do not realize that it has dangers both great and many. It has been said that honesty is not as easy as Blind Man's Buff. The same thing may well be said of publicity. The first and most obvious limitation of publicity is that publicity should only be given to truth and not to error. Here, however, we must not forget that there are certain forms of error which can only be exposed and got rid of by publicity, and again that it is often only possible to find out what is truth and what error by submitting the alleged facts to the test of publicity. What at first seems an incredible rumour turns out to be literally true and therefore a failure to report it would actually have been a suppression of the truth. But though the general rule may be strong in favour of stating facts, there are plenty of occasions when it is better that the facts should not be known, or at any rate known in detail to as few people as possible. As Sir Thomas Browne says somewhere: there are matters which deserve to be recorded only in the chronicles of Hell. In other words, every sound newspaper must obey the rule, which, if I remember rightly, is inscribed on each issue of one American newspaper: "We print all the news that is fit to print." Publicity, in fact, if it is to be honest in the true sense and of good report, like life demands an art. The more one studies this question of publicity the more it appears that what is wanted in the public interest is a just and clear understanding of the way in which publicity is to be achieved. The journalist's business is publicity, but it is also his business to see that this duty of publicity, thought carried out to the full, is carried out in a way which shall do not harm but good. If the methods of publicity are sound, fearless, and without guile, all is well. If they have not these qualities, then publicity may become4 THE ETHICS OF JOURNALISM the most degrading and dishonourable of trades. It is not difficult to see where the chief temptations to misuse the tremendous power of publicity arise. Publicity may be so used and turned as to represent most atrociously the doings of individuals or bodies of individuals. Facts may in a sense be given correctly and yet so presented as in effect to be little better than figments. A half truth, as all the world knows, is the worst form of a lie. Again, some record of wrong may be so given as to be a veritable source of pollution. Though apparently pilloried, the evil may really be held up for imitation and made not deterrent but attractive. Such cynical willingness to debauch the public mind is, however, I am glad to say, very rare, at any rate in this country, so rare indeed that it may almost be said to be non-existent in our Press. Heaven forbid that I should defend the Yellow Press, indiscriminately, but the Yellow Press deserves strict justice, as much as any other accused person, and it certainly would not be right to deal with the subject before me without pointing our how free even the least responsible portion of our Press is from using its function of publicity to pander to the baser appetites of man in the matter of indecency. It would not be at all just to say that this is because the public would not now tolerate an immoral newspaper, or, again, that it is due to the fact that the guardians of the law would intervene, for though the Press has most certainly been growing purer during the last twenty years, the same cannot be said of our books. Our friction has degenerated in this particular as much as our newspapers have improved. The pioneers of cheap newspapers have every right to say that they have refrained, and deliberately refrained, from any attempt to make profit by corrupting the public mind. The justifiable complaints that can be raised against popular journalism in its newest form are irresponsibility, cynical carelessness in the matter of truth, sensationalism, the destruction of a manly and honourable reticence and the introduction of triviality. To my mind the worst of these faults, after the supreme evil of indifference to veracity of statement, is triviality. Sensationalism and want of reticence will probably cure themselves, or at any rate the newspapers will give\ up their misdeeds in those respects as soon as the public taste has improved. The triviality of a great portion of our daily newspapers is, however, a defect which unhappily grows. What I mean by triviality can be seen at its worst in the American daily press, but it is fast becoming a feature of our own newspapers. For example the greatest of the New York dailies will often devote their most prominent columns of the foolishly expressed accounts of the trivial doings of very rich people. For the bride's mother is warned in stentorian tones that the public demand to know where her daughter's honeymoon is to be spent, whether in California or Florida, must be respected and that any attempt to withhold information will be viewed as an insult by the sovereign people. This devotion to triviality is debasing and degrading in a high degree. It is twice cursed. It degrades both him who reads and him who writes I once had a conversation with the reporters THE ETHICS OF JOURNALISM 5 of two very Yellow newspapers on an Atlantic liner outside the port of New York. The Lucania had run upon a sand-bank and we had to wait all day in sight of that towered city, exposed to the full fury of the interviewer. When I ventured to ask the two reporters in question whether they did not think it was perfectly absurd and ridiculous to print the chronicles of small beer, or rather of small slops, such as appeared in their columns, they readily, and I believe perfectly honestly, agreed, but said in defence that they had to obey their editor's orders. To me, at any rate, they acted most honourably and gave no report to our conservation, for I had reminded them that dog did not eat dog. A third reporter, however, to whom I had not thought it necessary to indicate as "private and confidential" an enthusiastic remark drawn by the beauty of New York harbour in an autumn sunset, honoured me the next day with a head-line of such colossal triviality that I cannot refrain from quoting it: "Editor Strachey says New York skins Venice!"-- a contribution to the illimitable inane worthy to stand by a headline in an English provincial paper: "Vestryman choked by a whelk!" I have dealt with the problem of publicity, but publicity, of course, is not the whole of journalism. Besides news there there is comment, and comment, at any rate among serious-minded people like the British, is quite as much thought of as news. It is with that part of journalism that the editor of a weekly newspaper has most to do. The journalism of comment may be divided into two parts, both perfectly legitimate. There is what I may term judicial journalism and the journalism of advocacy. In judicial journalism the writer attempts to approach the jury of the public rather as a judge than as a barrister, to sum up rather than make a speech for the prosecution or the defence. This does not of course mean that he does not in the end take a side or give a decision. He forms a view and states it, but in stating it he admits the existence of the other side and does not try to carry the jury away with him by the arts of rhetoric. Such journalism is not necessarily cold-blooded. Just as a judge may denounce baseness or misconduct in burning words, so the journalist who endeavors to maintain the judicial attitude may, when the necessity arises, be strong in his denunciations of what he holds to be weak, dangerous, or evil. He, however, who is bold enough to essay this form of journalism must never forget that a judge who professes to be judicial in tone, but who ends in being partial, is a worse man than an honest advocate, because he is, in fact, cloaking partisanship by hypocrisy. Little need be said in defence of the advocate journalist. He makes no pretence to be doing anything but pleading the cause of his party and placing it in the best possible light. It is not his business, but that of the opposition writer, to put the case for the other side, and if he occasionally pretends to an enthusiasm which does not really belong to him, he is only practising the innocent artifice of the counsel who tells the jury that he will be an unhappy man should he have failed in the task of persuading them to restore his long suffering client to his wife and family. 6 THE ETHICS OF JOURNALISM It must not be supposed, however, that the advocate journalist is a cynic who realizes that his own cause is a poor one, but calls it the best of causes because he is paid to do so. That, as all men of experience know, is a fallacy as regards the barrister, and it is still more a fallacy as regards the journalist. We should remember the story of the barrister who, at the end of a long career, declared that he had been singularly fortunate. He had never been called upon to defend a guilty person or to argue a case where the merits and the law were not strongly on his side. If this feeling grows up in the case of a man who, changing from prosecution to defence and from plaintiff to defendant, may often have to alter his point of view completely, how much more is it likely to grow up in that of the advocate journalist who is always on the same side? Believe me, the notion of the political journalist perpetually writing leaders against his own convictions is a pure figment of the popular imagination. No doubt an editor will sometimes ask a leader-writer not to put a particular view so strongly as he, the leader-writer, is known to feel it, but such reticence cannot surely be regarded as insincerity. I wish I had time to deal with the ethics of anonymity in journalism. The public are apt to suppose that anonymity is the cloak of all sorts of misdoings, and I have often heard people declare that in their opinion every leader-writer should be forced to sign his name. As I once heard it picturesquely expressed, "the mask should be torn from the villain's face. Why should a man be allowed to stab his neighbour in the dark!" As a matter of fact, I am convinced that anonymity makes, not for irresponsibility, but for responsibility, and that there are many men who, though truculent, offensive and personal when they write with the "I", will show a true sense of moderation and responsibility when they use the editorial "we". The man who writes for a newspaper very soon gets a strong sense of what is right and proper to be said in that particular organ, and he instinctively refuses to give way to personal feeling and personal animosity when he is writing, not in his own name, but in that of his newspaper. "I have hated and distrusted So-and-So ever since I was at Cambridge with him. I know what a false-hearted creature he was then, and how vain and supercilious, and I should like to get my knife into him some day. I feel, however, that the Daily Herald could not possibly attack him in this way. Even though my editor has told me that I may say what I like about him, it would not be fair to go for him unless I signed my name." That is an imaginary soliloquy which I am sure represents the feelings of plenty of leader-writers when confronted with a personal issue. Again, men who write anonymously, and in the name of their paper and not of themselves, are much less likely to yield to the foolish vanity of self-assertion. When Zola visited England I remember a very striking passage in which he expressed to an interviewer his astonishment at the anonymity of the British Press. He wondered how it was that our writers refused themselves the "delicious notoriety" which they might obtain through signed THE ETHICS OF JOURNALISM 7 articles. Thank heaven, our writers prefer the dignity which can be maintained through the honourable traditions of a great journal to such "delicious notoriety". The delicious notoriety of the individual is the ruin of the better journalism. Again, we must never forget that the signed article, however true and sound it may be, is always to some extent discounted through the personality of the writer. A. may have written in perfect sincerity of a particular statesman, but if he signs his name the gossip-mongers are sure to say that the article in question is to be accounted for by the fact that a fortnight before the writer was stopping with the Cabinet Minister who has been spoken well of, or because the writer's wife is well known to be a friend of the wife of the statesman, or for some equally trivial reason. Just as a good chairman of a committee should sink his individuality and speak for the committee as a whole, so a good leader-writer can with perfect honesty and sincerity sink his individuality and speak for his newspaper rather than himself. There is another point upon which I can only touch very shortly, and that is the ethics of newspaper proprietorship. People sometimes talk as if it were a great misfortune that the newspapers of England are as a rule owned by rich men. I cannot agree, though I do think it is a great misfortune that the newspaper cannot be started by a poor man. My reason for desiring that as a rule a newspaper proprietor should be rich is the danger of newspapers being bought, or at any rate of their articles being bought, as too often happens in those foreign countries where newspapers are not great properties. It is often said, for example, that a few thousand francs will always procure the insertion of an article in a French newspaper. This is no doubt a gross libel on the bulk of the French Press, but it indicates a danger when newspapers are owned by men of small means and make small profits. When a newspaper is bringing in £50,000 or £60,000 a year it is obvious that even if we assume the newspaper proprietor to have no sense of public duty, it will not be worth his while to sell the influence of his paper. He is not going to risk the destruction of a great property - destruction would surely ensue from his corrupt act becoming known - for a few hundred pounds. But though it makes for soundness the newspaper proprietors should be personally independent, it is also most important that they should be men whose wealth is derived from their newspapers and not from other sources. A great newspaper in the hands of a man who did not look to make a profit from it would be a source of danger, for, strange as it may seem at first sight, the desire for direct and legitimate profits in a newspaper is an antiseptic and prevents corruption. One does not want, no doubt, to see a newspaper proprietor, with his ear to the ground, always thinking of his audience, but the desire to stand well with his readers is often a power in the direction of good. The proprietor who endeavours to be the honest servant of his readers will not go very far wrong. When I say honest servant, I mean the man who plays the part of the servant who, though he will do his master's bidding when that bidding is[*[Enc in Strachey 3-31-08]*] 8. THE ETHICS OF JOURNALISM not positively immoral, at the same time is prepared to warn that master, courteously but firmly, against rash actions. There is nothing corrupt in such honest service, when rendered either to a man or a nation, or even to a Party. To put it in another way, there are worse things than studying public opinion and endeavoring partly to interpret it honestly and partly to guide it in the right direction. I will end by asking my hearers to do two things. Firstly, to think better of journalists and their morals than they are probably inclined to do. Secondly, not to exaggerate the influence and power of the Press. No doubt it has some great powers, but those powers are much more limited than is popularly supposed. Remember that by using exaggerated language in regard to the power of the Press people increase the evil which they desire to diminish. Dr. Johnson said very truly that no man was ever written down except by himself. Believe me, this is as true now as when Dr. Johnson said it. I do not believe in the power of the Press either to crush a good man and a great man or to exalt a weak man or a base man. No doubt a conspiracy of journalists might conceivably keep back a wise statesman or public man for a year or two, and, again, might for a time advertise into undue prominence an inferior man. In the end, however, matters right themselves. The public have a very sound instinct in persons as well as in things, and when the public recognize real worth in a man they will know how to prevent the newspaper from doing him wrong, supposing him for some reason to have incurred the enmity of the Press. Don't be afraid of the Press, but do it justice and keep it in its place, that is, the place of a useful public servant, but not of a master. This is the last word of a working journalist, who, though he holds no high-falutin' illusions as to his profession, is at the same time intensely proud of that profession, and who believes that, taken as a whole, there is no calling more worthy of being practised by an honourable man. (Published for the Pan-Anglican Congress Committees, who alone are responsible for these Papers.) Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. London: Northumberland Avenue, W.C. 1908. TELEGRAM. CIPHER CABLEGRAM. The White House, Washington. BERLIN, (Received 9:35 a.m., March 31, 1908.) Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. In fulfillment of my purpose to resign my post as Ambassador to Germany, which I communicated to the President in my letter to him dated September nineteenth, I have now the honor to fix the date of my resignation at the first of June, 1908. Tower. -Fd-Jm- [*PF*] WASHINGTON D.C. [*Taft*] [*Mch, 1908*] Dear Mr President, It has come to me that the appointment of Public Printer is to be used by Hemenway et al, if made as you now are inclined, as an instrument of attack - Could you hold up present decisionuntil Meyer Garfield Hitchcock and I can have a little further talk - Yours Wm.H.T. [*[Taft]*]F B [March 1908] WILLIAM CURTIS BOK MERION, PENNSYLVANIA Dear Mr. President, I thank you very much for giving me "Outdoor Pastimes of an American Hunter", and also for inscribing it. I read "Rough Riders" and thought it was fine. I am so interested inthe Civil War that I have gotten up a little army of my own. 6th Infantry 2nd Conneticut Militia I hope to see you early next month. from your faithful little friend Curtis Bok[*P.F*] [*L*] HEINS & LA FARGE. ARCHITECTS. 30-32 EAST TWENTY-FIRST STREET NEW YORK. C. GRANT LA FARGE. April 1, 1908. Dear Mr. President:- This letter will be given to you by Mr. William M. Chadbourne, who is not only a personal friend of mine, but the Captain of my Election District. I want him to know you, and I will vouch for him as a first rate fellow in every way. He is just the type of man that you want to see taking an active part in the real work of politics. It is due to him, and to other men of his type, that this 25th Assembly District has been cleaned up; and it is also due to them, and the hard work they have done that Herbert Parsons carried yesterday's Primaries, and Odell with his distinguished henchman, the President of Columbia University, have been put back, for the time being where they belong. Mr. Chadbourne is one of Herbert's most faithful and efficient allies, and he feels with me, and quite as strongly as I do, about the question of Herbert's going as a delegate to the National Convention. He knows that I had a talk with you about it. I wrote to Herbert, and have tried to get hold of him to say certain things, which I thought it was wiser not to write, but so far I have been unsuccessful. Mr. Chadbourne wants to talk to you about it, and I wish you would let him do so. He will respect fully your confidence, and I really think it is worth while, because I am deeply convinced that the matter is of importance, not merely in its present, but even more in its future aspect. Faithfully yours, C. G. La Farge The President, White House, Washington, D. C.[*P. F*] [*R *] Personal GRAND HOTEL D EUROPE AVIGNON Wednesday, 1st April, 1908. Dear Mr. President: Lest no one else should call your attention to this article from the London Times, which I found here today at this old home of the Popes, I am enclosing it herewith. Perhaps you know that the old staff of the Times have been able to maintain control - owing it is said, to the strong financial aid of Lord Rothschild and Lord Leconfield. The latter is a nephew of Lord Rosebery, son of his sister. I ought to have mentioned that Lord Cromer spoke to me, thethe last time I saw him, about your invitation to Washington, & about his great regret that he couldn't go. I think he was more afraid of the reporters & their interviews than of anything else; - although he spoke also of American hospitality as being a little too strenuous for a man of his years. He looks very well, & has just done a fine piece of literary work. I’m starting to Paris tomorrow, stopping over night at Lyons and Nevers, & reaching London by Monday. I’m Thoroughly glad to have been away during the Hill incident. I can always refuse to talk to the reporters, but I can’t always keep them from putting putting words in my mouth! So, at such a talkative time, it was a relief to be where they couldn’t even pretend to have questioned me. Nobody did, excepting the King. He was quite curious at the first outbreak, and I suspected he had a notion that his nephew might have been careless. I was glad to be able to say to him that I knew nothing about it. But the racket in the newspapers has been even worse than over the Tweedmouth letter! Yours sincerely, Whitelaw Reid.[For enc. see 3-30-08][*[Ca 4-1-08]*] Tuesday Evening German Embassy Washington [[shorthand]] My dear Mr President, Speck and I are wondering if now that you are alone you would be willingto come and dine just with us on any evening that would suit you. Believe me Mr. President your most Sincerely Lillian von Sternburg.us tomorrow Thursday, at eight o'clock. Needless to say the Ambassador and I will be alone, and GERMAN EMBASSY WASHINGTON [*Note*] Mr dear Mr. Loeb, Please tell the President how delighted we are that he will dine withwe will perfectly understand if he leaves immediately after dinner. Sincerely yours Lillian von Sternburg April 1. 1908[*[Enc in Reid 4-10-08]*] [*[4-1-08]*]Telephone 4957 Gerrard. Telegraphic Address: 'Templify, London.' For Reid No. The Temple Press Cutting Offices, 157, Strand, London, W.C. Bankers--LONDON & COUNTY. (Estd. 1897.) E. WILLIS, Manager, Advertising, Typewriting, Translating, Reporting, Record and File Searching, and Album Preparation undertaken and executed by own Staff. Efficiency guaranteed. AGENTS FOR THE COMMERCIAL UNION ASSURANCE CO., LTD. Cutting from Daily Telegraph Date [1,4] 08 Published at April 1, 1908 AN unprecedented and embarrassing incident has been settled by the Kaiser's acceptance of Mr. ROOSEVELT'S nominee for the American Embassy in Berlin. The incident was never intended for publicity, and it was quite clear to any intelligent person that it could not lead to any serious diplomatic disagreement. Although an adjustment has been arrived at between Washington and the Wilhelmstrasse, the episode raises issues of much more than local or temporary importance; to understand the significance of the case several considerations must be separately born in mind. We have to remember the remarkable change that is being gradually effected in the general character of the American diplomatic service. We have to realize, what very few persons in this country understand, the international importance that has been acquired during the last decade by the Embassy of the United States in the German capital. Again, there is the changed position of Ambassadors, regarded simply in their technical capacity. Finally, and above all, there is the question of how they are to hold their proper place under the expensive conditions of modern society, and how they are to discharge to the best purpose that informal mission to peoples which is becoming as important at least as their nominally exclusive function in relation to Governments. When these various points of view are a little studied, it will be seen that the temporary preference expressed by the German Emperor in suggesting that a man of considerable means should again be sent to a capital where life is becoming more costly and splendid in many respects than in any other city in the world was at least intelligible. For a long time there was a curious impression in these islands that diplomacy, as conducted between the two English-speaking Powers, was a family affair, carried on with an easy intimacy, and even with a sentimentalism, which could not exist as between any two nations speaking different languages. The American Ambassador for the time being had always been one of the distinctive figures amongst our national life, almost seeming to belong to it, and at least as popular as any of our own public men. That admirable tradition has been of great benefit to the world, and JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL, Mr. CHOATE, and now Mr. WHITELAW REID, have in turn exercised a function as Ambassadors, not only to a friendly Government, but to a kindred people, which was a potent influence for good, and for a long time, indeed, was like nothing else in the world. But, though that role is more persuasive and salutary than ever, it is no longer unique even upon this side of the Atlantic. We forget that to a vast number of American citizens--a number larger than the white population of all our Colonies put together--Great Britain is in no sense the Mother Country, nor is our language in any spiritual sense their mother tongue. They look to another great European nation as their Fatherland. They look to it with as much affection and interest as we suppose the Colonies in their warmest mood to cherish towards ourselves. They realise, rather more than less intently as time goes on, that the language of GOETHE and BISMARCK is the speech of their fathers. It is not nearly so true as it was that the German in exile puts off him nationality as lightly as a garment. Upon the contrary, the German element in the United States are held[??] any of our own public men. That admirable tradition has been of great benefit to the world, and JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL, Mr. CHOATE, and now Mr. WHITELAW REED, have in turn exercised a function as Ambassadors, not only to a friendly Government, but to a kindred people, which was a potent influence for good, and for a long time, indeed was like nothing else in the world. But, though that role is more persuasive and salutary than ever, it is no longer unique even upon this side of the Atlantic. We forget that to a vast number of American citizens--a number larger than the white population of all our Colonies put together--Great Britain is in no sense the Mother Country, nor is our language in any spiritual sense their mother tongue. They look to another great European nation as their Fatherland. They look to it with as much affection and interest as we suppose the Colonies in their warmest mood to cherish towards ourselves. They realise, rather more than less intently as time goes on, that the language of GOETHE and BISMARCK is the speech of their fathers. It is not nearly so true as it was that the German in exile puts off his nationality as lightly as a garment. Upon the contrary, the German element in the United States are holding with a new tenacity to their own culture and their own racial ties. This fact has brought about nothing less than a complete diplomatic revolution in the relations of Berlin and Washington. Ten years ago and later a very serious situation existed. Between the United States and the German Empire there was suspicion and antagonism. Threats of ultimate war were freely exchanged by the sedentary extremists of the belligerent newspapers on both sides of the sea. There is no doubt whatever that diplomacy was called upon to act in a situation as urgently requiring its intervention as any we could imagine. The improvement began at Berlin when Mr. ANDREW WHITE was American Ambassador. He was a man ideally adapted to his situation--no mere backwoodsman or plutocrat of the extinct types, but a scholar, a historian, master of the German language, and, as his autobiography has since shown, deeply indebted and almost passionately devoted to German culture. At the end of his term in 1903, the old conditions had been changed once for all, and the way was cleared for Mr. ANDREW WHITE'S successors to play the same part in Berlin that had belonged before only to American Ambassadors in this country. President ROOSEVELT'S nomination for the vacancy at that time marked another transformation, and created the principal Embassy of the Great Republic upon the Continent into one of the most brilliant social centres in any capital. Mr. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER, who has filled his present position for five years, has been deservedly regarded in Berlin as a persona gratissima, and he has enjoyed a success such as no foreign diplomat in this atmosphere had ever before achieved. He had studied in Germany in the years following Sedan, when the intellectual power and magnetism of German culture were perhaps stronger on the whole than they have ever been since. But being a man of culture did not prevent Mr. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER from being a man of business, and he had pursued a full commercial career before he returned to the American diplomatic service, with which he had been connected as attache for a brief period in his youth. Under Mr. McKINLEY and Mr. ROOSEVELT, he was at once appointed to the highest posts, and served successively at Vienna and St. Petersburg before being appointed to Berlin. He had thus enjoyed every opportunity to have the facts of the European situation at his fingers' ends. The sequel is tolerably familiar, even to the general reader. It is no secret that Mrs. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER, said to have been described by the Kaiser himself as "the feminine VON MOLTKE of society," has helped her husband's work. The consequence is that the American Embassy in Berlin has acquired a unique prestige, none the less effective for diplomatic purposes because depending partly upon methods which are not of a political kind, and might have created a ruling salon in any capital. Some time ago it became clear, to the regret of all Berlin, that the moment of change was at hand. Mr. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER'S approaching retirement was announced; and Dr. DAVID JAYNE HILL, now American Minister to The Hague, was appointed to succeed him. Like Mr. ANDREW WHITE, but unlike his immediate predecessor, he is not a man of wealth. His name was at first welcomed with alacrity in the German capital, where his personal worth is very well known; but when the difference to which we have referred became known, [???] was fully realised, it was clear that under the new conditions the brilliant precedent set during the last few years could not be sustained.gratissima, and he has enjoyed a success such as no foreign diplomat in this atmosphere had ever before achieved. He had studied in Germany in the years following Sedan, shen the intellectual power and magnetism of German culture were perhaps stronger on the whole than they have ever been since. But being a man of culture did not prevent Mr. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER from being a man of business, and he had pursued a full commercial career before he returned to the American diplomatic service, with which he had been connected as attache for a brief period in his youth. Under Mr. McKINLEY and Mr. ROOSEVELT, he was at once appointed to the highest posts, and served successively at Vienna and St. Petersburg before being appointed to Berlin. He had thus enjoyed every opportunity to have the facts of the European situation at his fingers' ends. The sequel is tolerably familiar, even to the general reader. It is no secret that Mrs. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER, said to have been described by the Kaiser himself as "the feminine VON MOLTKE of society," has helped her husband's work. The consequence is that the American Embassy in Berlin has acquired a unique prestige, none the less effective for diplomatic purposes because depending partly upon methods which are not of a political kind, and might have created a ruling salon in any capital. Some time ago it became clear, to the regret of all Berlin, that the moment of change was at hand. Mr. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER'S approaching retirement was announced; and Dr. DAVID JAYNE HILL, now American Minister to The Hague, was appointed to succeed him. Like Mr. ANDREW WHITE, but unlike his immediate predecessor, he is not a man of wealth. His name was at first welcomed with alacrity in the German capital, where his personal worth is very well known; but when the difference to which we have referred became known, [???] was fully realised, it was clear that under the new conditions the brilliant precedent set during the last few years could not be sustained. This was a matter perfectly worthy of serious attention from any point of view. There is nothing much more painful even to the recipient than the nominal promotion which involves a man in a false social position. We are not saying for a moment that Dr. HILL would find himself awkwardly placed. It was suggested, however, upon behalf of the German Government, that Mr. TOWER'S work in Berlin would be best continued by a man of similar wealth. Mr. ROOSEVELT insists upon the principle, as we may put it, that merit must go before millions. Merit enjoying a primacy so laudable in the abstract may sometimes fine itself in a position of considerable discomfort. It was impossible for the German Government to formulate any definite objection upon a point such as this, and Dr. HILL'S transfer from The Hague to Berlin will accordingly proceed. His personal claims are exceptionally strong. Dr. DAVID JAYNE HILL is no exponent of "shirt sleeves diplomacy." He has been Assistant Secretary of State at Washington. He is a man of learning and of manners, who is writing a "History of Diplomacy" upon a monumental scale, and who is probably more deeply steeped in the records of his profession than any other living member of it. The point nevertheless remains that social power and the ability to entertain upon a large scale and with distinction mean a very valuable addition to the diplomatic efficiency of any Embassy. The reason is that the imagination of most men, no matter to what social class they belong, is dominated by symbolism. Prestige, to be real, must be a thing expressed in visible terms. Mr. WHITELAW REID, upon his own account, would be more than worthy to represent any nation in any capital. But it is idle to ignore the fact that, as the occupant of Dorchester House, with its conspicuous air of princely dignity and stateliness, he possesses a complementary and commanding kind of influence. The historic mansion which he is able to make a centre of splendid hospitality becomes as it were a standing monument, conveying unawares to those who pass it a new sense of the weighty fact that the Great Republic is no longer a new country, but has become one among the established nations, and is now and henceforth one of the Greater Powers of the world. Any State in the future will find it well worth while to provide its representatives abroad with ample means when its Ambassadors do not possess wealth of their own.Telephone [49577 Gerrard.] Telegraphic Address: 'Templify, London' For [*Reid*] No._________ The Temple Press Cutting Offices, same part in Berlin that had belonged before only to American Ambassadors in this country. President ROOSEVELT'S nomination for the vacancy at that time marked another transformation, and created the principal Embassy of the Great Republic upon the Continent into one of the most brilliant social centres in any capital. Mr. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER, who has filled his present position for five years, has been deservedly regarded in Berlin as a persona gratissima, and he has enjoyed a success such as no foreign diplomat in this atmosphere had ever before achieved. He had studied in Germany in the years following Sedan, then the intellectual power and magnetism of German culture were perhaps stronger on the whole than they have ever been since. But being a man of culture did not prevent Mr. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER from being a man of business, and he had pursued a full commercial career before he returned to the American diplomatic service, with which he had ben connected as attache for a brief period in his youth. Under Mr. McKINLEY and Mr. ROOSEVELT, he was at once appointed to the highest posts, and served successively at Vienna and St. Petersburg before being appointed to Berlin. He had thus enjoyed every opportunity to have the facts of the European situation at his fingers' ends. The sequel is tolerably familiar, even to the general reader. It is no secret that Mrs. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER, said to have been described by the Kaiser himself as "the feminine VON MOLTKE of society," has helped her husband's work. The consequence is that the American Embassy in Berlin has acquired a unique prestige, none the less effective for diplomatic purposes because depending partly upon methods which are not of a political kind, and might have created a ruling salon in any capital. Some time ago it became clear, to the regret of all Berlin, that the moment of change was at hand. Mr. CHARLEMAGNE TOWER'S approaching retirement was announced; and Dr. DAVID JAYNE HILL, now American Minister to The Hague, was appointed to succeed him. Like Mr. ANDREW WHITE, but unlike his immediate predecessor, he is not a man of wealth. His name was at first welcomed with alacrity in the German capital, where his personal worth is very well known; but when the difference to which we have referred became known, and was fully realised, it was clear that under the new conditions the brilliant precedent set during the last few years could not be sustained. This was a matter perfectly worthy of serious attention from any point of view. There is nothing much more painful even to the recipient than the nominal promotion which involves a man in a false social position. We are not saying for a moment that Dr. HILL would find himself awkwardly placed. It was suggested, however, upon behalf of the German Government, that Mr. TOWER'S work in Berlin would be best continued by a man of similar wealth. Mr. ROOSEVELT insists upon the principle, as we may put it, that merit must go before millions. Merit enjoying a primacy so laudable in the abstract may sometimes find itself in a position of considerable discomfort. It was impossible for the German Government to formulate any definite objection upon a point such as this, and Dr. HILL's transfer from The Hague to Berlin will accordingly proceed. Dr. DAVID JAYNE HILL is no exponent of "shirt sleeves diplomacy." He has been Assistant-Secretary of State at Washington. He is a man of learning and of manners, who is writing a "History of Diplomacy" upon a monumental scale, and who is probably more deeply steeped in the records of his profession than any other living member of it. The point nevertheless remains that social power and the ability to entertain upon a large scale and with distinction mean a very valuable edition to the diplomatic efficiency of any Embassy. The reason is that the imagination of most men, no matter to what social class they belong, is dominated by symbolism. Prestige, to be real, must be a thing expressed in visible terms. Mr. WHITELAW REID, upon his own account, would be more than worthy to represent any nation in any capital. But it is idle to ignore the fact that, as the occupant of Dorchester House, with its conspicuous air of princely dignity and stateliness, he possesses a complementary and commanding kind of influence. The historic mansion which he is able to make a centre of splendid hospitality becomes as it were a standing monument, conveying unawares to those who pass it a new sense of the weighty fact that the Great Republic is no longer a new country, but has become one among the established nations, and is now and henceforth one of the Greater Powers of the world. Any State in the future will find it well worth while to provide its representatives abroad with ample means when its Ambassadors do not possess wealth of their own.Ackd 5/23/08 [SHORTHAND] File B African hunt portfolio No. 193 From REV. J. M. BAKER, MISSIONARY, ONGOLE, GUNTUR DIST., S. INDIA. ONGOLE, April 2nd, 1908. To President Theodore Roosevelt, Whitehouse, Washington, D. C. Dear President:- Upon reading in one of the Indian Journals that you were contemplating a trip around the world after expiration of your presidential term, the thought flashed up, why not invite the President and his party to be our guest at Ongole? Of a personal nature our arguments are,- Both Mrs. Baker and myself are very earnest and sincere in extending the invitation Our bungalow is large and arranged to entertain visitors. We have a private income besides our salary thus releaving us of feeling any financial burden. Historically Ongole is at least one of the most, and probably the most most noted of any station belonging to the American Baptist Missionary Union. Cor corroboration we enclose a report and ask you to write to Rev. F.P. Haggard Ford,Building Boston,Mass to send all his literature relating to Ongole. From the standpoint of affording an opportunity of studying native life in its purity and the real fauna and flora of the country we would stand high for the reason that the large city or porttown is the worst place to learn India. This large station has made it necessary to have ready tents and conveyances, and with no draw back to our work we could give you many novel and interesting experiences, out in the jungles. For a change we could show within a radius of 25 miles from Ongole an abundance of wild game from Dec. to March such as ducks,pigeons and deer. Please also note how convenient it is to reach Ongole No. 2. From REV. J. M. BAKER, MISSIONARY, ONGOLE, GUNTUR DIST., S. INDIA. ONGOLE, 190 . which is on the main line from Madras to Calcutta 180 miles north of Madras. As a last argument let me say that if you decide to accept you are at liberty to lay down the rules and just own the place. We have traveled much ourselves and know what a draw back it is to be overentertained. For references;- Dr. David Jayne Hill - Minister to Germany. Hon. John Ford NewYork City - who was instrumental with you in passing the bill for taxing fanchises Hon. Irving Q'Hommedien.- Senator N.Y. State Medina, N. Y. Rev. T. S. Barbour D. D.- Secretary Amer. Baptist Missionary Union, Boston Mass. Rev. A. H. Strong D. D. President of the Rochester,Theological Seminary Rochester,N.Y. Rev. W. C. P. Rhoades D. D. - Pastor Maray Ave.Baptist Church, Brooklyn, N.Y. These gentlemen know me well and the last named is my wife's own uncle. Yours very sincerely, Jas. M. Baker[*P.F*] [*Ap 2 08*] _I [*S*] [*Confidential*] Memorandum for the President. I recommend that no further steps be taken at present towards attempting to secure action by Congress providing for a form of government for the American Samoan Islands. The natives of those Islands appear to have a much more just conception of the kind of government to which they are adapted than ordinarily prevails in the Eastern portion of the United States. I should think that an exchange of professors of governmental science between Tutuila and Boston would be particularly advantageous to the people of the last mentioned city. If left along Congress will probably do nothing about providing a form of government for the Islands. There are few members of either House who are competent to devise a form of government and they are otherwise occupied. In view of the paragraph regarding Tutuila and Guam in the last report of the Secretary of the Navy and the proposal of a resolution providing for a Congressional frame of government, the inactivity of Congress must be deemed to be an approval of the continuance of the existing government. It is very desirable that this should be so. It is quite improbable that if Congress were to undertake-2- take to provide a form of government it would be as good as the one which now exists. They usually make a mess of it when they undertake anything of that kind. The Navy papers are herewith returned. Elihu Root Department of State, Washington, April 2, 1908. [*[For 1. enc see 3-30-08 Van Horne]*] [*F*] [*[1908*] [*[4-2-08]*] [* S*] GERMAN EMBASSY WASHINGTON April second. Dear Mr President Permit me to send you a letter which I just have received from van Horne. As he is the President White House a man of such clear foresight & as he has invested such great sums in Cuba. I though it would be interesting to hear is opinions in the situation Pray dont trouble to return the letter Believe me Mr President yours most sincerely Speck [*[Sternburg]*]Tho’s L James President. E.V.W. Rossiter, Vice President. J.R.. Van Wormer, Secy & Gen. Manager. W. C. Reid, Warehouse Supt. Lincoln Safe Deposit Co. and Burglar Proof Vaults and Fire Proof Storage Warehouses 32 to 42 East 42nd St. & 45 to 55 East 41st St. Cold Storage Silver Storage New York April 2nd 1908. Personal. [*F/ L N*] The Holland Society of New York Baron Van der Capellen Tablet. 2 The President. White House. Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. President:- The Van der Capellen Tablet Committee acknowledges your contribution of $10. to the Fund and thanks you for the same on behalf of the Holland Society of New York. Yours very Sincerely John R. Van Wormer Chairman. AMERICAN EMBASSY. LONDON. April 3rd, 1908. Dear Mr. President I beg to enclose some clippings from the "Times" of Monday last, which include their American correspondent's despatch and a very able leading article commenting on the same, which I thought would be of interest to you as giving a good example of the views of the best opinion here. A letter to Mr. Reid marked "Private" from you came in the bag yesterday which I have forwarded to Paris, where he is due to arrive to-morrow night from Biarritz. I expect him to reach London either Sunday night or Monday. Mr. MacKenzie King is going strong here. He has seen all the leading members of the Cabinet and other prominent people and Sir Edward Grey has talked with him at length several times, and is much impressed with his individuality. Indeed he has been so occupied that he has been unable to avail himself of my offers of attention. Mr. Reid had a long conversation with him -1-just before he left for Biarritz and has no doubt written you at length an account of what passed between them. Sir Edward Gray is very sanguine about Japan and the immigration question and he does not think that the Japanese will make any trouble. He thinks they are very anxious to carry out their promises and have every intention of doing so with no wish to promote emigration to the American Continent. He said to me that Canada had her own Treaty with Japan, which gave her excellent commercial advantages, and that it was therefore a question for her to deal with, but he thought and felt with us that Japanese immigration should be discountenanced and that we were quite right to put a stop to it. I think that he is fully alive to the situation and no doubt has been greatly enlightened by Mr. MacKenzie King's representations on the general subject. Mr. Root has no doubt informed you of the attitude of this Government concerning Liberia, and also the Congo question, upon both of which subjects I have written to him fully. The change of Prime Minister here will probably take place about Easter. The case of Sir HenryCampbell-Bannerman is of course considered hopeless. Mr. Asquith will succeed him but the shifting of the various portfolios will be a difficult question. A place in the Cabinet must be found for Winston Churchill and this they think will probably entail the loss of his election, which would be another awkward blow to the Government but of course a safe seat could be found for him somewhere else. Arthur Lee is delighted that the portrait is finished and Laslo has expressed himself by cablegram as considering it a great success. I wish he could have made a duplicate for Washington. I am to see it in Arthur Lee's house as soon as it is put in place. Spring-Rice was to leave for the Continent to-day. He is looking very well and is as interesting as ever. With our respects to Mrs. Roosevelt Yours and Sincerely J. R Carter[FOR ENC. SEE 3-30-08]Nile, or vice versa. I think that it would certainly be better to go to Mombasa first and hunt on the highlands of E. Africa where the climate is healthy and so get gradually acclimated to African conditions before going to Uganda and the upper Nile, which is unhealthy. I believe your best plan would be to leave England early in August, so your hunting in East Africa during the dry months of September and October and then work on to Uganda and the upper Nile during the European winter, when the sun is far south, but I will be able to get the best advice on this April 3rd 1908. TELEGRAMS- WORPLESDON, STATION-BROOKWOOD. HEATHERSIDE, WORPLESDON, SURREY. [*Ackd 4-29-08*] [*S*] Dear President Roosevelt I have just heard from Macmillan and Co, that they will bring my book out at the end of this month, and as it appears I will forward you a copy and also send one to Mr Fleischmann who so kindly allowed me to publish his most interesting account of the struggle between the Rhinos and the Crocodile. You will still I think be able to make a very interesting and successful hunting trip in East and Central Africa, and will be able to cover a great deal more country in a short time than you could have done 30 years ago. Wherever the English language is spoken (or for that matter the language of any of the civilized nations of the world) you may be sure that from the highest officials downwards, everyone will be ready to help and assist you in every possible way to make your African trip a great success. Col Patterson (the author of the Tsavo man eaters) is now the chief game warden in British East Africa, and F. J. Jackson whose article on East African game in the Badminton Big game Volume you will know is vice Commissioner in British East Africa. I will write to both of them at once and get you full information as to the best time to start from England for a hunting trip commencing in B. E. Africa, and ending on thethen to Lake Victoria, and from there through Uganda by the Nile to England again with four or five months & hunting for something like £700 of which £200 would be cost of licenses and fares by rail and steam boat. Now please let me know if I can do anything to help you. I could get all your outfit and [prof] provisions ready for you in London, if you would let me know about what you wanted. Anything that I can do, it will afford me very great pleasure to do, and I will write to Patterson and Jackson at once. They would have porters Masai gun carriers and a skilled Somali hunter all ready for you at Nairobi. Hoping to see you on your way to Africa and with kind regards to Mrs Roosevelt and all your children. Believe me yours very truly. F. C. Selous TELEGRAMS- WORPLESDON, STATION- BROOKWOOD. Heatherside, Worplesdon Surrey. point from Jackson. There is a very good firm of outfitters in London Majors "Lawn and Alder: 1 and 2 Brackley Street London E.C. They have fitted out Jackson and most of the officials in East Africa, Uganda, and Nigeria for many years, and know exactly what is wanted and have every kind of camp outfit. I would advise taking all provisions from England as they will be fresher and also cheaper than if bought in Africa. Lawn and Alder would supply and ship everything to Mombasa, and also make up the provision boxes and all stores in weight suitablefor native carriers, the only means of transport in East and Central Africa. Your American small bore rifles will be no doubt as good as any other small bores, but if you intend to get a big elephant in Uganda or on the upper Nile you ought to have a 450 double cordite rifle. Neumann who was the last professional white Elephant hunter swore by one of these rifles, which he told me was far more effective than the old big bore black powder rifles he once used to use. A rough idea of the cost of such a rifle as you contemplate would be Journey from England to Nairobi B.E. Africa about £50. Hunting license in E. Africa £50. Hunting license in Uganda £50. Provisions and outfit - clothes, tent, camp furniture - perhaps about £100. Expenses whilst in country for Porters are about £50 a month. You ought to think to buy a mule or a horse at Nairobi, which you might sell again. I think they cost about £30. When I went for a little trip to East Africa a few years ago, I was four months away from England and 2 1/2 months in East Africa. My total expenses came to just £300, but I had no horse, and not many porters, as I did not go far from the railway line. I should think that you could make the trip from England to Mombasa[*1908*] GERMAN EMBASSY WASHINGTON April third. Dear Mr President The Emperors telegraphic address is Syracuse, Sicily. Believe me, Mr President yours most sincerely, Speck [*[Sternburg]*][*1908*] GERMAN EMBASSY WASHINGTON April third Dear Mr President As to the presence of Dr Hill in Berlin during the time of Mr Towers dinner I am not absolutely sure. O'Loughlin, The President White Housewho is generally well informed, stated that Dr Hill was there. If this should not have been the case he must have been closer at hand than Griscom in Rome. I have the honor to send you these lines because in your letter to Mr Tower is stated that Dr Hill was in Berlin. Believe me, Mr President yours most sincerely Speck [*[Sternburg]*][*wrote war Dept 4-18-08*] [*W*] HEADQUARTERS PHILIPPINES DIVISION MANILA U.S.A. T. "McClellan" At Sea, April 3rd, 1908. Dear Mr. President: Your letter of February 27th, 1908, about Leonard, received. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate your writing. It was certainly very kind and thoughtful of you to do as you did. I felt a little worried about him at first, for, as you know, he has been pretty much away from boys of his own age, and plunged into a school like Groton meant a good deal. I felt confident he would do well when once started, but he has grown so tremendously for the past year or two that we were a little worried about the sudden change. He must be now in the neighborhood of 5' 11-1/2" tall, and not yet quite 15-1/2 years old. As you will see from the above, we are on our way home; we have made the following stops: Singapore, Colombo, Aden, Alexandria, and Malta, and are due at Gibralter Sunday evening or Monday morning. I expect to leave the ship at Gibralter, having, as you know, requested leave of absence for six months. It is my intention, if possible, to obtain authority to be present at the German Maneuvers as a looker- on, with authority to go where I like. This gives as good if not better opportunity than one has when present formally as a guest of the Emperor, etc. The French Maneuvers come-2- about a week after the German. These I want to go to in an official capacity, if possible. Mr. Cambron, our former ambassador, has written me once or twice during the last few years to the effect that he would be very glad to see that I was invited if I cared to go, or words to that effect. After about two weeks in southern Spain we expect to locate the youngsters and the nurses at Vevy or Geneva. Leonard will probably come over and join us, which will give him a chance to get a good start on his French. We have had a pleasant run, and have been much interested in all the ports at which we have called. With kindest regards to Mrs. Roosevelt and yourself, in which Mrs. Wood joins me, I am, be sure Very sincerely, Leonard Wood [*[Leonard Wood]*] The President, The White House, Washington, D.C. hfsGROTON SCHOOL GROTON, MASS. [*F*] April 4th,1908. My dear Theodore, I have received your note of the seventh' of April. Quentin is now registered for 1909 as well as for 1910, and I hope that we shall be able to take him in the first of the two years. I am, Sincerely yours, E. PeabodyTELEGRAM. The White House, Washington. 2 PO NE JM 21 Govt. 1:05 p.m. MESSINA, (Rec'd. April 4,1908, via French). PC His Excellency President Roosevelt, Washington,D.C. Many thanks for your telegram. Shall await communication from Sternburg. William I.R. Note: (PC) means acknowledgement of receipt by telegraph).to emphasize the wisdom of silence ER [*[Root]*] The President [*P.F.*] Apl 5 /08 DEPARTMENT OF STATE WASHINGTON. In this letter to Tower I have suggested in pencil (1) changes at foot of page 1 & top of page 2 to take Griscom out of the statement about the Emperors contradiction. Tower may be a bitter enemy attacking us in a few weeks and there is no benefit to us in giving him a certificate to use against Griscom or against us for not punishing Griscom or for not backing him up against the Emperor. I think also it is better to soften the statement about the Kaisers cable The statement that is a different account answers the same purpose & isn't open to any argument or to demand for a trial. (2) As to Towers leaving now I should substitute a paragraph which puts the responsibility on the Germans instead of taking it yourself. That is where it belongs for it is only the wish expressed by Speck which causes the suggestion to Tower. So far as we are concerned it would be much better if he could stay until June 1st & keep still I should be much pleased for my part if he could make his peace with the Emperor off his own bat & get them to want him to stay. (3) I have put in a few wordsCopy Nairobi, 4-5-08 My dear Akeley: You would have loved to be with us, along the Ravine (Eldama) forest and into the highlands beyond, up to the Ushin Gishu Plateau, across the Nandi Plains, down the N'zoi River, up the slopes of Elgon, dawdling on the fringe of Koromojo Country, and back again, the whole occupying two and one half months of most perfect weather, and for companionship, a friend from Australia, now to the game and keen as mustard on lions. ......he went away to Australia chuckling over the possession of seven lions secured in my company, I being lucky enough to get six more which he helped to shoot. This lot includes two exceptionally fine males, and my friends two of the same sort. How fine they are you can imagine when I say that my best one is, I think, better than the "bon tosher" you got, although it has not the man on the flank like yours. Tother fellows two, though not quite so good as my best, are so evenly matched that they average better than mine, and one of his has the man all along the flank, just like yours. One of his is a black, and the other is the most beautifully coloured beast I have ever seen. Imagine a mane so dark and tawny that it might well be called black, which shades to a beautiful dark red; all between the ears and over the eyes the hair is particularly thick, giving an extra savage appearance, not belied by his behavior, as his temper was particularly nasty. Last, but not least, there are genuine dark purple lights on the edge of the mane and on the tail tuft - and as the beast is one of the largest I have seen, you can imagine how fine a pelt it is. The beast described was, when shot, the finest I had ever seen in my life, and only eclipsed by that of yours. Next day Barr Smith (my pal) got a finer one still, the black-maned boy with the hairy flanks, and I a very fine tawny bird, though not so good as his two. Description fails however when I try to picture my own black maned one, secured about a week after. It was a colossal beast, his hide so light and tawny that with the sun at evening shining on him as he ran he appeared almost white. Contrasted with this, the longest, thickest, and blackest mane I ever saw dead or alive, made my mouth fairly water as Barr Smith and I galloped him. I had arranged with B.S. to give him first shot at all lions and up to then had kept to the contract without a pang, but I can tell you I felt sick at the idea of seeing him shoot this beast, the lion of my life so far. Fortune came to me however, as when we got to within about sixty yards and I was opening my mouth to cry "stop" my friend's horse found a hole and came a cropper, badly shaking his rider. By the time he was under way again the lion had several hundred yards start and was nearing cover, so we rode him forCopy Nairobi, 4-5-08 My dear Akeley: ........... You would have loved to be with us, along the Ravine (Eldama) forest and into the highlands beyond, up to the Ushin Gishu Plateau, across the Nandi Plains, down the N'zoi River, up the slopes of Elgon, dawdling on the fringe of Koromojo Country, and back again, the whole occupying two and one half months of most perfect weather, and for companionship, a friend from Australia, now to the game and keen as mustard on lions. ......he went away to Australia chuckling over the possession of seven lions secured in my company, I being lucky enough to get six more which he helped to shoot. This lot includes two exceptionally fine males, and my friends two of the same sort. How fine they are you can imagine when I say that my best one is, I think, better than the "bon tosher" you got, although it has not the man on the flank like yours. Tother fellows two, though not quite so good as my best, are so evenly matched that they average better than mine, and one of his has the man all along the flank, just like yours. One of his is a black, and the other the most beautifully coloured beast I have ever seen. Imagine a mane so dark and tawny that it might well be called black, which shades to a beautiful dark red; all between the ears and over the eyes the hair is particularly thick, giving an extra savage appearance, not belied by his behavior, as his temper was particularly nasty. Last, but not least, there are genuine dark purple lights on the edge of the mane and on the tail tuft - and as the beast is one of the largest I have seen, you can imagine how fine a pelt it is. The beast described was, when shot, the finest I had ever seen in life, and only eclipsed by that of yours. Next day Barr Smith (my pal) got a finer one still, the black-maned boy with the hairy flanks, and I a very fine tawny bird, though not so good as his two. Description fails however when I try to picture my own black maned one, secured about a week after. It was a colossal beast, his hide so light and tawny that with the sun at evening shining on him as he ran he appeared almost white. Contrasted with this, the longest, thickest, and blackest mane I ever saw dead or alive, made my mouth fairly water as Barr Smith and I galloped him. I had arranged with B. S. to give him first shot at all lions and up to then had kept to the contract without a pang, but I can tell you I felt sick at the idea of seeing him shoot this beast, the lion of my life so far. Fortune came to me however, as when we got to within about sixty yards and I was opening my mouth to cry "stop" my friend's horse found a hole and came a cropper, badly shaking his rider. By the time he was under way again the lion had several hundred yards start and was nearing cover, so we rode him for copy Nairobi, 4-5-08 My dear Akeley: You would have loved to be with us, along the Ravine (Kidama) forest and into the highlands beyond, up to the Ushin Gishu Plateau, across the Nandi Plains, down the N'zoi River, up the slopes of Elgon, dawdling on the fringe of Keromojo Country, and back again, the whole occupying two and one half months of most perfect weather, and for companionship, a friend from Australia, now to the game and keen as mustard on lions. he went away to Australia chuckling over the possession of seven lions secured in my company, I being lucky enough to get six more which he helped to shoot. This lot includes two exceptionally fine males, and my friends two of the same sort. How fine they are you can imagine when I say that my best one is, I think, better than the "bon tosher" you get, although it has not the man on the flank like yours. Tether follows two, though not quite so good as my best, are so evenly matched that they average better than mine, and one of his has the man all along the flank, just like yours. One of his is a black, and the other the most beautifully coloured beast I have ever seen. Imagine a mane so dark and tawny that it might well be called black, which shades to a beautiful dark red; all between the ears and over the eyes the hair is particularly thick, giving an extra savage appearance, not belied by his behavior, as his temper was particularly nasty. Last, but not least, there are genuine dark purple lights on the edge of mane and on the tail tuft - and as the beast is one of the largest I have seen, you can imaging how fine a pelt it it. The beast described was, when shot, the finest I had ever seen in life, and only eclipsed by that of yours. Next day Barr Smith (my pal) got a finer one still, the black-maned boy with the hairy flanks, and I a very tawny bird, though not so good as his two. Description fails however when I try to picture my own black maned one, secured about a week after. It was a colossal beast, his hide so light and tawny that with the sun at evening shining on him as he ran he appeared almost white. Contrasted with this, the longest, thickest, and blackest mane I ever saw dead or alive, made my mouth fairly water as Barr Smith and I gallopped him. I had arranged with B.S. to give him first shot at all lions and up to then had kept to the contract without a pang, but I can tell you I felt sick at the idea of seeing him shoot this beast, the lion of my life so far. Fortune came to me however, as when we got to within about sixty yards and I was opening my mouth to cry "stop" my friend's horse found a hole and came a cropper, badly shaking his rider. By the time he was under way again the lion had several hundred yards start and was nearing cover, so we rode him forCopy Nairobi, 4-5-08 My dear Akeley: .......... You would have loved to be with us, along the Ravine (Eldama) forest and into the highlands beyond, up to the Ushin Gishu Plateau, across the Nandi Plains, down the N'soi River, up the slopes of Elgon, dawdling on the fringe of Koromojo Country, and back again, the whole occupying two and one half months of most perfect weather, and for companionship, a friend from Australia, new to the game and keen as mustard on lions.........he went away to Australia chuckling over the possession of seven lions secured in my company, I being lucky enough to get six more which he helped to shoot. This lot includes two exceptionally fine males, and my friends two of the same sort. How fine they are you can imagine when I say that my best one is, I think, better than the "bon tosher" you got, although it has not the man on the flank like yours. Tother follows two, though not quite so good as my best, are so evenly matched that they average better than mine, and one of his has the man all along the flank, just like yours. One of his is a black, and the other the most beautifully coloured beast I have ever seen. Imagine a mane so dark and tawny that it might well be called black, which shades to a beautiful dark red; all between the ears and over the eyes the hair is particularly thick, giving an extra savage appearance, not belied by his behavior, as his temper was particularly nasty. Last, but not least, there are genuine dark purple lights on the edge of mane and on the tail tuft - and as the beast is one of the largest I have seen, you can imagine how fine a pelt it is. The beast described was, when shot, the finest I had ever seen in life, and only eclipsed by that of yours. Next day Barr Smith (my pal) got a finer one still, the black-maned boy with the hairy flanks, and I a very fine tawny bird, though not so good as his two. Description fails however when I try to picture my own black maned one, secured about a week after. It was a colossal beast, his hide so light and tawny that with the sun at evening shining on him as he ran he appeared almost white. Contrasted with this, the longest, thickest, and blackest mane I ever saw dead or alive, made my mouth fairly water as Barr Smith and I galloped him. I had arranged with B.S. to give him first shot at all lions and up to then had kept to the contract without a pang, but I can tell you I felt sick at the idea of seeing him shoot this beast, the lion of my life so far. Fortune came to me however, as when we got to within about sixty yards and I was opening my mouth to cry "stop" my friend's horse found a hole and came a cropper, badly shaking his rider. By the time [?] he was under way again the lion had several hundred yards start and was nearing cover, so we rode him for Copy Nairobi, 4-5-08 My dear Akeley: You would have loved to be with us, along Ravine (Eldama) forest and into the highlands beyond, up to the Ushin Gisha Plateau, across the Mendi Plains, down the N'soi River, but the slopes of Elgen, dawdling on the fringe of Koromojo Country, and back again, the whole occupying two and one half months of most perfect weather, and for companionship, a friend from Australia, now to the game and keen as mustard on lions. .......he went away to Australia chuckling over the possession of seven lions secured in my company, I being lucky enough to get six more which he helped to shoot. This lot includes two exceptionally fine males, and the friends two of the same sort. How fine they are you can imagine when I say that my best one is, I think, better than the "bon tosher" you got, although it has not the man on the flank like yours. Tother follows two, though not quite as good as my best, are so evenly matched they are average better than mine, and one of his has man all along the flank, just like yours. One of his is a black, and the other the most beautifully coloured beast I have ever seen. Imagine a mane so dark and tawny that it might well be called black, which shaded a beautiful dark red; all between the ears and over the eyes the hair is particularly thick, giving an extra savage appearance, not belied by his behavior, and his temper was particularly nasty. Last, but not least, there are genuine dart purple light on the edge of mane and on the tail tuft - and as the beast is one of the largest I have seen, you can imagine how fine a pelt it is. The beast described was, when shot, the finest I had ever seen in my life, and only eclipsed by that of yours. Next day Barr Smith (my pal) got a finer one still, the black-maned boy with the hairy flanks, and I a very fine tawny bird, though not as good as his two. Description fails however when I try to picture my own black maned one, secured about a week after. It was a colossal beast, his hide so light and tawny that with the sun at evening shining on him as he ran he appeared almost white. Contrasted with this, the longest, thickest, and blackest mane I ever saw dead or alive, made my mouth fairly water as Barr Smith and I [gallpped] him. I had arranged with B.S. to give him first shot at all lions and up to then had kept to the contract without a pang, but I can tell you I felt sick at the idea of seeing him shoot the beast, the lion of my life so far. Fortune came to me however, as when we get to within about sixty yards and I was opening my mouth to cry "stop" my friend's horse found a hole and came a cropper, badly shaking his rider. By the time [[strikethrough]] he was under way again the lion had several hundred yards start and nearing cover, so we rode him for 2 all we were worth and tumbled off to take a chance at 150 yards. To my shame, be it said, I felt delighted when Barr Smith's first shot went wide and little Leslie was free to take a hand in the game, which he did with one from behind and another in the chest as old "jelly bags" turned nasty. I stayed by the carcase and skinned him myself by the light of a grass fed fire until the boys turned up with a lantern. You will be glad to know that our skins arrived in Nairobi in the pink of condition. .....We had an undue share of lionesses among the bag - eight out of the thirteen - but as we got every beast we fired at this is only due to bad luck.... Some day I hope to go back to the same place - I hope you will be here to go too. A lioness nearly ended for all time the troubles of the scribe, as he stood unconscious of her presence within three yards of where she lay crouched to spring. Barr Smith saw her and said, "There is a reed-buck lying in the grass just in front of you." As I had just seen a fresh 'kill' I did not fancy the colour of the buck described, and executed a flanking movement with more haste than dignity; as I did so Barr Smith's boy called "Simba", B.S. saw what it was and I just in time to see the old girl, ears laid back, paws doubled underneath, and fangs gleaming, when he took her behind the shoulder. She landed neatly on the very spot I had been standing at a moment before where I had the pleasure of breaking her back with my Mauser, while B.S's. second shot, beautifully placed, got her within two inches of his first, and through the heart. This was practically the only adventure we had with lions, as although four turned nasty the county was open in each instance and they never got very near to us. We both used a 350 Rigby Mauser, and a better gun I don't hope to find. ....... We had rotten luck with elephants, as although we got eight times among them, they were all young bulls and cows, and we only shot one, the biggest tusker we saw whose teeth together only weighed 60 1-4 lbs. ........ I wish we had taken a camera with us as we got right in among the elephant, and after spending an hour looking at one herd, B.S. got his bull within five yards, in excellent light and generally under conditions favourable to a photo. Also some three weeks later I put in a 12.45 to 3.30 inspecting a herd of about 300 cows and calves and could easily have photographed the lot in from eighty eleven different aspects. None of them had sizable ivory but one bull, who with a 70 lb. tooth, appearing, was about to pay the penalty when he obligingly turned his head and disclosed a broken stump in the place where the other tusk ought to grow. LESLIE J. TARLTON the necessarily unsettled state of my affairs, incident to the travel involved in my orders precluded my writing and expressing to you my heartfelt gratitude for the action you had taken in so carefully reviewing the official report in my case and your judgment thereon. I must confess that I am utterly unable to perceive any basis in the Board of Investigation's report for the recommendation made by [*Ack 4/13/08*] [*V*] [*Vogelsang, C(arl) Theodore*] Navy Dept. Washington U.S.S. Wisconsin Puget Sound Navy Yard, April 5, 1908. My dear Mr. President - Your letter, enclosing a copy of the letter to the Secretary of the Navy in my case, reached me on the day that my relief reported on board the Mayflower in New Orleans. I would like to have acknowledged the receipt of that letter instanter, but the rush of events and the Chief of Bureau of Navigation Considering all the circumstances it was unquestionably the wisest thing to do to have relieved me of command, avoiding thusly any future charge of discriminating influence in my behalf. To me it was a bitter but a very just judgment; and, hard as it was, I accepted it with that fortitude that is born of a keen sense of responsibility for the consequences of any actions that I take. My pride, more no loss justifiable, suffers; but pride that is justifiable can be rehabilitated. To offset the bitterness of having to relinquish prematurely my first command, I have your personal letter which assures me that your affection and regard remain entirely unaltered. If my service in your official household [?] him such as to merit such an expression of appreciation from you, even after my again, in perhaps a larger field, be an instrument to be used by you for the furtherance of your progressive, far-reaching and profound principles and policies in what the Germans call welt politik. Your letter, Mr. President, expressed the hope to see me soon and such was my anxious desire; for I wished to present myself to you in person to express my thanks and appreciation for all that you had done for me. I found, however, that my orders did not contemplate any digression misfortune, then I count my experience invaluable and this attestation of your regard as an heirloom. I have accepted the situation in its every phase with as much philosophy as possible; and, far from being discouraged, I can look with confidence to the future and see many years yet of useful service ahead of me. And I have within me the earnest hope that at some future day, I may on my part, and under them I could not go to Washington and had to proceed direct from New Orleans to this station. The exigencies of the service may have required this but it came very hard at the time; because, under all the conditions existing, I had a craving to see my family, if only for a day, to readjust things to the changed conditions. But, even in this disappointment, I found courage and a most helpful compensation in the noble character and splendid fortitude of my wife, whose telegram and letters assured me that all was well at home, that she was prepared to accept the full import of my orders, realizing all that was entailed by them, and that she trusted in the future to re-establish conditions in a compensatory way. I have had great comfort in reading in the Press the daily movements of the Mayflower until her return to New Orleans, being thus assured of the successful completion of the trip so long contemplated by Mrs. Roosevelt. I trust that it was in every way a mostcomfortable and enjoyable vacation. This ship is destined to join the Fleet for its cruise to the Orient and beyond; and it may be my good fortune to be present again, but in a different role, at the possible review of the Fleet upon its return home. That would mark almost the completion of my present tour of sea service which terminates in June, 1909. Then, if practicable, I hope for a tour of shore duty in Washington as Secretary of the Light House Board if a vacancy exists there about thatassociation with you - a leave taking, as it were - and it is difficult to close. Pray accept my unbounded gratitude and unalterable devotion, and may I have the honor to remain, Sir, Faithfully yours C. Theo. Vogelgesang Lieut. Comdr. U.S.Navy time and such assignment be agreeable to the President of that Board. May I ask, Mr. President, that you convey to Mrs. Roosevelt my profound gratitude for her sweet thoughtfulness in remembering my wife in a time of anxiety and distress with a beautiful gift of flowers? The act was worthy of Mrs. Roosevelt and I may be pardoned if I say that Mrs. Vogelgesang was worthy of the flowers. This letter, Sir, seems to me like the final severance of my personal[*[Encl in Reid 4-10-08]*] [*[4-5-08]*]In foreign affairs not the most important episode of the week, but the most amazing, has been the strange case of the American Embassy in Berlin. To understand an incident which has ended in the Kaiser's complete acquiescence in Mr. Roosevelt's decrees--for the first of earthly potentates rules at Washington--we must recollect the significant change which has occurred in the condition of German-American diplomacy. Mr. Andrew White, an Ambassador devoted to German culture, laid the foundations of an entente cordiale. His successor, Mr. Charlemagne Tower, is an accomplished millionaire, who continued to work. Mrs. Charlemagne Tower has been nothing less than Assistant-Ambassador for all social purposes, and has been described by the Kaiser himself as "the feminine Von Moltke of Berlin society." When the retirement of Mr. and Mrs. Tower approached, the Wilhelmstrasse was inconsolable. It ardently desired the continuance in undiminished splendour of the precedent which had been set in what has now become the most expensive and ostentatious capital in the world ______________ The Kaiser wished that another millionaire should be appointed. Mr. Roosevelt nominated a diplomatist who was poor, but virtuous. Mr. David Jayne Hill, indeed, is American Minister of The Hague, was the author of a "History of Diplomacy" which is of Teutonic length and exhaustiveness. He has been Assistant-Secretary of State at Washington. He is in every way an able and accomplished man. His only fault is that he does not possess the unquestionable advantage of great private wealth. To request that he might be passed over on this account was an act of painful tactlessness. President Roosevelt published a somewhat Jeffersonian assertion that merit must go before millions; and Mr. Hill's appointment to Berlin is accordingly confirmed. It is humiliating for a Hohenzollern to have requested the services of a plutocrat and to have been met by the refusal of an austere Republic to fill its vacant Embassies with Trust magnates. We must not be led, however, to ignore the real point, though Berlin has blundered. Want of ample means is a serious disadvantage to any diplomatist representing in any modern capital the interests of a great nation. A country which trebled the salaries of all its principal Ambassadors would make a cheap investment. _________ Mr. Roosevelt's own character has conquered circumstance, and whatever may happen to him after leaving the White House, he will play a greater part in American affairs than any ex-President before him. It seemed for a time as though the retiring ruler of the Republic in the last few months of his away would be as little regarded as dead Caesar. Even his political opponents, the Democrats in Congress, are paying tributes to his ideals and working to pass his mea- [*The Observer Sunday, April 5, 1908*] sures. The influence of every vital personality is disturbing, but so was that of the healing angel who troubled the pool. P.P.F Ackd 4-8-08 West Medford, Mass. April 6, 1908 Dear Brother Roosevelt, On very short notice and entirely unexpectedly I am obliged to have my tonsils taken out immediately (as a cure for rheumatism!) and will be incapacitated, as far as exercise in concerned, for about a week. I am very much disgusted that this should have occurred on the eve of my leaving for Washington, as I was looking forwardfoot-ball. It is not difficult to conceive which side of the question would meet with your approval . Would that you were a member of the “opposition” and could supplement our arguments by an expression of your opinion to the faculty! Very respectfully yours, John W. Hallowell. His Excellency Theodore Roosevelt The White House, Washington. tremendously to some more tennis with you, and only hope that you will be put to no inconvenience by my very late, but unavoidable, default. Speaking of exercise, some of us who live not far from Cambridge are endeavoring, with doubtful success, to counteract the steadily growing tendency of certain authorities at [Cambridge] Harvard to practically eliminate intercollegiate athletics, particularly4 few days, unless you consider as I hope you will, that the circumstances warrant your sending word to the Secretary to the effect that you want Hill to remain where he is until his regular tour of shore duty is completed. Nothing less will end this scheming to obtain his removal from Washington. So far as I have been able to learn the Senate Committee investigation was the joint arrangement of Senator Hale and certain of his friends among the Bureau Chiefs; probably with the approval of the Secretary. They ought to stand in the open by the results of their own investigation. With the greatest esteem, Faithfully yours, A. L. Key The President. #5 Garden Street Cambridge, Mass., April 6, 1908. [*Ackd 4/8/08*] [*N*] My dear Mr President: This morning I received a letter from a retired naval officer in Washington in which he states that those naval officers who have been most concerned in defending certain defects charged against the Navy are making a strong effort to have Lieutenant. Commander F. K. Hill, now attached to the General Board, sent away from Washington on account of his actions and long continued effort in directing attention to the armor belt question (2) Hill is an excellent officer with a fine record. He served under Captain Cowles as Navigator of the “Missouri” and he is now serving under Admiral Dewey, who thinks highly of him. His interest in the armor belt question is entirely unselfish, his only thought in connection with it has been the good of the Navy. In my opinion he has been absolutely correct in practically all of his criticisms. He is not politic but he is aggressive and honest and those officials who are on the defensive are gunning for him. If he should be detached from (3) his present duty before the end of his regular tour it would undoubtedly be considered, throughout the Navy, as an official condemnation of those officers who have called attention to defects and stood for what they believe to be the truth and the efficiency of the Navy, without fear of the disapproval of those in authority. Besides his transfer, under the circumstances, would be very unfair, personally, to Hill. On April 2 he was first offered a place as ordnance officer at Mare Island and later, on the same day, was offered a place as Equipment officer at League Island. In my opinion the defendants will send him out of Washington, one way or another, in a Acnd 4-15-08 P GOVERNMENT OFFICE PORTO RICO April 6, 1908. Dear Governor:- I am going to try to get together General Brooks, General Davis, Governor Allen, Governor Hunt, Beekman Winthrop, General Buchanan, Admiral Dunlap, and four or five other old Porto Ricans who are around Washington, for a little dinner at the Metropolitan Club some time between the 11th and 16th of May. Would it be in any way possible for you to be present? I think it would be an extremely interesting affair for us to get together the men who have connected with Porto Rico since the American occupation, and it might be fun for you. Of course it would be absolutely informal, and if possible I would prefer that the press did not know that you were going to be with us. If you can be with us, will you set your own date for that week, and let Beekman Winthropknow when you can come? I would also very much like to have Mr. Garfield, as I think it would interest him. Always sincerely yours, Regis H Post [*[Regis H. Post]*][*PF*] [*N*] NAVY DEPARTMENT WASHINGTON M-M-M April 7, 1908. My dear, Mr. President: I desire to submit for your consideration the following in answer to your letter of the 23rd ultimo: First, as to the location of the waterline armor belt: In June last, before the contracts for the DELAWARE and NORTH DAKOTA were awarded, Lieutenant-Commander Hill called to see me relative to the location of the waterline armor belt on these two vessels. I asked him to present his views in writing. He did so, and his letter was referred by me to the Board on Construction, which was directed to give the matter most careful consideration and report to me its conclusions. The Board, after having considered the matter, submitted its report, in which all of the members of the Board concurred, stating in the most definite terms that no change whatever should be made, since, in the judgment of the Board, the belt was properly located. I had a-2- number of conversations with Lieutenant-Commander Hill, and, for my own satisfaction. I took the matter up with the then Chief of the Bureau of Navigation, Admiral Brownson. Admiral Brownson went over the report of the Board on Construction very carefully, and then stated to me that he agreed with the conditions reached by the Board. I also asked Admiral Evans to look into the matter and to give me his honest judgment as to the proper location of the waterline armor belt. Shortly before he left with the fleet for the Pacific, Admiral Evans called on me at the Department and stated that he had gone over the report of the Board, as also the objections of Lieutenant- Commander Hill, and was clearly of the opinion that the belt was properly located, and stated that he agreed with the Board in its conclusions. The Senate Committee on Naval Affairs has had this question under consideration and, for your information, I enclose to you a copy of my letter of March 9th written to Senator Hale, Chairman of the Committee. In this connection I beg to invite your attention to sheet six, of Appendix No. seven, of the recent-3- report of the Chief Constructor of the Navy concerning certain alleged defects in vessels of the United States Navy, Document No.297, 60th Congress, first session, a copy of which is enclosed herewith. The section of the DELAWARE shows that the lower edge of the lower belt of the heavy side armor is designed to be 4 feet 10-1/4 inches below the waterline when the vessel is fully completed and has on board two-thirds of all stores, ammunition, &c., and 1000 tons of coal in the bunkers. This lower section of heavy belt armor as shown on the drawing is 7 feet 11-1/2 inches wide. The upper section of the heavy side armor is 7 feet 1-1/2 inches wide, 10 inches thick at the bottom and 8 inches think at the top. It is worthy of note that the length of the lower section of the heavy side armor on the DELAWARE is 381-1/2 feet, thus affording the protection of heavy armor for the side of the vessel unequalled, so I am informed by the Chief Constructor, by that of any battleship built or in course of construction. Appendix No. 7 of the report of the Chief Constructor also shows the location of the waterline armor belts on typical ships of foreign navies as well as those of the United States Navy, and it is especially interesting to note that on the AKI, the most recently designed battleship now actually in course of construction, of which the Department has any information, the distribution of side armor is very similar to that-4- on the VERMONT class, but the height of the upper edge of the main side armor belt above the water is only 3 feet 6 inches, as opposed to 4 feet 3 inches in the case of the VERMONT class, although the submergence of the lower edge of the heavy side armor below the water is identical with that of the VERMONT class when both vessels have 900 tons of coal in the bunkers. It should be noted that while the upper belt of the AKI is only 7 inches thick, the upper belt of the DELAWARE and SOUTH DAKOTA classes is 10 inches thick at the bottom and 8 inches thick at the top. In other words, the heavy belt armor of the DELAWARE class is more than 15 feet in width, and, at designed displacement, with 1000 tones of coal in the bunkers, and two- thirds of all ammunition, stores, &c., on board, there would be 4 feet 10-1/4 inches of this armor below the waterline, and a little more than 10 feet above. It may also be stated, in this connection, that since the number of rounds of ammunition for each 12-inch gun on the DELAWARE, under fully supply, is generally in excess of that provided for battleships now attached to the Atlantic Fleet, and two-thirds allowance of ammunition for each 12-inch gun on the DELAWARE weighs somewhat more than the full allowance for each 12-inch gun on the battleships now attached to that fleet. Admiral Evans, bearing in mind the conversation that he had with me upon this question, has paid special attention to -5- the location of the waterline armor belt since the leaving of the fleet for the Pacific, and, in a report received from him the early part of last week, he deals directly with this question. In this report, which is dated March 6th, he uses the following language, the underscoring, however, being mine, vis: "Judging from the figures contained in the several replies from Commanding Officers which relate to this subject, it would appear that better protection might have been afforded had these belts been originally placed between 6 inches and 1 foot higher; this on the theory that the Commanding Officer would admit sufficient water before an action to sink the belt to within about 18 inches above the waterline; but even this is open to question, for it has been noted that even when heavy laden and in the smooth to moderate seas which have thus far characterised this cruise, the ships frequently expose their entire belt and the bottom plating beneath it. It must be remembered that even a 5 or 6-inch shell (of which there would be a great number), could inflict a severe and dangerous injury if it struck below the belt, while otherwise the waterline, even with the belt entirely submerged, is, on account of the casemate, armor and coal, immune to all except the heaviest projectiles. The fact is that under the sea conditions in which battles may be fought a belt of 8 feet in width, if considered alone, is too narrow to afford the desired protection, whenever it may be placed; and the question becomes an academic discussion, with certain arguments on each side. It is understood that on the latest ships, this question is of little import, as the citadel armor is but one inch less in thickness than that on the waterline, and for those ships already built, it is believed that if the bridges are removed and all weights which will be landed when war breaks out are taken into consideration, the ship will rise the six or twelve inches which is believed to be the maximum that it should be desired to raise them.It is especially interesting to note that even when "heavy laden and in the smooth to moderate seas" met with on the voyage the ships frequently exposed their entire belt and the bottom plating beneath it. This statement appears to me to offer conclusive evidence of the desirability of keeping the lower edge of our heavy armor belts at least as low as now provided, any change being rather in the direction of lowering than raising, especially where the upper belt is composed of as heavy armor as that provided for the DELAWARE and SOUTH CAROLINA. This opinion is shared by such of the members of the Board on Construction as have seen Admiral Evans' report, and is further reenforced by the reported results of the recent gun-firing tests against the HERO, very reliable information received indicating that that vessel was sunk by a shot which penetrated the hull below the armor belt, showing that it is quite possible for projectiles, under certain conditions, to penetrate water to a considerable extend prior to ricocheting. This tendency of projectiles to enter water at long ranges where there is a sufficiently great angle of fall, had been already demonstrated by direct experiment by the Ordnance Department of the U.S. Army, as well as by more limited experiments by the Ordnance department of the Navy. Attention is also invited to Rear-Admiral Evans' statement that "on the latest ships, this question is of little-7- import, as the citadel armor is but one inch less in thickness than that on the waterline." So far then as concerns vessels of the DELAWARE and SOUTH CAROLINA classes, which vessels are now under construction, the question of the exact location of the lower edge of the heavy belt armor would seem to be fully disposed of, and that the removal of any portion of the lower edge of the main armor belts of those vessels would be distinctly prejudicial to their fighting efficiency. It may be noted, in passing, that the weight which would be removed from the ship by cutting off 10 inches of the lower edge of the armor belts on the DELAWARE and NORTH DAKOTA would correspond to less than 2 inches in draft of the vessel, being only a little in excess of 110 tons. The effect on the speed of the vessel would only be a few hundredths of a knot, and the weight so saved could not be converted into coal or ammunition, or stores, for the obvious reason that the cubic capacity of spaces so assigned would remain wholly unaffected. It would therefore seem evident that the removal of any of the lower edge of the waterline armor on the DELAWARE and NORTH DAKOTA would decrease materially the effective armored protection of those vessels without important compensating advantages in other directions. With respect to vessels now in service, particular attention is invited to the fact that although some commanding-8- officers have stated that it would have been better had the armor belts been placed, in the first instance, 6 inches or one foot higher than they are really placed, such a recommendation is seriously discounted by the subsequent statement of Admiral Evans himself, that "even when heavy laden and in the smooth to moderate seas which have thus far characterized this cruise, the ships frequently expose their entire belt and the bottom plating beneath it." Personally, I am in favor of a material reduction in such heavy fittings on battleships as have been installed primarily for convenience and which do not greatly add to the military efficiency of the vessel. I am advised that in the past the great difficulty among designing bureaus has been to keep the weights incorporated into vessels within the limit provided by the design, the general tendency of officers attached to ships being to recommend additional fittings and suggested improvements which involved increased weight without a corresponding gain in fighting efficiency. Under this heading may be mentioned, specifically, bridges, emergency cabins, and other deck erections, special boat handling apparatus, additional boats, office enclosures of various kinds, etc. The consensus of opinion is that the ships now under construction, namely, the SOUTH CAROLINA, MICHIGAN, NORTH DAKOTA, and DELAWARE, are amply protected by armor. In my judgment, the waterline armor belt, if anything, should be-9- lowered instead of raised. By raising the belt you take from, instead of add to, the ship's protection, for if the belt is raised ten inches of twenty inches, it reduces the protection below the water line by just that amount. Second: Concerning your inquiry with respect to the character of turret ammunition hoists to be installed on the DELAWARE and NORTH DAKOTA, and on the SOUTH CAROLINA and MICHIGAN, battleships now in course of construction, I beg to advise you that the two-stage hoist has been provided for. About three years ago contract was also made to install a two-stage hoist in the turrets of the U.S.S. NEW HAMPSHIRE, but the firm to which was awarded the contract for the installation of these hoists made a serious error in their calculations of weight, so that it became necessary for the Bureau of Ordnance to cancel the contract in order to prevent the vessel being heavily overweighted. I am informed by the Chief Constructor that plans have been prepared, and working models constructed, with a view to modifying the turret ammunition hoists of all battleships now in commission, in order to increase the safety of those hoists to the greatest degree possible without seriously impairing their efficiency in the rapid service of ammunition. I am also informed by the Chief Constructor that outline plans have been prepared indicating the changes which would have to be made in these hoists to convert them to the two-stage form. The Chief Constructor also states-10- that his Bureau is prepared to undertake any structural work in connection with the changes in the ammunition hoists of vessels in commission so soon as the ships are available and definite plans with respect to the hoists have been furnished by the Bureau of Ordnance. The necessary appropriations to undertake this work have already been requested from Congress. Third, as to the proposed creation of the office of Second Assistant Secretary of the Navy to be filled by a line officer. I am not in favor of the appointment of a line officer as Second Assistant Secretary of the Navy. In the first place there is no necessity, in my judgment, for such an office, and, in the second place, the creation of such as office would not be in accord with our past policy. One of the wisest things, in my judgment, in the foundation of our government is the subordination of the military to the civil authority. To clothe a commissioned officer of the Navy with the powers of an Assistant Secretary would undoubtedly operate in derogation of civilian control and direction of the Department, and would cause trouble to the Secretary in practice, especially if the new officer were given any powers by statute. If, on the other hand, he were not given statutory powers there would be no use in creating the office by law, i.e., if the new Assistant Secretary were to do only such things as the Secretary should assign to him, and to act-11- only in an advisory capacity, a statute is not necessary. The Secretary can avail himself of one or more such assistants at any time on any matter, having all the advantage of free choice and of selecting advisers specially qualified upon any particular subject, and he does not have to overcome in such cases the often very decidedly set views of a particular officer The presence of such an officer exercising control in the Navy Department would be costly. Theory and observation confirm this. It is not ungracious to say that military and naval training does not trend in the direction of economy. As a class naval officers are of the highest honor, but as a class they are not economical. In dealing with the heavy expenditures of public money involved in almost every line of naval activity economy must be considered, or the naval establishment will ultimately find itself out of popular favor. A military Assistant Secretary is not needed. For advisors the Secretary now has at his immediate right hand the Chief of the Bureau of Navigation, who is in touch with the movements of the service. He has the military heads of all the Bureaus and their assistants constantly available as technical advisors. He has the Board of Construction, a body presided over by an experienced line officer of his own selection, and he has the General Board, at the head of which is the Admiral of the Navy. If-12- wisdom is not found in this array, it would hardly be found in one more adviser of the same kind. The Secretaries generally have complained, not of too little, but rather of too much, and too insistent naval advice. My views upon this subject may not coincide with yours, but I give them to you for what they are worth. Since writing the above I have received another report from Admiral Evans, dated Magdalena Bay, Mexico, March 17, 1908. The following is an extract from his report: "Even with smooth seas and practically no wind, the swell at times caused such rolling and pitching as to expose the lower portion of the armor belt even at heavy load, hence the lower limit of armor should not be raised." It seems to me that this ought to settle once and for all the question of the proper location of the waterline armor belt. Very respectfully, V H Metcalf Secretary. The President.findings reversed I would never have bothered you about it, especially as I am told that he was succeeding. One thing in your letter is not quite clear to me namely when you ask me if I can give you any information tending to show that he has not acted well during the last year for I am morally certain that the proceedings of the board that examined him last January described at length the methods and used by him to obtain a divorce from his wife to which he testified himself, before the board. I therefore conclude that you have not seen the proceedings of the last board and in my [*Letter to Gen Bell 4-10-08*] [*M*] Fort Riley Kansas April 7, 1908 Dear Cousin Theodore, I received your letter regarding Jones this afternoon and must say that I am awfully sorry I did not write you sooner or spoken to you about it while I was in Washington. To tell the truth I never for a minute expected the War Department to take the stand it did in his case, and if I had not happened to hear accidentally that he was moving heaven & earth to have the boardtelegram to-day told you to get them from the department. His testimony before the board was somewhat as follows. He did not like his wife so they came to an agreement that if he would pay her $1000. she would give him the divorce, and he would not contest it, so she came on to Washington and brought proceedings against him, and during the time the proceedings were on he went down and staid with her every night and after the divorce was granted he staid in Washington for a month to the same state of affairs still continuing. I did not hear him give this testimony, so it is hear say evidence as far as I am concerned, but on the other hand I have every reason to believe that it is true at least in it's main point. Now if this testimony was given to the board I do not see how the board could fail to find him right on his own statement. and for the life of me I cannot see what legal technicality the War Dept can find for reversing the boards findings, for this act was done by him between the time he was examined by the first board in Jan 1907 and the time of his second examination in Jan 1908. I want to say right here that nobody believes the above story, as everybody seems to like his wife who by the way has since married a Major of engineers, who is a great friend of General Bells.I don't see any order yet limiting the service of officers away from troops to 4 years and on the other hand the detail of [what] what an old Sergeant of mine used to call "Pious Port Hole soldiers" continues. Affectionally yours Dan T. Moore Fort Riley Kansas I don't see what you can do about it now that he has been confirmed and commissioned, excepting perhaps to jump on the Dept with both feet, so that such a thing will not happen again, for there certainly is a nigger in the wood pile some where. I know that you are placed in such a condition that it is next to impossible for you to get at the inside of this business, where as if I was there it would not take me more than 5 minutes to locate Mr. Nigger and every thing else connected with the business.April 7, 1908. The Attorney General (Confidential and Personal) Majority witnesses have testified before grand jury. Have statements of other witnesses. Evidence sufficiently involves Steunenberg, Sweet, Kincaid, Pritchard and Wells in conspiracy to obtain timber lands illegally. Participation of Barbour and Moon and also Palmer not clearly shown. Participation of Frank Martin still more doubtful. Think it very doubtful if conviction could be secured under instructions court would give because of Williamson case and United States against Budd holding corporation wishing to purchase might advertise fact. Also think overt acts upon which must rely to toll statute insufficient as matter of law. To be more specific, conspiracy originated in nineteen one by Kincaid, Wells, and Sweet furnishing money, other three procuring entries. Steunenberg joined early in nineteen two, and, through Palmer, interested Barbour and Moon, who formed company and furnished capital, requiring Steunenberg to assure good titles, Sweet being bought out. No doubt number of entries procured in nineteen two were illegal and suspicion cast thereby upon all subsequent entries. Large group of entries of apparently illegal nature made September fourteen, nineteen three in interest of Barbour company. Small group made in nineteen five apparently legitimate. Last group only entries within statute. 2. They were lands originally entered in nineteen one at instance of Wells and disallowed by land office. Frank Martin was employed by Steunenberg to defend cases before Land Office, and after disallowance, and before time to appeal had expired, Martin procured relinquishments from original entrymen and sold them to relatives and friends who proved up with their own money and subsequently conveyed to Martin, who in turn conveyed to Barbour Company. While suspicion attaches to these entries in view of relations of parties and Martin's employment by Steunenberg in contest cases, they appear otherwise legitimate, and we have small faith in their sufficiency to toll statute. The only other transactions within statute are deeds to company from Palmer, Rand, and Long of lands received from entrymen in interest of company and apparently prosecuted in January, nineteen five, by the Secretary Interior and decided June, nineteen five. We are of opinion that deeds referred to will not remove bar of statute. We know question is before Supreme Court in one of Colorado cases, but think insufficiency of such act will be apparent to you upon consideration. Government completely defrauded when lands pass from it to someone for benefit of conspirators and subsequent disposition of lands immaterial. The appeals at most involve Steunenberg only, and not Barbour and Moon. Steunenberg, Sweet, and Palmer could not properly be indicted, former being dead and statute run against latter. Rand and Long had no knowledge of conspiracy. Barbour and Moon's relation to matter 3. possibly legitimate under Supreme Court decisions. Kincaid, Wells, Pritchard, and Downs were merely tools. Martin's connection, except as Attorney, not clearly established. We regard it as important that in practically all cases entrymen had to pay location fee of twenty-five dollars and expenses of original filling, even where afterwards furnished with money to prove up. Shall probably conclude presentation of matters to Grand Jury Wednesday. In view of mass of testimony tending to show fraudulent, if not criminal, purpose of parties, Grand Jury will probably be disposed to indict, but doubt if conviction can be secured under instructions court would give as to limitations and -----. Answer in cipher immediately.TRANSLATION. Message not wholly intelligible. Department wishes indictments in cases where evidence promises conviction. Desires omission of defendants against whom evidence is weak. Question of limitations involved in pending appeal must be assumed decided in favor of Government's contention. If local court takes contrary view, responsibility will rest with it. Subject to foregoing instructions, matter left to your discretion. Department recognizes difficulty of situation, and authorizes statement that you act by its directions. [*[enc in Bonaparte 1-8-08]*][*PF*] [*J*] B-R DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE QUI PRO DOMINA JUSTITIA SEQUITUR Office of the Attorney General, Washington, D.C. April 8, 1908. The President, The White House. Dear Mr. President: I have just seen Mr. Smith and assured him that I should be happy to have him consult with Mr. Purdy, and also to advise with him myself, as to any matter connected withe the Hepburn Bill, which he may with to consult about. I have written a note to Mr. Jenkins, informing him that Mr. Smith would communicate with the Committee "owing to my very numerous engagements at this time." Mr. Gardner Lathrop is anxious to see you with me for a few minutes with regard to the second of the rebate cases against the Santa Fe Railroad at Los Angeles. The company was convicted in the first case and fined $330,000. The second case, which is of much less importance, is about to be tried. He is anxious to have it postponed until the first is decided. I have sent a telegram to the United States Attorney Lawley, at Los Angeles, asking whether he this this advisable in the interests of justice. I, personally, see no very great objection to it, but I think I ought to mention it to you, since this is one of the cases about which Mr. Ripley publishedThe President. 2. his attack on all concerned some months ago. I told Lathrop I would ask you to see him for a few minutes before Cabinet meeting Friday, and I hope to be present; if I am not well enough to come, however, I will ask Purdy to come in my stead. I send you herewith a translation of a long cipher telegram which I have received from Harr and Gordon, and special attorneys sent to Boise, and also a copy of my reply. Of course, these communications are highly confidential. It is not quite clear what some parts of their telegram mean, but I understand them to say, in substance, that they think the grand jury will indict but that a conviction is improbably under instructions as to the statute of limitations which they expect the court to give; and that the evidence is not clear as to all the parties. Before Friday I shall undoubtedly have had definite news from them. Pray believe me, as ever, Yours most respectfully and truly, Charles J. Bonaparte, Attorney General. [*[for enc. see 1-7-08]*][*J*] [*Ackd 4-8-08*] B-R DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE QUI PRO DOMINA JUSTITIA SEQUITUR Office of the Attorney General, Washington, D.C. April 8, 1908. The President, The White House. Dear Mr. President: I venture to suggest a slight change in your proposed message, intended to strengthen our claim that, if the Congress does nothing, its inaction will be an assent to the construction of the law contained in my opinion; otherwise, I can think of no possible improvement. I take advantage of this occasion to say that, unless you think I am needed here tomorrow, I shall remain in Baltimore "for repairs." I think that a day's rest will enable me to get rid of my cold. I am feeling a little under the weather, but I hope to have the pleasure of seeing Senator Bourne for two hours or less this afternoon. Pray believe me, as ever, Yours most respectfully and truly, Charles J. Bonaparte, Attorney General.[*[for enc. see Speech ca 4-8-08]*][*F*] SCRIBNERS MAGAZINE CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, PUBLISHERS. 153-157 FIFTH AVENUE. NEW YORK, April 9th, 1908. Dear Mr. President: I have received your letter of April 7th enclosing an additional appendix to "The Rough Riders." We have already sent it to the printer who will make it up as Appendix G; a proof of it will go to you in a few days. We shall then make it into plates and have it ready for the next printing, which will probably be toward the end of the year. Faithfully yours Robert Bridges The President,8 April 1908 Knighton, Buckhurst Hill. Stations. Woodford or Chingford [*Ackd 4-17-08*] [*B*] My dear Roosevelt It is pleasant indeed to think of you getting a glorious holiday after your most memorable term of office. If I can contribute in the least degree to the success of it how pleased I should be! The enclosed is an extract from a letter of Sir Alfred Pease who is brother to my daughter in law, Mrs Gerald Buxton. He has a small ostrich farm near the Athi Plains which form part of the upland plateau of British East Africa. I send it that you may enjoy the pleasures of anticipation. B.E.A. is by far the most wonderful farm country left in the world. though alas it is threatened by various influences. It is moreover a divine temperate climate on the plateau - 5000-7000 feet, It is nearly equally good at all times of the year. I certainly put this down as the first item in your programme though not necessarily the first in order of time. I should rather prefer July August and September there myself. Then the Soudan. This is too hot for comfort except November-March inclusive. It is a much lower level It is a perfectly straight forward thing to go up in a gun-boat from Khartoum to Gondokoro, shooting on the way in the neighborhood of Fashoda. From Gondokoro it is a march of 3 weeks to Entebbe on the Victoria lake and from there you have steam connectionSTATIONS. WOODFORD OR CHINGFORD KNIGHTON, BUCKHURST HILL. with the terminus of the Uganda Railway near which there is the finest shooting. This is only a very brief outline which I will fill up in a few days and also suggest other alternatives further south. My family and especially my daughter Clare wish to send you and Mrs Roosevelt hearty greetings. I trust she is well. I cannot doubt that she is looking forward to the relief from the high pressure of the last 3 years. I will presently tell you who is in high authority in the respective Territories. Ever my dear Roosevelt yours faithfully E. N. Buxton The Hon Theodore Roosevelt536 Pacific St Brooklyn New York, April 8th, 1908 My Dear President Roosevelt In the year 1878, when the writer was proprietor of a hotel near the corner of Spring & Broadway New York. Captain Jennings of the White Star Steam Ship Adriatic with whom I had sailed to Calcutta as Steward on one of the Steamships named the Asiatic belonging to the same line as the Adriatic in 1871, invited me to dine with him on board the Adriatic and at the dining room table Captain Jennings introduced me to a Gentleman named Chester A. Arthur as Collector of the Port of New York. & little did he or I think at that time he would be nominated so soon after for Vice President of the United States much less to become President through such deplorable circumstances. on another Occasion I had to call at police headquarters in New York Many years ago & there I had the honor of being introducedCopy of letter to President Roosevelt See pages 9 to 132 to a gentleman by the name of Theodore Roosevelt as a police Commissioner of New York who later became Vice President of the United States & through circumstances equally as deplorable as those which resulted in the elevation of General to the Presidency also became President Arthur of our great Country but whom today is our President through the over whelming majority of the people's votes cast at the last Presidential Election although Mr President I am sorry to say you did not get my vote for the simple reason I was on the Sea on my way from Panama to San Francisco as a passenger on board of the Pacific Mail S. Ship Peru. but I felt so sure of your election by an immense majority that I took a chance & in a Spirit of fun I wrote a Bulletin & posted it up in the Smoking Room of our Steamer - This Special by wireless. Theodore Roosevelt elected by an Immense Majority - and on our arrival at3 San Francisco Nov. 11th 1904 - I was delighted to find my Bulletin was correct - & I am proud to consider myself one of your people to use the term some people & neighbors go into hysterics about. Well my dear President I hope you will pardon the liberty I take in addressing you at such length but I may here state that I have been contemplating for a long time [of] writing to you but at last I have concluded to do so. although I am a stranger to you comparatively speaking I have watched your career with keen interest from the day I first saw you. I don't think there are many among the hundreds of thousands who admire you who have watched with more pleasurable interest your deserved advancement all through your public life as police Commissioner assemblyman Ass't Secty of the Navy Governor Vice President & President as your humble servant the writer has done. these remarks4 Mr President are simply preliminary as it were to my principal object in writing you - were I not aware of your love of a Square deal & Justice to all I would not have the heart to write you at all- the writer a citizen of these United States spent many years of my life at sea - My first voyage was on the Brig Haitienne to Port au Prince. Santo Domingo April 1863 - overhauled by the Privateer Alabama off the West Indies & allowed to proceed afterwards. I sailed on the ship Assam Valley Liverpool to Calcutta. Singapore-Mauritania Shanghai. Ningpo St Helena. to London - in January 1866. I joined the Allan line of Steamships as Captains Boy - April 18th 1866 - I together with my parents & three sisters came to & settled in New York- I continued in the Stewards department from boy up & along the line to Chief Steward - in several Steam Ship lines viz5 Allan, Imman. Cunard. White Star. P.S.N. Co-Pacific Mail S.S. Co- P.R.R.S.S. Co - South A. S.S. Co. between Valparaiso Chili. Bolivia. Peru Ecquador. Colombia. Central America Mexico. California. also for years between New York and Liverpool. 1867-1868 - Carried troops from Bombay to Abyssinia during the Abbyssinian Expedition. I was then with Mr Thomas Kinsay Pinser - who is purser today of the American liner Saint Paul now in New York. in the course of time - & through adverse circumstances I had to again seek employment in my old line the Sea-Nov. 1900. I went on the United States Army transport Sherman to Manila with Captain C. H. Grant now of Howard Goulds Steam Yacht Niagara coming back to San Francisco encountered the great Typhoon. Upon my return to New York I was appointed Manager and Steward of the Hotel & Restaurant6 department of the Townsend & Downey Ship Building Co. Shooter Island. New York where I served luncheon to Admiral Evans, the German Admiral & Mayor of Hoboken when they came to inspect the yacht Meteor then in course of construction and where we were all honored by the presence of your esteemed daughter & yourself to christen the Meteor on the 25th of July 1902. The next time I had the great pleasure of seeing & hearing you was on the 10th of June last Georgia day. I had the good fortune to be seated about forty feet behind you & general Grant on the same platform. previous to that I was at the Shore end of the government pier when your carriage drove in I could lay my hand on your Carriage - I would so much have liked to have shaken hands with you that day but that was not to be. However I had the great satisfaction7 of hearing almost every word of your great speech. I had the pleasure of joining in the great applause from the North. South. East & West - as well as seeing that incomparable dress Parade of the 600 West Point cadets - with whom I marched down the pier just prior to their embarkation on the Transport Sumner The nearest I have got to you since then my dear President was on the 16th of December last when I went down Hampton Road in company of the fleet on board the Steamer Endeavor - and we did endeavor" to see you. No doubt you remember how the Seaway arrived & steamed up on the Port side of the Mayflower & we blew 3 toots and got answer from the Mayflower as she was heaving in her anchor. Just as you were going to start back to Washington. I am so glad to hear our Bob is improving. Now Mr President I8 I wrote Admiral Evans from Virginia making application for the position of Steward on the Steam Collier now Building or for Chief Commissary Stewards position Admiral Evans caused a letter to be written me advising me to make formal application to the Chief of the Bureau of Navigation at Washington which I did and got reply telling me to Report on Board the Hancock, which I did. there the Officer told me I was past the Maximum age 35. I presumed Admiral Evans thought as the officer on the Hancock did that the age limit should be waived in my Case on account of experience & was advised to again write to Washington. got reply could not waive although I am told the Chief of the Bureau of Navigation has discretionary power. [M] Mr President I am just as old as I feel say 30 years although Born 1850. I am young, alert active. Wide awake I can put in double9 the Hours men half my age can do - I wish my dear president I could be afforded an Opportunity to demonstrate to you in a practical way my fitness to discharge all the duties pertaining to the position of Chief or Commissary Steward on any Steamship. Transport. Yacht Club or other place. & in feeding troops I bow to no one, either as individuals or in companies. In august last I made the enclosed application for a position in the Transport Service, but there were no vacancies, in Sep last I made application at the Commissary department at Newport News Was told there were no vacancies soon after I learned there was a vacancy on the Kilpatrick for Second Steward. I went to the office & offered to take that position as I was very much in need. Was told by a clerk by the name of Chuck to call again in a10 few days I did so and in the meantime I wrote to New York to Governor Woodruff for a letter to Captain Kilian of the Commissary, who seemed inclined to appoint me but he was overruled by his Subordinate Mr Chuck an englishman, who told me letters Cut No Ice with him even from the President of the United States - and that the 'Chief Steward' who is a Nova Scotian did not want a man older than himself & furthermore he the Steward had a friend in New York he had sent for one who had never been in the Service so I had to bow to the great Mr Chuck I am American Citizen nearly all my life notwithstanding the fact I had been in the Service before as Chief Steward & Commissary Steward which my credentials show & with a letter from Hon Timothy L Woodruff I was ignored. Now Mr President I dont know but I understand all officers in11 in the United States Army transports are supposed to be citizens of our country if the law don't cover the Stewards department dont you think dear Sir it ought to be so amended as to cover the Chief Steward Second & Commissary & Storekeeper - do you think dear President that it is right Just or equitable that an American citizen should be made step aside & the preference given to aliens. I can answer for you I know you don't. let every man prove his citizenship before allowing him to sign Articles on our Transports except the crew if the Vestal is going to ship a merchant crew. I would be glad to obtain the Stewards Position if I cannot get other position. I have application in Secty Cortelyou's hands for a position in the Secret Service. I speak Spanish fairly well & would be glad to serve in Cuba Porto Rico Honolulu or Panama or elsewhere. I12 been in all the places mentioned would be glad to work under Gov Magoon in Cuba. Mr President I am sure I could give entire satisfaction in conclusion dear President. You will be doing a great justice to many deserving men if you will cause the proper department to investigate the System hiring Officers, Captains & Engineers in the Transport Service - all I ask Mr President in behalf of many other worthy men as well as myself is Justice and I feel sure in my heart of getting that from the Idol of the Plain people of this great Republic Theodore Roosevelt. With profound respect I have the honor to subscribe myself one of your people James J Conway13 as to my general Character [credibility] My Dear President Roosevelt I would most respectfully refer you to the Hon Timothy L. Woodruff " Hon William J. Gaynor Brooklyn " " Almet F Jenks " General Isac S Cather Brooklyn General George W. Wingate " General James Jordan " Hon George R. Malby " William M Calder Ex Naval officer Theodore B Willis " " " Robert A Sharkey Excise Commissioner Col Harry Marshall A Casey Smith & Harris } naval architect designer of } the Yacht Meteor R Ross Appelton Captain G.H. Grant Howard Gould's Yacht Niagara & numbers of others. Respectfully Yours J. J. Conway[*West Virginia - M*] [*cal ed attached*] MONONGAH MINES RELIEF COMMITTEE MAYOR W. H. MOORE, Chairman MAYOR W. E. ARNETT, Vice Chairman J. E. SANDS, Treasurer J. M. JACOBS, Secretary B. F. MORRIS, Assistant Secretary COL. T. G. PRICE WM. O. DAWSON, Governor of West Va. WM. HAGGERTY WM. GASKINS S. J. BOYDOH BISHOP P. J. DONAHUE JUDGE JOHN W. MASON SUBSCRIPTION COMMITTEE Gov. W. M. O. DAWSON, Chairman POSTMASTER A. HOWARD FLEMING, Secretary MAYOR W. E. ARNETT MAYOR W. H. MOORE BISHOP P. J. DONAHUE JUDGE JOHN W. MASON REV. J. C. BROOMFIELD REV. H. G. STOETZER REV. A. BOUTLOU REV. W. O. DAVID REV. JOS. LEKSTON REV. JOS. D'ANDREA A. HOWARD FLEMING L. M. KUHN PHILIP PELLIGRINO JOHN R. BENNETT J. P. McKAIN R. T. CUNNINGHAM EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MAYOR W. H, MOORE, Chairman J. M. JACOBS, Secretary MAYOR W. E. ARNETT J. P. McKAIN R. T. CUNNINGHAM [[dhorthand]] [*File*] Fairmont, W. Va., April 8, 1908. My Dear Sir:- We have, from Hon. Wm. M. O. Dawson, Governor of West Virginia, under date of March 30, 1908, a letter transmitting your letter of March 28, 1908, together with your check for $100.00 endorsed by Governor Dawson to the order of J.E. Sands, Treasurer, same being your contribution to the fund in the hands of this Committee for distribution among the widows and orphans of the workmen who lost their lives in the Monongah Mines Disaster December 6, 1907. We enclose herewith our Treasurer's formal acknowledgment of this contribution, and convey to you the thanks of these widows and orphans for this kindly expression of sympathy from you. Very truly yours, A. Howard Fleming Sec. Subscription Committee. His Excellency, Theodore Roosevelt, President of United States, Washington, D.C. TELEGRAM. The White House, Washington. 3 PO.KN.KQ. 16 - 8:56 P.M. Boston, Mass., April 8, 1908. William Loeb, Jr., Washington. Believe changes of passing resolution of preference excellent; think O'Brien, of Boston TRANSCRIPT, judges situation wrongly. A.P.Gardner.[*copy of this telegram delivered to President.*] TELEGRAM. The White House, Washington. 2 PO. CO. RD. 35 Paid 6 p.m. Boston, Mass., April 8, 1908. Wm. Loeb, Jr., Washington, D.C. Lodge says to Taft people that his attitude against preference resolutions has approval of President. I did not understand the President that way. Please wire me to Touraine Hotel, Boston. Shall not publish New York telegram. A. P. Gardner.TELEGRAM. [*F*] (COPY) (Delivered to The President) [*9:56 p.m.*] The White House, Washington. Boston, Mass,. April 8, 1908. William Loeb, Jr., Washington. Believe chances of passing resolutions of preference excellent, think O'Brien, of Boston TRANSCRIPT, judges situation wrongly. A.P.Gardner.[*Ackd 4/8/08*] TELEGRAM. The White House, Washington. 2 PO.CO.FD. 35 Paid - 6 p.m. Boston, Mass,. April 8, 1908. William Loeb, Jr., Washington. Lodge says to Taft people that his attitude against preference resolutions has approval of President. I did not understand the President that way. Please wire me to Touraine Hotel, Boston. Shall not publish [Northern (?)] your telegram. A.P.Gardner. (Above read to Secretary Loeb over telephone, who directed that it be referred to The President).[*Ackd 11/10/08*] Address Inspector of Ordnance in Charge and refer to No. Naval Torpedo Station, Newport, R. I. B. April 8, 1908. My dear Mr. President: In accordance with Mr. Loeb's note of Apl. 6th, stating that you desire me to send you a letter which I have from the late Naval Constructor Woodward in regard to open turrets, and also to send you certain information concerning torpedoes, bearing directly upon some testimony given before the Sente Naval Committee, I beg to submit herewith a copy of Mr. Woodward's letter, and a few facts in regard to the torpedo situation. Mr. Woodward's letter is so conclusive that no comment is required; it is only necessary now to point out that the letter was written four years ago, and Mr. Woodward's opinion, that the shutters then proposed were trivial and a mere makeshift, has been absolutely borne out by practical experience. As you doubtless know, Mr. Woodward was one of the ablest men in his Corps. "Navy Department Board of Inspection and Survey Washington April 27, 1904. "My dear Gleaves:- I was very sorry to have missed you the other day and especially so, not to have an opportunity of discussing turret design with you. "The tendency to adopt what appears to be the simplest solution to prevent such accidents as occurred on the MISSOURI, by putting a flat with hinged shutters-2- 4/8/08. under the turret, the shutters necessarily having to be opened twice every time a gun is fired so that for each discharge of the turret guns there will have been 4 separate intervals during which the turret proper and the handling room are in direct connection, is in my opinion the merest palliative to the present conditions. "There is only one complete solution which is to have the ammunition hoists in two parts so that the powder and shell taken from the magazines is carried up to an intermediate platform some distance below the guns and there bodily transferred to a second ammunition hoist which brings the shell and powder directly to the breech of the gun. By a suitable design of the various parts of the ammunition hoist, this arrangement can be made entirely safe so that at no time shall there be any direct connection between the space in the rear of the breech of the gun in the turret and the handling room proper opposite the magazine. This is the solution adopted by Vickers and you can see it fully illustrated in figures 21 and 22, page 96 of Notes on Naval Progress, dated July, 1902. "There is however a second arrangement of ammunition hoist which is used by Armstrong which is almost equally satisfactory and which consists in bringing-3- 4/8/08. up the ammunition on the side of the guns in the turret so that the openings of the hoist are well forward of the breech of the gun, and you can see details of this hoist in the London Engineer (or Engineering, I have forgotten which) of about the beginning of the present year. Unfortunately the Office of Naval Intelligence has grown too decrepit in its old age to continue their notes on Naval Progress so that the Service is not kept informed as to latter day practice abroad, - a matter which I think can only be regarded with very general and profound regret. "The whole truth of the matter is that our present turret hoists, in the general features of their design, are extremely crude, in that the military and accidental possibilities of accident to them appear to have received scant attention. I should deeply regret myself if advantage is not taken of the present agitation in the matter to recast their design on well-considered and modern lines, as I believe that the advantage gained by the shutter addition to the present hoist which has been somewhat unthinkingly advocated, is trivial in its character instead of being thorough. It may be the best that can be done with a hoist whose design is badly considered, but in view of the importance of the matter, it appears to -4- 4/8/08. me that not only for new work, but in so far as practicable for vessels that we already have, the only correct solution is to re-design the hoists on as nearly as possible military principles as the other features of the gun mount will permit, for those vessels we already have; and in new work, give the matter the same consideration that is now being accorded it abroad, and afford the gun's crew and the ship the same protection against either military damage in action, or the carelessness or inexperience of the gun's crew itself in time of peace, that is afforded by well-considered foreign designs. "If you are around the Department and will drop in at the Board of Inspection and Survey, I should be glad to talk with you further on the same lines, if you are interested in the matter "Yours very sincerely, /s/ J. J. WOODWARD. Lieutenant-Commander Albert Gleaves, U.S.N., Commanding U.S.S. MAYFLOWER, Navy Yard, Washington, D.C."-5- 4/8/08. In regard to the Torpedo Question: the present dearth of torpedoes is due to two causes:- (a) The Bureau of Ordnance did not order Whitehead torpedoes subsequent to 1896 in sufficient quantities to keep the service supplied. (b) Until recently, the practical abandonment of the Whitehead during the development of the turbine torpedo. The lack of torpedoes is not due to the instability of the contractors to make Whitehead torpedoes, not to the inefficiency of the Whitehead torpedo, which has been and is the world's standard. I have been recently informed by Mr. F. M. Leavitt, of the firm of the E. W. Bliss Co., that their torpedo plant was idle and inoperative so long that they were practically on the point of closing it up, when, about 1899, at their earnest solicitation for an order, they received a contract for 30 Whiteheads. This was their last order until January, 1904, when they were awarded a contract for 50 Bliss-Leavitts, a type that gives great promise of efficiency but which is not yet perfected. Our total orders for torpedoes made from May, 1891 - the date of the first contract - to January, 1904, (12-1/2 years) was 414. This does not include 34 torpedoes bought abroad in 1898, and 50 Howells bought in 1889, and which have long since been obsolete. Since January, 1904, a total of 450 torpedoes has been contracted for, including 50 latest model Whiteheads-6- 4/8/08. recently bought in England, and it is probable that other large contracts will soon be let. At all events, the torpedo outlook now is encouraging. During the last ten or twelve years the development of the torpedo abroad has advanced prodigiously, but even when the torpedo had only a range of 800 to 1000 yards, and when the question of its installation in battleships and armored cruisers was one widely discussed at home and abroad, foreign naval powers, so far as known at the Torpedo Station, neither withdrew the torpedoes from their heavy ships nor did they cease to keep up a reserve supply, but continued the building and development of the torpedo. In this respect we pursued an entirely different policy; not only were torpedoes not provided for the armored ships, but for about five years no torpedoes were purchased at all either for torpedo boats or for reserve. The result is, that, according to the most reliable information, England has now a supply of about 10,000 of all models, and builds 400 annually; Japan and Germany are supposed to have about 4000 each, and they manufacture from 100 to 200 annually; and France has probably about the same number of torpedoes as Germany, and she manufactures from 100 to 200 annually; while on the other hand the total number of torpedoes of all descriptions - obsolete and otherwise - now possessed by the United-7- 4/8/08. States is 422, of which only about 151 would be available for service in time of war at ranges over 1000 yards. There are now due on present contracts 330 torpedoes (295 Bliss-Leavitts and 35 English Whiteheads). I am, sir, Very sincerely yours, Albert Gleaves, Commander, U.S.N. The President, The White House, Washington, D.C.TELEGRAM. [*Ackd 4/9/08*] The White House, Washington. FOR THE PRESIDENT: Memorandum from Secretary Loeb:- Senator Lodge telephones from Boston that he has carried out the program as discust with the President on Sunday. The other side has agreed to a division of the delegates at large on the understanding that no resolution will be passed. He says that if the Taft resolution is now introduced it will be beaten and the effect will be bad. If any on from Massachusetts should speak to the President and try to get the President to advise any other course the President should say that he sustains the position Senator Lodge has taken. -KQ- Received by 'phone at 7 p.m., April 8, 1908. [*Gardner, Augustus P.*][*[4-8-08]*] To the Senate and House of Representatives: I herewith submit a letter from the Department of Justice which explains itself. Under this opinion, I hold that existing statutes give the President [has] the power to prohibit the Postmaster General from being used as an instrument in the commission of crime; that is, to prohibit the use of the mails for the advocacy of murder, arson and treason; and shall act upon such construction [thereof]. Unquestionably, however, there should be further legislation by Congress in this matter. When compared with the suppression of anarchy, every other question sinks into insignificance. The anarchist is the enemy of humanity, and the enemy of all mankind, and his is a deeper degree of criminality than any other. No immigrant is allowed to come to our shores if he is an anarchist; and no paper published here or abroad should be permitted circulation in this country if it propagates anarchistic opinions. The White House, April, 1908. [*[enc. in Bonaparte 1-8-08]*][*Ackd 4/10/08*] Torpedo Station Newport R.I. [*Navy*] April 9, 1908 My dear Mr. President: I hope that the accompanying letter contains the information you wish. Before leaving Newport to join my ship in Puget Sound,, I want to take this opportunity to say goodbye. I am ordered to the St Louis which is temporarily in reserve, but Admiral Pillsbury intends to transfer me to the Charleston about the 1st July. I am much pleased with the orders, and am detached tomorrow. Mrs. Gleaves joins in kindest regards for Mrs. Roosevelt and yourself. I beg to remain, Mr. President Very Sincerely Albert GleavesNAVAL TORPEDO STATION, NEWPORT, R. I. April 9, 1908. My dear Mr. Loeb: I have the pleasure to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 6th, and enclose, for the President, the information that he desires. I am detached from the Torpedo Station tomorrow, and leave here on Tuesday to join the St. LOUIS at Bremerton. She is a fine ship, and I hope for a pleasant and profitable cruise. With best wishes, I remain, Very sincerely yours, Albert Gleaves. Hon. Wm. Loeb, Jr., The White House, Washington, D.C.American Embassy. London. April 9, 1908. Personal. [*Ack'd 4/18/08*] Dear Mr. President: The Cabinet crisis, as you know, is turning out as I have been advising you and Mr. Root for the past six weeks. Before I left Biarritz I learned that the King had decided not to come back to see the new Prime Minister -- though it was evident those around him realized that this was somewhat of a departure from the British fetish of precedent. This morning the London "Times" reads him the most distinct lecture on the subject I have yet seen addressed to the King in any respectable newspaper during my service here. I enclose it herewith. People who are sometimes wise above what is written, and are seeking perpetually to read between the lines of everything unusual, have an idea that this may be a sort of revenge for the position in which the determination by the Conservatives to help the party in power out of the mess over the Emperor's correspondence with Lord Tweedmouth left the paper which first drew attention to it and made it an international incident. I should doubt this; but, at any rate, it is a mode of reference to the sovereign quite unusual in England. There is no good prophesying, when the cable will have given you the changes in the Cabinet before this reaches you. But it may be said in a general way that the changes foreshadowed indicate the restoration to power of the old Whig element of the Liberal party; less care to cater to the incongruous elements like the Labor wing, the Irish wing, etc., and the probability of a less compliant line in the new Prime Minister and a more vigorous enforcement2. of party discipline. Asquith is a very strong man. Hitherto he has not been very popular, but sometimes the possession of power increases popularity. You will remember the droll incident I related a year or two ago as occurring at Windsor between Mrs. Asquith and the wife of the late Lord Chancellor. Her health since then has not been strong, and she hasn't been seen much in society, but she is sure to be brought conspicuously to the front. She is clever - perhaps dangerously so. She came here to meet Alice at luncheon. The day I got back I found in the most important of the Sunday papers here, "The Observer," the enclosed little article, which, because of its considerate and agreeable tone towards you, I thought you might like to see. I found also two curiously abusive paragraphs on the same subject from one of the weekly papers which has lost something of its old prestige. Perhaps it may be trying to regain position by violence. At the risk of seeming immodesty I am also enclosing an editorial from the "Daily Telegraph," the most widely circulated and most influential of the popular papers in London. It appeared during my absence on the Continent. Aside from the pleasant personal reference to myself, I think it will interest you because of the considerate treatment of the recent incident from its own special point of view. While Mr. Asquith is making up his Cabinet and Parliament stands adjourned nothing is going on here - nothing at least but the everlasting speeches which the American Ambassador is compelled to make. I am going down to Luton to make the second of these for this week, and am going to take that opportunity to tell the English merchants something about how San Francisco met the disasters of the earthquake and the fire. 3. The Pilgrim Club here, which is untiring in its search for opportunities for notable dinners, has sent an invitation to Dr. Hill in Paris, urging him to come here as the central figure of a Pilgrims dinner to be given him in honor of his appointment. They sent a man to Paris to see him, and report that he was pleased for the invitation, but asked some days to consider it. I only heard of this to-day. If they had consulted me about it beforehand, I should have hesitated a little as to whether it was wise in Dr. Hill's own interest. There can be no doubt many English would be extremely glad to make such an occasion notable, because they want to emphasize what they regard as the discomfiture of the Emperor. [*But whether giving them their opportunity would be the most fortunate preclude to Dr. Hill's official residence in Berlin is a thing to be thought of. He has been so discreet though, through the late flurry, that doubtless he will have given consideration to this point*] Very sincerely yours, Whitelaw Reid[*[For attachment see 4-20-08]*]Vienna, Prague, Munich, Berlin, Paris and London emboldens him to submit them now to the American people. That is the object of his present visit and he rightly holds that he cannot begin more auspiciously than by paying his respects to America's President and first citizen. I have asked him to convey to you at the same time my kind regards and cordial wishes. I am Dear President Roosevelt, Yours very sincerely, Count Witte [*P.F. ppf "W'*] St. Petersburg 9th April 1908. Dear President Roosevelt, A distinguished fellow countryman of mine - the painter Alexander Borissoff - is on his way to the United States and he asks me to give him a letter to you. Complying with his request I cannot suppress thewish that I too were about to pay another visit to the "great Republic, were it only to renew the keen pleasure which my conversations with its President conferred upon me two and a half years ago. M. Borissoff who has much to see and learn there has also something to show and to teach. For he is a painter who has struck out a special line of his own, having completed a series of remarkable tableaux illustrating life and nature within the Arctic Circle. A few years ago he rigged out the first Art Expedition that ever visited those frozen regions. On and off he spent some five years in polar lands, in Nova Zembla for instance he resided for eighteen months on end. The success scored by exhibitions of his works held at[Encl in Reid 4-10-08] [4-9-08] Mr. Asquith Prime Minister. MR. ASQUITH yesterday kissed hands upon his appointment as Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury, and is expected to start upon his homeward journey to-day. That this high constitutional function, intimately bound up with the most delicate adjustments of our political system, has taken place at Biarritz, a modern day's journey beyond the confines of the kingdom, is a very wide departure from hitherto unbroken precedent. It may perhaps be regarded as a picturesque and graceful tribute to the reality of the entente with our French friends that the KING and the PRIME MINISTER should find themselves so much at home in their beautiful country as to be able to transact the most important constitutional business on French soil. Still, the precedent is not one to be followed, and every one with a sound knowledge of our political system must hope that nothing of the kind will happen again. Circumstances are doubtless conceivable in which it might be necessary to resort to this mode of transacting constitutional business, but in this case we are glad to believe that HIS MAJESTY is in excellent health. No other plea but that of necessity can be regarded as entirely adequate at a time when the importance of keeping the constitutional functions of the CROWN fully in evidence cannot be exaggerated. There are other inconveniences. A week has been unnecessarily lost at a critical period of the Session; and if any hitch should occur in Mr. ASQUITH’s arrangements - a thing by no means rare on such occasions - it will not be immediately possible for the KING and his Minister to have those further personal conversations which would become desirable and perhaps indispensable. This and other possible inconveniences will, however be mitigated by the welcome change in His MAJESTY’s plans, according to which he will be in London on this day week, to hold a Privy Council. There is nothing to be gained by discussing the probable distribution of offices in the new Ministry, though it may be observed that those who predicted a minimum of rearrangement are likely to be proved Reconstruction will apparently provide a fair amount of electoral interest and excitement. But the essential thing in the new Ministry is the new PRIME MINISTER, who differs so widely in many ways from his predecessor that the general direction of affairs cannot but respond to his idiosyncrasy. He starts, as LORD LANSDOWNE observed last night, in conditions much less favourable than those of two years ago. The wave that brought his party into power has Spent its force, and the exuberant exultation of his supporters in Parliament has given place to a more chastened mood. In one sense that may be an advantage to MR. ASQUITH, who probably never fully shared the rather wild enthusiasm of two years ago. But the docility that may come of disillusionment is not perhaps a Very valuable asset for a leader. His party as a party is discredited, notwithstanding meritorious work by several members of the late Government. It is now very distinctly on the defensive, and its attitude is perforce is personally deeply committed to some portions of the late Government’s programme, although from others he can, and probably will more or less depart. He is uncompromisingly attached to free trade, at a time when public opinion is running strongly in the direction of tariff reform, and when high food prices and diminishing exports. He was the great protagonist of free trade in SIR HENRY CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN’s Ministry, having made a considerable reputation by following MR. CHAMBERLAIN about the country applying the antidote of orthodox oratory. The country, though greatly shaken by MR. CHAMBERLAIN, was not ready fully to accept his views, and in that wavering condition of opinion Mr. ASQUITH no doubt did good party service and contributed to the result of the general election. But by the irony of fate he has done more, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, than any other who Can be named to bring home to the people the can be named to bring home to the people the inadequancy of our existing system of taxation. Not only is direct taxation pressing with a weight never so acutely felt before except at moments of national peril, but the desperate need for money has brought the country face to face with proposals which threaten property in many directions and have caused a widespread sense of insecurity, which verbal protestations are powerless to allay. MR. ASQUITH has, indeed, Greatly weakened his assurances, and destroyed the effect of his resistance to Socialist schemes in some directions, by his adoption of non-contributory old-age pensions as the Government policy. He thus opens the door to a huge expenditure which there are no means of meeting under a free-trade regime except by resort to the methods of his most headstrong supporters. A free-trade [*“Times” April 9. 1908*][*Times. April 9. 1908.*] advocate of non-contributory pension schemes, which, however moderate in their inception, must necessarily grow to large proportions, will find it difficult to regain that confidence which the late Government has forfeited. The Licensing Bill MR. ASQUITH has made his own, and his arguments in its favour have been of a kind which justifies every degree of harshness in dealing with property recognized by the State in practice, if not in theory, for centuries. Its provisions revolt the common sense and the common honesty of the country, all the more because in striking at a trade hated by his supporters it injures innocent investors having no connexion, save as mortgagees, with breweries or publichouses. It may be doubted whether he will or can consent to any serious modification, at any rate until the measure goes to the House of Lords. He has never been a zealous supporter of the policy of filling the cup, and we do not suppose that so practical a thinker regards this as an opportune time for pursuing that policy even if he favoured it. But if concessions have to be made on the Licensing Bill it is obviously possible to make them with a better grace when they become necessary to save the measure from wreck. As regards the Education Bill there is no doubt that MR. ASQUITH is favourable to compromise, which will be facilitated by the appointment of a new chief to the Education Board. He has relegated Home Rule to a future so dim and distant as greatly to depress MR. REDMOND and his followers, refusing to pledge his party to take it up even in the next Parliament. He is no Little Englander, but believes in the necessity for adequate armaments, while as Prime Minister he will not be directly hampered by departmental exigencies, which beset him as Chancellor of the Exchequer. On these points there is room to expect from MR. ASQUITH a policy of greater moderation and of a less disturbing kind than that of the late Government. If that expectation is fulfilled his path will be very notably smoothed so far s the Opposition are concerned. There will be no desire to obstruct for the sake of obstruction if the new PRIME MINISTER can place national interests before the party interests, to which they were too frequently subordinated by the late Government.it. The girl gives up half her fortune, a considerable one inherited from her mother, Squier's first wife, by marrying without her father's consent. As for Rousseau's official character, he is, as I have said to you on former occasions, a man of very exceptional ability. That is the opinion of Col. Goethals and of all others who have knowledge of his services here. No member of the Commission stands higher than he. You are right in calling the name "Squeers." That is what it should be. Very Faithfully yours Joseph Bucklin Bishop [*B.*] [*Ackd 4/17/08*] ISTHMIAN CANAL COMMISSION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 10th April. Dear Mr. President - It is reported here, on the authority of his wife that the American Minister has cabled to Washington asking for the removal of Mr. Rousseau as Commissioner, because of his conduct in marrying Miss S. against the wishes of her parents. Whether there is any truth in the report or not, I cannot say for it is impossible to place any credence in anything Mrs. S. may say at any time. But, in accordance of Mr & Mrs. S. toward their - or rather his - daughter has been not merely hurt but inhuman. The girl is 26 years old and as sweet and refined a creature as I have ever known. She and Rousseau love each other and desired to marry. Seeking to do so in all regular and proper manner. Mr and Mrs S not only opposed marriage but grossly maligned Rousseau and ill-treated the girl. There was no other way out of it than the one taken, and Rousseau would have been a mean-spirited creature if he had not taken over with the wish of Col. Goethals. I write to say to you that Mr. Rousseau's conduct in the matter has the absolute and unquestioned approval of the Colonel, and, so far as I can learn, of all other members of the Commission, and of all Americans on the Isthmus. A few days ago, I wrote an account of this affair to Mrs. Roosevelt, for her entertainment; not thinking it would reach your ears officially. Every important statement in that letter I vouch for, and will sustain. The conductTELEGRAM. The White House, Washington. 5 WU. HC. FD. 39 Paid 11:11 a.m. PK, Boston, Mass., April 10, 1908. THE PRESIDENT. Best thanks for telegram. An agreement has been reached which states explicitly that convention is for Taft, but refrains from formal resolution. Nothing could be better;as a result attitude taken by Draper and myself fully justified by result. H. C. Lodge.[*[for 5 encl see 1-4-08 4-5-08 4-1-08 4-9-08 4-10-08]*] [*Ackd 4/18/08*] [*R*] DORCHESTER HOUSE, PARK LANE,W. 10 April, 1908. My dear Mr. President: i don't want to overwhelm you with mere newspaper clippings, but you really must see the full tail of this, from The Times of this morning. Yours sincerely, Whitelaw Reid. [Encl in Reid 4-10-08] [4-10-08]DAY, APRIL 10, 1908. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ments, and excused, palliated, or glorified, as occasion demands, in similar ways. The open propagation of this assassination literature and the crop of murders and other crimes which has sprung from it have unquestionably caused great uneasiness and a feeling of deep reprobation amongst the masses of the American people. It is not surprising that they should have also attracted the attention of the PRESIDENT, and that they should have led him to make efforts to crush a great and growing evil. There can be no doubt amongst men who believe in the ordinary moral code, and who are acquainted with anarchist doctrines, as to the justice of MR. ROOSEVELT'S condemnation of the anarchist system. The anarchists themselves admit that the mission of the true revolutionist is a mission of wholesale, ruthless and unscrupulous violence. His aim, as BUKUNIN, the great apostle of the creed, laid down, is universal destruction, and in pursuit of that aim it is his duty to shrink from no means and to spare none. The first object put forward in the programme of the American Anarchists, as it was published at Chicago in November, 1883, is "the destruction "of the existing class rule by all means-- "i.e., energetic, relentless, revolutionary, and "international action." That is the creed which they openly teach in their newspapers and which they use the mail service to propagate, and it is the creed which the more reckless amongst them not infrequently practise. These men are clearly, as MR. ROOSEVELT calls them, enemies of society and of all mankind. If he can devise any effective means for suppressing their doctrines or for restraining the circulation of those doctrines, he will be rendering a great service to civilization. But the question inevitably suggests itself whether any degree of coercion which public opinion will at present approve would in fact be effective for such purposes? That depends on the main upon the state of feeling upon this subject which prevails amongst the people of the United States, and of that feeling the PRESIDENT has generally proved himself to be an unerring judge. Fuller particulars of his proposals will be awaited with the deepest interest in all the States of the old world; and, whatever may be thought of the prospects of his struggle with this terrible evil, honest men everywhere will wish him victory in the fray. President Roosevelt on Anarchism. PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT has entered upon a campaign in which he will command the sympathy and the moral support of the civilized world. He has called upon Congress to legislate, we are told, for the suppression of Anarchism, and he has himself taken administrative action to limit a particular form of Anarchist propaganda. In his special Message to Congress he describes the quality of the crime which he proposes to combat with his customary directness. "The Anarchist," he declares, "is an enemy to society and an enemy "to all mankind. He is a deeper degree of "criminality than any other." MR. ROOSEVELT is convinced, not only of the enormity of the offence, but of the supreme importance of coping with it. "When compared with the suppression of "Anarchism," he asserts, "every other question "sinks into insignificance." The brief telegraphic account of his Message which has reached us does not make the scope of the legislation which he desires clear. The object which he has immediately in view is to prevent the Anarchists from using the American mails for the circulation of periodicals which advocate murder, arson and treason. But it does not seem probable that he would refer to an enactment confined to giving the Government further powers for this purpose in terms so general as those which he appears to have employed. He holds, in fact, that he possesses certain powers of this kind already. MR. BONAPARTE, his Attorney-General, advises him that the circulation of periodicals of this mature is an offence at common law, and that the POSTMASTER-GENERAL is justified in refusing to carry them as part of the mails. MR. ROOSEVELT believes that this opinion is a sound statement of the law, and he announces in his Message that he will instruct the POSTMASTER-GENERAL accordingly. It would seem, however, that the PRESIDENT wishes not merely to hinder the circulation of these pernicious documents, but to make the publication of them a crime against the United States. It is not at present such a crime. It is a crime against the common law punishable only by the Courts of the separate States. A Federal statute is necessary to in order to constitute it a crime within the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts, and MR. ROOSEVELT informs Congress that in his judgment further legislation in this matter is indispensable. By an Act which was passed after the murder of his predecessor, PRESIDENT MCKINLEY, congress forbade alien Anarchists to enter the United States. PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT cites this measure as a precedent and contends that, as alien Anarchist are rightfully excluded from the territory of the Republic, so should Anarchist publications, whether published in America or abroad, be excluded from its mails. What other steps for the suppression of Anarchism he may contemplate, we are at present unable to say. The immediate cause of MR. ROOSEVELT'S action may perhaps be found in the series of Anarchist crimes which have been committed in several cities of the Union since the year began. In January a bomb which seriously wounded several persons was exploded in a bank at Kansas City, and the Government of Washington found it necessary to warn the Government of Brazil that an Anarchist plot existed to damage the American fleet on its voyage to the Pacific. Early in March a Russian Anarchist from Kishineff made a murderous attack upon the Chief of Police in Chicago, it is supposed from revenge for the activity of the police in tracking an Anarchist murder, of which the victim was a priest, that had been committed in February. Towards the end of the month a man named SILBERSTEIN blew himself and a companion up in Union-square, New York, with a bomb which they seem to have intended to fling at the police. A card was found in SILBERSTEIN'S rooms which certified that he was a member of the Anarchist Federation Union. It was signed by ALEXANDER BERKMAN, another Russian Anarchist, who is said himself to have attempted to murder MR. FRICK at Pittsburg some years ago, and who is the husband of the notorious EMMA GOLDMAN. This woman is also a Russian, but she owes her education to Germany. It has been alleged that it was her speeches which incited CZOLGOSZ to murder PRESIDENT MCKINLEY. Many crimes are attributed to the operations of the Italian Anarchist organization known as the "Black Hand." It is said to pursue a policy of blackmail, enforced by the sanction of bomb explosions directed against the recalcitrant. It is believed to be widely extended, and to have branches in New York, Pittsburg, Baltimore, Washington, New Orleans, Chicago, and San Francisco. The crimes of violence which the extreme sections of other organizations, not nominally Anarchist, constantly perpetrate have also a strong family resemblance to those of the confessedly Anarchist bodies. They are advocated by similar argu would [??????????????????????????????????????] depends in the main upon the state [o???????] this subject which prevails amongst the people of the United States, and of that feeling the PRESIDENT has generally proved himself to be an unerring judge. Fuller particulars of his proposals will be awaited with the deepest interest in all the State of the old world; and, whatever may be thought of the prospects of his struggle with this terrible evil, honest men everywhere will wish him victory in the fray.[*A*] [*Ackd 5/18/08*] E WELLSELEY ASHE ARCHITECT, SURVEYOR, LAND & ESTATE AGENT. MANUFACTURERS' AGENT NAIROBI, B.E.A. April 11th '08 President Roosevelt. Dear Sir, I have heard that it is your intention to visit this country for Big Game hunting and I beg to state that I have a 5000 acre farm in the very heart of the best game country here which I would like to place at your disposal. Most of the African game is to be found on my land, including Lion, Leopard Hippo. Rhino. Giraffe, Zebra, Buffaloe and various species of Buck. I am bounded by two large rivers and using my Shamba as head quarters you can get every East African animal, with the exception of Elephant, in less than twelve hours journey. I have also an option on my two neighbours land comprising eight thousand acres more. Mr. Churchills party lately killed a Lion in this locaility. Should you really contemplate this visit I shall be very pleased to make any arrangement you with for your reception. I have the honour to remain, Yours respectfully, E Wellesley Ashe[ca 4-11-08] P7 File Root THE WHITE HOUSE, WASHINGTON. It is hereby ordered that $2.50 be deducted from the Presidents salary for his being late at the office Saturday April 11th 1908. David J. Brewer T. S. C. [In handwriting of Elihu Root][*[For 1. attachment see ca. 4-11-08]*] April 11 - 1908 1733 R. Street. Dear Mr Loeb - Can you send me three admissions to the President's seats in Senate & House for next Tuesday the 14th for Mr & Mrs Humphrey Ward & myself - If you would get John an answer I will send for the tickets Monday but I would be glad to know today if I could have them or asto arrange with Mrs Ward Sincerely Yours Anna Roosevelt Cowles[*I will be in my office until 4 oclock if you can send*] [*[ca 4-11-1908]*] Mr William Loeb Jr Eq Secretary to the President The White House [*them over to me I will take them up to Mrs. Cowles W. S. Cowles*] [*Sent to Ad. Cowles 4/11/08*] [Enclosed in LaFarge 4-14-08] [4-12-08]Roosevelt's Travel Plans. Thinks It Would Be Better for Taft to Have Him Away. Washington, April 12 - Should President Roosevelt's present desires be realized he will spend the first year after his retirement from office in travel outside the United States. His itinerary has not been determined, but his plan is to see some of the rugged and little frequented portions of foreign lands as well as to travel the beaten track of the tourist. That the President will indulge his fondness for hunting big game is believed by those to whom he has confided his intention. It was at the recent dinner of the Boone and Crockett Club in this city that the President last told of his intentions for next year. He is quoted as saying at this time: "If William Taft is nominated and elected President, which would be very gratifying, it would make impossible any criticism if I were abroad, to the effect that I was dictating to him and being followed, or that I had dictated and had been turned down in my suggestions." It is the President's present intention to remain at the White House until the returns from the Chicago Convention have been received, but it is likely that Mrs. Roosevelt will have the family settled at Sagamore Hill before that time. As to politics, it is said the President will be simply an "interested observer." and politicians will find no cause to make Pilgrimages to Sagamore Hill.Enc. in Reid 4-14-08 4-12-08APRIL 12, 1908. The Week. [?] be the mentor of monarchy has been part [???????e] historic function of "The Times." Its [???isms] of successive sovereigns have been [some?] bold and just ; upon other occasions they have been merely mistaken and ungracious. It is an insult to characterise adequately the mischievous unfairness of the attacks upon the King which have wide appeared in our contemporary's columns during the past week. In the Press these comments have been widely reproduced with an eloquent absence of comment. The majority of sensible persons have been misled. It is necessary to point out that "The Times" has been misinformed. It has indulged in the premature exercise of a cheap censorship and its methods, more even than in a recent incident, have been an example of how not to do it. Let us be plain. On Monday it was suggested that Mr. Asquith ought not to go to Biarritz and that His Majesty ought to avail himself at once of the facilities for travel now existing for Monarchs "as for humbler folk." On Thursday the attack was emphasised with less courtesy than before, and still less knowledge. The country was informed that a week of Parliamentary time had been lost ; that Constitutional precedent had been [????????] that the new Prime Minister would kiss hands upon foreign soil ; that nothing but absolute necessity could excuse these consequences of the King's absence ; that His Majesty, however, "is in excellent health." The King's conduct, in other words, is represented as having been wholly inconsiderate, arbitrary and lacking a sense of duty to the nation. The kindest thing to be said about these strictures is that they are more undiscerning than experienced journalism ought to be and show a singularly bad instinct for probability. The facts are simple. The King was warned by his doctors that he might defer his journey altogether, but that if he went to Biarritz he could not return without danger from a bright climate to the treacherous air of London in the earlier part of the month of sudden changes. All the circumstances were considered. There was no reason to think that the Ministerial crisis would arise before Easter. When His Majesty departed it was well understood by all concerned that, acting upon the opinion of his physicians, he would not return at once, except in a grave emergency justifying the risk incurred. No such emergency has arisen, and the preposterous homilies administered to His Majesty have been based upon a complete misunderstanding of elementary facts. The nation will survive the loss of one week of Parliamentary time. Mr. Asquith, who is in the prime of life, will survive his journey to the Pyrenees. It is not accurate to suggest that the Cabinet have been inconvenienced by the postponement of the Licensing Bill. The respite has been more welcome than Ministers and their journals have dared to confess. The whole appearance of inconvenience has been particularly convenient to politicians in a quandary. The Cabinet needs to revise its measures even more than to reconstitute its membership. We are certain that Mr. Asquith and his colleagues rejoice in the saving interval they have unexpectedly secured and do not consider that one minute of it will be too long. We agree that one extraordinary feature of the Cabinet crisis ought never to recur. Before Mr. Asquith's return on Friday we were a hapless nation in a state of political orphanage. The country was denuded of constituted authority. The king was abroad. The Prince of Wales was away. The new Premier was out of the country. There was no Minister in charge. Nominally speaking, there was [??] Government, for Mr. Asquith's colleagues had all handed in their formal [????????????] according to usage. The situation was, in theory, Gilbertian. In practice, there was no difficulty whatever. Departmental business was carried on as usual. The nation hardly remembered that France was a foreign country, and even the suggestion that a Council might be hold in Paris excited no alarm. There has been no greater compliment to the entente cordiale. We were able to publish in a late edition last Sunday the first news that Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman had resigned the Premiership. The moment was as unexpected as the event was inevitable. Medical advice combined with political events to hasten the change. It has made no difference to the sentiments of kindness and sympathy with which the nation turns to the sick room in Downing-street. Yesterday's bulletins reflect the gravity of the ex-Premier's condition. His weakness is extreme and increasing. Parliamentary arrangements were at once dislocated. On Monday the second reading of the Licensing Bill was to have been moved, and Mr. Asquith was to have made one of the most important speeches of his career. He rose instead to move the adjournment of the House until next Tuesday, when members will meet for formal business and will separate again for the Easter holidays. The tributes to the ex-Premier in both Houses were fitly framed and touched with a sincere note of human feeling not always found in these eulogies.April 12, 1908. The Week. Parliamentary arrangements were at once dislocated. On Monday the second reading of the Licensing Bill was to have been moved, and Mr. Asquith was to have made one of the most important speeches of his career. He rose instead to move the adjournment of the House until next Tuesday, when members will meet for formal business and will separate again for the Easter holidays. The tributes to the ex-Premier in both Houses were fitly framed and touched with a sincere note of human feeling not always found in these eulogies. The Old Pilot and The New. The Pilot of the ships of State Yields up his post at length, And leaves the labour grown too great For waning human strength; And friend and foe unite to praise The tenor of his toiling days. Not his the peril and the pride An untried course to steer, And safe the reeling ship to guide Through stormy foam of fear, Or on the unknown sea to feel The unknown rock that rends the keel. Enough for him the port to reach By ways each sailor knows, To cheer his friends with halting speech, And all but win his foes, Till each can wish a happy rest To the plain man who did his best. Another hand is on the helm, A stronger hand, it seems, To keep the vessel of the realm From rocks of rough extremes, And through the tempests near or far Follow the high unchanging star. All for the State, the land we love; Be that his single aim, To set the public good above The party creed and name, And still the steadfast course pursue - Thanks to the old! hail to the new! Adrian Ross. The new Premier kissed hands at Biarritz, travelling on Monday night and returning on Friday evening. History notes that he read a yellow-backed novel on the way; followed a golfing party in the rain soon after his arrival; smiled upon every journalist who approached; and communicated nothing. As we point out in another place, there was no question for a moment as to who Sir Henry Campbell, Bannerman's successor ought to be. There has been no man of our time more conspicuously marked out at the moment of a vacancy in the Premiership for the highest office which a subject can occupy. Whether he can hold what he has won is one of the most interesting questions with which political speculation has ever had to deal.[*F*] SCRIBNERS MAGAZINE CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, PUBLISHERS, 153-157 FIFTH AVENUE. NEW YORK, April 13, 1908. [*S*] My dear Mr. Loeb: We have received this morning the additional matter for the Appendix of "The Rough Riders." It will be added to that sent us the other day and a proof of the whole will be sent to the President before it is cast into pages. Very truly yours, Robert Bridges Mr. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President.[*F*] [*H*] President's Office, Yale University, New Haven, Conn. April 13th, 1908. My dear Mr. President:- You are very good indeed to have looked into the matter about the Schofield letter further. I am interested to know just how the thing stood and where the misunderstanding arose. It is needless for me to add that what you did was exactly right -- the only thing you could have done under the circumstances; and that the trouble arose partly from Mr. Schofield's making more of the letter than it really warranted, and still more from my own lack of foresight in failing to provide myself with similar and stronger communications. I am enjoying very much the recollections of the luncheon two weeks ago. Faithfully yours, Arthur Hadley[*Ackd & ret'd Encl from James Ford Rhodes 4-14-08*] [*LH*] UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE PHILIPPINES Personal. April 13, 1908. Dear Theodore:- Here is a note which surprised me and which I think it will interest you to read. When you have read it I shall be glad to have Mr. Loeb return it. Always yours, H. C. Lodge To the President.[*[For 1 enc. see 4-14-08 Taft]*] [*F Z*] [*W*] WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON. April 14, 1908. My dear Sir: I am directed by the Secretary of War to enclose you a memorandum containing an inquiry and report by the Secretary of War upon the action of various boards since October, 1900, in recommending Subig Bay as a naval base. This in accordance with instructions contained in the letter from the President of February 11, 1908. Very respectfully yours, Fred W. Carpenter Private Secretary. Hon. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President. Enclosure.[*For 1 enclosure see 4-12-08]*] [*Ackd 4-15-08*] 30 EAST TWENTY-FIRST STREET 14 April Dear Mr President: I was annoyed to see in the "Times" yesterday, a note about your post-presidential plans which quoted very closely what you had said to me at the B. C. dinner. I don't suppose I should have noticed it, except for its saying that you were supposed to have thus expressed yourself "at the recent Boone & Crocket's dinner & &c". I don't suppose it's necessary for me to assure you that I don't repeat things you say to me in that way, and I'veno idea at all how the paper got hold of this. Faithfully yours, C. G. LaFarge 5 Garden Street, Cambridge, Mass., April 14, 1908. My dear Mr. President: Your letter of the 10th instant reached me two days ago, I am in thorough sympathy with nearly all that you say. I think you underrate the great good you have accomplished for the Army during your administration. Recently I have talked with several representative officers of the Army and they were a unit in saying that the Army has never been as efficient as it is today. You have succeeded in advancing and placing in important commands and administrative positions several of the younger and most efficient officers of the Army and you have succeeded in reorganizing the War Department by which you have provided the Secretary with a Chief of Staff and a General Staff,-- all of which you have accomplished in the face of much opposition both in the Army and in Congress. And you have not had, nor do you now have, a single retired officer of the Army serving in any position that affects the efficiency of the Army. -2- In the Navy you have made repeated recommendations to Congress and sent in a Special Message on the subject of obtaining younger captains and flag officers but nothing has been accomplished in that direction since the legislation of 1899-- though your efforts have been cordially supported by nine tenths of the public press and nine tenths of the line officers of the Navy, you have had no distinguished and influential Secretary, such as Mr. Root, to assist you in your work. The Navy Department has the same administrative organization that the War Department formerly had and all that is asked, by practically every line officer of the Navy who has no associations with the bureaus, is that the Secretary be given a Chief of Staff, or Executive officer, with duties corresponding to those of the Chief of the General Staff of the Army. Should an officer be appointed to this place he should have no present or past bureau associations, no administrative mistakes or administrative colleagues to defend that would be bound to impair his efficiency, nor should he be too near the age of retirement. I have been told by officers of the General Staff of the Army that many mistakes- 3 - had been made during the administration of the first two chiefs, who served only a few months before reaching the age of retirement. I suggested the name of Captain Helm because he is a man of unusual ability, industry, and strength of character, who can always be counted upon to perform his duty, and his administrative work in the Philippines was of the highest order of excellence. I also believe that Captain Wainwright or Captain Schroeder, both of whom will become flag officers in July and will not retire for more than three years, would perform the duties of the office efficiently and satisfactorily. I agree with you in your statement that if you could always have the right kind of a Secretary and the right kind of Chief of Navigation that all that is desired could be accomplished under the present organization. But frequently a Secretary is appointed from purely political considerations and will not be the right kind and though the Chief of Navigation will generally be the right kind, for fitness will usually be the only element considered in his appointment, as we cannot always count upon a thoroughly efficient man. All that I contend for in this matter is that if you place by law and regulation certain authority and responsibility upon an indifferent man, with no mistakes- 4 - or associates to protect, you will get better results from him than if he is left to act according to his own sense of duty and his readiness to accept grave responsibilities. Efficient supervision or coordination under the present system will mean great friction between the Chief of Navigation and the other bureau chiefs, for he would be required to assume duties not assigned to him by law or regulation, it would also mean that the Chief of Navigation could not, himself, attend to the administrative duties of his own bureau. I agree entirely with nearly everything you have said except about the lack of the necessity of a Chief of Staff for the Navy Department. I consider that the arguments for the creation of that office are much more pressing and stronger than those that led to the creation of the office in the War Department. Though you have met with opposition in the public press and in the Army to your well considered plan of advancing young and efficient officers I wish to particularly invite your attention to the fact that your experience with the Navy has been quite the opposite. Your efforts to obtain personal legislation for the Navy by which old and- 5 - efficient officers would be retired, the decision to place old captains to one side in favor of younger captains to command battleships, your action in putting a stop to the voluntary retirement of lieutenant commanders in order to force old and efficient commanders or captains on the retired list have all been cordially approved and supported by nine tenths of the Navy and the public press. The Navy below the grade of commander and many above that grade realize and cheerfully accept the absolute necessity of some fair system of more drastic elimination in the upper grades. The public press, with few exceptions, support you in all these efforts to reduce the ages of captains and flag officers for nearly all of our newspaper men know how we compare in this respect with leading foreign navies. As you know the Chairman of the Senate and House Naval Committees have persistently stood in the way of the Navy personnel legislation that you have attempted to obtain. There has never been any doubt in my mind that both Houses would enact the legislation if they were given the opportunity. It is the general opinion in the Naval service, with which I agree, that it is illogical, in the face of the acknowledged fact that our captains and flag officers on the active list reach their grades too- 6 - near the retiring age, and that it is an administrative error to employ retired officers of the Navy in important posts that affect the efficiency of the fleet, that it results in a poor quality of administrative work, is plainly an injustice to the captains and flag officers on the active list (for they are all eligible for the duty and are ignored in favor of retired officers) and such practice only accentuates the main evil, excessive age, under which we suffer both ashore and afloat. It is the general opinion of seagoing officers that no retired rear- admiral should be employed on active duty except as a reward for meritorious work while on the active lists as, for example, Rear-Admirals Luce and Evans, and then should not be employed in any post that directly, or indirectly, involves the efficiency of the fleet. Four defects have been established during the recent controversy that would have been, in my opinion, corrected long ago had there been a Chief of Staff in the Navy Department similar to the Chief of Staff in the War Department, namely,-- the location of the water line belt, the continued neglect of battle drills, the open turret and our pronounced deficiency in torpedoes.- 7 - Though Admiral Evans has again written that the actual experience of the recent cruise has convinced him that it would be a great mistake to raise the lower edge of the armor belt he does not at all cover the question at issue. He does not realize, apparently, that with full bunkers all the different classes of battleships in his command have the lower edges of their armor at decidedly different depths beneath the surface of the water, the three ships of the "Alabama" class 6'-3", three of the "Missouri" class 6,-11", tow of the "Kentucky" class 7'-1", three of the "Kansas" class and two of the "Louisiana" class 7'-5" and five of the "Virginia" class 7'-11". It is plain that all these different depths cannot be correct and if it is claimed that five of the ships must have the lower edge of the belt 7'-11" beneath the surface, to protect their vitals, then it must be conceded that we have five ships that must have the lower edge of the belt lowered 6", two lowered 10", three lowered 18", and three lowered 20". Admiral Converse and the Chief Constructor agreed in their testimony that the minimum depth below the surface at fighting draft should be five feet and expert opinion, the world over, is in practical agreement on this point. - 8 - Since a captain can always lower the armor about 12 inches, in a few minutes, by permitting water to run into the double bottom it seems to me as plain as anything can be, when we consider the lack of protection of these ships just above the water line-- where they are going to receive their vital injuries in action-- that every one of them should be lightened as much as practicable by the removal of all guns and weights that will not add to their fighting efficiency. In my opinion Admiral Evans has reached his present conclusion either through superficial considerations of the subject or from a natural disinclination to disagree with the attitude to which the Navy department is committed. He has been a flag officer in command of battleships, in smooth and moderate seas, from 1902 to 1908 and their behavior at sea during this recent trip was precisely the same as during the previous five years. Nothing in their behavior has been developed during the cruise not previously well known to himself and every other seagoing officer who has served on board the ships. The Navy considers that you, more than any- 9 - President who has preceded you, realizes and appreciates the obstacles that stand in the way of our efficiency and our great hope has been, and is, that you would set us on our feet before the end of your administration. I have a faint hope, since Congress seems inclined to consult you as to the laws that must be enacted before adjournment, that you might include the Navy Personnel Bill among the number to receive action. You have made annual recommendations on the subject for five years and you sent a Special Message and bill to the last Congress. In my letters to you I have given you my honest opinions for I know that is what you want and they are the only kind worth giving and receiving. But I again repeat what I said to you in my last letter, that I am entirely willing to trust your judgment after all the facts involved in a problem are placed before you. I have now placed before you what I believe to be the facts in the questions we have discussed and i very highly appreciate your indulgence,- 10 - in the press of the tremendous work that you go through, that you given them your personal attention and consideration. With greatest esteem, Faithfully yours, A. L. Key. The President, White House. [For 2 encs see ca 4-14-08]F R AMERICAN EMBASSY, LONDON. April 14, 1908. CONFIDENTIAL. Dear Mr. President: As I sent you the other day the unusual lecture which "The Times" read to the sovereign in connection with the change of Ministry, perhaps you will be interested in seeing the other view of the case, very plainly stated by the leading Sunday paper, "The Observer." This is the paper whose judicious comments on you I sent the other day, because I thought them so sensible and likely to be agreeable. Their view about the King seems also sensible. Perhaps I ought to explain though, that, while "The Observer" did have until recently the high position I have attributed to it, it has of late become one of the Harmsworth properties, and the general tendency here, particularly in conservative circles, is to speak of the Harmsworth influcence as a disagreeable type of American "yellow." ---------- I hesitated the other day, when speaking of Mr.Asquith's accession, to mention the revival of some old gossip about him. On the whole, it is better to let you know about it; though, so far as I personally know, there are no facts to warrant the stories. The complaint has been whispered, however, among his own followers that under the strain of his extremely hard work during the past year or two he has taken to drinking so much more freely than formerly as to alarm his followers a good deal. I just say that I have seen him under all sorts of circumstances, in exciting debates in the House, at the end of a long public discourse, etc., and have never see the slightest 2. indication of anything of the sort. As I suggested the other day, he is unquestionably able, and as unquestionable not popular. He has the reputation of not being conciliatory. All the same he has done his work of Cabinet making expeditiously and well. I shall hope to get the inside view of it within a few days. They are to "kiss hands" on the afternoon of Thursday next on the King's return from Biarritz. When I cam back from the Continent I found Mr. Mackenzie King was announcing the Colonial and Indian authorities had given him practically all he wanted, and that he was just about to start home. So I wrote him at once, reminding him of the proposal before I went away as to dining or lunching with me, and renewing the invitation. It turns out, however, that he has made some engagements up in Edinburgh which he feels compelled to keep, and is unable to get back in time to make an engagement with me before sailing! It is just as well! I have shown him every possible good-will, and have not been conspicuously identified in any way with this movement. Neither has the country been;--insipite of the fact that they all seemed at the beginning bent on treating him as really your representative rather than Sir Wilfrid Laurier's. I am sure they have had a distinct object lesson on the subject, and are not likely to give us any further examples of that "certain condescension" on the part of foreigners about our embarrassments on this subject, which we used to fancy that we detected. Mr. Mackenzie King has borne himself very well, and so far as I can see we have nothing to complain of. Yours sincerely, Whitelaw Reid[For enc see 4-12-08]one of the master, really not a master but a physical instructor, asked if I could get him a signed picture of you. Could you ask Mr. Loeb to have one sent him, i.e. to Mr. Albert Cross Groton School Groton Mass. [*Sent 4/14/08*] I wish you could see the Fergie baby. He is very endearing, but Martha is the really cunning one, very much like Ethel as she used to be. They are getting a house in Mt. Kisco. Your loving Kermit [*R*] Sunday. [*[4-14-08]*] Dearest Father, Here I am, embarked on the Post term, the beginning of the end. The rowing is in full swing. I am rowing different positions pretty nearly every day on the eight. We have hadblustering March weather, & it's been very rough on the river & difficult rowing. I am very anxious to hear about Audrey. How is she? I hope Roswell hasn't been playing 'possum any more, raising a temperature when he hears he is going to be taken out. I have come up from summer at New Orleans to spring at Washington, and now up to the end of winter here, but I think spring will come here soon. Mr. Gardner asked me if I thought you would like [one] a copy of his book on Greece. I said I was sure you would. It is coming out in about a week. Mother, I think, will like it very much.[*Ackd 4-15-08*] [[shorthand]] NOAH SEAMAN OYSTER BAY, LONG ISLAND. Oyster Bay April 14/08 My Dear President By request I write you that three of the Fern Hollow campers are coming to Washington and will be stop at the National Hotel until[l] Friday night leaving New York on Wednesday noon Mamu is coming with them they would like to see you while there if they knew at what time it would be convenient Yours Resp Noah Seaman[*Ackd 4/17/08*] Country Club Lakewood N. J. April 14, 1908 Dear Mr. President A short time ago I had two rather interesting letters from Japan, one on the military situation there, the other on the emigration question. The former was written by our military attache there & forms a sequel of a letter I received in July last year giving a view. The President White House.of Japans military policy up to June last, & of which I sent you a memorandum to Oyster Bay. The other letter came from one of our old consuls in Japan who is in close touch with the Foreign Office there & whom I should consider by far our best expert in Japan in all political, financial & economical questions. Shortly before leaving Washington had a letter from our ministerin Peking. I mentioned the contents to you, but as they seem of growing importance, in case the latest news from China should be true, I thought it would interest you to have them in detail. The letter says: During a conversation with Chang chi ting, now grand secretary of the state council he mentioned for the first time the question of a possible understanding between China & GermanySo far this question has only been touched in talks I had with Liantimyen, vice president of the Wai wu pu. During conversation with Chang chi ting the latter strongly emphasized that he considered closer relations with Germany as most necessary for the future peace & order of China and several of the most important members of the Government shared his views. But, Chang chi ting added the same relations with the United2. States are of most far reaching importance, and would mean an absolute necessity in the interest of peace and order within Chinas domains. Hence China, continued Chang chi ting, intends to lay her desires before the President of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt. For this purpose either Liantimyen or Tangshaoyi are to be sent to Washington. During the discussion the fear was expressed that an agreement between these twopowers in China would mean jealousy among the other powers interested in China, especially among those who have treaties or under standings with Japan, & create an unfriendly attitude towards China. Hence it was considered as advisable to treat any policy agreed upon secretly."- So far the letter goes.- Personally I should consider secrecy as a blunder. If some question of important is even under discussion in Peking something is bound to leak out.- In case you should consider the question3. worth taking up, why not give the plain truth to those outside nations interested in it. I dont see what the question could contain outside of: 1. Integrity of Chinese Empire 2. Open Door. 3. Status quo. As to the men mentioned to be sent to Washington, I know them both. Liantimyen is a rare type of the true Chinese patriot, a fine fellow and strong friend & upholder of Yuan chi kai, at present he is vice president of the Peking Foreign office. The other, Tangshaoyi, is at present Governor of Mukden. What give the consents of the beformentioned letter from Peking special importance is the fact that it shows that those members after the Prince Ching passes the strongest influence (i.e. Chang chi ting and Yerang chi kai) are working in favor other beforementioned agreement. 4. We came up here to recover my lost voice and hope that we shall be back in Washington in a week. Permit me to congratulate you on your latest message to Congress. If that message will not bring the four big battleships and silence H. I do not know what will. My wife asks me to send you and Mrs Roosevelt her kindest remembrances in which I ask to be allowed to gain. Believe me, Mr President, yours most sincerely Speck [*[Sternburg]*]WAR DEPARTMENT, Office of the Secretary. April 14, 1908. MEMORANDUM For The President: Subject: Inquiry and report by the Secretary of War upon the action of various Boards since October, 1900, in recommending Subig Bay as a naval base; study given to the subject and methods employed in coming to conclusions; circumstances bringing about reversal of said conclusions; General Staff study of subject, etc., made in pursuance of instructions contained in letter from the President dated February 11, 1908. Having made the inquiry directed, the Secretary of War deems it best to take up seriatim the requirements and statements contained in the President's letter, and report upon them separately in order to insure the there covering of the subject, as is evidently desired by the President. Quoting, therefore, from the President's letter: I. "I direct that the Secretary of War make a full inquiry and report to me upon the action of the previous boards since October, 1900, in recommending Subig Bay, including particularly the action of the Joint Board in December, 1903." From the records now available it appears that a Board of five naval officers under Admiral Remey, convened by the Secretary of the Navy in 1900, after investigation of the subject, reported unanimously in favor of Subig Bay as a naval base. In September, 1901, the General Board of the Navy, after seven months of study and consideration of the report of the Remey Board and of the subject in general, recommended the establishment of a strong naval base at Subig Bay. Their report was approved by the Secretary of the Navy in November, 1901. The next recorded action seems to have been the following:- On June 15, 1903, the General Board of the Navy, in letters addrest to the Secretary of the Navy, urged the importance of permanent fortifications to guard the entrance to Subig Bay. Among other things the Board stated: "4. Since our occupation of the Philippines much time has been given to this question. The different Commanders-in-Chief have examined it in succession and have appointed boards and individual2. officers to make special reports in which the comparative advantages of different sites have been weighed. Their conclusions have all sustained the opinion of the Spanish as to the advantages possessed by Olengape and Subig Bay over any other position available. "5. Within the past year a board especially appointed to examine the tactical and statistical features of the Philippine Islands has most emphatically supported the same conclusions. This Board states that 'Luzon is the most natural shield for all the islands of the group. Any probable attack will come from the North or from the West, and to the North and to the West must our attack be directed whenever we engage in war with any great maratime power. Luzon then is the great prize to be defended; and it should be our great stronghold, where we may find secure refuge when weak, and from which, when strong, we shall issue to attack.' "6. 'Subig Bay whose entrance is only thirty miles from that of Manila Bay, must be considered as a part of the Manila region in any discussion of the defense of the Philippines, or of their advantages as a base for naval operations, because it is so valuable a position that it would surely be seized as a base by the enemy if it were not strongly occupied by ourselves in the event of war. Moreover, if it be made a strong base for an adequate fleet, Manila will be better defended than it could be were our naval station situated in its immediate vicinity. With the two, Manila and the Station close together, an attack on one would (be) an attack on both; with the station at Subig, Manila could not be attacked until Subig was reduced.' "7. The Board also states that the Island of Luzon is, because of its commanding position, population and resources, to all intents and purposes the Philippine Islands; that whoever holds Luzon, holds and controls the Philippines; that whoever holds Subig Bay, controls Manila, which is difficult to defend. Cavite, moreover, is unhealthy, indefensible and unfitted for use by large vessels. "8. Summing up: First, the Manila region is the all important strategic area in the Philippines and should have the first attention. Second, Subig Bay is the key (from a naval standpoint) of that region and should be made an impregnable naval base of the first order immediately." On July 31, 1903, the General Board again urged the importance of fortifications at Subig Bay, among other things saying: "**the General Board desires to urge the importance of permanent fortifications to guard the entrance of Subig Bay. Without them, the naval station would but invite attack, and if attacked would be untenable. The whole argument presupposes that the Bay is to be made impregnable. Without the naval station there would be no purpose in fortifying it, and without fortifications the purpose of the naval station would be defeated. "2. The General Board has learned that the War Department has plans for the defense of both Subig Bay and Manila Bay, but that at present there is no provision for executing either of them. Both are undoubtedly necessary, but the defense of Subig Bay may be regarded strategically as the more important of the two, because, in the words of a report quoted in the letter referred to, 'Whoever holds Luzon holds and controls the Philippines; whoever holds Subig Bay controls Manila and consequently the Island of Luzon.' The fortification of Subig Bay is an essential part of the naval defense of the Philippines. Any attack upon the archipelago must be made by sea, and the defense ultimately depends upon control of the sea."3. On November 23, 1903, the Secretary of the Navy, in his annual report, discust our need of a naval base in the Philippine Islands, the points that should be considered in the location of such a base, and the relative merits of the only two places which had, up to that time, been seriously considered, viz., Manila Bay and Subig Bay. Upon the latter ubject he said: "The question is, at which of these places are these essential points best combined? Naval opinion, so far as it has reached the Department, unanimously favors Subig Bay. The Commanders-in-chief of the Asiatic Station and two boards of naval officers appointed for the consideration of the question agree that our naval base should be within Subig Bay. To the weight of these opinions there is added the high authority of the Admiral of the Navy, whose views have been frequently and earnestly expressed. It would seem as if this body of opinion to be deemed conclusive. I know of no other military question upon which such unanimity exists." In pursuance of instructions received from the Secretary of the Navy, and presumably with his report of November 23d before it, the Joint Army and Navy Board met on December 9, 1903, and at this meeting the question of the defense of Subig Bay was discust. The following officers of the Army were members of the Joint Board at that meeting: Lieut-General S. B. M. Young; Brigadier-General T. H. Bliss; Brigadier-General W. F. Randolph; Brigadier-General G. L. Gillespie. At this meeting this question was referred for report to a committee consisting of General Gillespie and one naval officer. At a meeting of the Joint Board on December 15, 1903, the same Army members being present, the committee previously appointed reported to the Board, as follows: "A. That without a protected Naval Base in the Philippines the Asiatic Fleet cannot keep open the lines of communication for supplies from the United States, or between the Army Posts within the Philippines, without which supplies the military forces of the United States could not hold command of the Islands. "B. That Manila Bay is not suited for a Naval Base without the construction of an artificial harbor sufficient to provide anchorage for the fleet. This is impracticable without the expenditure of many millions of dollars. "C. That Subig Bay is suitable for a naval base and station; and of all harbors in the group it is the best suited for the purpose. "D. That the fortification of the Bay is essential to the security of a naval station located there. "E. That a fortified naval base at Subig Bay will contribute materially to the defense of Manila Bay."4. The committee also reported: "While the question for your committee to consider is the defense of Subig Bay, it begs to invite attention to the defense of Manila Bay, which it believes should be undertaken at the same time." The report of the committee was dated December 13, 1903. On December 18, 1903, the Joint Board again met, for the further discussion of this question, the same Army members being present, and under date of December 19, 1903, the Board presented its conclusions in part in the following language: "3. The Joint Board is unanimously of the opinion - 1. That without a fortified naval base in the Philippines the Asiatic Fleet cannot keep open the lines of communication for supplies from the United States, or between the Army Posts within the Philippines, without which supplies the military forces of the United States could not hold command of the Islands. 2. That Manila is not, but that Subig Bay is, suited for a naval base and station; and of all harbors in the archipelago, it is the best for the purpose. 3. That the fortification of Subig Bay is essential to the security of a naval station located there. 4. That a fortified naval base at Subig Bay will contribute materially to the defense of Manila Bay. "4. The Secretary of War in his annual report calls attention to 'The necessity of constructing defenses for our insular possessions,' and names Subig Bay and Manila Bay among other places for which 'projects for defense * * * have been made and approved, and estimates for the necessary construction have been submitted to Congress' and adds: 'There ought to be no delay in putting all of these points in such a condition that at least they will not be defenseless against any sudden foray by a single lightly armed cruiser.' "5. The purpose of the Joint Board is to point out that Subig, the American naval base in the Far East, and Manila, the capital and military headquarters of the Philippines, stand preeminent, and to urge that appropriation for the fortification of these two bays should be made by Congress without delay, in order that the development of the naval station and its defense may proceed together, and that the commercial and military resources of the city may be guarded. The consequences of neglect or delay may be nothing less than national disaster." On May 23, 1904, the Joint Board met with the following Army members present: Lieutenant-General A. R. Chaffee; Brigadier-General T. H. Bliss; Brigadier-General G. L. Gillespie; Brigadier-General J. P. Story. At this meeting the expenditure of an appropriation recently made by Congress for fortifications in the Philippine Islands, and the allotment of the entire amount in fortifying the entrance to Subig Bay, was discust, but the question5. of its suitability as a naval station or defensibility against attack from the land side did not arise. From the record it appears that no question touching Subig Bay again arose for discussion in the Joint Board for over three years. During the latter half of the year 1906 international friction began to arise between the United States and Japan, and it is a noticeable feature, and one worthy of consideration, that all the aforementioned proceedings of Boards were had at a time prior to this, when Japan was believed to be a warm friend of the United States. Furthermore, this action was taken before the Russo-Japanese War, before Japan had demonstrated in this war her possession of first-class military strength, and before there was any reason to suspect that her position and attitude toward the United States would ever be what they have become in the past three years. No one then dreamt that Japan had become a first-class world power, and until her successful siege of Port Arthur no such weapons and methods as were employed by her had ever been utilized in siege operations before. The whole military world learned much concerning Japan, and concerning improvements in the art of war, from the Russo-Japanese War. It is fair to presume that had the political attitude of Japan been, at the time action on Subig Bay previously mentioned was taken, what it has now apparently become, and had her military strength been then known as it is now, it is very doubtful whether the numerous naval boards and the Joint Board would have been so unqualified in their advocacy of Subig Bay as a naval station. At any rate, it is very significant that the first reference to any alteration in political conditions, and to any possible attack against Subig Bay from the land side which came to my attention was contained in the following quotation from a letter address to me by the Secretary of the Navy under date of March 4, 1907: "* * * Political conditions have so altered that war is not improbable with an Asiatic power whose fleet is superior to any which the United States can habitually keep in Asiatic waters, and which would, therefore, in the absence of a practically impregnable American base, have the Philippines at its mercy during the three months required to bring over our Atlantic Fleet--a time sufficient to destroy all resources for the support or supply of that fleet upon its arrival; and it may be confidently stated that officers of both Army and Navy are in complete accord in the belief that the ability to hold Subig Bay against powerful attacks both by land and sea would be the only thing that could save us from overwhelming reverses in the early states of war with such a power." 6. From the language used in referring to the defensibility of Subig Bay by the first board of Naval officers (the Remey Board) which reported in favor of its selection as a naval base, it is perfectly apparent that the Board was thinking of defense against an attack from the sea alone, and had no reference whatever to an attack from the land side. The language referred to is as follows: "It admits of such strong defense by shore batteries, mines, searchlights, and auxiliary means as to be capable of certain and effectual defense without the aid of any portion of the fleet." JJ. "* * * In November, 1903, the Secretary of the Navy in his annual report stated that the two boards and all others concerned were unanimous in their views on this Subig Bay matter and that he knew of no other military question on which such unanimity existed." The use of the word "military" in this connection by the Secretary of the Navy in his annual report tho perfectly proper, was well calculated to mislead the casual render and create the impression that the "unanimity" of opinion referred to included both Army and Navy opinion. This, however, is not the case, as will be seen by reading the entire paragraph in question found quoted above from the report of the Secretary of the Navy. He was evidently referring to a unanimity of Naval opinion only. It would be erroneous to conclude from this paragraph of the annual report of the Secretary of the Navy that sentiment in favor of Subig Bay as a naval base has been entirely unanimous, either in the Army or the Navy. In order to convey an entirely correct impression of the real character of Army opinion in this connection, it will be necessary to fully review the facts as disclosed by the record. As stated above, in discussing the action of Boards since October, 1900, the records appear to show that the question of locating a naval base in the Philippines was one upon which the navy acted alone until 1903. Prior to December 9, 1903, apparently no Army officer was ever consulted, or had opportunity to express an opinion concerning the suitability of Subig Bay as a naval base. The report of the Secretary of the Navy, in which unanimity of opinion is referred to, was rendered prior to this date. At the several meetings of the Joint Board occurring during December, 1903, in which the selection of Subig7. Bay as the location of a naval station was discust, Generals Young, Bliss, Randolph and Gillespie of the Army were present. As the opinion of the Joint Board in expressing the conclusions it had arrived at as a result of the discussions which had taken place during these several meetings is reported to have been unanimous, it is assumed that these four Army officers did acquiesce in this opinion. At the meeting of the Joint Board on May 23, 1904, the question of fortifying Subig Bay was discust, and General Gillespie states that a difference of opinion developed concerning the most advisable way in which to allot appropriations recently made, and that therefore the opinion of the Board was not unanimous on that date, but it does not appear that the question of the suitability of Subig Bay as a Naval base arose in any way whatever at this meeting. The next time any question touching the Naval base at Subig Bay came before the Joint Board was on June 18, 1907, at which time its suitability as a Naval base did not arise for discussion. It therefore appears that up to this time the question of the suitability of Subig Bay as a Naval base was discust by the Joint Board at the meetings during December, 1903, only, and that Generals Young, Bliss, Randolph and Gillespie were the only Army officers who ever acquiesced in approving the action of the Naval Boards which previously selected Subig Bay as the site for a naval station. Ever since June, 1907, Army officers before whom this question has arisen for discussion have uniformly contended that Subig Bay was not a suitable location for a Naval base, because if its indefensibility against attack from the land side. That there were also Naval officers who did not favor the location of the Naval base in Subig Bay was developed in a hearing before the sub-committee of the House Committee on Appropriations on December 12, 1906. It does not appear that the defensibility of Subig Bay against attack from the land side was ever seriously questioned until the month of March, 1907, the opposition, such as it was prior to that time, having been mainly based upon other considerations. Admiral Folger, in a report of June 1, 1904, against the establishment of a Naval station at Subig Bay, did, however, mention the necessity for its defense against attack from inland, as follows: 8. "* * * Lastly this is to be fortified against an attack from inland (since we cannot command the sea, and our enemy may land an army) as well as on the side facing the sea." I understand that General Wood, who was on duty in the Islands at this time, though not in chief command, concurred fully with Admiral Folger, and that he communicated his views directly to the President. III. "* * * I ask that a report be made with special reference to the question as to what study was given to the subject, what methods were employed in coming to the conclusion, and what circumstances occurred to bring about not merely the change in, but the absolute reversal of, what appeared at one time to be the unanimous conclusion." In so far as the first part of this question is concerned, I must, perforce, confine my report to the study given the subject of Army officers, prior to the ratification by the Joint Board of the location of the Naval base at Subig Bay, inasmuch as I know nothing concerning the study given it by Naval officers and the records disclose nothing to enlighten me. As it appears that there were absolutely no reliable or accurate topographical maps in existence at that time of the terrain surrounding Subig Bay, and inasmuch as it appears that none of the four Generals previously mentioned had ever seen, much less studied, this terrain, I am compelled to conclude that they gave practically no study to the question of the defensibility of Subig Bay from the land side. This conclusion is not only supported by the fact that this question seems never to have been raised by anyone until referred to in a letter by the Secretary of the Navy in March, 1907, but is also supported by a statement made by General Gillespie that he accepted the view that Subig Bay was suitable for a naval base and station as a technical proposition within the exclusive judgment and jurisdiction of the Navy Department; and also by the statement of General Story who served on the Joint Board in 1904, that he then held the opinion that the selection of a Naval base was a matter which concerned the Navy alone, and that the Army should simply confirm the Navy's recommendation. In fact, it must be acknowledged that up to the year 1906 the attitude of the Army and Navy officers generally toward questions as to the suitability of different locations for naval bases appears to have been in effect that the selection of naval bases was purely a naval question, and one which concerned the War Department no further than to provide and man sufficient guns, and to be prepared to establish such submarine defenses as would defend against attack from the9. sea any harbor selected by the Navy as a Naval base. That up to that time little or no attention had been given to the question of defending Naval stations against attack on the land side may also be inferred from the fact that in laying out the Naval reservation lines at Guantanamo a number of high peaks, sufficiently near to command the entire Naval station on the land side, were not included in that reservation. General Gillespie has recently stated that the ideas of defense considered at the time the Joint Board deliberated upon and accepted the report of the committee upon the location of a Naval base at Subig Bay excluded any extensive provision against landing parties for the same reason that an identical policy has always prevailed in the continental limits of the United States until a very recent period. As to the methods employed by the Joint Board in coming to its conclusions as to the suitability of Subig Bay for a Naval base, it is believed that these methods have been sufficiently disclosed by what has been already reported, but a statement of the circumstances which occurred to bring about not merely the change in, but the absolute reversal of, what appeared at one time to be the unanimous conclusion will again require a full review of numerous facts. On March 6th, 1907, I received from the Secretary of the Navy a letter dated March 4, 1907, with four inclosures. Its immediate purpose was to secure the expenditure upon the fortifications of Subig Bay of the entire amount of $500,000 then recently appropriated by Congress for fortifications in the Philippine Islands. It was in this letter that the Secretary of the Navy mentioned the defense of Subig Bay against a land attack, the first time, so far as I know, it had never been brought by anyone. I handed this letter to the present Chief of Staff to read, and, after doing so, he remarked that he believed it would be impossible to defend Subig Bay with any such force as we would ever have available in the Philippine Islands against an attack by Japanese from the land side, and I directed him to make a report on he subject. He stated that this question was involved in a larger study of combined operations between the Army and Navy in the Pacific, which was already going on in pursuance of an agreement he had entered into in January with the Chief of the Bureau of Navigation of the Navy, and that until10. this study was completed he would be unable to make an adequate and satisfactory report on the subject. Several days afterwards the President called a conference between the Secretaries of War and the Navy, and such of their assistants as they desired to have present, for the purpose of discussing the expenditure of the appropriation for fortifications in the Philippine Islands mentioned above. I was unable to be present at that conference, but had an interview with the Chief of Staff and the Chief of Artillery on the subject, and designated them to represent me. Owing to his belief that Subig Bay could not be defended against an attack by the Japanese from the land side, the Chief of Staff was opposed to installing any permanent fortifications on the mainland surrounding that Bay, but as the scheme proposed by the Chief of Artillery contemplated expending the money upon emplacements to be constructed on Grande Island alone, the Chief of Staff acquiesced in this plan, because Subig Bay seemed to be so advantageous in position that it would probably be seized as a base by an enemy in the event of war if it were not strongly occupied by ourselves, and that if held by an enemy it would seriously embarrass our position in Manila. I am informed by the Chief of Staff and the Chief of Artillery that the question of the land defense of Subig Bay was raised at the conference, which took place on March 9th, and that the Chief of Staff, having been asked his opinion as to what force would be required to defend it against attack from the land side, exprest a disinclination to giving an offhand opinion upon a defense so extensive, remarking that it was a big question, which would require careful study and accurate maps, but that he thought it would be difficult. A memorandum prepared by the Chief of Artillery on the following day makes mention of these circumstances. On the eleventh of March I had the letter of the Secretary of the Navy officially referred to the Chief of Staff for comment, in view of the recent conference with the President. On the 4th of June the Chief of Staff left Washington on a long inspection tour of Western posts, in pursuance of orders from me, and I left the city shortly afterwards. We both returned on August 14th. A few days afterwards I called a conference of all the Bureau Chiefs for the purpose of going over the annual estimates, and at this conference an estimate 11. was submitted for funds with which to construct fortifications on the mainland at Subig Bay. Thereupon the Chief of Staff announced his conviction, based upon study made since the conference in March, that it would be impossible to defend Subig Bay with any such force as we were ever liable to have available in the Philippine Islands against an attack by the Japanese from the land side. He therefore opposed the construction of batteries on the mainland, and a general discussion ensued, in which the Chief of Staff contended for the fortifications of Grande Island alone, insisting that the Japanese would inevitably capture any batteries placed upon the mainland, and either turn them against our own ships, or against fortifications on Grande Island. The Chief of Staff subsequently discust the matter with me again, and we had some correspondence about it after I left Washington en route to the Philippines, but there was so much difference of opinion in the matter, that, upon a suggestion made by the Chief of Staff, I postponed final decision until my arrival in the Philippines and personal inspection of conditions on the ground itself. I found on my arrival in the Islands that General Wood had given much attention to the question of the defense of Subig Bay ever since his occurrence with Admiral Folger, and that he was more strongly than ever of the opinion that making Subig Bay a Naval station and fortifying it would be a capital mistake. My recollection is that he had already, either by cable or letter to the Department, exprest this view. After talking with General Wood, Admiral Hemphill and other officers there present, and after going to Subig Bay for the purpose of making a personal inspection of the terrain, I became convinced that the Army view that Subig Bay was indefensible from the land side was well founded, and gave General Wood instructions to have an accurate survey and map completed as soon as possible, and a report made setting forth all the data necessary to establish this conclusion. This report was recently received from General Wood, and simply tends to support the conclusion mentioned above. During my absence and that of the Chief of Staff from Washington, everybody at the War Department became so convinced of the indefensibility of Subig Bay from the land side, and the impropriety of constructing batteries on the mainland, that General Oliver brought the matter to the attention of the President, who gave orders suspending operations until the whole question could be re-submitted to the Joint Board. Owing to the delay in securing maps and data from the Philippine Islands the General Staff studies had not been entirely completed, but the Joint Board met and authorized further study by the General Staff, the result of which was to be submitted to me upon my return from the12. Philippine Islands, and by me transmitted to the Secretary of the Navy for study by the General Board before reference to the Joint Board for final action. When the Joint Board did meet it took the action reversing its former decision in the matter, to which action the President refers. It will thus be seen that the principal circumstance which occurred to bring about the said reversal was the advent of one additional member in the administrative organization of the War Department who possest such personal knowledge of the terrain surrounding Subig Bay as enabled him, in the absence of topographical maps of this terrain, to explain and demonstrate to the satisfaction of others that Subig Bay was not defensible against attack from the land side by any force commensurate with our probable military and Naval resources in the Philippine Islands. It seems rather curious, and yet it appears to be a fact, that until the arrival of the present Chief of Staff in Washington no Army member of the Joint Board, and no Bureau Chief having any responsibility or prerogative in connection with this matter, had ever seen the terrain surrounding Subig Bay, much less studied it. IV. "Was this ever made a general staff study? If so, I desire to see the reports." The General Staff of the Army was authorized by Act of Congress approved February 14, and the order establishing it was dated August 14, 1903. Though General Young was the Chief of the General Staff, and General Bliss a member, on December 9, 1903, when the Joint Board approved the selection of Subig Bay as a Naval base, this question was never referred to or studied by the General Staff of the Army until submitted to it by the present Chief of Staff last year. It can only be inferred that owing to its very recent organization at that time its work had not become systematized, or it did not occur to the Chief of Staff as necessary or appropriate to refer the question to it. Had it been so referred at that time the weakness of the situation in regard to its defensibility on the land side might have been disclosed. This question has now been thoroly studied by the General Staff, as well as the relative merits of Subig Bay and Manila Bay as the location for a Naval station. I have directed the Chief of Staff to submit to you in person various reports upon this subject, as they are13. too voluminous to accompany this memorandum. V. "* * * I desire to know whether the successive and widely varying conclusions reached are due to original and careful study by the members of the general boards and joint boards, or whether they have resulted from the perfunctory ratification of the views of some subordinate officer in any case." It is impossible for me to determine how much original study may have been given before reaching conclusions by General Boards, but it seems apparent from the foregoing report that the action of the Joint Board in December, 1903, in so far as it relates to the suitability of Subig Bay as a Naval base practically amounts to a ratification of the action of two of its members composing a committee. This view seems reasonable from the fact that the recommendations of the committee and the conclusions of the Joint Board in this regard are exprest in practically identical terms. It is apparent from what has been stated in the foregoing that the Army members of the Joint Board gave little or no study to this question. As previously stated there seemed, at that time, a tendency in the Army to regard the location of a Naval base in the Philippine Islands as a purely Naval question, to be judged by naval men alone. VI. "* * * It is quite evident that there is some defect in method which ought to be removed." It is perfectly true that prior to the organization of the Joint Board a serious defect in method of transacting all business of common interest to both branches of the national defense did exist, and even after the Board was organized it took some time for the War and Navy Departments to get their ideas properly digested as to those classes of business which should not be finally disposed of without consideration by the Board. It is believed that this experience with questions and differences over the location of the Naval base at Subig Bay will be sufficient to prevent the existence of any misapprehension in the future as to the scope of the obligations of the Joint Board, or of any of its members. The President also states:14, VII. "* * * This year a great many Senators and Congressmen have said to me that they disbelieved in the general staff for either the army or navy because of the curious attitude of the Joint Board in this Philippine defense matter." This rather curious conclusion is, of course, based upon a misapprehension, and upon the assumption that the General Staff of the Army has in some way been responsible for the location of the naval base at Subig Bay, and afterwards, thru vacillation, changed its mind. It must be apparent to the President that the sole connection which the General Staff of the Army has had with this matter has been to discover and demonstrate that Subig Bay is not defensible against serious attack by an invading Army from the land side by any such land forces as we are ever liable to have available at the breaking out of hostilities in the Philippine Islands. I personally have never been heartily in favor of plans which contemplated the abandonment of Manila, and the present Chief of Staff has always concurred with me in this regard. I now feel, and so does the Chief of Staff, that in case of emergency, prior to the completion of defenses at the mouth of Manila Bay, it would be better to tow the floating dry dock to a place near our best defended position (island) out there, and then arrange to submerge it if necessary, rather than undertake its impossible defense at its present location in Subig Bay. The rest of the equipment and supplies of the Naval station at Olongapo, which could not be removed in time, would simply have to be abandoned or destroyed in case of a serious land attack. The following quotation from a report of the Joint Board (dated March 5, 1908) on this subject makes a clear explanation of the situation which led to the radical change in policy: "Up to the siege of the Russian naval base of Port Arthur, and the destruction of a fleet in being in that harbor by, or as the result of, the use of 28 centimeter mortars and other heavy ordnance, no guns of such size, power, or accuracy had ever been used in siege warfare, and the import of the use of such weapons had not been studied. Since the demonstration made in that siege, it has become apparent that the effects of like, or ever stronger, weapons must be the basis of calculation, not only in the selection of places to be fortified, but in the character of the fortifications constructed. Not only are questions raised as to the adequacy of single forts and works erected before this development, but questions as to the entire defense system of whole frontiers, like those of Germany and France, or of great naval bases such as Gibraltar. It should not be a matter of surprise that, in 15. the light of the siege of Port Arthur, great nations like England and France are contemplating the remodeling of their defensive works to meet a new development of war, even if this remodeling involves great expense. "That the United States should give heed to the lesson, either by modifying its defensive works, or by shifting a naval base, which, prior to those developments seemed to possess all the requirements but which is now seen to be lacking in one very important feature, - namely defensibility from a modern attack by land, - to a position which makes it more defensible, is but reasonable and proper. "The peculiarly close similarity of Subig Bay and Port Arthur as regards their suitability for naval base purposes in relation to area of water, surrounding terrain, and nearness of a powerful enemy, necessarily attracted attention and emphasized the necessity of our giving consideration to this question. Both Port Arthur and Subig Bay had been selected as naval bases; both had small water areas which could be brought under the fire of powerful guns placed upon the commanding hills which surround and dominate those waters; both were many miles from the main bases of the nations which controlled them, and both were very near to a nation powerful on the sea and land. "The importance of the cooperation of the Army and Navy in the selection of a naval base having been impressed upon both services by the operations at Port Arthur, and the attitude of Japan -- the nation which had successfully conducted operations against that naval base -- towards the United States having changed from that of marked friendship to one which indicated possible open hostility, correspondence between the War and Navy Departments, looking to the mutual study by the two services of questions relating to offensive and defensive operations in the Orient, was inaugurated in January, 1907, resulting in the War College of the Army and the Navy undertaking the study simultaneously." A conclusion was finally reached which was stated and commented upon by the Joint Board as follows: "****that the character of the terrain around Subig Bay was such that the United States could not defend, - with the land forces available, or with any land forces which it would ever probably have available in that region,- the naval utilities concentrated therein against such an attack as might reasonably be expected from that country in case of war. "It was thus that the question of the abandonment of Subig Bay as a naval base and the placing of that base in some more secure position, arose naturally from the developments of the Japanese war. Up to the time when the lessons of that war were fully appreciated and Japan had passed from the position of a sure friend to that of a possible enemy, Subig Bay seemed to possess all the requisites necessary for naval and military purposes. No European nation could be reasonably expected to transport over sea a force sufficient to threaten Subig Bay from the land side; hence, plans for defense under such a contingency were not necessary. But when Japan became a possible enemy, and the means adopted by that nation in destroying the naval base of her late enemy were known and appreciated, the aspect of the case was entirely changed and16. it became the duty of the military authorities to change their plans, just as they have repeatedly changed their plans as to armament and equipment as better types have developed. "In studying this new phase, there was a natural reluctance on the part of the Navy to give up a place which, from the naval point of view had so many advantages: but the further study progressed, the more clear it became that the Army could not guard the absolute necessities of the Navy in Philippine waters, if those utilities were placed at Subig Bay, and the study resulted in the late recommendation that the naval base be placed behind the fortifications of Manila Bay. "It is believed that the change from the unanimous conclusion of 1903 - that Subig Bay was suited for a naval base and station - to the reversal of that conclusion in 1907, was justified by the altered conditions of war, by the evident transition of a powerful nation close to that base from an attitude of strong friendliness to one of possible hostility, and because the whole question had received the best thought and thorough study of both service before the Joint Board reluctantly changed its views." In the foregoing remarks and conclusions of the Joint Board I concur. Very respectfully, Wm H Taft Secretary of War.[Enc in Carpenter 4-14-08][*[Ca 4-14-08]*] Page 1. The following is to follow the words (about page 13 of the typewritten statement)-- "but makes no statement of the amount of their belts above the water line." In connection with this subject, the correct location of the water line belt, the testimony before the Committee conclusively shows that seagoing officers in all navies are in practical agreement, and have been in agreement for several years, that the lower edge of the water line belt should be about five feet below the normal load draft line. In our own Navy, in 1896, this normal load line was specifically fixed by the Walker board and was called by that board the fighting draft, the draft of the battleship under service conditions with not less than two-thirds of her full load of coal, ammunition, supplies and stores of all kinds. Expert opinion now appears to be unanimous that the rule should, without question, call for full ammunition instead of two-thirds. The recommendations of the Walker board, though approved by the Secretary of the Navy, have been disregarded, with result that all the battleships of our fleet now under, or about to join, the command of Admiral Evans carry the lower edge of their water line belts, at fighting draft, as nearly as can be determined from the official records of their log books at the following depths below the surface of the water:- three at 5 feet and 6 inches, three at 5 feet and 10 inches,-2- two at 6 feet and 3 inches, five at 6 feet and 5 inches, and five at 7 feet. According to information recently given in the public press Admiral Evans and Naval Constructor Robinson are of the opinion that because the lower edge of the belts frequently showed in moderately rough seas during the voyage of the battleship fleet to the Pacific that the lower edge of the belts are not too low as now located. To seagoing officers there is nothing new in the information that in a moderately rough sea, that happens to fit the period of roll or pitch, of a battleship that she will frequently show to an observer on her own deck, or to an observer on the deck of a ship at a short distance, the plating beneath the water line belt. The value of such observations depends entirely upon the height and distance of the observer from the ship observed. The question at issue is not what can be seen from a height near the ship observed. The real question is would a shell fired from a battleship at another battleship, three miles distant, the fighting range of battleships, the shell during the latter part of its journey making an angle of not more than seven degrees with the water, have any chance, in a sea that causes a battleship to roll seven degrees, of racking her side at a point five feet below her draft line in smooth water? The universal expert opinion in all foreign navies and the opinion of the great mass of the sea-going officers in our own Navy appears to be that a shell so fired would necessarily strike the upper body of a wave, would-3- dip only a few inches beneath the surface of the water and ricochet before it could possibly reach the side of a heavy battleship, (a ship that is much more inclined to go through a wave than to float on top of it,) at a point five feet below her line of flotation in smooth water. From a great number of observations at our record and battle target practices and from experiments made by the Coast Artillery it appears to be well established that a shell which strikes the water at an angle of less than ten degrees invariably dips only a few inches below the surface and ricochets. We have no record of any battleship that has been sunk or seriously injured in action by a shot beneath her water line belt. The four largest and most recently designed battleships of the Russian fleet that were sunk or capsized by gun fire at the battle of Tsushima are not supposed to have received a single injury beneath their water line belts but, from the best information obtainable, were sunk by shells that penetrated their six inch armor just above the water line or lien of flotation in smooth water. The action was fought in a moderately rough sea. These Russian ships had narrow thick belts with the lower edge of 6 feet under water, in the full load condition of the ships, the upper edge of the belt a foot or so above the line of flotation in smooth water. It has been said that the location of water line belt armor on our battleships is an academic question, but it appears to be a question of concrete fact, definitely settled at the battle of Tsushima, for it cannot be denied that if our battleships now-4- under, or about to join, the command of Admiral Evans should go into action their condition, so far as water line protection is concerned, would be very similar to the Russian ships. As proved in an action fought to a finish in a moderately rough sea our battleships have too much protection below the water line and too little above. It does not appear to be a theoretical question for academic discussion, but a positive fact decisively proved in the highest court of appeal that they have tons of armor protection where it is not needed and lack tons of armor protection where it is needed. The error of location in the water line belts is due to the fact that under battle conditions their actual draft is much greater than the designed draft that determined the location of their water line armor distribution. Abroad the criticism has frequently been made of our battleships that we attempt to carry too much on a small designed displacement. Our battleships do not carry their weights on their designed displacement, but on a displacement considerably greater than the designed. If they carried their weights on the designed draft as recommended by the Walker board and approved by the Secretary of the Navy, quoted and apparently thoroughly approved by Admiral Converse and the Chief Constructor, the location of their water line belts would be defensible. In comparing the water line armor protection of the 37 British battleships completed between 1899 and 1907 and the-5- and the 18 American battleships completes in the same interval, it should be noted that the former in addition to their water line belts invariably have a protective deck from 2-1/2 to 3-1/2 inches in thickness that slopes down and connects the lower edge of the belt armor.[*[Enc. in Key 4-14-08]*][*[Enc. in Key 4-14-08]*]15. April [*[08]*] STATIONS, WOODFORD OR CHINGFORD. KNIGHTON, BUCKHURST HILL. [*B Ackd 4-29-08*] My dear Roosevelt I am now sending you a general map of East Africa from Cape to Cairo and have marked in red pencil what I consider the 4 best game areas. It is an old map & does not mark railways &c. Taking them from North to South the first is round about the Junction of the Nile Affluents - the Sobat, Bahr el Ghazal, Bahr El Jebal, and Bahr el Teraf with the White Nile. Suppose you take it this way round, Uganda is approached by marching from Gondokoro on the Nile. The province of Doroto the west of the Capital, is the last place left in the world for Elephant, and you could make sure of finding them without a great expenditure of time. Mr Hesketh Bell is the Chief Commissioner of Uganda. Then comes British East Africa very easily reached from Entebbe by steamer on the Victoria Nyanza Lake and railway. This is the greatest game area - the most varied scenery and fauna. I will not burden you further to day but am preparing some more modern and larger scale maps to follow. There would be no difficulty in getting South from B. E. A. to British Central Africa by the chain of lakes but I think you would find it tedious. I suggest in preference that you take Steamer to the Cape and go up thence to the Victoria Lake and Barotse Land another very good game area.STATIONS, WOODFORD OR CHINGFORD. KNIGHTON, BUCKHURST HILL. All this is very sketchy. Much depends on the season of the year when you start. Sudan is only tollerable in the winter Uganda also better in the winter That is to say it is not so devoted as British East Africa which has a good climate on the high ground all the year round South Africa is I believe most tollerable in the Spring (their Autumn) or the Autumn (their Spring) When I write next I will give you a list of some of the big game which you are sure to see in each of the areas specified. Always yours very faithfully E N Buxton The Hon Theodore Roosevelt.principle that your administration was fighting for. I believe that it was the strength of this message that brought the work of this element to a halt and allowed the more sensible counsel of this faction to prevail the net result of which is the practical acceptance of Mr Tafts candidacy I think your message will mark the high-water mark of American State papers. I wish I could see you. I shall be glad when you are out of [*Ack 4-15-08*] Dear Colonel [*G*] I was as pleased to get the books and your letter. When I read your message sent to congress on Jan the 31st I was positively thrilled. It was a defiance of the reactionaries who were bringing tremendous and constantly increasing pressure (in a hundred devious ways) upon the country as a whole to have the people discredit theoffice for then you can probably find time to come up and make me a good visit. I am very busy almost as much so as you. I shall open a new mine and town this summer and probably start the erection of the biggest ore concentrating mill in the U.S. I fortunately have been able to continue all of my men at work and have not been forced to cut wages for which I am very gratefull. The men stood by me last summer in our fracas with the western Fed. of [labor] miners and I want to show them I appreciate it. If convenient will you send me the text of the Employers-Liability Bill which recently passed the Senate. I am interested. This is an important thing and should be framed right. I have had much experience in this matter handling the company's liabilities, miners aid fund and the Carnegie Aid Fund. Still three feet of ice in the lakes here. Best wishes Ever faithfully Jno. Greenway 4/12/08.[*Ackd 4-16-08*] [*no enclo filed*] P. O. BOX 1222 CABLE ADDRESS, ROOSEVELT Roosevelt & Son, 33 Wall Street, New York, April 15, 1908 Dear Theodore Philip has again broken loose in verse and knowing you will be interested I enclose a copy. I think it shows considerable command of language and some ideas. Of course you can see he is fond of Kipling but for a boy of not yet sixteen it shows possibilities. I do not know what he will say to my having sent it. He has all the bashfulness of a boy [ab] and all the joy of a young author and was very much pleased with your letter about his first verses He showed me the letter with pride and it had evidentlybeen fingered by every boy in school, at the same time he was shamefaced over the notice taken of the verses and begged me not to advertise him too much. Ted was down and stayed with us on Saturday night going back Sunday midnight and I had a pleasant talk with him about his future. He does not seem to have settled yet what it will be. He is thinking over various plans but does not seem to have found anything which specially interests him and in which he is willing to put all his energy to succeed. I do so hope he may find such an occupation, it would mean so much to his future. I have been having some2. P. O. Box 1222 CABLE ADDRESS, ROOSEVELT Roosevelt & Son, 33 Wall Street, New York, correspondence with James and it seems likely he will come on here to work under Fred Whitridge who is receiver of the 3rd Ave R.R. It seems to me a good opportunity to test his capacity. New York must offer the biggest street railroad problem in the country and this seems a chance to find out if it can be run profitably and honestly. George will be down for his holidays on Saturday and he intends to begin work this Summer. I do not intend to put his nose to the grindstone till Autumn and then the problem it to find enough to keep him busy. During the past 10 years I have so reduced my outside business in order to attend to family affairs and charities that I have not much business and must now set it going again. Jack should have a good trip if had can get a companion to ride home with him from Chicago which is his present plan. And then he wishes also to go to work but I shall give him a year or so of training before I take him in here. This letter seems all about the boys but I am so interested in watching how young men start their [on] independent struggle and the way they meet and generally overcome the difficulties and I feel sure you are3 Roosevelt & Son, P. O. Box 1222 CABLE ADDRESS, ROOSEVELT 33 Wall Street, New York, ___ interested too. I understand very little off what is going on in Washington at present. Everyone seems to be having a disagreeable time and unable to do what they wish but that seems so often the case. And untill Congress adjourns no outsider can tell what they are at. The Aldrich Bill in which I took an interest has been so altered that it original friends would not know it. At best it was a makeshift till something more thorough was worked out. I am looking forward to the Summer when I shall see something of you. There are many trees we can cut and much poison vine and old roots we can grub up on our own land as well as in the body politic. Your attached cousin Emlen [*[Roosevelt]*][*Ackd 4/15/08*] [[SHORTHAND]] [*S*] Confidential To Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States Mr. President: A story is current here in New York City that the elements in Wall Street hostile to you are deliberately planning to precipitate next Summer the worst panic yet and lay the blame on your administration. Forewarned is forearmed: This my purpose in addressing you. I have another, a more vital purpose. If, on investigation, you find this report is true, can not this plot be forestalled? It is not a question of discrediting you. They can't do it. Fair minded Americans generally agree with your views and look to you as their standard bearer against these reprisals of the autocratic money power. The latter are merely wielding a boomerang. Senator La Follette hit harder and carried farther than they know. Another panic, however, would mean great additional distress among poor people already suffering grievously from "hard times". More horrifying2 still, it would rouse the anarchists to still greater activity. This bloodless civil war we are waging can have but one outcome - the country must be ruled by the people. Today, "every idle man," as the saying goes, "is a vote against Wall Street" - and every loyal American too. But what of yourself, the standard bearer? As Col Watterson remarked lately, "Rooseveltism" is not Roosevelt but the demagogues and jingoes who seek to elaborate and distort your utterances, "climbing on your shoulders" to enhance their own popularity. Why not, then, let us hear and see the real President Roosevelt? Could you not arrange a tour of the country with plenty of frank but conservative utterances that would be a campaign of liberal education in the real issues, minus the jingoes? It could do much - very much - to hasten a peaceful conclusion of this national crisis and correct the deceitful utterances of your enemies. Such a plan, of course, might seem ambiguous after all that has been said of your wishes regarding Secretary Taft as a Presidential candidate. But what is the real Presidential situation as the well-informed voter sees it? Secretary3 Taft, admirable man, is too good natured and not positive enough to meet the crisis; his boom may burst, in the nature of things, before November. Another panic would kill it. Bryan, a "chronic candidate", is impossible, Gov. Hughes is not a winner even in his own State. Gov. Johnson is alluring as an unknown man, but conservative Minnesota people do not believe he would size up to the job. You have declined to run. The weakness of the others named, is Wall Street's strength. In a crisis like this, are your wishes or ambitions for a friend everything? I, personally, (and I believe the country at large) regards you as having more of the iron resolve of Washington, who sacrificed himself and won, despite terrible odds, endless cabals and vituperation worse than you have received, rather than as a man who evades and prevaricates as President Buchanan did,, thereby precipitating the Civil War. Believe me, Mr. President, I have written thus at length purely in a spirit of patriotism and sincere loyalty to you. May I ask that this letter be strictly confidential, for urgent reasons personal to myself. I am, Mr. President Very Respectfully Yours Asa Steele 112 West 44th Street, New York City, NY, April 14th, 1908 EXHIBIT A. COPY. WAR DEPARTMENT WASHINGTON April 15,1908. CONFIDENTIAL. My dear Governor Magoon: In order to verify conclusions, and not because of distrust of them, I have concluded to send McCoy to Cienfuegos to make report to me on the condition of public opinion in that neighborhood as to the Reilly contract. I hope you will say nothing to any one on this subject, or what the occasion for McCoy's coming is. Very sincerely yours, Wm. H. Taft. Hon. Charles E. Magoon, Provisional Governor of Cuba, Havana, Cuba. [*[For 3 attachments see 4-15-05]*]wake, which McCarren held here yesterday. - And Denver - two months away! Faithfully Caspar Whitney [*W*] [*Ackd 4-16-08*] CENTURY CLUB NEW YORK April 15, '08. Dear Colonel - Do let me go down and kidnap that son-of-a-gun, at Caracas, and bring him to the Great White Father at Washington for a heart talk - all I ask is one other patriot of my own choosing, and a small boat like the Gloucester, to get away with the goods. - Seriously, that is a solution of the vexing Venezuela - problem - dont you think? - And Castro is no ones fool. - I am so spoiling for action. - I almost - went to the Bryan [*Wister*] [*Ackd 4-15-08*] [*Wister*] [*[April]?*] SEXLESS CITIZENSHIP. All sorts of people live in Philadelphia, and several sorts hurt it. The[ir] absence of these, or their death, would help it. The burglars and the murderers are an obvious class, as are also the police who fail to catch them, or who help them to hide. Obvious also is the garbage contractor to whom we pay thousands of dollars fo for removing an article from which he proceeds to make many thousands of dollars more. In other places, it is the garbage contractor who pays the city for the privilege of getting its garbage; garbage is a valuable municipal asset. We don't merely give it away, we give it away and pay a bonus with it; we are doubly imbecile. But I wish to speak not of the garbage contractor and others like him, but of the Philadelphian of property and of education who tolerates him year after year, who, by never voting to suppress him, assists our once honorable city to be the conspicuous fool that she has become in the eyes of the country. This man on election day cannot spare five minutes to walk to the polling booth in his division, and say his say, play his part, cast his vote. Though he is a tax payer, though he has reached the age of twenty-one, nevertheless in a government of the people for the people and by the people, he is as completely sterile as an ox in the herd. There was a country where bachelors were punished by law; there is a country today where the man who fails to vote, the sexless citizen, is fined by law. In the absence of such law 64 [*[over]*] 2 here, I suggest that after every election, a list of citizens who have failed to vote in every division of every ward be published, with their residences and the assessed valuation thereof. This publicity may prove a correction to their discreditable shirking of what is their first duty as citizens of the Republic.Dear Theodore: I wrote this for a paper the other day. A feeling in my bones assures me. You will quite think so too, & so I ship it to you. I see no chance of coming to you at present. My mother seems very gravely out-of-health. Yours ever Dan. [*[Owen Wister]*][*[Ca 4-15-08]*] EXHIBIT B.EMILIO DEL REAL, Cienfuegos, Cuba, April 30, 1908. Mr. Frederick R. Mackey, Havana. Dear Sir: Fulfilling our understanding, I have the pleasure to send herewith to you, a full and literal copy of Mr. Figueroa's answer to my writing of April 23rd last; asking for a declaration of the Municipal Liberal Zayista Assembly of Cienfuegos about Mr. Hugh J. Reilly's subject. If you are kind enough as to confront my writing and its answer above referred to, you will see that Mr. Figueroa's letter is a way of avoiding the requested statement, covering, at the same time, the Council action on our matter. In reality, this is not an answer but it is anyhow, enough, as to show that only the political party intrusted with the municipal authority in this city, is the one who thinks and threatens wit the disturbance of the public order and also, the one who, challenges the American's authorities power, opposing themselves to the Washington agreement by means of an untrue threat in which nobody believes. Very truly yours, (Signed) EMILIO DEL REAL. J.C.A.Mc PARTIDO CONSERVADOR NACIONAL. ---------------- PRESIDENCIA. CIENFUEGOS, 24 de Abril de 1908. Ldo. Sr. Emilio deal Real. CIUDAD. Señor:- Dada cuenta en la noche de ayer al Comité Ejecutivo de la Junta Municipal Del Partido Conservador Nacional, que presidio, de la comunicación de Vd, de igual fecha, en que pide á este organismo político ciertas declaraciones relativas al discutido contrato de las obras del Acueducto del Hanabanilla, celebrado entre el Ayuntamiento de Cienfuegos y Mr. Hugh J. Reilly; por unanimidad se acordó contestarle sin tardanza, como me complazco en hacerlo, que el Partido Conservador de Cienfuegos estima indispensable la pronta construcció del Acueducto, servicio de cloacas y pavimentació que urgentamento reclama esta ciudad; que acordadas dichas obras con el beneplacito de sus habitantes, que en memorable banquete á que concurrieron los más importantes elementos representatives de la riqueza, la industria, el comercio, las ciencias y las artes, mostraron su satisfacción y complacencia por el contrato celebrado; accidentes de caracter político cambiaron, por obra del poder público, la faz del Ayuntamiento de Cienfuegos; y desde entonces, los Concejales nombrados por el Gobierno, con excepción de los independientes2 Señores Cardona, Torriente y Mauri, que pronto renunciaron su cargo cuando vieron que el Municipio entraba en una senda política de marcada hostilidad contra los actos del anterior Ayuntamiento, esos nuevos Concejales se pusieron abiertamente frente al contrato acordano y aplaudido antes; y como predominasen en el nuevo Ayuntamiento ciertos intereses favorables al actual y casi inservible Acueducto de Jicotea ó Candelaria, se tomaron acuerdos cóntrarios al cumplimiento de aqual contrato. Modificado este en Washington por el Secretario de Guerra de los Estados Unidos y el Contratista Mr. Reilly, y cuando ya los habitantes de Cienfuegos, sedientos y anhelantes, creyeron que al fín iba á darse comienzo á las obras; ahora los empedernidos enemigos del contrato acuden á un recurso impropio de hombres serios: dicen que aquí se perturbaría la paz pública si esas obras las realizase Mr. Reilly.- Este no es más que un ardid de litigantes temerarios.- El pueblo de Cienfuegos quiere que cuanto antes se le provea de agua, sea quien quiera el que la traiga, y celebrado como está un contrato perfectamente legal, no hay razón que aconseje buscar en estos momentos un nuevo contratista, porque tal aplazamiento, además 3 de ser gravoso para el Municipio por la indemnización que habría que pagarle á Mr. Reilly, sólo tendría por objeto prolongar el actual estado de cosas, ó sea la falta de aqua en la ciudad, con perjuicio de todos sus habitantes y sólo con provecho para ciertos interesados en que la población carazca de agua, alcantarillado y pavimentación. Aquí nadie es capaz de perturbar el orden porque la ciuda se higienico y sanée y sólo hombres cegados por el interés ó la pasión serían capaces de dedir lo cont rario, infiriendo grave ofensa al pueblo de Cienfuegos, contra la mira de sorprender al Gobierno Americano. Comprendiéndolo así este Comité, no sólo acordó dirigirle á usted la presente comunicación, sino que acordó también pasar categéricos telegramas al Secretario de la Guerra de los Estados Unidos y al Gobernador Provisional de Cuba. Cumplido, pues, lo acordado por el Comité, me es grato repetirme de usted atento amigo S. S. (f) J. F. Pellón. J. C. A.Cienfuegos, Abril 30 de 1908. Comité Municipal del Partido Liberal PRESIDENCIA ______ Sr. Ledo, Emilio del Real. CIUDAD. Señor:- En contestación á su escrito de fecha 23 tengo el honor de manifestarle, que el Comité Municipal del Partido Liberal de este Término, que me honro en presidir, acordó después de haberse dado lectura al mismo, participarle á Vd. que hace suyo todos los acuerdos y manifestaciones que haya tomado al Ayuntamiento de este Término en los asuntos de Mr. Hugh J. Reilly. De Vd. respetuosamente. Dr. Leopoldo FigueroaPARTIDO LIBERAL HISTORICO CONVENCION MUNICIPAL DE CIENFUEGOS. P R E S I D E N C I A Cienfuegos 27 de Abril de 1908. Sr. Emilio del Real. Distinguido Señor: - Por haber sido ausente de este Ciudad, no he podido acusar á Vd. recibo de su communicación, fecha 23 del corriente mes, y me apresure á hacerlo, para manifestarle, que pasarán algunos días sin que se reuna la Asemblea Municipal que presidio; este no obstante, me creo autorizado á contestar á Vd., interpretando el parecer de dicha Asemblea, en la forma siguiente: 1a. Esta colectividad no tiene motivos para oponerse, ni para apoyar, que sea Mr. Hugh J. Reilly, quien lleve á efecto la construcción del Acueducto de la "Hanabanilla", y del sistema de cloacas para esta ciudad, que tiene contratados con el Ayuntamiento. 2a. Esta colectividad estima, que el pueblo de Cienfuegos lo que desea es, que tengamos agua, de que tanto carecemos, sea Mr. Reilly el que la traigo, ó cualquier otra persona. 3a. Eso de los trastornos de oden público, sólo esta en la2 mente de los que dicen que lo habrá, si es Reilly quien ejecute las obras. Aquí lo que queremos es agua. 4a. Permítame que no conteste lo que en igual número dice Vd. en su carta: yo presido un partido de órden, y nada, ni nadie, nos haría seguir otro camino, que el que corresponde á nuestra seriedad. 5a. Esa pregunta la contesto repitiendole lo anteriormente dicho: lo que este pueblo quiere, es agua, traígala quien la traiga. De Vd. atentamente. (Firmado) Demetrio López Aldazabal - J.R.M.[*[Attachment to Taft 4-15-08]*][*[Ca 4-15-08]*] EXHIBIT C.THE PRESIDENTS AND SECRETARIES OF LABOR UNIONS. Manuel Soriano and Jose Castañeda of the Gremio de Estivadores, which has membership of about 150. Miguel Palacio, President, Gremio Mutuo de Estivadores, which has a membership of 137. President Francisco Franco of the Junta of Brazeros, which is composed of about 320 members.Representative Men Whose Opinions Were Judged of Special Value. =:0:- - - :0: - - -:0:- American Consul General. The Roman Bishop of Cienfuegos. Edwin W. Atkins, Sugar Planter, Soledad. Hughes Manager, Soledad Plantation. Beale, Colonnia Soledad Plantation. Drain, Cuban Central Representative. R. K. Dunstan , Representative of Vermeule & Co. R. H. Bethel, Sub-contractor of Reilly. Brander, Chaplain, U. S. A. Lt.-Col. Hardie, 15th Cavalry in charge civil affairs. Dr. Allen, U. S. A., Sanitary Officer of City. Pedro J. Olozagosta Tacon, 185, Secret Service. Jennings Cox, Mgr.,Daigueri Mines. Dr. Tomlinson, U.S.A., former Sanitary Officer of City. Major Beach, Civil Governor, Santa Clara. Ferrer y Daniel, Rector of the Cathedral Church. Augustu Sanchez y Planos President, Junta de Musicoz Gabriel Cardona, Banker. BalthazarTorriente, Merchant.Those talked with on List furnished by Mr. R. E. Dunstan. ENGLISH AND AMERICAN. R. Edgar, Manager, Cable Office.d F. Hunicke, German Consul. Rev. De Barry, Congregational, Independencia. Mr.Hughes of Soledad. Capt. Beale on Coloniaa of Soledad. Mr. Drain of Cuban Central. Santiago Murray, National Bank Cuba. SPANIARDS. Nicholas Castano, Sr. A. Ville. C. Cardona. T. Martinez, President, Cuban National Bank. R. B. Checkley, Manager, Royal Bank Canada (Am. West Indian born) Father G. Regis (French) Head of Dominican order. The Bishop of Cienfuegos. CUBANS. Sancho Marmol, S. Crus and Huorutiner (Hot Anti) Vandapa, Judge of Instruction. Dr. Figuaroa (Hotest Anti) PERSONS SEEN FROM LIST FURNISHED BY SR. DEL REAL, LAWYER FOR MR. REILLY. Patricio Castano-- Español, propietario y comerciante: fomento Núm. 5 Alejandro Suero Balbin-- Español, propietario y comerciante: Arguelles Núm. 137 Trino Martinez y Gonzalez-- Español, comerciante Director Del Banco Nacional. Consul Americano, San Carlos Núm. 79 Federico Hunicks, Consul Alemán. Gabriel Vandama-- Juez de Instrucción Nicolas del Castano y Padilla, comerciante, propietario, naviero hacendado Santa Isabel y Santa Clara. Gabriel Cardona y Forgas-- Cubano, propietario y comerciante Independencia 91. Baltazar Torriente-- Cubano, propietario, comerciante-- Arguelles Núm. 176 Francisco Sanchez Marmol-- Cubano, Abogado, propietario-- Santa Cruz esquina á Hourrutiner. Adolfo de la Losa-- Cubano, Industrial, Avenida de la Independencia Núm. Demetrio Lopez Aldazabel-- Cubano, Abogado Jefe del Partido Liberal Miguelista. Leopoldo Figueroa-- Cubano Jefe del Partido Liberal Zayista. Miguel Andres Calzadilla-- Maestro de Obras, Santa Elena 118. Persons Interviewed In Connection With List Furnished By the American Consul General. Nicolas Castano, S. Federico Hunicke, San Isabel y Mar, G. Gabriel Cardona, San Isabel y Arguelles, C. Alejandro Suero Balbin, S. Balthasar Torriente, Sanchez, Marmol, Santa Cruz escina Horrutinier, C. Jose de la O Gracia, San Fernando 127. Joaquin Torriente, Santa Elena 73 escina De Clouet, Landa, Santa Elena near San Luis, C. Trino Martinez, Director Banco Nacional de Cuba, S. 127 San Fernando. Edgar, Manager of the Cable Office, Isabel y Santa Clara, E. Rev. Regis Gerest, "Dominican College," S. Elena, F.PERSONS INTERVIEWED, WHOSE NAMES WERE GIVEN ON LIST FURNISHED BY MR. R. H. BETHEL, SUB-CONTRACTOR, CIENFUEGOS. Alberto Sasso, Commission merchant, Santa Clara cor. Sta. Isabel. Trino Martinez, Manager of Banco Nacionanl de Cuba. Baltazar de la Torriente (at Balbin y Valle)[*[attachment to Taft 4-15-08]*][*[Ca 4-15-08]*] EXHIBIT D. Cienfuegos, a City of more than 28,000 is supplied by a concessionaire by the name of Madrazo, who pumps from an open hole some 30 x 30 feet, in which there are several springs and much surface drainage, through a 6" main to a reservoir in the City. During the rainy season he is able to furnish water throughout the morning, but during the dry season, this pumping lasts for but a hour after daybreak. At present he pumps for about an hour, and then sells water from wagons which are filled from the reservoir. There is a great scarcity of water amongst the well-to-do citizens, who largely rely upon large cisterns and tanks upon the roofs of their houses, while the poor people stand in lines every morning while the water is in the mains, and fill such cans as they may, and during the rest of the day, people can be seen begging from house to house of the well-to-do for water from the cisterns. In the leading hotel of the town at which I stopped, there was sufficient water in the rooms for washing purposes, and in two days out of the week, I was enabled to get a shower from a tank on the roof, on the payment of thirty cents per shower. The American Surgeon in charge of sanitation reports great suffering and much danger due to this lack of water, as he is unable to enforce sanitary regulations.[*[attachment to Taft 4-15-08]*]OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR REPUBLIC OF CUBA UNDER THE PROVISIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNITED STATES Havana, Cuba, April 16, 1908. My dear Mr. President: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 4th instant wherein you quote the remarks of Baron Sternburg as to what he thinks should be done upon the termination of the present intervention of the United States in the administration of the Government of the Republic of Cuba. I note also your remark, as follows: "The time is rapidly coming when we must formulate just the kind of government which we wish to leave in Cuba on February 1st, next, when we abandon the Island, and also the terms and conditions, if any, which we shall make before leaving. "I think no time should be lost in getting up a tentative scheme for discussion. I am myself very doubtful about leaving a temporary military force. I do not know whether it would be feasible or advisable to have a military force left permanently somewhere in the neighborhood of Havana. At any rate will you now as speedily as may be submit to me your views, obtained after consultation with any people, Cubans or others, whom you desire to consult? Throw these views as nearly as possible into a rough scheme so that I shall be able to go over it with Root and Taft." In answer to this call I have the honor to submit the following: 1. The United States is dealing with the Republic of Cuba and its government as a going concern, temporarily administered by the Provisional Governor and his assistants, pursuant to the provisions of the Appendix to the Cuban constitution and an existing treaty between the United States and Cuba.-2- The termination of the Provisional Administration will be accomplished by installing in office Cuban officials duly elected thereto, whereupon the administration will be continued pursuant to the provisions of the Cuban constitution intended to regulate such administration under normal conditions. 2. There are, undoubtedly, defects in the Cuban constitution, but the several periods of time allotted to the Provisional Administration have not permitted that Administration to attempt the reform of the old or adoption of a new constitution. The Peace Commission sent to Cuba by Your Excellency in September 1906, and which was forced to establish the Provisional Administration, contemplated the termination of such Administration on or about January 1, 1907; this term was extended, by agreement of all political parties, until the close fo the "safra" season of 1906-7 (not later than June 30, 1907); in April 1907, it was determined to have an enforced registration of Cuban electors and for this purpose a census was necessary; six months was thought sufficient in which to take this census and the elections were postponed until a date to be fixed after such census was completed; nearly a year has elapsed and the census is just completed. On January 14, 1908, Your Excellency ordered the elections to be held at such time, or times, as would terminate the present Provisional Administration not later than February 1, 1909. -3- Had it been known from the beginning that the Provisional Administration would continue for a period of two years, it would have been possible to have secured a proper registration, to have held elections for delegates to a Constitutional Convention, and to have completed the work of such Convention; but it is now both impossible and inexpedient. Therefore the form of government will be that heretofore established and maintained by the constitution of the Republic of Cuba. 3. The Cuban Government was unstable because it lacked even the ordinary means and agencies by which stability is secured. The Constitution was a "dead letter" because laws were not enacted making its provisions operative. The Cuban Congress enacted little, if any legislation affecting the general law of the land, and, therefore, the difficult task arose of administering a Republic by Spanish laws, Royal Decrees and orders of Captains General intended for a Monarchial rule enforce by a military administration. Manifestly, a body of laws adapted to the government of a Republic and in harmony with modern thought is required to give stability to the government of the Republic of Cuba, or any other Republic. These laws may be classified as political, organic, and remedial. The Provisional Government entered upon this work at once and has prosecuted it with vigor. The events which caused the Provisional Administration-4- naturally caused that Administration to give first consideration to the political laws. Laws have been formulated and enacted regulating municipal, provincial and national elections. Laws providing for the organization and administration of municipalities and provinces have been drafted, published and made public, and criticisms and suggestions respecting them invited. The laws will soon be in final shape and put in force. A law regulating the exercise of the powers of the Executive Branch of Government is about completed; this law will define the jurisdiction, prescribe procedures and regulate the exercise of the authority of the several Executive Departments - - making operative the provisions of the Constitution respecting the several subjects, and manifestly will be of great assistance in securing the stability to the Government. A Civil Service law following the general lines of that in force in the United States has been formulated, by the Advisory Law Commission. The Commission divided on the question of putting this law in force and the law was formulated against the protest of a part of the Commission. There is considerable objection to the law, and I am considering whether it shall be enforced in toto, or gradually. -5- A law securing for the Judiciary independence from control by the Executive branch of government has been substantially completed by the Advisory Law Commission, but its final action has not been reached. A Commission composed of Judges, Fiscals, and members of the Faculty of the University Law School are now drafting a new Penal Code and a Code of Criminal Procedure. Their work will be completed in time to be promulgated by the Provisional Administration. The reforms effected by these two Codes will remove numerous causes of much trouble; they also make operative several provisions of the Constitution heretofore in abeyance. While not all the political and organic laws required have been enacted, the ground has been substantially covered, or will be before the Provisional Administration ends. The work which the Provisional Administration sought to accomplish and which it has substantially accomplished is, the organization of the several governmental agencies (national, provincial and municipal); the enactment of laws regulating the relations which these governments sustain to each other and to the people subject to their jurisdictions; and to make certain organizations and regulations conform to the requirements of the Constitution. Surprising as it may seem, these potential means of stability did not heretofore exist in Cuba. -6- 4. The Government being organized, the exercise of its powers and functions regulated, it is necessary for that Government to have a force with which to preserve the peace and enforce lawful purposes. The Constitution of Cuba contemplates municipal police, rural guards, and a permanent army. The municipal police forces of the larger cities are sufficient in size and fairly efficient; in the smaller towns the force is inconsiderate in size and more or less inefficient. The law establishing and maintaining the Rural Guard is an excellent one; the force is sufficient in size and has reached a high degree of discipline and efficiency; it now numbers 5180 and is distributed at about 380 stations throughout the Island; it is a civil body similar to what is known, in the United States, as the constabulary; it has a military organization but was not considered a military arm until that character was conferred upon it by the necessities of the revolution of 1906; the law of its organization is an adptation of the Mexican law; it does not have jurisdiction within the inhabited portions of the towns, or "municipal zones", except upon call of the Municipal authorities; it is a rural police, patrols the rural districts, serves Court process, apprehends violaters of the law, etc. A military force pure and simple is a reasonable and necessary agency for the stability of the Government. -7- The necessity of such a force in Cuba was demonstrated by the insurrection of 1906 and is well stated by President Palma in a letter dated October 10, 1906, as follows: "I suddenly found myself in the midst of a termendous social disorganization, with thousands of insurgents in three provinces and the menace of rebellion in two others, without sufficient regular forces to undertake immediately an active campaign against the former and to beat and disorganize them; at the same time I constantly feared that they would carry to the great sugar plantations of Santa Clara the measures of destruction already realized on railroad stations, locomotives, bridges, culverts, etc.; I saw the customs revenues fall off by one-half and the other income of the State to 25-30 per cent, and that the millions of the Treasury were being spent in streams with uncertain result and to very doubtful advantage, a large part being used for keeping up hastily improvised militia, which, for that very reason, could not inspire sufficient confidence as to their reliability for undertaking the labor, the privations and the dangers of a constant persecution of adversaries who were also Cubans and in a great number of cases, friends and comrades." The Provisional Government has enacted a law providing for the organization of a Permanent Army, consisting of the already existing Cuban Artillery, Rapid Fire Gun Squads and Mountain Gun Battery, and authorizing the enlistment of a brigade of Infantry or so much thereof as may be deemed advisable. It was deemed advisable to make the Permanent Army a separate command thereby reducing the danger of militarism or the possible danger of the commander of a large armed force using it in opposition to the Chief Executive. 5. The field of legislation has not been entirely covered. There remains the great work of making laws in harmony with the Constitution and republican institutions-8- whereby shall be regulated the relations which the inhabitants sustain to each other - in short, the reform of the several codes descended from the Civil Law, which have been in force in Cuba for centuries. The reform of these codes, especially the Code of Civil Procedure, would be advantageous to Cuba and doubtless increase the stability of its government. If time permitted it would be advisable for the Provisional Administration to undertake the work. It is, however, an undertaking which the Cubans are fully capable of performing. the lawyers of the Island are familiar with the Civil Law and know the defects of the existing law. In matters of business and commerce, the Cubans and Spaniards of the Island are fully capable of good judgment and I feel may safely be left to formulate and secure this legislation. It would have been well if, immediately after the adoption of the constitution, a Commission had been formed, composed of lawyers versed in the Civil Law, to draft new Codes, and such draft submitted to the Cuban Congress for legislative action. I contemplate organizing such a Commission if it appears expedient and propitious. There is, however, some danger that, by reason of too many new laws being enacted and reforms attempted, all of them will be relegated to desuetude. -9- Attention is called to the fact that in the Philippines and Porto Rico, although these Islands have had an American administration for nearly ten years, the work of doing away with the old Spanish laws and Codes and substituting therefore modern laws and codes adapted to republican form of government has not been accomplished. A number of remedial measures of the kind above indicated have been enacted. These resulted from a call made by the Provisional Governor on the several Departments to report desirable remedial measures. I will not detail all of them, but among them is the establishment of the national quarantine service, also the procedure for securing the segregation and disposition of estates in common. I have gone into detail somewhat in order to show that the Government of Cuba has now been supplied with many guarantees of stability which before were lacking. These guarantees are agencies ordinarily possessed by every government and their absence in Cuba not only explains the catastrophe of 1906, but occasions wonder that the catastrophe was so long deferred. The new government will start off much better equipped than was the old one. 6. The industrial development of Cuba is such that the Government will always be called upon to face a hazard resulting from the fact that from the middle of November to the middle of May work is abundant and a shortage of-10- labor exists. This induces employers to import foreign labor. From the middle of May to November is the "dead season", and also the "rainy season" in which little or no agricultural labor or any other outdoor labor is performed. This gives a large idle class for six months in the year. This simulation occasions suffering among the laboring classes resulting in bands of marauders, disturbances of the peace, violations of the law, etc. 7. Another difficulty with which the Government must contend is that, in Cuba, as also in Central America and portions of South America, the people are ignorant of the collective benefits of government. This ignorance results from the fact that they have never witnessed or experienced such benefits. Their idea of a government is an organization that gives offices, valuable concessions, special exemptions, etc. There are not enough of these to go around and thereupon results the irrepressible conflict between the "outs" and the "ins". 8. The Provisional Government has undertaken to correct the evils mentioned in paragraphs 6 and 7 by inaugurating an extensive system of long needed public improvements, including roads, harbor improvements, governmental structures, municipal betterments, etc. This has proven successful in securing employment for a large number of men during the "dead season", and also in teaching the people of Cuba some of the collective benefits of-11- government, and that there are many things more advantageous to them, individually and collectively, than offices, concessions, etc. To enable the future government to continue this much needed work, and the field is large, the Provisional Administration has greatly increased the personnel and mechanical plant of the National Department of Public Works, not only in Havana but in all of the provinces. Much work has been done and I believe the impulse given will keep the work going for years, and a demand created which will secure the necessary appropriations. This also is an added guaranty to the stability of the forthcoming government. 9. The Provisional Administration, largely through the work of the American advisers has increased the efficiency of the several Executive departments. This has been accomplished by instructing the Cuban personnel, and I believe the improvement is permanent. I repeat that the new Cuban Administration will start off well equipped with the ordinary means and agencies of stability. There remains to be considered the question - Shall it be provided with extraordinary means and if so, what means? The extraordinary remedies suggested are: 1. A force of United States troops stationed at Camp Columbia.-12- For what purpose? Certainly for nothing more than moral effect and to act as a guard for Havana or outside property of Americans or other foreigners, thus enabling the Government forces to take the field. It would not do to send them against insurgent forces until after the Government had demonstrated inability to put down the insurrection. If the moral effect of their presence in Cuba were to disturb the "moral peace", would they not be an incumbrance instead of a help? It must not be assumed that the presence of the United States troops will awe the Cubans. Every man, woman and child of them believes they waged a successful warfare against and wrested independence from 285,000 Spanish soldiers. It is the moral force of the United States and not its military force they consider and the possibilities of a blockade that "gives them pause". If there were troops at Camp Columbia they could not be used except upon order of the President of the United States. Under these circumstances, why not have them stationed at St. Augustine, Key West, and other nearby places? We are authorized now to land troops at Guantanamo and Bahia Honda and a good road will soon be completed from Bahia Honda to Havana. From a military point of view no serious obstacle could be presented to our landing troops at several points near Havana; at least without months of-13- preparation of shore batteries, etc. But I am confident that if there were actual need of United States troops in Cuba to quell an insurrection, both sides would appeal for them as they did in 1906, for the minute an insurrection breaks out there will go up, all over the Island, a demand for "Peace at any price". Especially would this be true if the Cubans were assured that another intervention would not terminate their independence. If they believed an attempt was being made to destroy their independence, a large army would be required to guard the property of Americans and other foreigners, especially the sugar estates and tobacco warehouses and factories scattered from one end of the Island to the other; while another large army would be needed to pursue and destroy the guerilla bands. There is, among the Cubans, much discussion of, and objection to, the proposal to continue the presence of the troops. Were announcement made that such plan has been adopted, it would become the "burning issue" of the campaign and make lots of trouble. This matter should not be decided until it is known whom the President is to be. If there should be dangerous opposition to his assuming or occupying the office, he will ask for the troops and the proposition will assume a different aspect. As the matter now stands, Secretary Root is accurate in saying "the position of the troops will become untenable in three months". -14- Permanent military occupation is not contemplated, and whether temporary occupation is required at a given time or occasion, need not be determined until the time and occasion arrive, or are near at hand. The second extraordinary remedy suggested is: 2. To leave the Rural Guard under an Adviser of the quality of Dougherty. I believe this is feasible and practicable, largely because it will be acceptable to the superior officers of the Guard. The same thing is true of the Permanent Army and will be adopted if the officers are available. I note the statement in Baron Sternburg's memorandum, "Without your adviser they (the Rural Guard) will soon fall into the hands of the cursed politicians and your present system of promotion, solely by merit, will cease quickly, bringing back the old evils." The recurrence of the "old evils" is sought to be prevented by the new law of the Armed Forces. If, however, the President and Cabinet decide to violate the law, ignore the lessons of the past and put the Guard into politics, I fear the Adviser will be unable to prevent it. The third extraordinary remedy suggested is: 3. Place the department of justice under an equally strong adviser; and, Place the treasury under an adviser to prevent the respreading of corruption.-15- The feasibility of this plan depends upon the temperament of the gentlemen selected as Cabinet officers by the new President. If the plan is acceptable and the Adviser agreeable to the Cabinet officer, the suggestion could be rendered effective. Ordinarily any man sufficiently prominent to be made a Cabinet officer would resent the presence of an Adviser and if he accepted an office so encumbered, would ignore the Adviser and act on his own judgment. The relation might be made agreeable by an Adviser of tact and discretion but even then the Adviser must be a man of sufficient prestige to compel concurrence in his views. An Adviser to the Treasury Department is unnecessary and several times I have, thought of dispensing with the present one. The administration of the Treasury under President Palma was excellent and no frauds of any magnitude have been unearthed by the Provisional Administration. There were extensive frauds in connection with disbursement of funds for payment of soldiers' claims. These frausd were similar to those perpretrated in the early years of the United States Pension Office. I do not think the Cuban officials participated in the frauds or were benefitted by them, but there was a laxity in investigating and accepting proof. This came from the feeling that the distribution was intended to benefit all Cubans for all had participated in the struggle for independence.-16- These fraudsd were discovered, investigated and punished by the Palma Administration. The Customs service appears to have been especially well performed. The principal evil was the severity with which the laws were enforced and penalties arbitrarily inflicted. It became almost a mania with the Customs House to collect each month more than was collected in the corresponding month of the previous year and if the increase was not secured, normally, recourse was had to changes in classification or some such means; but all importers were treated alike. In the Internal Revenue Department there was a similar severity and more or less fraudulent collusion between inspectors and manufacturers, but the Cuban officials prosecuted them vigorously and with such severity that many appeals were made from action taken under the Palma Administration to the Provisional Governor. These were sent to the Department of Justice and investigated by the American lawyers serving in that Department. Practically all of them were reversed and the fines remitted. Appropriate decrees have been issued regulating the exercise of the arbitrary power possessed by the Treasury officials. I might mention that Major J. D. Terrill Adviser of that Department, reported in favor of sustaining the action of the Treasury officials in all of the appealed cases.-17- An Adviser to the Department of Justice will be much needed because much ligislation must be enacted by the Cuban Congress and the Adviser to that Department could render great assistance; he could also be very useful in explaining and securing enforcement of the laws decreed by the Provisional Administration. I note the fears expressed by Sir William Van Horne, quoted in your letter, as follows: "Instead of two political parties Cuba now has half a dozen or more factions and the jealousies and hatreds which have grown up in the last two years make a successful Cuban government impossible for a considerable time to come unless controlled and upheld by the U. S. through a protectorate or something of the kind. One danger I see is that a third intervention may be resisted and that would mean a guerilla warfare and the loss of many lives - not, perhaps, by bullets, but by fevers - a repetition to some extent of the experience of Spain." The real basis for these fears is the racial characteristics of the inhabitants of the Island. Like all other people of Spanish origin they are hot blooded, high strung, nervous, excitable and pessimistic. They are suspicious of every one. These racial characteristics have been intensified by the tragedy of life in Cuba for generations. Their suspicion of other members of society is perfectly natural, for, during Spanish times, the Spanish contingent were their foes and frequently Cubans purchased protection or immunity for themselves and families by furnishing information to the Spanish authorities. The effects of the thirty years struggle have not disappeared and cannot entirely disappear during this generation. -18- We cannot change these racial characteristics by administering their Government for two years or twenty years, not would they be changed by a military occupation. The changes, if made, will be effected by forces and influences of altogether different kind and character. All we can do is to await the progress of events, doing what is practicable to keep that progress orderly. You quote Sir William Van Horne as further saying: "To set up a Cuban Government and leave U. S. troops to support it for a time, as has been suggested would be absurd for a government so started would not stand a week after the withdrawal of the military support." If Sir William refers to a government the personnel of which is appointed by the American Government, I agree with him; but if he refers to a Government established pursuant to the plans announced by Your Excellency in 1906, and followed by the Provisional Government, I think he is mistaken. The United States is fully committed to the reestablishment of the independent government of Cuba. In the latter part of 1907, there was a vigorous campaign inaugurated by the Cuban press and much discussion by the general public favorable to an extension of the Provisional Administration in order to provide additional legislation, acquire a better understanding of the new laws, perfect the adjustment of the reorganizations of the several governments (national, provincial and municipal), and make further-19- progress in public improvements and material developments. This discussion was ended by the letter of Secretary Taft to the President, dated January 13, 1908, wherein the Secretary said: "It was hoped by some that the census might be completed in September last. I did not think so, and I am not at all surprised to learn that the census has not yet been completed and probably will not be until April or May. This will postpone the local elections until June, the Presidential election until December, and the installation of the President and Congress and the turning over of the island until about March or April of 1909. This is in compliance with our promise when we assumed temporary control of Cuba, and it seems to me that we ought to allow nothing to interfere with carrying out that promise. There are important interests that would be glad to delay our stay there for years, but good faith and good policy both, in my judgment, require us to leave at the time appointed." This was supplemented by the direction of Your Excellency, as follows: "I direct that the installation of the President and Congress of Cuba to be elected next December and the turning over of the Island to them take place not later than February 1st, 1909. If it can be turned over earlier I shall be glad but under no circumstances and for no reason will the date be later than February 1st, 1909." Pursuant to this declaration the political parties have organized and entered upon an electoral campaign. The initial steps required of the Government by the Electoral Law have been taken. I cannot conceive that consideration will be given a proposal to abandon this plan or to renounce the national policy declared by the joint resolution of the American Congress in April 1898: "That the people of the Island of Cuba are and of right ought to be free and independent."-20- The close of the Provisional Administration and the restoration of the Cuban Administration on or before February 1, 1909, is inevitable unless there should be decided change in existing conditions, and further discussion of the proposal is calculated to produce efforts to induce that change. Candor compels me to state that, in my judgment, the retention of United States troops in Cuba and an insistance that American Advisers be accepted by the several Executive Departments and the Commanding Officers of the Armed Forces, will not solve the problem nor materially affect the outcome. If desired and requested by the new President and his Cabinet, they would "help some", but if obnoxious to the new administration they will be irritants. I am quite certain Baron Sternburg, being a trained observer of ability and experience, would agree with this statement if time and opportunity were afforded him to study the points wherein the situation in Cuba differs from ordinary situations presenting the same general aspect. For the past eighteen months there have been few hours of the day (or night) when I did not try to think of some additional guaranty for the stability of the work in which we are now engaged. There are two things which, if accomplished, would make the Government of Cuba stable,-21- 1. Cessation of the constant, senseless and trouble- breeding criticism with which the Government is surrounded as by a circle of perpetual fire. This hypercriticism is engaged in by both press and public. Every act of the Government is subjected to it; both general laws and special measures are included; Governmental action which results in benefits to an individual such as the payment of debt, the purchase of property, the letting of contracts, or appointment to office, are immediately branded as tainted with fraud, graft, treason and even worse and more debased and disgraceful motives. The constant reiteration of these charges, publicly and privately, eventually destroys public confidence in the Government and its personnel, then comes some period of more than ordinary excitement, a step is taken, outcry is made and peril or catastrophe results. One of the worst phases is that this criticism is indulged in by people who refuse to do anything else to secure good government. The practice is old and was as rampant in Cuba under Spanish rule as it was under Palma. The Provisional Administration has not been entirely exempt from criticism, just and unjust, although on the whole I have not much of which to complain. A good deal of criticism was avoided by reason of general satisfaction with the policies pursued; and not a little by reason of the general knowledge that the Provisional Governor was receiving the support and approval of the Washington Administration.-22- I can easily see that a Cuban administration would be hampered and weakened by those fierce attacks, yet I cannot see how to prevent them. 2. The second great accomplishment would be to induce the property owning and commercial classes to engage in active politics, assume and discharge the obligations of Cuban citizenship. It is true that many individuals of these classes are aliens, but they have lived in Cuba all or the greater portion of their lives and have no intention of leaving; all their interests are here, identified with and involved in the affairs of the Island. The naturalization laws are liberal and many of these individuals became Cuban citizens by omitting to register their previous citizenship. Why self-interest does not prompt them to the slight exertion and political activity necessary to secure the benefits they all clamor for, is difficult to understand. Yet the existing condition is well described by Secretary Taft in his address before the Havana University, as follows; "Your difficulty was this, that you were brought up under the fifteenth and sixteenth century ideas of government, the government of one man, or a few men, and that you were taught to look to somebody else for the responsibility of government. You exercised only the function of criticism (an in old days that criticism had to be restrained in the face of the government), and the most of your people, especially those of the educated and wealthy classes, trained themselves to occupy a position not of indifference, but of inactivity with reference to political and governmental matters. Now, it seems to me I find here a relic, altho the reasons for it have disappeared, of that condition, and I find that the law is committed to one class, that the medicin is left to another class, that the commercial interests are left to a third class, and that the political matters are left -23- to a fourth class, and that the three classes other than the political class lean back thru the influence of past association and watch with intense interest, but I fear with not a great deal of influence, what is done by their government. I venture to suggest that if the other classes do not take an active part and insist on exerting their influence in politics, the question naturally arises what was the necessity for changing your form of government at all. The theory of popular government is that all classes shall exercise decided political influence." Perhaps more surprising than the failure of the business classes to exercise their political influence, is a similar failure on the part of the public service corporations, the trade organizations of which there are many, and industrial associations such as the Liga Agraria. No one doubts that a small amount of effort from a combination of the public service corporations, industrial associations already existing, and business organizations which have been in existence for years, could absolutely control the political situation. The political leaders would be obliged to appeal to them and glad to secure their assistance; they could control the management and dictate the nominations of all political parties. These people are vitally interested in good government, peace and quiet, and industrial and commercial development. The value of their interests agregate hundreds of millions of dollars and yet they do nothing to protect them from their greatest peril. So little attention do they pay to the condition of public affairs, that Sir Wm. Van Horne told me he and -24- his people were taken by surprise when the insurrection of 1906 broke out as they had not the slightest suspicion such a thing was brewing. Mr. Orr of the United Railways of Havana told me he had heard about a conspiracy to get up a revolution but didn't think it would amount to anything. If you talk with a Cuban or Spanish "non-politico" about engaging in politics, you get little more than a shrug of the shoulders. If they talk they say that if they go into politics those whom they oppose will take revenge on them, burn their property or injure their person or family; to this they will add, "Why should we? The United States is bound by the Platt Amendment to look after this government". I believe there is little or nothing in the "shooting and burning" excuse. That might occur if only one or two of the "non-politicos" went in and became active. Nothing of the kind happens to the property owners who are in politics; and certainly nothing injurious would happen if they all went in. On the contrary I believe the "politicos" would be glad to have them come in. The real reason for their inactivity is their unwillingness to make the exertion, their willingness to allow others to assume the responsibility and trouble, and the belief that the United States should and will attend to the matter. I can understand this mental attitude in the Cubans and Spaniards, but not in the others. The stability of all governments comes from the business element and property owners and if those of Cuba-25- would overcome their present inertia and go into politics, not to hold office, but to establish good government, the question of further guarantees would be solved. How to get them to do it, is a question I have vainly attempted to answer for the past year. In default of this complete guaranty, it becomes necessary to consider other guarantees, and how to secure them. What should the United States do through the medium of the Provisional Administration? 1. Promulgate as many laws as possible and expedient calculated to secure the guarantees of stability ordinarily possessed by Republics. 2. Complete as many as possible of the long needed public improvements necessary for the common wants of the people and the development of the Island. 3. Provide as many as possible of the aids to production, commerce, and navigation calculated to reduce the cost of production, marketing, importation and distribution. 4. Provide by the adoption of plans and appropriation of funds for the continuance of extensive public improvements for a period of time ample to enable the Congress to act on the matter. 5. Reform and readjust the working of the Executive Departments so as to avoid friction within or without. What should the United States do through the medium of the new Cuban Administration? 1. Arrange, if possible, for the retention of an American officer as Adviser to the Commander of the Rural Guard; also American officers to assist in organizing, drilling, etc., the Permanent Army; also, an American Adviser for the Department of Justice, who is especially qualified to draft projects for revision of laws to be submitted to the Cuban Congress and render assistance in securing their enactment. -26- 2. Reach a decision of the question as to whether U. S. troops are to remain in Cuba and, if they remain, where they are to be stationed. 3. Arrange for efficient sanitary service in Cuba and withholding quarantine restrictions in United States. 4. Promote and create more and closer trade relations and trade benefits by revision of the tariff schedules of Cuba. 5. Give special attention to the trade and needs of Cuba in drafting the new tariff law for the United States, a revision of which law will undoubtedly soon be made. 6. Establish a high joint commission, or adopt measures calculated to secure such a commission if needed, to hear and determine contested elections or other controversies involving the relations of an administration and any large portion of the population; such commission to be composed of certain designated Cuban officials such as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Rector of the University of Havana, and others, also members appointed by the President of Cuba and American members appointed by the President of the United States. It would be necessary also to prescribe how, when and by whom call could be made for the assembling of such commission. Such a Tribunal would be far less objectionable and expensive than to use the army and navy of the United States; much more in harmony with orderly procedure of government, and would probably be taken advantage of by disappointed political partisans who might otherwise foment or bring on insurrection. N.B. If the retention of troops is decided upon, it is best (but not indispensable) that they be stationed at Camp Columbia. The best officer to put in command is Colonel E. H. Crowder, U. S. A., and to secure the best results he should be made a Brigadier General of the line. Crowder's work in the Philippines and in Cuba thoroughly qualifies him for the work of aiding and advising the new administration, and his service with the Provisional Government-27- has secured for him a favor and standing with the Cuban people that will enable the new President or any Cabinet officer to consult him without offending Cuban sentiment. If troops are not left, I hope Colonel Crowder's services, as an Adviser, will be available and acceptable to the Department of Justice. He can accomplish much good in that capacity. What the United States should do on its own motion, - 1. Send to Cuba, as American Minister, the very best man that they can procure. This man must be familiar with Latin-Americans. He must be free from any connection with Cuban institutions, factions or public affairs. He must be a man of ability and tact, calculated to gain and retain the confidence and good will of the Administration and the Cuban public. He must be familiar with the workings and necessities of governmental administration; must have a knowledge of law as well as a knowledge of the commerce of our own country and the requirements of Latin-American countries. In short, he should be a man who would make a good adviser for the President and his Cabinet, with sufficient tact to induce them to desire him to act in that capacity and seek him for that purpose. He must possess a knowledge of commerce and trade, and the relations between the Consul General and Consuls at Santiago and Cienfuegos with the American Minister should be clearly-28- defined and modified so as to do away with friction between him and these officers. 2. The Consul General residing in Havana should be a first-class business man with a thorough knowledge of the requirements of commerce and also well acquainted with the Latin people. He should report all matters not relating exclusively to Commerce to the Minister. The Consul General should be permitted to deal with the Customs House officials and with matters pertaining to commerce in the municipality, but under no circumstances should he be permitted to deal with any of the Secretaries or Heads of the various Departments. These matters must be left in the charge of the American Minister. The foregoing also applies to Consuls at Santiago and Cienfuegos. 3. The commercial relations between the United States and Cuba must be more closely cemented than they are at present. Our commerce with Cuba which today is in round numbers about $40,000,000 out of a total importation of about $90,000,000 certainly gives us a wide margin for additional trade. 4. The Administration at Washington and the American officials and officers should maintain friendly relations and exhibit a friendly interest in the administration and personnel of the new Government, thereby affording opportunity to respond to requests for information and advice and avail themselves of occasion for giving admonition. -29- NOTE: Several Cubans have told me the officials of the Cuban Government who assumed office when the Military Government withdrew, were troubled about many things, especially administrative details, of which they had no previous knowledge and gladly would have consulted with their American predecessors but were unable to do so. General Wood, who won and retained the respect and good will of the Cuban people, was in the Philippines; as were General Bliss, Colonel Scott, Captain McCoy, and others. Lieut. General Chafee was sent to China, and the other officers who were connected with the Military Government were at other far-distant stations. Secretary Root retired from the Cabinet within a comparatively short time after the independent government was established, and Washington manifested no special interest in the detail workings of the government or desire to assist therein. I feel sure the Cuban administration would have duly appreciated a friendly hand at that time and think it is conclusively shown by the numerous calls that administration made upon Consul-General Steinhart and the way they received and acted upon his recommendations and advice. I believe much can be accomplished in the future by bearing in mind this suggestion and acting along this general line. -30- 5. After the new Cuban officials elected under the Provisional Administration have been installed in office and the present Administration terminated, the United States should make known, in no uncertain way, that the new administration will receive the moral and material support of the Washington Government; that, if abuses exist or arise, the Cubans must correct them at the polls in manner and form provided by law; and destruction of life or property will call for indemnity from the Cuban Treasury instead of the taking over of the administration of the Government by the United States. The Cubans are so constituted that while they are devoted to an independent Cuban Government, they prefer that government should be administered by Americans rather than by their political opponents. Most of the "non-politicos" prefer the Americans to either of the Cuban parties - not because they accept American ideas and principles of government, but because they think an American administration affords better protection to them and their interests and also because many of them dislike the Cubans so they view the struggle between the Cuban political parties and factions with indifference and do nothing to check either of them. Such a situation is perilous and should be brought to an end. The authority granted by the Platt Amendment should not be perverted into a menace to the object it was intended to conserve. Your obedient servant, Charles E. Magoon. The President The White House, Washington, D. C. [*[Enc in Magoon 4-17-08]*]Memorandum. Of articles of agreement between the Secretary of War and Herbert J. Browne and William G. Baldwin whereby the said Browne and Baldwin are to investigate the Brownsville case with a view to finding out the names of the perpetrators; and agreeing to pay to said Browne and Baldwin $5000 in consideration thereof. Dated April 16, 1908. Returned to the Secretary of War, April 16, 1908, bearing the following endorsement: "The White House, Washington, D.C. April 16, 1908. Approved. The payments herein provided for shall be paid from and shall constitute a charge against the appropriation made by the Deficiency Act of March 3, 1899 (30 Stat. L., 1223), to "meet unforeseen contingencies constantly arising." (signed) Theodore Roosevelt.[*Ackd & enc retd 4/16/08*] [*Cf*] [*W*] [*see War Dept. 12/17/08*] WAR DEPARTMENT WASHINGTON April 16, 1908. CONFIDENTIAL My dear Mr. President: The Brownsville investigation before the Senate while it establishes beyond any reasonable doubt the correctness of the conclusion reached by you on the report of the Inspectors and the other evidence, has done nothing to identify the particular members of the battalion who did the shooting or were accessories before or after the fact. If the bill now pending, introduced by Mr. Warren, passes it will throw upon upon you the duty of a further examination into the evidence to determine whether certain of those now discharged ought not to be restored on the ground that they were not parties to the shooting; did not know the persons who did it; and were unable to give any clues to the perpetrators. It becomes your duty, therefore, and that of the Department to make every effort possible to identify the men who did the shooting and to establish the innocence of as many as are innocent among these discharged. In the pursuit of that purpose I have had a conference with Herbert J. Browne, who, under circumstances not necessary to repeat; made an investigation into the circumstances of the affray, and is a journalist of considerable experience; and with Mr. W. G. Baldwin, the head of a large detective agency at Roanoke, Virginia, serving the great railways that2 pass through that town. I have written to the Presidents of the three railways which Mr. Baldwin serves to know whether he is considered by them to be trustworthy, reliable and skillful, and until I have an affirmative answer from them on this subject I shall not sign the contract. The contract has been prepared by the Judge Advocate General. I have talked with Mr. Badlwin and with Mr. Browne, and they think that unless within thirty days the prospects of success are bright, it would be useless to continue the investigations further. If, however, their clues are found, as they expect to find them through the use of the large force of detectives in the employ of Mr. Baldwin, then thirty days further may be needed in order to render the proof satisfactory. There is as you will see in the contract the right to cancel the contract at the end of thirty days and thus save half of the expense proposed should it turn out the effort is wholly useless. You will find written upon the back of the contract a formal endorsement and authorization for you to sign in order that the money to satisfy the contract may be withdrawn and paid from the appropriation there mentioned. Very Sincerely yours, Wm. H. Taft The president. Inclosure.[*P.F.*] Embassy of the United States of America. Berlin. 16 April, 1908. Mr President, I thank you for your letter of the 4th instant which I have received today. The incident relating to Dr Hill has been exceedingly painful to me - I have given the history of the whole case to the Secretary of State in my dispatch of April 3rd. (No.1334). which I trust you will read. I telegraphed the Department of my letter to you, because, as the Emperor had been emphatic in his conversation, I did not wish to withhold from you for nearly two weeks so important a piece of information. But I did not intend that telegram to be publicly known. The fact the the Emperor did not like DrHill was not a secret in Berlin; though it was not to be known that he had so expressed himself to you. I do not know how that fact was first told here; but the newspaper correspondents quickly obtained word from America that a despatch had been received at the Department from me. In the discussion that took place immediately thereupon, sufficient information was collected from people who had been been at my dinner, whence the Emperor had spoken very freely, to put the story together. I beg you to believe, Mr President - -and I am the American in this Case, appealing to my own Chief of State whose interests I safeguard and represent - that, whatever telegrams may have been sent to you from German sources in this matter, there can be no mistake or misunderstanding as to the conversation which I had with the Emperor and which I reported to you. I have been accustomed to talk with him as you know, - and he speaks English as well as I do. No man could have been moreearnest or more intent than he was. The denials have been made by the Foreign Office here; but not by the Emperor himself who is in the Mediterranean and does not know much about this controversy. He is too much of a soldier to deny his own deliberate acts; and I am not enough of a fool to report to you conversations which I have partially or imperfectly understood. I regret the publicity of the affair, for which I am, however, not responsible. I have not made any statement upon the subject, and shall not do so. I am, Mr. President, with great respect, Sincerely Yours, Charlemagne Tower. Honorable Theodore Roosevelt President of the United States.April 16th 1908 [*Ackd 4-27-08*] My dear Mr President. I am very sorry to see by this morning's Times that your appeal to Congress for four more battleships has been rejected by more than a majority of two to one, in the popular branch of that body, though not it would seem in a very full House. I thought your message on the subject which was cabled yesterday or rather extract therefrom - admirable, and there is nothing which a Diplomatist learns sooner than "if we desire to secure peace.....it must be known that we are at all times ready for war." If this had not been well known in one case you would not have been able to make peacebetween Japan & Russia or to stop a European war at algeciras; and as I have for many years past felt that one of our chief duties would be, more & more as time goes on, to make use of our great power to prevent wars in Europe & elsewhere, and as the only way of carrying out that laudable duty is to have our diplomatists backed up by the most potent navy obtainable, I agree with every word you have said on the subject. Still, you have caused enormous progress to be made in that direction during your seven years Presidency and I suppose a further increase in the Navy is a mere question of time. Probably this year being a Presidential one is not favorable for any sort of expenditure but I am glad you have once more put yourself on record in the matter.We have been over here for a week to empty our London house which we have sold; not without regret as it is identified in our minds with many interesting incidents connected with Anglo- American nations and is situated in a part of Charles I's garden at Whitehall. But the setting up of two Embassy Houses elsewhere has been pretty expensive and this one has had to go. I sincerely hope that the bill will pass for the purchase of the Paris Embassy and that others will follow shortly. I dont know the actual facts about the Hill incident but I imagine that the German Emperor when he realized that Dr. Hill could not keep a house but would have to go into a flat in which the majority could not, for reasons of safety in these anarchical days if for no other reason, pay him visits as he does to other Ambassadors [is] had a feeling of regret that the importance of our Embassy at Berlin should thus be reduced.But the Emperor's handling of delicate diplomatic matters is not as felicitous as yours and there was but one proper way of dealing with the incident when it occurred; and that was your war upon the success of which I heartily congratulate you as I have already done to the Secretary of State. Dr. Hill's conduct during the very trying ordeal was beyond praise and thoroughly justified his fitness for [such] a position of delicacy. It has been very interesting here during the past week with the change of Ministry. I dined with Asquith two nights after his return from Biarritz and just after he had completed his ministry, and heard all the gossip connected with his difficulties &c. the injured feelings of those not included &c with which I need not trouble you. Asquith is a strong man and a very able one and 5/ the general feeling is that the Government is strengthened by the change of Premiers. A. J. Balfour thinks it an interesting question whether Asquith will be able to keep in hand his somewhat manly followers, whom Campbell Bannerman has allowed to do pretty much what they liked; and he does not think in any case that a change of party is imminent. The Irish do not like Asquith because he will have nothing to do with Home-Rule (i.e. practical independence as they understand it) on the ground that England will not tolerate it but I think that ability, when combined with straightness and absence of self-seeking, always tells and I shall be surprised if he does not make a success of it. I had a delightful dinner with the Trevelyans. Sir George showed me with great pride the [lilac?] cup whichyou, Mr Root & Cabot sent him and which will go down to posterity among his most valued possessions. It was a very nice thing to have done on your part & richly deserved on his; but you would have thought of paying him the compliment. He has been reading tremendously at the British Museum for his fourth volume, and says that he has read through all the newspapers both Whig & Tory, pamphlets &c. upon which he could try his hand, which appeared on the subject during the remaining years of our Revolution with which the 4th vol. will deal. Much of it will have reference to this side of the water, Parliamentary debates public feeling &c. What a delightful man he is and, as I hope you know, his admiration for you is perfectly boundless. I follow our own political situation with the deepest interest as you may imagine and am hoping to get home this fall on a visit just in time to vote. Believe me, dear Mr President Most Sincerely yours, Henry White We return to Paris this aftn.Ackd 4-27-08 CFW copy The Athenaeum, Pall Mall, S.W., April, 16, 1908. My dear Mr. President: I am very sorry to see by this morning's Times that your appeal to Congress for four more battleships has been rejected by more than a majority of two to one in the popular branch of that Body, though not it would seem in a very full House. I thought your message on the subject which was cabled yesterday - or rather extracts therefrom - admirable, and there is nothing which a Diplomatist learns sooner than "if we desire to secure peace ...... it must be known that we are at all times ready for war." If this had not been well known in our case you would not have been able to make peace between Japan and Russia or to stop a European war at Algeciras; and as I have for many years past felt that one of our chief duties would be, more and more as time goes on, to make use of our great power to prevent wars in Europe and elsewhere, and as the one way of carrying out that laudable duty is to have our diplomatists backed up by the most potent navy obtainable, I agree with every word you have said on the subject. Still, you have caused enormous progress to be made in that direction during your seven years Presidency and I suppose a further increase in the Navy is a mere question of time. Probably this year being a Presidential one is not favorable for any sort of expenditure but I am 2 glad you have once more put yourself on record in the matter. We have been over here for a week to empty our London house which we have sold; not without regret as it is identified in our minds with many interesting incidents connected with Anglo-American relations and is situated in a part of Charles I's garden at Whitehall. But the setting up of two Embassy Houses elsewhere has been pretty expensive and this one has to go. I sincerely hope that the bill will pass for the purchase of the Paris Embassy and that others will follow shortly. I don't know the actual facts about the Hill incident but I imagine that the German Emperor when he realized that Dr. Hill could not keep a house but would have to go into a flat in which His Majesty could not, for reasons of safety in these anarchical days if for no other reason, pay him visits as he does to other Ambassadors, had a feeling of regret that the importance of our Embassy at Berlin should be thus reduced. But the Emperor's handling of the delicate diplomatic matters is not as felicitous as yours and there was but one proper way of dealing with the incident when it occurred; and that was your way - upon the success of which I heartily congratulate you as I have already done to the Secretary of State. Dr. Hill's conduct during the very trying ordeal was beyond praise and thoroughly justified his fitness for a position of delicacy. It has been very interesting here during the past week with the change of MInistry. I dined with Asquith two nights after his return from Biarritz and just after he had completed his Ministry, and I 3 heard all the gossip connected with his difficulties, etc., the injured feelings of those not included, etc., with which I need not trouble you. Asquith is a strong man and a very able one and the general feeling is that the Government is strengthened by the change of Premiers. A. J. Balfour thinks it an interesting question whether Asquith will be able to keep in had his somewhat unruly followers, whom Campbell Bannerman has allowed to do pretty much what they liked; and he does not think in any case that a change of party is imminent. The Irish do not like Asquith because he will have nothing to do with Home-Rule (i.e., practical independence as they understand it) on the ground that England will not tolerate it but I think real ability, when combined with straightness and absence of self-seeking, always tells and I shall be surprised if he does not make a success of it. I had a delightful dinner with the Trevelyans. Sir George showed me with great pride the silver cup which you, Mr. Root and Cabot sent him and which will go down to posterity among his most valued possessions. It was a very nice thing to have done on your part, and richly deserved on his; but few would have thought of paying him the compliment. He has been reading tremendously at the British Museum for his fourth volume, and says that he has read through all the newspapers both Whig and Tory, pamphlets, etc., upon which he could lay his hand, which appeared on the subject4 during the remaining years of our Revolution with which the 4th vol. will deal. Much of it will have reference to this side of the water, Parlimentary debates, public feeling, etc. What a delightful man he is and, as I hope you know, his admiration for you is perfectly boundless. I follow our political situation with the deepest interest as you may imagine and am hoping to get home this Fall on a visit just in time to vote. Believe me, dear Mr. President, Most sincerely yours, (Signed) HENRY WHITE. We return to Paris this afternoon.[*[4-16-1908]*] DEPARTMENT OF STATE. WASHINGTON. This Tower of silence Has suffered Vi'lence For everyone talked When the Kaiser balked Except this home of the dead [*[E. Root?]*]Tower's letter 4/16/08OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR REPUBLIC OF CUBA UNDER THE PROVISIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNITED STATES Havana, Cuba, April 17, 1908. My dear Mr. President: I send you herewith my third attempt to answer your letter of the 4th instant. The first two drafts were so long I knew you could not find time to read either of them. The present letter is too long for a man so pressed for time and overburdened with duties as you are; but I urge you either take the time to read and consider it now, or lay it aside until the opportunity is secured to give the subject of the correspondence the consideration it merits and requires. With kindest regards and sincere admiration, I am, Sir, Your obedient servant, Charles E. Magoon. The President, The White House, Washington, D. C.[*[For enc see 4-16-08]*]Whether Taft or any other Republican can do so is not so certain although [although] within the range of possibility. I say this not because I do not think Taft will have a strong candidate - but you have impressed yourself on our People in a way that no other President has done in my time at least - and [*Ackd 4/20/08*] [*Wright, Luke E.*] Confidential. W Memphis April 17th 1908- My dear Mr President. Your favor of the 13th inst was duly received. I confess myself astonished at its contents, although perhaps I should not have been in view of your many past evidenceof confidence and good will. I should esteem it a great honor as it would be a genuine pleasure to be a Member of your official family and in the event of Secretary Tafts retirement under the circumstances named by you I shall hold myself subject to your orders. I confess I wish it could have been so that you could have been a candidate for Vice Presidency again. I verily believe that as against Mr. Bryan who seems to have the Democratic nomination at his mercy, you would have carried several Southern States and among them Tennessee then do my self the honor of calling on you and expressing my thanks in person. Sincerely yours Luke E. Wright The President Washington, D. C. 5. any other candidate would have to accomplish largely what you have already accomplished. Whilst the Solid South has been in some respects a fortunate thing for the Republican Party it has been unfortunate for the Southern people and the Country at large There were reasons in the past which perhaps made this solidarity a necessity - but in sofor as concerns the Border States at least, this necessity no longer exists, and there are many and most substantial reasons why intelligent and patriotic men in the South should divide on current questions, as they do elsewhere. If there could be a readjustment upon other than sectional lines so that some of the heretofore reliable Republican States in the North should become doubtful or Democratic and some of the Southern States Republican or doubtful it would be a consummation devoutly to be wished even if it did result in depriving a number of politicians of both Parties of their jobs. I hope to be in Washington in about ten days and shall[*Ackd 4-20-08*] SCRIBNERS MAGAZINE CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, PUBLISHERS, 153-157 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK April 18th, 1908. S Dear Mr. President: Your letter of April 18th, addressed to Mr. Charles Scribner, was received shortly after he sailed for the other side. The matter to which it refer--the use of an extract from "The Rough Riders" in a volume to be published by Doubleday , Page & Company--had however been brought to hi s attention through one of the editors of the Review of Reviews, and had been carefully considered by him. Our reasons for not viewing the proposition favorably were that these volumes are made to be used as part of a subscription scheme with various publications, and there is always the possibility of their passing into different hands--beyond the control of their original projectors. We want to protect the valuable copyright of "The Rough Riders", both for your sake and ours in every way, and it did not seem wise to us to let a significant part of the volume get beyond our control. However, we of course want to meet your wishes in the matter and we shall take it up again, with restrictions in regard to ownership, and a time limit on the use of the extract. We shall also ask from the publishers a small money payment. Hoping this action will meet with your approval, I am Faithfully yours Robert Bridges The President.[*Ackd 4/20/08*] [*F*] THE FAY SHCOOL. SOUTHBOROUGH, MASS. April 18th, 1908. My dear Mr. Roosevelt: We have your son Quentin's name on our list for next year, and as we are now making up the school for that time, I write to ask if it is still your desire that he come to Fay School in September? Will you be good enough to advise me in the matter at your convenience? Believe me, with kind regards, Faithfully yours, Waldo B. Fay Theodore Roosevelt, Esq., The White House, Washington, D. C. [[shorthand]][*Ackd & wrote Col. Sanger 4/20/08*] April 19th [*R*] 422 Madison Avenue. Darling Theodore. As Vice President of the New York County Committee of the "American National Red Cross," I have been asked to beg you to write a note to be read at the meeting on the 28th when Secretary Taft give you this message 'Tell the President that what he did in his address at Cornell some years ago has born much fruit, & tell him also that his course about the rail roads (in the stocks of which I have my Municipal capital) has made me more confident, rather than less confident, that the income of my family after my death, will be assured"! He's sent us his love & admiration. - Devotedly Corinne [*[Robinson]*] especially at this meeting when we expect enthusiasm from the presence of the Secretary of War. Your note should be addressed to Col. Wm. Cary Sanger, President of the New York State Branch of the "American National Red Cross" & can be sent to me When I was at the Hot Springs ten days ago, I saw much of Dr Polk, & he asked me to is to speak. We feel that a note from you saying how important it is for every citizen of the United States to be a member of the "American National Red Cross" would carry great weight,[*F*] [*N*] A SOCIAL SETTLEMENT IN SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE (INCORPORATED) 456 AND 468 N STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. SEND CONTRIBUTIONS OR PLEDGES TO J. Philip Herrmann, Treas. N. W. Con. 7th and I Streets N.W. Telephone Main 4490 Resident Workers Mr. and Mrs. John P.S. Neligh Miss Clara Jessup Van Trump Miss Emma Johnson Miss Jessie Holman Miss Eugenia M. Bray Trustees A.M. Lothrop President J. Philip Herrman Treasurer Miss Clara Jessup Van Trump Secretary Frederic L. Moore John S. Sleman, Jr. Cuno H. Rudolph James E. West Dr. George M. Kober Max West John P. S. Neligh Mrs. Albert Clifford Barnet Mrs. Adelia Gates Hensley Mrs. Alonzo W. Shunk Mrs. Eugenia W. Weller Mr. Charles F. Weller Finanace Committee James E. West Chairman. A.M. Lothrop J. Philip Herrmann Cuno H. Rudolph John S. Sleman, Jr. Charles F. Weller Committee on Endowment John S. Sleman, Jr. Chairman A. M. Lothrop J. Philip Herrmann Purposes (From articles of Incorporation) To conduct a social settlement and social center, including clubs and classes, educational activities, industrial work, entertainments and social gathering. To maintain playgrounds, gymnasium and baths. To conduct summer outings. To institute and maintain philanthropic enterprises. To foster co-operation and mutual helpfulness among the people of its vicinity, by enlisting all who may be interested in united efforts for the common good. To promote the development of volunteer personal service in civic and philanthropic lines. So to express in practice the commandment "Love thy neighbor as thyself" that this settlement shall be in the truest sense a "Neighborhood House." April 19, 1908. Hon. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President, White House, City. Dear Mr. Loeb: For several years I have sent to you annually a letter similar to the enclosed which you have kindly submitted to President Roosevelt. I hope you may be willing to do the same this year. I trust I have established with you a reputation for not troubling the President often or in ways which do not seem to be necessary. Neighborhood House is grateful to you personally for your help and we trust that you and Mrs. Loeb will come down to inspect the settlement on Friday or Saturday, May 1st or 2nd, at the time of our great Spring Festival, from 3 to 6 and 7-30 to 9-30 P.M. I shall be on hand at that time and shall hope to have the pleasure of conducting you through the buildings. Cordially yours, Chas. F Weller For the Board of Trustees.[*[For 1. enclosure see 4-30-08]*]A SOCIAL SETTLEMENT IN SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE (INCORPORATED) 456 AND 468 N STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. SEND CONTRIBUTIONS OR PLEDGES TO J. Philip Herrmann, Treas. N. W. Con. 7th and I Streets N.W. Telephone Main 4490 Resident Workers Mr. and Mrs. John P.S. Neligh Miss Clara Jessup Van Trump Miss Emma Johnson Miss Jessie Holman Miss Eugenia M. Bray Trustees A.M. Lothrop President J. Philip Herrman Treasurer Miss Clara Jessup Van Trump Secretary Frederic L. Moore John S. Sleman, Jr. Cuno H. Rudolph James E. West Dr. George M. Kober Max West John P. S. Neligh Mrs. Albert Clifford Barnet Mrs. Adelia Gates Hensley Mrs. Alonzo W. Shunk Mrs. Eugenia W. Weller Mr. Charles F. Weller Finanace Committee James E. West Chairman. A.M. Lothrop J. Philip Herrmann Cuno H. Rudolph John S. Sleman, Jr. Charles F. Weller Committee on Endowment John S. Sleman, Jr. Chairman A. M. Lothrop J. Philip Herrmann Purposes (From articles of Incorporation) To conduct a social settlement and social center, including clubs and classes, educational activities, industrial work, entertainments and social gathering. To maintain playgrounds, gymnasium and baths. To conduct summer outings. To institute and maintain philanthropic enterprises. To foster co-operation and mutual helpfulness among the people of its vicinity, by enlisting all who may be interested in united efforts for the common good. To promote the development of volunteer personal service in civic and philanthropic lines. So to express in practice the commandment "Love thy neighbor as thyself" that this settlement shall be in the truest sense a "Neighborhood House." April 19, 1908. President Theodore Roosevelt, White House, City. Dear Mr. President: For several years you have expected and encouraged me to write to you on behalf of "Neighborhood House", the leading social settlement of Washington. Last year you kindly subscribed one hundred dollars and you have also contributed generously in other years. We have made strenuous efforts to complete our financial canvass this season without calling upon you because we realized that you are heavily drawn upon. We find, however, that the collection season is nearly exhausted and that we still have to secure fifteen hundred dollars toward the modest budget of seven thousand. Some of us have been making a personal canvass and I have been delegated to write to you. If you feel that you can take part with us again this year we shall be greatly honored and helped by your cooperation. Very truly yours, Chas. F Weller For the Board of Trustees.[*[Enclosed in Weller, 4-19-08]*] Neighborhood House Work and Play Festival EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MISS CLARA JESSUP VAN TRUMP, CHAIRMAN MR. AND MRS. CHARLES F. WELLER, WARDENS MR. J. PHILIP HERRMANN, TREASURER MR. JOHN P.S. NELIGH MISS JESSIE HOLEMAN MRS. CLARA D. NELIGH MISS EUGENIA M. BRAY MISS EMMA JOHNSON MISS JEAN A. POIRIER TRUSTEES OF NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE A. M. Lothrop, President J. Philip Herrmann, Treasurer Miss Clara Jessup Van Trump, Secretary Frederic L. Moore Mrs. Albert Clifford Barney John B. Sleman, Jr. Mrs. Adelia Gates Hensley Cuno H. Rudolph Mrs. Alonzo W. Shunk James E. West Mrs. Gardiner G. Hubbard Dr. Geo. M. Kober Mrs. Charles J. Bell Max West Mrs. Eugenia W. Weller John P. S. Neligh Mr. Charles F. Weller Contributions will be gratefully received by members of the Executive Committee and should be sent to the Treasurer of Neighborhood House Mr. J. Philip Herrmann N.E. Cor. 7th and I Sts. N. W. UNUSED TICKETS NEED NOT BE RETURNED [*[4-19-08]*] To The Friends of Neighborhood House GREETING: A CORDIAL INVITATION IS HEREBY EXTENDED TO ALL THE FRIENDS OF NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SIXTH ANNUAL SPRING FESTIVAL TO BE GIVEN AT NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE 456 AND 468 N STREET SOUTHWEST, BY THE SETTLEMENT CLUBS AND CLASSES ON APRIL THIRTIETH AND MAY FIRST AND SECOND, FROM 3 TO 6 AND 7.30 TO 9.30 O'CLOCK. PATRONS Mr. John Taylor Arms Justice and Mrs. David J. Brewer Mr. and Mrs. Chas. M. Ffoulke Gen. and Mrs. John W. Foster Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Fraser Col. and Mrs. Archibald Hopkins Mr. and Mrs. Hennen Jennings Mr. and Mrs. Carl B. Keferstein Mr. and Mrs. A. Lisner Hon. and Mrs. H. B. F. Macfarland Mr. and Mrs. John R. McLean D.r and Mrs. E. P. Mertz Hon. and Mrs. Truman H. Newberry Hon. and Mrs. J. Van Vechten Olcott Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Nelson Page Hon. and Mrs. Henry T. Rainey Mr. and Mrs. E. Francis Riggs Mr. and Mrs. Henry C. Sheridan Mr. and Mrs. Thomas W. Sidwell Mr. and Mrs. Geo. Otis Smith Mr. and Mrs. Thomas W. SmithOrder of Events 3 TO 6--7.30 TO 9.30 O'CLOCK Personally Conducted Tours Through the Settlement GUIDES TRUSTEES OF NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE STUDENTS FROM MT. VERNON SEMINARY STUDENTS FROM NATIONAL PARK SEMINARY STUDENTS FROM GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY THE EVER, EVER, EVER LAND PLAYYS In Kindergarten rooms at 456 N St. Time 4 to 6 "THE GARDEN OF LITTLE-OH-DEAR" Given by The Knights of the Round Table and The Little Merry Makers' Club MOTHER GOOSE IN DREAMLAND The Golden Rule Club Time 8.00 to 9.30 THE MIRROR OF MATSU-YAMA Senior Members of Neighborhood Peace Club ALICE IN WONDER LAND Junior Members of Neighborhood Peace Club FOLK PLAYS On Playground at 468 N st. Time 4 to 6 and 8 to 9 o'clock YE OLDEN TIME MERRIE MAY GAMES Of England and America A PUNCH AND JUDY SHOW ATTENDED BY The Building-Trades Guild of London, England, 1607 Given by The Young Builders Boys' Club A DREAM OF CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH VIRGINIA, 1607 Given by Boys' Commonwealth Club Order of Events Continued 3 TO 6--7.30 TO 9.30 O'CLOCK FLOWER SHOW In Reception room 468 N Street Mrs. Gardiner G. Hubbard Mrs. Charles J. Bell Mrs. Alexander Graham Bell FRENCH CHEF AND MAIDS In Public Library Reading Rooms MAKING AND SELLING BON BONS Miss Eloise North Students from Mt. Vernon Seminary Robert Bell Members of Neighborhood House Cooking Classes ICE CREAM, CAKE AND LEMONADE In Club Rooms on 2d Floor at 468 N Street and In Hall at 456 N Street Served by Members of Neighborhood House Woman's Club DOMESTIC EXCHANGE In Basement at 456 N Street Supper and other Good Things Prepared and Served by Members of P. E. O. Chapters and Members of N. H. Woman's Club ARTS AND CRAFTS EXHIBITION AND SALE In Reception Room, 2d Floor, 456 N Street BASKETS, MATS AND CUSHIONS Made by hand in a Neighborhood House Basketry Shop RUGS HAND WOVEN NEEDLEWORK EXCHANGE Members of Neighborhood House Woman's Club HAND ILLUMINATED MOTTOES TOOLED LEATHER ARTICLES By Industrial Classes THE DOLL BABY ORPHANAGE Needs Little Mothers for Dolls Dressed By Jenny Wren Club THE TAFFY SHOP HOME-MADE CANDIES By Neighborhood House Cooking ClassesR April 20, 1908 Read with much interest. R. B no encls filed[*[attached to Reid 4-9-08]*]United States Senate Committee on the Philippines Personal. [*F*] April 20, 1908. Dear Theodore:- [*not enclsd*] I send you the proof sheets of a report of our Finance Commission which has been investigating the finances of the City of Boston. You may not think, at first, that it has any bearing on the National Government, but if you will read it carefully, from beginning to end, you will see that it does concern our Department of Justice, and that it is an extraordinary exposure of certain business methods. It sustains some of the views you have been criticized for expressing in an extraordinary way and is a revelation of business methods which is little short of appaling. It is worth your reading, every word of it. You must remember that these men have got all the evidence. Nathan Matthews is coming down next week and I shall bring him to see you. It begins about the city, but you will see very shortly how it involves gross violations of the laws of the United States. Sincerely yours, H.C. Lodge To the President.[*R*] [*Ackd 4/21/08*] JACOB A. RIIS, 524 N. BEECH STREET, RICHMOND HILL, BOR. OF QUEENS NEW YORK, April 20 1908 My dear Mr President I cannot resist the temptation to send you an article on the charities (in the mail) about playgrounds in Washington. I confess that congress "stumps" me. [*not yet recd*] The priest, our neighbor, has been after us. It is a regular thing. Of that I will send you the record, when it is all complete. I want you to know all the facts - you and Mrs Roosevelt. I intend to carry this matter to the archbishop, and if need be, to the ecclesiastical court of last resort. The priest has borne false witness once too often. On May 15 we - Mary, myboy and I, sail for Antwerp to spend 3 weeks at Nauheim, taking the heart cure (I). Thence we go to Denmark and back by August 1st. For the first time I shall spend a while in the Kaiser's realm. Perhaps I shall run across him. At all events I shall probably see King [Fredrik] Frederik, your great and good friend who is a great backer of yours, in his own Kingdom. Shall I ask for his vote for Taft? Come to think of it, then he will have been already nominated. Our love to you and yours Always, and may you have a good and restful summer. Always yours Jacob A Riis[*Ackd 4/20/08*] Monday. 1765 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE My dear Mr. President: We shall be delighted if you & Edith will dine with us Friday at 8 o'clock. I am going to New York tomorrow, & I hope to be here again on Friday. Cabot has not got the book you mention I am sure, & he would love to have it. I think he has seen the Hughes appreciation. Ever yrs, Nannie L. [*[?]*]THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON April 20, 1908. Memorandum for the President: Senator Beveridge telephones that Hale has given notice that he will take up the naval bill tomorrow, and Senator Beveridge says he is privately informed that it is Hale's intention to rush the bill thru as soon as possible. Senator Beveridge says, in his judgment, if the President would see the following Sentors he could get them to vote for four battleships: Ankenny Borah Brown Burkett Carter Clapp Cullom Curtis Depew Dixon Dolliver Du Pont Frye Gamble Guggenheim Hemenway Hopkins Knox Nelson Piles Simmons Smith of Michigan (Newberry might see him first) Stephenson Sutherland Warren Senator Beveridge also thinks it would be worth while to speak to Senators Elkins, Clarks of Arkansas, and Clay. Perkins is for two battleships, but has told Senator Beveridge that if the president has any private reasons he will vote for four. Stewart is the father of Phil Stewart, and on account of that relationship it might be worth while for the President to see him. Smith of Maryland might also be worth seeing. Senator Beveridge wishes to emphasis the necessity for lightning speed on account of Hale's determination to rush the bill thru; and also that the above is only his judgment, and he may be wrong as to some of the Senators named. [*F*] [*Cf*] [*B*] State of Indiana, Indianapolis. ATTORNEY GENERAL JAMES BINGHAM. ASSISTANTS HENRY M. DOWLING EDWARD M. WHITE ALEXANDER G. CAVINS April 21, 1908. Honorable Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. President:- My family and myself arrived home safely last week, and had a most delightful trip. All my spare moments on my trip, and continuously ever since I have been home have been spent in talking politics, and I write you again in confidence to say to you that Judge Taft will never on earth be equal to the emergency in Indiana. If Bryan is nominated you are the one man that can save us. Judge Taft can not do it. Governor Hughes can come the nearest of any one else other than yourself. It is the burden of the talk everywhere that if Bryan is nominated he will capture the labor vote throughout the State of Indiana, unless you are renominated, in which event it is conceded by all, without exception, democrats and republicans alike, that the republicans will sweep the state. I do not state this too strongly. I know what I am talking about and that I am not mistaken. The 1904 ticket is the one to save our legislature in Indiana. It might be that we could elect the State ticket with Governor Hughes nominated, and possibly with Taft, but never the legislature. On my trip, after I left Washington, I talked with T.R.2. men who were acquainted with the sentiment among the Carnegie Steel Company workingmen, and I was given to understand that they were all for Roosevelt. I talked with James R. Taylor of the New York Stock Exchange, one of the active members, and he gave me to understand that much of this talk about the feeling against Roosevelt by the stock exchange was magnified; that the members of the stock exchange were more particularly incensed at what he chose to call the demagoguery of some of the members of congress. Occasionally it has been suggested to me that some of the financiers were hostile toward you, but when I asked the question what these financiers would do as between you and Bryan, the answer was universal that they would be for you. And when the question was put to them as to what labor would do in case Bryan was nominated, and some one other than you was nominated, it was conceded that the question would at once be involved in great doubt. There is much talk among the common people that Taft is being backed by Wall Street, and that he will be dominated by that influence. I write you thus in detail because of the genuine alarm I feel at the situation. I realize that it would be suicidal for you to become an aggressive candidate, but if your trusted friends were advised that the nomination would come to you without any effort on your part, and this would be in harmony with the dignity that ought to be maintained in contests for nomination for an office of this character. IT.R. 3. feel that the general belief that you are pushing the candidacy of Judge Taft is operating very greatly to your disadvantage. I am not expecting you to say to me that which I most desire to know, but I do want to urge upon you the necessity of your willingness to accept this nomination, and of your putting your trust in some one with reference thereto that can aid in the protection of your interests. Requesting again that this communication be treated in confidence, I remain, Yours very truly, James Bingham TELEGRAM. [[SHORTHAND]] [*Cf*] [*G*] The White House, Washington Received in cipher. Roma. (Received April 21, 1908, 4:30 p.m.) The President, Washington. The King desires very much to have a copy of your outdoor pastimes. Griscom. [*His Majesty Victor Emmanuel III King of Italy*] [(your Majesty)] [*sent 4/22/08*]21. IX. 08. ZOOLOGICAL MUSEUM TRING, HERTS, ENGLAND. Dear Mr. Buxton, I just received your letter and shall very gladly prepare a list of birds and also give if wanted, some other hints in order to make President Roosevelts expedition a successful one from a scientific point. A list of birds without any description would of course be of no use whatever and to make descriptions or even keys would take a long time. There is a book on the birds of German East Africa by Reichenow and at least 3/4 of the birds of German East Africa also occur in the British territory. But the book (1894) is somewhat outdated now. I shall procure a copy and have it interleaved and shall give additional notes there. Will you kindly tell me, when the President is likely to start - I expect well before Decembre - and whether he will shoot only in the chasai countries of British East Africa or whether he intends to proceed to Uganda properly, where there is splendid shooting to be found on the plains of the Maiandja River. Any how so it was when I visited these regions 14 years ago. I hope that the President will take a good taxidermist with him. Do you know whether any scientific man is to accompany the expedition? Yours' sincerely Oscar Neumann.[*F*] [*ppf P*] April 21st, 1908. TELEGRAMS- WORPLESDON, STATION - BROOKWOOD. HEATHERSIDE, WORPLESDON, SURREY. My dear President Roosevelt My book is just out, and I am now posting you with this letter two copies of same, and I should be much obliged if you would forward the one in which I have put his name, to Mr Max. C. Fleischmann of Cincinnati, as I do not know his private address. I trust that you will like the book as it now stands. I revised all the articles I sent you to read, and added one or two more before handing the complete manuscript to the Publisher. I wrote to Mr F. J. Jackson (the vice- governor of British East Africa) and to Col Patterson directly I got your letter telling me you were looking forward to being able to make a hunting expedition to East and Central African, and as soon as I hear from them I will let you know. With renewed thanks for all the kindly encouragement and practical assistance you gave me with my book, and hoping that it will have many readers Believe me dear President Roosevelt Yours very truly F. C. Selous[*P.F.*] [*Cf*] [*R*] AMERICAN EMBASSY, LONDON. April 22, 1908. CONFIDENTIAL. Dear Mr. President: The personal "hoodoo" on this Government continues in a way to attract the attention of the superstitious. You will remember that at the outset the Minister of Foreign Affairs, in the very moment of attaining one of the greatest places (under the Premiership) open to a British subject, was stricken by the most poignant domestic grief;-- his wife being killed in a cruel and brutal way by a runaway horse she was driving. Then the Prime Minister reached what most Englishmen consider a bewildering height just as his wife's invalidism became so pronounced that it was perfectly clear that she could not discharge the duties of her new post, and indeed could not survive long to enjoy it. Never in my life have I seen anything more pathetic that the brave little woman's effort to discharge her duty at his first reception. She could not even stand up, and could scarcely make herself heard in the hum of conversation; yet she was pathetically eager to meet and greet every one she ought to, and the Prime Minister was equally pathetic in his anxiety that his guests should meet her. She was straining her strength every moment, and I felt guilty in remaining in conversation with her during the few minutes in which she evidently desired to have it continued. Nothing was clearer than her wish to mark their regard for the United States through its representative. As you will remember, she lingered for a little time, was taken off to 2. the Riviera in the hope of prolonging her days, and instead ended them there in a foreign land. It only needed the London gossip which attributed to the stricken Premier the purpose of marrying her trained nurse to add to the poignancy of the whole affliction. Sometime afterwards, just as Lloyd George was beginning to take the first steps in his phenomenal capture of British confidence, he lost his oldest daughter. Then "Lulu" Harcourt, whose rise has been almost equally phenomenal, and unlike that of any of the others has apparently not been accompanied by the slightest envy or ill-will on the part of anybody, was checked in the midst of his work by the alarming illness of their child. A surgical operation was necessary, the poor thing's life was despaired of, and I suppose for thirty-six hours it did hang in the balance, while the grandparents on both sides (Lady Harcourt and Mrs. Burns) were wild with anxiety, and Mrs. "Lulu" herself was suffering agonies which only a mother can understand. I saw her a few days after the child had slowly struggled back to life again, and the evidence of what she had been through was pathetic. Then came poor old "C.-B.'s" collapse, almost at the climax of his career, while things were still running fairly prosperously with his Government and just after he had uttered the voice of the nation in welcome to its guest, the German Emperor. He made a brave struggle for recovery, put in a few rather perfunctory appearances in the House and made a few almost equally perfunctory appearances in its debates; then went to Biarritz in a struggle for strength for his work; tried to resume on his return, but was sent to bed soon after, and has been making a gallant but hopeless fight for life ever since. The pathos of the situation was heightened by the fact that his3. elder brother was lying in a similar state across the border, among their Scotch friends. Next come poor Asquith--a man they speak of as having fewer friends than "C.-B.", whom nevertheless one can't help admiring for his ability, and in whom I have always found also a very agreeable personality. I told you of the social calamity at WIndsor when Mrs. Asquith's brighht tongue hoodooed them at the beginning of their Ministerial career, with the unfortunate remark about the late Lord Chancellor. He has never made an appearance in an important speech since in the House in which he has not strengthened his position till at last it became perfectly clear that in spite of the number of other strong men in the Government, he was overwhelmingly indicated as the new Prime Minister. Finally he was summoned to Biarritz and "kissed hands". On his return and before he had had a chance to appear in the House as Premier, his brother-in-law, whose guest he was to have been over Easter, was burned to death by an overturned lamp. Poor Asquith was down there only to be called in for the inquest and now for the funeral. And to crown all, comes news since I began dictating this letter, that "C.-B." has passed away. For himself it is not to be regretted;--I am sure that his physicians have for weeks felt any outcome impossible, and those who watched the gradual decline nearly all came to think thati would be kinder if it were shorter. But think of the effect on the imagination of the successor. He has not yet appeared in the House as Premier, and can only appear now, if at all, to announcne"C.-B.'s" death, while he had been revising and recasting "C.-B's" work. I think I know that Sir Henry wanted to resign sometime ago, but4. that it was felt it would be better for him to hold on nominally at least to the position until the King came back from Biarritz, and that the physicians were not quite willing to have him return until this treacherous month of April has gone. So "C.-B" tried honestly to look at the papers sent him and to express some opinions, but finally begged to be relieved from it, and made a personal appeal to the King to accept his resignation. It was accepted, of course. Then came the summons to Biarritz, and all the recent history with which the cables have supplied you. Now before "C.-B" is buried will come the news either of the defeat of Winston Churchill in Manchester, or of his re-election by a reduced majority, which will be considered as a rebuke. Under such auspicies the gallant old Scotchman will be borne to his grave, and the heavily burdened man who succeeds him will enter upon the duties of his office. Sincerely yours, Whitelaw Reid. To The President, White House, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.[*H ppf*] [*Ackd 4-23-08*] EDITORIAL ROOMS,HARPER'S MAGAZINE HARPER & BROTHERS FRANKLIN SQUARE,NEW YORK April 22, 1908. Dear Mr. Loeb: Do you think there is a reasonable possibility that we might secure for future serial publication in Harper's Monthly Magazine, the President's personal reminiscences, to appear under some general title such as "Seven Years in the White House," to be adequately illustrated! If there is even a remote possibility of this, please let me come and talk it over. Sincerely yours, Henry E. Rood Wm. Loeb, Jr.UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE PHILIPPINES Personal. [*Ackd 4/24/08*] April 23, 1908. Dear Mr. Loeb:- I enclose a memorandum in regard to that matter about which you spoke to me in which Mr. Byrne was concerned. You will see, if you take the trouble to read the memorandum, that the case was thoroughly investigated, that Mr. Byrne was not called before the General Board of Appraisers for the very obvious reason that they had not only the evidence of a special agent sent to Nottingham, but of Mr. De Vries, the head of the Board, who had been there himself. You will see, also, that the decision was rendered before Mr. Byrne left the service of the Department and the whole matter settled; and you will further note that he himself notified the Department that the goods were now being entered at their true value. I think this will make it plain to you that there is absolutely no shred of truth of particle of foundation to the story which you told me you had heard. I with you would say to the President that I think it would be well for him to see Foss and Loudenslager, the House Conferees on the Naval bill, without delay, because from what Foss told me I gathered that he did not propose to accept the $7,000,000 or more put on by the Senate to assure the immediate commencement of work on the new battleships and torpedo boats. If the House underto throw that out it will make a great deal of trouble and lead to a protracted fight. Sincerely yours, H. C. Lodge William Loeb, Jr., Esq.[*[For 1. enclosure see ca 4-1908]*][*P.F.*] [*Cf*] [*R*] AMERICAN EMBASSY, LONDON. April 23, 1908. PERSONAL Dear Mr. President: Long before this can reach you, you will have seen the result of the exciting contest going on in Northwest Manchester over Winston Churchill's re-election. I am only sending the enclosed because if you happen to have the time I think you will find it of interest to see a first class example of the British style of stump speaking. The speech by Lloyd George, which I enclose, seems to be thought as good a thing in its way as a British statesman is capable of on the stump. By way of offset, perhaps you would like to see a little of the style of campaign handbill, circular, etc., and so I am sending a few of the things against Winston. Yours sincerely, Whitelaw Reid. The President, White House, Washington, D.C. U.S.A.[For enc.see 4-23-08[*R*] [*P.F.*] April 23 1908 DEPARTMENT OF STATE. WASHINGTON. Dear Theodore I acknowledge your kind invitation to attend the conference upon the conservation of our natural resources on the 13th 14th 15th of May. As no limits of time are mentioned I assume that the attendance is to continue during the entire period of three days & that conservation of our natural resources will involve board. With this understandingand an abiding faith in Mrs. Roosevelt's ability to rise to the emergency I glady accept. At what hour do you breakfast on the 13th? Faithfully yours Elihu Root I see that you are inviting the Supreme Court. Brewer likes griddle cakes & molasses. ER4/23/08 Sen Beveridge says the President should see Carter as he would be most helpful If possible also get McCumber either on our side or neutral[*[ca. 4-23-1908]*] MEMORANDUM. There are two different features in connection with the case of May & Ellis, importers at New Orleans. One of these deals with Saint Gall embroideries and is a technical matter as to the making out of the invoices, but the other deals with Nottingham netting and its proper value. In the case of Saint Gall embroideries the question has been whether or not this firm have been the purchasers or the consignees of the goods that have been brought to this country. There have been complications existing between the action of the Collector at New Orleans and that of the Treasury Agent at Saint Gall which has brought about confusion but which has now been adjusted. There was no question at all of wrong values as the firm were very careful to invoice their goods at the rates as established and put in force by the Agent at Saint Gall who has this matter in charge. The value of Saint Gall embroideries is established in a different way than that of any other merchandise that comes into this country, as the goods are practically appraised in Switzerland. The value depends upon the stitch rate and an advisory appraisement is made by our representative there and invoices made out accordingly. This system was adopted several years ago in order to clear away troubles in this line of importation and has worked satisfactorily and well. The Nottingham net question was one entirely of the value-2- of the goods, The Examiner at New Orleans, acting more or less under advice of Mr. Byrne, advanced the values of these goods brought in by May & Ellis from 60% to 80%. The duties were paid under protest by the importers and an appeal taken to the Board of General Appraisers. In the meantime, a thorough investigation of the subject was ordered by the Department representative in England, and General Appraiser De Bries, who was in Europe at the time, went to Nottingham and made a personal examination of the conditions and the matter in dispute. The case was heard after Mr. De Vries returned to this country and it was the fact that the President of the Board of General Appraisers had himself looked into the question of the market value of Nottingham that induced the Department to believe that Mr. Byrne could not offer sufficient testimony as to the Nottingham value of these goods to justify his going from New Orleans to New York for this hearing. After the evidence presented by both sides before the Board of General Appraisers, the decision of the Board was that these goods should some of them be advanced from 6% to 12%. while others should be entered at the same value as their invoices declared, thus practically sustaining the contention of May & Ellis that their importations were not under-valued and rejected entirely the position taken by the Examiner at New Orleans that these goods were under-valued some 80%.-3- Mr. Byrnes still contends that the decision was wrong, but the Board of Appraisers is by law constituted the court of last resort as to the value of merchandise imported into this country and from its decision there is no appeal. All of these cases were finished before Mr. Byrne left the service of the Department. He finished his service as Special Employe on March 15th. On February 24th he wired the Department that the matter was closed with May & Ellis and that they were now entering their goods at true value. In a memorandum sent to the President, dated February 25th, he made a statement that the matter had been brought to a close and that the goods were now being entered at true foreign market value. [*[Enclosed in Lodge 4-23-08].*][*Enc. in Reid 4-23-08*] THE GOVERNMENT OF SACKS. The Liberal Government have given the cheap sack of coal to the foreigner. The Liberal Government have given the dear sack of coal to you. The Liberal Government have sacked 20,000 men from the Army. The Liberal Government have sacked 20,000 men from the Reserve. The Liberal Government have sacked 4,000 men from Woolwich Arsenal (many with 40 years' service). The Liberal Government have sacked 5,000 men from Portsmouth, Chatham, Devonport, and Pembroke Dockyards. The Liberal Government have sacked 3,000 men from the Navy. The Liberal Government have sacked 600 men from the Coastguard. Is it not time that such a Government was itself sacked? Let us begin now by giving the sack to Winston Churchill. LIBERAL ATTACK ON MR. CHURCHILL. Councillor J. P. Pennington, a well-known Manchester Liberal, is not pleased with either Mr. Churchill or the Government. He has published a letter, in which he says: We have to-day the unpleasant spectacle of a Cabinet Minister seeking re-election in a manner suited to a blatant American politician asking the suffrages of a Western American State. Mr. Churchill's method would make a stranger think that instead of being the honoured man of the day he was a convict fighting for his life in the dock. This is a pity. We want commonsense, not sharp repartee, eleventh-hour promises to every section, outside advocacy (even colleagues in the Cabinet). This Government is on the faulty lines of 1892-5, "filling the cup." Let sensible people who want sober reform take heed. Let Churchill go. Let the Government eventually go, as they will, and the other side will then be ready and able to make some of their reforms. MR. CHURCHILL'S ACTION FOR LIBEL. Mr. Churchill has issued through his solicitors, Messrs. March, Clayton, and Pearson, a writ against the Manchester Courier. He claims damages for an alleged libel contained in last Monday's issue of the journal named, the proprietors of which have accepted service of the instrument. Mr. Joynson-Hicks's polling-card with literature was posted to-night to every elector. An important item is an appeal on his behalf signed by his Election Committee, with Sir William Houldsworth, for many years the respected member of North-West Manchester, at its head. I give the main passages of this appeal: Efforts have been made by advocates of all sorts of causes to divert your minds from the issue upon which we contest this seat. Plainly and concisely this is the question asked of you. Do you approve of the conduct of your affairs during the two past years by the Liberal Government? That Government has now for a second time struck a determined blow at the schools of the Church of England, the Church of Rome, of the Jews, and of other bodies who count the religious training of the young vital to England's welfare. It has in its education and licensing proposals embodied the principle of State confiscation without payment and unwarrantably curtailed individual liberty. By its proposals to limit the power of the House of Lords it attacks the only security afforded by the Constitution that far-reaching measures should be fully considered and examined before becoming law, and claims that a temporary majority shall interpret by a vote in a single chamber the will of the people upon questions of the first magnitude. The record of the Government is one of obeying the prejudices and promptings of extremists and we ask you to declare that this is destructive of that security and confidence which are essential to this commercial community. The Roman Catholic Federation are now fighting Mr. Redmond with the gloves off, and they have to-day placarded the hoardings with the following manifesto, which is printed in the gayest of green colours associated with the Emerald Isle: IRISHMEN UNITE. Mr. John Redmond said on April 15, 1908, at Dublin: "Of the pending bye-elections the only one of real interest in Ireland was the one in Manchester. It was not a question of personality, but of the new Government, and he did not see how they could ask the Irishmen of Manchester to vote for Mr. Churchill. Vote for Joynson-Hicks. The last act in this comedy of political tergiversation is written by the hand of Mr. Dan Irving, the Socialist candidate, who thus apostrophises and appeals to the free and enlightened Hibernian electorate, whose votes, it is apparently assumed, are put up to auction in order to be knocked down to the highest bidder: Irishmen, what have you to do with either Radical or Tory? Both have cast your members into prison, and shot down your fellow-countrymen. Join hands, then, with the British democracy, and vote for Irving and the well-being of all. In this welter of competition there is a multitude of opinions as to how the Irish vote will really go. The Nationalist political leaders claim that Mr. Redmond will be obeyed, that is, the Mr. Redmond of this week. At the same time the Mr. Redmond of last week is being so industriously exploited by the Roman Catholics, who are most actively canvassing in Nationalist quarters, that serious misgivings have arisen in the minds of the political section, and I am informed that no less a personage than Mr. T. P. O'Connor himself is expected here to-morrow in the hope that he may be able to make straight the crooked and devious paths which are now perplexing the distracted electorate.[*[Enc. in Reid 4-23-08]*] SPEECHES BY MR. LLOYD-GEORGE. The Chancellor of the Exchequer arrived in Manchester early this afternoon in order to speak at a series of meetings in support of the candidature of Mr. Winston Churchill. The first meeting was held during the afternoon at the Gaiety Theatre, under the chairmanship of Sir Edward Donner, and was very largely attended. Mr. Lloyd-George, who was enthusiastically received on rising to address the meeting, said:-- Mr. Chairman and Fellow-citizens,--I am very proud to deliver my first speech as Chancellor of the Exchequer in my native city of Manchester, and I am still more pleased to do so as I am coming here to assist the candidature of my friend and colleague Mr. Winston Churchill. (Cheers.) I have been reminded that there is some rule which is, or at least ought to be, obsolete--that no Cabinet Minister should appear on a platform at a by-election. (Laughter.) I have never seen any reason for that rule, and I am very pleased to be present here to break it. But I am not sure that I am the first to do so. That rule applies, I believe, not merely to Cabinet Ministers but to ex-Cabinet Ministers, and at the Peckham election (laughter) there was one very redoubtable ex-Cabinet Minister who has been in many more Cabinets than I have, and that is Mr. Chaplin. I do not wish to shelter myself behind the portly and, I may add, the courtly form and figure of Mr. Chaplin. I am here because I find a colleague assailed by every monopoly and privilege which stands in the pathway of progress. (Hear, hear.) You must remember this--and I think the time has come to ponder upon it--that there is no injustice, no anomaly which does not bring profit to somebody, and the moment you begin to remove these you will excite the anger and hostility of the people who are deprived of the benefit of that injustice. One man's wrong is always another man's perquisite; too often the drunkard's ruin is the brewer's dividend. (Cheers.) VESTED INTERESTS. If you put an end to-morrow to the excessive drinking which is doing so much harm to our land, half of the brewing syndicates of England would be insolvent. When you touch excess you rouse up indignation and the animosity of those people, at any rate, who have vested interests in it. I found recently when I was dealing with the Port of London (cheers) there was a problem which appeared to be perfectly simple. It was essential to the trade of that great Port, the greatest in the land, that we should deepen the channels, increase the facilities, and improve the equipment. When I first approached the question I said, "Here is a simple problem; there ought to be no difficulty at all in dealing with it." But, on the contrary, I found that there vested interests in keeping the Port in the condition in which it was, and you will find everywhere that the channel of progress in this country is clogged and chked by vested interests. (Cheers.) One might have thought that nobody would have denied the Nonconformist grievance in education. I say I have known it from experience. When I attended, a village school, four-fifths of the children were Nonconfirmists, but no Nonconformist was ever permitted to become a teacher in his own village school without submitting to a test which was humiliating to him. ("Shame.") In thousands of parishes those good, well-behaved citizens who constitute some of the best citizens in the land were excluded from the elementary right of citizenship in education. No one denied it. It was acknowledged to be a grievance. It ought to be perfectly simple to remove it, but the moment you attempt to do it what happens? You might imagine we were uprooting the whole Christian religion. (Hear, hear.) Who denies that there is excessive drinking in the land? (A voice, "No one.") Who has even said that it is not doing harm to the moral, the material, and the mental interests of the people of the land, that it is not depressing the national welfare, that it is not producing untold misery and unhappiness? And yet the moment we attempt to deal with it in a moderate way--because, mark you, our Bill is not as drastic as the Bills which have been adopted by every colonial Legislature--the moment we attempt in a tentative and almost timid way to deal with it, there are people who go about and talk as if we were going at the end of 14 years to abolish the Decalogue. (Laughter and cheers.) You can go on in Bill after Bill. The moment you talk about removing any old-established wrong and grievance you will find swarms of vested interests clustered round it, all rising in anger to protest against your action. There is only one way to deal with them. You must arouse the sense of the community to its own interests, and insist that, above all, the interests of the people should be paramount. THE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMME. I will tell you why I am here. I have heard it suggested that now we have got a new chief instead of the grand old chief who has been struck down, that we are about to abandon our programme of social reform in order to win back, it is said, the confidence of the country. (Laughter.) I tell you if we did that we should win the contempt of the country. No, on the contrary, we are going to press forward, and I am here to stand by the side of my colleague Mr. Winston Churchill in his fight to clear the road for progress in this country. (Cheers.) Why should there be an election at this present moment, and why should that election be contested? (Cheers.) Two years ago Mr. Churchill was elected by a handsome majority to represent this constituency in Parliament. He has now been promoted, justly promoted (hear, hear) --I think even his political opponents will acknowledge that--to the position of the President of the Board of Trade. As Presidentn of the Board of Trade, it would undoubtedly be a great advantage to him, and through him, to the trade of the Empire, to be associated with a great commercial community like Manchester. It would be an advantage to the President of the Board of Trade to come into such direct contact with the centre of commercial life in Lancashire. Might I also suggest that it would not be a disadvantage to Manchester to be associated with the holder of this office, and its possibilities are great. I have held that office for two years and I know something about those possibilities. During those two years I do not claim to have done more than making what I think is known as a cross-out in the reef, and I find the ore to be rich, and worth the working. I had just started to drive a few adzes and levers into the heart of the rock, and I was intent on rich results, but now the work has been handed over to a very competent engineer, and to his skill, ingenuity, courage, and resource. I do not doubt that the possibilities of that office will be exhausted to the utmost, and I can recommend you to invest in the concern under the new management. (Cheers.) I have been wondering why it is they should ask North-West Manchester to change its mind. I have heard the charge brought against the race to which I belong, for I am a Celt, that we were fickle. Fickle! Do you think we change our minds in two years? We think out our course and take a long time to think. We appear to be deciding quickly, but that is all appearance. We have really taken a long time to think out the problem, and when we decide we pursue that course not for one Parliament, or two, or three, but for decades--until we attain our ideals. (Hear, hear.) Is Manchester the sort of city where the people decide in the year 1908 to stand for great principles, and then in two years sell them to the first chance bidder that comes along? (Cheers.) THE GOVERNMENT'S PAST RECORD. What have we done in the meantime that has forfeited the confidence of Manchester? (A voice, "Nothing.") Have we maladministered our offices? (Cries of "No.") If so, which? (A voice, "Foreign affairs.") Foreign affairs? Where is the blunder there? (A voice, "Chinese labour.") Aye, the Chinese are going, and soon they will all be gone. (Cheers.) We said we would do it, and it has been done. (Loud cheers.) Take the Colonial Office. That office has restored peace and confidence to South Africa. (Cheers.) Take the Exchequer, we have restored the national finances. When we come into office the national credit had slithered down 30 rungs of the ladder. (Laughter.) We could not stop the impetus at once, it was falling so rapidly, but by Mr. Asquith's sound finance confidence and credits has been gradually restored. (Cheers.) Have you ever had a man in the Foreign Office who is more helpful to the trade of the country abroad than Sir Edward Grey? Sir Alfred Jones, who is a perfectly impartial authority so far as we are concerned, has borne testimony to what Mr. Churchill has done for the cotton- growing industries of the Empire. (Cheers.) As for the Board of Trade, I would rather not say a word about that. I leave that to my opponents. Take every Department, contrast it with what happened before--the blundering, the muddling, the unbusinesslike conduct of affairs in every Department. Who has brought a charge[*[Enc. in Reid 4-23-08]*] of that kind against the present Government? Yet the Conservative candidate for this constituency is sighing for the great days of Mr. Balfour and Mr. Brodrick (laughter and cheers), when gilt-edged securities were brought so low as to be within the reach of the poorest investor. (Laughter.) I fail to see why North-West Manchester should change in two years. There is not a pledge we have given we have not attempted to redeem. We have done nothing which the country knew perfectly we were not going to undertake, and as far as administration is concerned I challenge comparison, at any rate, with our predecessors. But what we have done is only an earnest of much greater things which I think we can accomplish if the country gives us the opportunity. (Cheers.) You cannot accomplish much in two years in a great country like this, and I think we can do still greater things for the trade of the country, but it must be upon the basis of freedom in trade. THE ISSUE OF THE ELECTION. I am glad to realize that in these days the flag of free trade has been waved by the Liberal candidate. (Cheers.) I am not sure of the flag of Mr. Churchill's opponent. I am not sure what the was at the last election. I think he was a free-trader--(A voice:--" A half-and-halfer," and laughter)--a kind of shandy gaff. (Renewed laughter.) I have read with considerable care his address and some of his speeches, and, really, I do not know where he is. But, on the whole, I think this free-trader has been lassoed and bridled by the tariff reformers. He is carrying their harness. "T.R." for tariff reform, is branded on his hide (laughter); and although he is a candidate for North-West Manchester, I think he belongs to the Birmingham cattle ranch. (Loud laughter and cheers.) Really, I fail to see what use Manchester has for a thing with heart free trade and its heels protectionist, and neither one thing nor the other. (Cheers.) This is much too serious an issue for that, much too grave an issue. It is one of the gravest issues that this constituency in Lancashire could possibly decide. What is the position? I think there has been an attempt to eliminate this question out of the purview of this election. It cannot be done. If this election were to go against Mr. Churchill, the free-trade candidate, no one can deny that it would be a blow to free trade. I want Lancashire to realize what that means. There is no county in England whose fortunes are more inextricably bound up with freedom of trade than Lancashire. I wonder whether even Lancashire men fully realize what it might mean. I think it might mean a great trade catastrophe for Lancashire if there were a departure from the root principles of our fiscal system. Take the present condition of things. Before leaving the Board of Trade, I was curious to find out what is the position of Lancashire in its main industries as compared with its trade rivals. You know the contention of the tariff reformers is that, owing to the free imports which flow into this country, our trade has been destroyed because by means of protection foreign countries are able to build up great industries in competition with ours. THE COTTON TRADE. Now, what are the great industries of Lancashire? First and foremost comes the cotton trade, the greatest in the world. What has happened in the cotton industry not merely in Lancashire but throughout the world? You here in Lancashire are drawing your raw material from the ends of the earth. It has got to be carried across thousands of miles of ocean. In America, they have the cotton-fields at their own door, and you might have imagined that, with the raw material on the spot and with a high protective tariff to help it, if there was anything in tariff reform at all, that this would be peculiarly a case where protection would be triumphant and that free trade would go to the wall. Now, let me give you one or two figures. Last year from Lancashire alone, a county which is not the size of a single State in Ameria, you sold to the world, not merely to the Colonies but to all the countries of the world, £110,000,000 worth of cotton fabrics, representing an increase of the previous year of 11 per cent.* (Cheers.) Take next the United States of America. The cotton grown there is excellent cotton in quality, it is grown on the spot, and there is a huge protectionist tariff. What did they well there last year? They sold £5,700,000 worth. Lancashire free trade sells £110,000,000; United States of America, protectionist, sells £5,700,000. (Cheers.) It represents a decrease in America from the trade of the previous year of 45 per cent. You have heard a deal about unemployment. Trade has been bad and, of course, those gentlemen talk as if unemployment was the monopoly of free-trade countries. Suppose your trade in Lancashire had gone down in a single year --your export trade--by 45 per cent. Think of the mills that would be closed, of the thousands that would be thrown out of employment. Yet in Lancashire you had an increase of 11 per cent., whilst the Unite States had a decrease of 45 per cent. Then there is Germany--the bogey Germany, that paradise of protection. (Laughter.) You have every element in Germany that would make a Tory paradise--a high tariff, an exalted Imperialism and a still more exalted tax on food, a Conservative Administration, a powerful aristocracy, Socialism there being not strong enough to make a policy but just strong enough to frighten people into Toryism-- just the sort of land to live in, and yet here in Germany wages are lower by 20 per cent. than in this country, the cost of living is higher by another 20 per cent., the hours of labour are longer, and the City of London stock-jobbers, who are mostly tariff reformers, when they are asked to lend money on the freehold of this protectionist Garden of Eden, insist upon 4 per cent. and with reluctance advance then. (Laughter.) But when they are asked to advance money on the security of this free trade purgatory they are only too glad to do so at 3 per cent. (Cheers.) What does Germany do in cotton? Well, she does a little better than America. She sold last year very nearly, not quite, one-fifth of what you sold. (Laughter.) Free trade is better than protection by five to one. The trade of Germany in textiles last year decreased by 5 per cent. France is another great protectionist country and she has gone down, she only sold 12 millions, and yet she has got a tariff, she has got duties on goods, she has got protection, and she sells exactly one-tenth of what you sell of cotton goods. I am sorry to trouble you with these figures, but trade has a way of working itself out in figures always except n the tariff reform pamphlets. (Laughter.) Now, if you take your trade in cotton compared with the world during the last four years let me give you one figure, the increase in your sales during the four years is greater than the whole of the sales of the United States of America and Germany and France put together. (Cheers, and a voice, "Cotton is going" and Laughter.) Yes, cotton is going and going very strong. (Laughter.) You increased your exports in cotton goods, the products of your brain and your muscle, by 26 millions in four years, those exports were higher by 26 millions last year than they were four years ago. this si more than all the goods sent out of the cotton mills of Germany, the United States of America, and France put together. (Cheers.) So much for protection in cotton. There is another important item. What about wages? The wages in the cotton mills of Lancashire are higher than in the cotton mills of this Mulhausen, in Germany, by 40 per cent., and the hours are better. You have a bigger trade, higher wages, shorter hours, and these gentlemen come to you and say "Swap this for the long hours." (Loud cheers.) Just you ask them what they think you have come from. (A voice, "Chowbent.") MACHINERY. You have got another considerable interest in Lancashire and that is engineering. There you might think that in machinery protection might be an advantage. In the first place, you must remember that America, in more senses than one, is a country of inventions (laughter), some of them patented and some of them not. (More laughter.) Of course, they are driven, very largely owing to the scarcity of labour, to resort to machinery where in many cases you would not (hear hear), and no doubt their patent laws have been more favourable in the past, but only in the past (cheers), and the result is, it has been a great country for new machinery. The real test of free trade and protection as to which of the two is better is when they come face to face in neutral markets. That is the real test, when the commercial travellers of England meet the German and American at the same counter in China, in the Argentine, where the three go in the same warehouses to tender their goods. Which of the three comes out on top, that is the test. In cotton the free trade traveller comes out an easy first, his goods have got the gloss of freedom on them. (Hear, hear.) Well, now comes machinery. Of course, in the old days we were an easy first even in the making of machinery. It is not the case now, but I will tell you where we are very good. We are very good in adapting ideas after other people have thoroughly tried them. (Laughter.) An American tries a machine which will take him to the moon, and he[*Enc. in Reid 4-23-08*] comes down to the ground. He tries another machine and he fails again, and a third and a fourth time. At last he succeeds, and then English engineers begin to make it. (Laughter and cheers.) That has really been the experience of the last 20 or 30 years. We are rather slow, we rather allow other people to make themselves bankrupt over experiments, and then we avail ourselves of their ingenuity and their enterprise. The result is this, America last year sold to the world £18,000,000 worth of machinery, including the sales to Great Britain, and Germany sold also £18,000,000 worth of machinery. And then comes this poor old free trade country (laughter), limping along, ruined, nobody employed, occupied in consuming foreign goods, nothing to do, our ships empty, and we sold £31,000,000 worth of machinery. (Cheers.) A small country ; but you must not judge quality by size. (Laughter and cheers.) It is often the little one that comes out well. So much for machinery. In cotton we beat them with free trade. In machinery we beat them easily with free trade. SHIPPING. What is your third great industry? Shipping. If you read tariff reform pamphlets you would never know that we owned a single ship. (Laughter.) Shipping is never mentioned in decent protectionist society. (Laughter.) It does not fit into the argument. (Laughter.) So it is left out, thrown out of this Garden of Eden. What has happened in shipping ? There at any rate we meet on equal terms. You cannot put tall barriers across the ocean, you cannot erect customs houses on the waves ; and what happens ? This little country, just the size of one State of the United States of America ; the whole of Great Britain you could put down in one of the States of America, and it would fit in nicely, and here it is carrying in its ships half the trade of the world. (Cheers.) That is a gigantic thing. Reckon them all, every one of them, Germany, United States of America, Japan, France, Spain, Italy, Norway, add them all together, and we carry half the trade of the world. (Cheers.) And then what happens in the shipbuilding trade ? This trade is bad just now ; it is probably worse than it has been for a long time ; but we built more ships in our yards last year than were built in all the other shipbuilding yards in the world put together. (Cheers.) I should think that that would have satisfied anybody. Not more than any one protectionist country, but more than every one of them put together. These are your three great industries. You have the great port of Liverpool and the almost equally great port of Manchester, and a very considerable port it is. I went through it the other day, and was glad of the way in which you had carved out this great port in the middle of the land ; it is a very remarkable achievement, and it shows that that is really the way of fighting tariffs in this country ; it is by brains and enterprise, and not by those quack methods of tariff reformers. These you have shipping, machinery, and cotton, your three great industries in Lancashire, and in all three we are easily first in this free-trade country. I will tell you of a suggestion I had to make to tariff reformers supposing they got up a deputation to go to Germany to visit the Kaiser, and supposing they could carry along with them a cotton spinner who preferred the mill hours and the wages in Mühihausen to Manchester—if they scoured the Lancashire asylums they might find one. They go to the Kaiser and say, "There you are in a great country with trade and industry protected by tariffs. We come from a ruined county, a country absolutely desolated by the operations of freedom, and we have come to make a proposition to you ; you might change your cotton export trade for ours. (Loud laughter.) Then there are our engineering exports ; you might swop those. (Laughter.) And then there is our shipping ; will you give us your magnificent mercantile marine in exchange for ours ?" He would look at them and say, "Gentlemen, where did you escape from ? " (Loud laughter.) FREE TRADE AND PEACE. By every test which you like to apply, free trade comes out triumphant, and it would be the greatest catastrophe to Lancashire if a change were effected. It is an easy thing to change, but it would be very difficult for you to go back. (Cheers.) In a moment of falseness, in a moment of resentment about petty things, in a moment of fitfulness, in a pure desire for some sort of change, you may throw over this great institution that has been the making of Lancashire, and you will not get it back. Will you allow me to say this before I abandon this question of free trade ? It is not merely in the interests of trade alone that I would have you stand by freedom in our markets. Free trade is a great pacificator. We have had many quarrels and causes of quarrels during the last 50 years, but not a single one was with any first-class Power. Free trade is slowly, but surely, clearing a path through the dense and dark thicket of armaments to the sunny land of brotherhood among nations. (Cheers.) We buy hugely from nations, we sell largely to nations, we fetch here, we carry there, and we traffic everywhere. It is their interest to be on good terms with us ; it is our interest to be on good terms with them. (Cheers.) Our trade and our commerce are established through the weaving of the silken strands of peace to bind nations to us in the bonds of commercial fraternity ; and let me tell you this, the day will come when the nation that lifts up a sword against a nation will be put in the same felon category as the man who strikes his brother in anger. (Loud and continued cheering.) I know not how many generations —it may be centuries—will pass before the swords are beaten to ploughshares and the spears into pruning hooks ; but of this I feel assured, that, when that day dawns, it will be reckoned as one of the greatest and noblest achievements in the wonderful story of the human race that the men and women who dwelt in this little island, standing alone against the world, triumphantly defended the path along which humanity marched into the realms in which the Prince of Peace reigneth for ever and ever. (Loud and prolonged cheers.) Will Lancashire sell that tradition ? (Loud cries of "No.") Well, I tell you, the race which would give up that position in the history of the world is a race that you and I ought never to feel any pride in possessing relationship to. I appeal to you, men of Lancashire, not to abandon your position, whatever inducements may be offered to you, and this is all I have to say about free trade. It is a great fight, but I would not have you believe that there is nothing more to do. Free trade may be the alpha, but it is not the omega of the Liberal policy. Build on it as a foundation, but do not take away the foundation of the fabric. TRADE POLICY. It is a great foundation for this building, but it is only the foundation. I have never been a believer in the do-nothing policy for trade, and if there were time—but I have to go to another meeting (cries of " Go on ")—I would just indicate two or three points where something more could be done. There are great things to be done even for the advancement of the trade of this country, and a good deal has been done in the improvement of our foreign Consuls, establishing agencies in the Colonies, and in the Patents Act (cheers), which has brought more employment to our shores—at least, it will—than a hundred tariffs. That Act has got to be ruthlessly and rigidly administered, and I have every confidence that Mr. Winston Churchill in his new office will do so. I would wish to see reorganized the great inland transport system of this country, so as to get rid of the wasteful competition which is a burden upon the industry and the trade and the commerce of the country. I should like to see an end put to the preferential charges which are given by the railways for the conveyance of foreign produce. Free trade is not preference for the foreigner ; it is fair play for everybody. I should like to see more done in the development of water transport and rail transport so as to open up the resources of our own country. (Cheers.) THE LAND SYSTEM AND SOCIAL REFORM. Then I should like to see a reasonable, a practical, and an equitable land system. (Hear, hear.) I know of industries that have been stifled and starved, and some prevented by the unreasonable demands with regard to land. I could give you innumerable instances. I know how agriculture is depressed very largely owing to the land conditions. After all, the land of this country was not created and given as an endowment to maintain the dignity and delight of a small class. (Hear, hear.) It was given for the benefit of all the children of the soil. That has got to be seen to, and I believe if we had a forward policy on these lines you would get such a trade boom in this country that we have never witnessed the like of. (Cheers.) We talk about the development of foreign countries and possessions ; we have not come even to the development of our own country, and when I talk about trade and industry first, it is not because I think trade and industry are more important than social reform ; it is purely because I know that you must make wealth in [*Enc. in Reid 4-23-08*] the country before you distribute it, and having done that, we must see fair play to the worker in that direction. After all, this is a rich country; it is the richest country under the sun. And if there is poverty here it is not because it is a poor country. I believe it is the richest country the world has ever seen, and yet in this richest country you have hundreds of thousands of people living under conditions of poverty, destitution, and squalor that would, in the words of an old Welsh poet, "make the rocks weep." This is a stain upon the flag, and it ought to be the duty of every man in this country for the honour of his native land to put an end to it. There are men in such easy circumstances that they at any rate need not apprehend the dread spectre of unemployment, the wolves of hunger may not be waiting during the winter to prey upon their children; but still I am of those who believe that human sympathy is in the end capable of a deeper and ore potent appeal to the human heart than even interest. And if these poor people are to be redeemed, they must be redeemed not by themselves. There is nothing strikes one more than this. Owing to the stupor of despair into which they have sunk, they must be redeemed by others outside, and the appeal ought to be to every class of the community to see that in this great land all this misery and wretchedness shall be put an end to. This is what I hope to have some part in. I cannot boast, like Mr. Hyndman, the Socialist, that I belong to a different class to the audiences I address. I am a man of the people (cheers), live amongst them, and it has been the greatest joy of my life to have some part in fighting the battles of the class from whom I am proud to have sprung. (Cheers.) And I will tell you why I am specially interested in your candidate. He and I have been working together for five years, and when I saw him five years ago in Parliament, at the outset of a career which I knew was going to be a great one, as he was ready to put the whole of his great and brilliant powers at the service of the people, I welcomed his comradeship with a glad heart, and if you will allow me to say so, I believe that he and I, working together, can do something, at any rate, to relieve this degradation upon the social conditions of England. This is neither conceit nor vanity on my part; it is faith. The task is a great one, the task is a difficult one, the task of the reformer is a heart-breaking one. There are sympathies to arouse, there are suspicions to allay, there are hopes to excite, there are fears to allay, there are faint hearts to sustain,there are hot heads to restrain (laughter and cheers), there is the dormant interest in right to wake up, there is many a vested interest in wrong to be beaten down. This is a task that has broken and baffled many men, and when you get a man like Mr. Winston Churchill, who is prepared, in spite of previous discouragement, to face that task, then I say to you it ought to be the pride of a great constituency like this to give him that strength which alone comes from the confidence of a great victory. (Loud cheering.)EDWARD E.HIGGINS, PRESIDENT O.S.MARDEN, VICE-PRESIDENT FREDERIC L.COLVER, SECRETARY DAVID G.EVANS, TREASURER Success Magazine A PERIODICAL OF AMERICAN LIFE ORISON SWETT MARDEN, EDITOR NEW YORK UNIVERSITY BUILDING WASHINGTON SQUARE April 24th, 1908. To the President, Washington, D. C. Dear Mr. President:- Since talking with you yesterday afternoon, I have become stronger in my belief that a veto of the Naval Appropriation Bill in its entirety, in case the four battleship appropriation cannot be obtained, is a plan worth your most careful consideration. I base my belief on the following facts and theories: 1.- The country is absolutely with you, in my judgment, in demanding a greatly increased Navy. I have no shadow of a doubt of this. 2.- The obstructionists of the Senate must be taught to realize and believe this. If it can be done in no other way, it will probably be cheaper and better to do it now, than to let things drag along for another six months or a year. 3.- In no better and surer way, perhaps, can this be done, than by a veto message based on the high ground of the necessity for properly and adequately protecting our country. I do not believe it will be necessary to scare the country by expressing any fear of war--your own personal statement that our present protection is inadequate, joined with what the press will do in support of this, will be, I think, sufficient to flood Washington with letters that will force Congress to recede from it obstructionist tactics. 4.- The very worst that could happen, I believe, would that Congress would pass the present bill over your veto. They would not dare give you less than is contained in the bill, no only because of public sentiment, but because they tremendously need your personal support in their political contests this year. As a matter of fact, I believe that there will be a flame of patriotism arise from all parts of the country, particularly if the veto should come about the time when the fleet if entering, or lying at, San Francisco. 5.- There is still one other argument in favor of the veto, which ought to be most carefully weighed by you, I think, and that is the question as to whether-- knowing what you know of the really urgent need for a greater Navy-- you would be doing your full duty if you To the President---2--- should fail to take every possible step to get what is necessary. If you do fail to do this, the responsibility is perhaps divided between Congress and yourself, instead of being wholly on Congress, where, it ought to be. I know you will understand that the spirit in which this letter is written is merely suggestive- not argumentative. You know far better than any other man what is wise and possible to do under all the circumstances. It may be of interest to you to know, however, that Ii passed the evening last night with Senator Bourne of Oregon, and asked his opinion of the wisdom of the veto. At first he dismissed the matter as being impossible- then he began to ponder over it- and finally, saying that the idea grew upon him greatly, he called up at 10:30 P.M. a friend in the House and asked him to come over for a conference. I apologize for this long letter. Very respectfully yours, Edward E. Higgins [*Senator Beveridge also approves a veto - so he expressed himself to me*][*F*] EDWARD E.HIGGINS, PRESIDENT O.S.MARDEN, VICE-PRESIDENT FREDERIC L.COLVER, SECRETARY DAVID G.EVANS, TREASURER Success Magazine A PERIODICAL OF AMERICAN LIFE ORISON SWETT MARDEN, EDITOR NEW YORK UNIVERSITY BUILDING WASHINGTON SQUARE April 24th, 1908. [*H*] To the President, Washington, D. C. Dear Mr. President:- This is to confirm my telegram sent at 11 A.M. today reading as follows: "We are just telegraphing every Senator, as follows: Our information convinces us that all sections of country enthusiastically approved President's policy for greatly increased Navy, regardless of cost. If four battleship appropriation be not granted, we shall urge President to veto Naval bill and appeal to country, and shall help in every every possible way." All of the telegrams to Senators went out at about 10:45, and should have been delivered in the Senate Chamber by 112:30. I hope that they may have had some slight effect, at least, upon the nerves of some of the weak-kneed ones. Very respectfully yours, Edward E. HigginsHENRY K. McHARG 40 WALL STREET NEW YORK April 24th, 1908. WILLIAM EMLEN ROOSEVELT, Esq., New York City. My dear Mr. Roosevelt:- You know I have more or less interest in Virginia and Tennessee, being President of the Virginia Iron, Coal & Coke Company, and I have just heard that there is a vacancy in the Federal Judgeship, as I understand it, of the Northern District of Tennessee or Virginia, and that a man by the name of H. H. Haynes, of Bristol, is being urged very strongly for this position, especially by Benjamin F. Dulaney, who is his brother-in-law, and whose reputation is very unsavory, even in the community in which he lives. Mr. Dulaney also is a Democrat and has been looked upon as the leader of the Democratic party in Eastern Tennessee. I am told by people in whose word I have the most absolute confidence, who are not politicians but reputable business men in the community, that Judge H. H. Haynes is not a proper person to appoint to this position. Most of these gentlemen had no axe to grind and did not suggest anyone for the position, one of them, however, said that he knew Judge Fowler of Knoxville,- who as I understand is an applicant,- and that he was,- to use this gentleman's language,- a man of fine parts and ability. However; the purpose of this note is not to ask you to urge the appointment of anyone special, but its main abjest is to oppose the nomination of 1HENRY K. McHARG 40 WALL STREET NEW YORK W. E. R., Esq., 4/24/08. Judge Haynes, who, I am sure,-if the President could be sufficiently informed in regard to his character and his connections, &c.,- that he would feel as I do on the subject. Very truly yours, Henry K. McHarg[*[Enc. in W E Roosevelt 4-24-08]*]a great deal. Do you remember at the end where they [bur] bear the Captain along to Burial "And all along that road the Tilbury Band Blared indiscreetly the Dead March in Saul." I like "Taillefer the Trouvère" a great deal. Your loving Kermit. [*[Roosevelt]*] [*Ackd 4/04/08*] Sunday [THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON] Dearest Father, The rowing season is progressing. I am rowing three in the first eight. I am being worked up towards bow, because of my unfortunate weight, or rather lack of weight, but I'm rowing in pretty goodform, and my reputation from past years race has stood me in good stead, being mentioned every now and then by the coach. Our first race is against the second freshman crew on a week from next Saturday. I so hope you can get off that African. It would be just too wonderful for anything. However, I am being very careful not to look forward to it too much in case it doesn't come off. I have always dreamed of someday when my ship came in crossing Africa but now it looks as if perhaps the ship wouldn't have to come in first! I have been rereading parts of Captain Craig. I like some parts of it[*Ackd 4/25/08 R ppf*] P. O. Box 1222 CABLE ADDRESS, ROOSEVELT Roosevelt & Son, 33 Wall Street, New York, 1908. The President, Washington, D. C. Dear Theodore:-- I enclose you with this a letter from Mr. Henry K. Mc Harg. You probably recollect him, he was a friend of Jacob Riis, and backed Riis in some of this charitable work. He has no interest in this matter which he writes about, except that he feels it is his duty to let you know the reputation of this candidate for the judgeship. Mother is looking forward to seeing Edith, but I am sorry that I shall probably be out of town on Saturday and Sunday and may not see her. I hope Ted is all right of his sore throat, and thought he might come on here too for the dance Saturday night and stay with us, but have heard nothing from him yet. Yours truly, W Emlen Roosevelt.[*[For enc. see McHarg to W E Roosevelt 4-24-08]*]Ackd 5-6-08 T Cf Embassy of the United States of America Berlin. April 24, 1908. Mr. President: I am sending you by express, through I. P. Roosa, Esquire, the Government Despatch Agent in New York, a copy of the illustrated history of the Castle of the Wartburg, which has recently been prepared and published by the Grand Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach. This copy is one of the limited number which the Grand Duke has set aside for sovereigns and chiefs of state,and I have available myself of the opportunity to obtain it for presentation to you. If I were just entering the Government service, or if I were intending to continue in it for an indefinite time, I should not venture to offer a present to you; but, under the circumstances, and in view of the fact that I have resigned my post and as now retiring to private life in America, I beg you to accept this account of one of the most interesting monuments of antiquity in Germany, as a mark of my appreciation of your kindness toward me and as a souvenir of my service during your administration as Ambassador to Germany. I am, Mr. President, with great respect, Very sincerely yours, Charlemagne Tower. The Honorable Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States.4-24-08 Sen Beveridge phones that after his speech this afternoon Hale asked that no vote be taken & the Senate adjourned. [*V*] They have succeeded in getting Guggenheim on their side & he thinks the President should see Guggenheim on the morning Thinks Frye is on our side xHiggins[*[attached to Higgins 4-24-08]*][ inc . in Higgins 4 - 24- 08 ] Fairbanks Foraker LaFollette Cannon Knox Root Bryan Tom Johnson John Johnson Gray Folk Scattered 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 3 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 5 1 1 1 1 2 5 2 1 12 10 1 2 2 8 1 1 17 6 3 8 2 1 7 3 1 1 1 21 10 3 1 1 1 6 1 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 6 2 2 1 1 1 1 15 9 3 3 2 3 2 1 3 1 1 1 2 10 1 2 1 1 2 48 26 9 8 4 15 9 3 1 3 1 1 6 1 1 1 14 1 1 3 3 11 13 2 2 2 43 61 13 5 11 1 9 14 1 5 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 5 3 2 2 2 2 1 23 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 38 14 2 4 10 7 1 2 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 21 7 1 1 11[*[enc in Higgins 4-2 4-08]*] 1 1 1 1 1 21 5 1 7 7 1 2 2 1 1 21 1 2 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 20 10 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 21 15 2 1 5 1 1 2 2 2 20 3 2 5 4 7 1 1 1 1 4 27 7 2 3 5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 39 18 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 9 1 2 5 1 25 9 2 4 1 1 8 1 1 21 4 1 2 4 4 8 1 1 6 2 1 21 2 1 2 1 5 1 1 1 5 1 2 1 80 22 2 2 10 4 8 27 2 1 1 1 2 2 5 5 2 1 4 31 5 2 2 1 2 3 1 346 93 9 17 30 7 27 71 6 2 3 5 14 4 28 39 4 3 14 1 8 7 2 1 1 2 1 14 1 18 1 1 2 1 1 5 1 4 8 23 7 2 28 39 4 3 14 1 8 7 2 1 2 9 1 23 24 3 10 3 3 1 1 1 1 4 1 10 13 1 1 2 4 1 3 9 3 1 1 1 9 11 2 5 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 9 1 2 2 2 1 4 15 1 1 18 19 2 2 5 1 3 3 2 6 2 9 5 3 2 4 2 3 20 4 3 36 22 4 2 7 2 12 1 1 1 2 7 1 3 5 1 2 1 2 99 1 18 1 1 5 1 23 98 15 6 8 1 3 1 164 136 33 11 46 8 25 40 6 1 2 3 32 25 80 26 17 14 1178 59 192 13 22 99 84 18 429 81 15 11 695 161 328 4 47 9 5 79 14 2 0 112 38 55 2 15 [*[enc in Higgins 4-24-08]*] RESULTS OF THE VOTE BY THE LIFE SUBSCRIBERS OF SUCCESS MAGAZINE TAKEN IN FEBRUARY AND MARCH, 1908 Roosevelt Taft Hughes Cortelyou Question #1 Question #2 Question #3 Question #4 Question #5 Question #6 Question #7 Question #8 Choice Section I Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Section 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Connecticut 119 5 120 3 121 120 65 55 106 14 121 1 112 9 Connecticut 73 3 31 35 1 19 52 2 2 Delaware 13 1 12 2 13 13 10 5 11 3 13 1 12 3 Delaware 6 5 1 3 7 Disct of Columbia 37 35 34 2 34 2 20 15 34 4 35 2 34 5 Disc of Col 13 1 11 8 8 11 2 1 Maine 163 164 162 166 100 65 156 10 159 4 160 4 Maine 108 4 0 23 55 2 16 34 5 1 Maryland 126 4 124 6 127 4 127 3 76 55 110 18 126 4 109 22 Maryland 80 2 12 23 1 19 29 3 1 Massachusetts 386 6 384 8 385 7 388 3 780 110 342 50 390 2 384 8 Massachusetts 244 5 1 48 99 4 67 114 15 4 New Hampshire 77 1 77 1 77 1 75 3 26 45 65 10 76 1 77 1 Hew Hamps 38 1 11 93 16 21 1 New Jersey 210 13 208 15 711 12 213 9 140 93 198 75 221 210 10 New Jersey 150 5 20 79 2 24 52 7 1 1 New York 743 18 742 17 741 16 748 12 460 300 685 70 740 20 723 37 New York 383 31 3 59 142 10 313 772 20 5 3 1 Pennsylvania 810 30 809 31 802 37 816 24 410 430 690 148 820 19 789 51 Penns. 538 13 2 107 288 10 114 108 77 1 10 Rhode Island 60 4 60 4 60 4 60 4 45 20 61 3 64 61 3 Rhode Island 137 11 18 6 26 3 2 Vermont 105 1 104 3 103 3 103 63 43 94 7 98 97 3 Vermont 54 1 1 10 18 1 13 14 1 1 2 Virginia 135 8 138 5 132 6 132 6 60 82 128 13 140 2 110 34 Virgina 53 14 2 11 10 2 12 32 5 3 West Virginia 113 6 115 4 118 1 118 1 74 45 100 17 85 33 74 44 W. Virginia 159 4 21 30 4 7 26 5 1 3097 97 3092 99 3088 92 3112 67 1829 1362 2780 392 3086 89 7950 224 1836 84 9 380 899 37 539 798 95 6 22 9 Section II Section II Illinois 573 13 573 14 523 13 573 11 391 162 510 22 529 4 509 18 Illinois 356 9 59 141 7 46 104 23 1 18 Indiana 269 6 269 6 271 4 274 1 180 95 260 14 369 6 260 14 Indiana 161 10 39 75 3 28 59 6 2 4 1 Michigan 404 7 407 9 410 6 408 8 210 196 378 38 414 1 400 14 Michigan 289 7 54 170 1 22 87 17 2 6 4 Ohio 654 11 653 10 650 15 650 15 433 232 575 90 333 132 620 35 Ohio 412 44 120 767 5 36 131 35 9 2 Kentucky 107 108 106 1 104 51 46 97 11 105 1 98 5 Kentucky 42 4 2 15 14 2 11 14 2 1 Wisconsin 207 7 205 9 208 5 207 7 96 118 184 30 212 1 197 16 Wisconsin 116 8 26 35 2 17 38 4 1 2 1 2169 44 2164 48 2168 44 2166 42 1341 849 2004 305 3062 145 2094 102 Section III Section III Iowa 358 4 349 9 356 6 353 5 224 134 304 56 357 2 340 20 Iowa 240 15 36 114 5 38 65 13 1 8 Kansas 286 3 286 3 283 8 284 6 150 136 282 3 280 2 267 17 Kansas 152 10 59 73 3 10 34 9 1 9 1 Minnesota 753 4 753 4 348 4 353 3 133 116 309 40 250 1 247 5 Minnesota Missouri 170 12 24 79 2 18 28 11 4 Nebraska 214 4 212 6 315 3 217 1 89 129 176 37 212 4 204 12 Nebraska 131 4 22 53 3 8 26 6 4 North Dakota 125 3 127 1 126 2 137 1 73 52 100 24 123 1 122 2 N. Dakota 85 1 10 41 3 6 3 1 2 1 South Dakota 136 2 137 1 135 3 125 3 73 81 110 29 138 1 138 8 S. Dakota 180 4 8 38 4 3 19 3 5 1614 23 1603 28 1600 32 1606 26 803 802 1391 218 1599 15 1544 91 975 54 202 450 20 96 220 49 5 35 2 Section IV Section IV Alabama 79 7 80 5 98 4 81 3 37 43 70 13 82 1 67 15 Alabama 31 8 7 15 11 8 5 2 [*[enc in Higgins 4-24-08]*] Section IV Section IV Alabama 79 7 80 5 78 4 81 3 37 43 70 13 82 1 67 15 Alabama 31 8 7 15 11 8 5 2 Arkansas 53 1 52 2 54 1 53 1 21 31 49 6 54 1 44 8 Arkansas 19 2 4 8 2 9 2 2 Florida 98 2 98 2 97 3 95 2 60 54 100 14 111 93 8 Florida 65 9 16 27 3 11 30 6 2 Georgia 99 4 96 4 99 4 102 1 49 55 92 10 100 1 98 6 Georgia 52 9 2 6 16 3 14 8 5 2 Louisiana 60 1 54 5 57 3 59 1 20 41 55 6 60 1 55 6 Louisiana 26 3 6 14 1 2 13 1 1 Mississippi 50 1 53 4 53 3 54 1 25 42 45 12 56 51 5 Mississippi 9 5 5 6 7 8 10 3 North Carolina 90 4 88 6 90 4 91 4 47 48 83 11 92 2 80 16 No Carolina 29 4 2 6 16 14 13 2 Oklahoma 88 2 88 2 89 3 87 3 44 46 73 17 87 2 78 11 Oklahoma 40 9 9 17 2 6 8 1 1 1 South Carolina 55 2 53 4 54 3 55 2 22 35 46 11 56 1 43 10 So Carolina 19 4 1 7 1 1 12 Tennessee 77 2 76 3 79 1 77 2 45 33 69 8 74 72 5 Tennessee 28 4 15 14 9 17 5 Texas 189 7 189 10 190 4 190 51 106 90 152 39 190 4 142 49 Texas 79 9 8 30 10 23 2 1 938 33 926 47 938 33 944 25 474 518 834 147 967 13 824 139 397 64 4 83 170 17 88 151 32 11 1 Section V Arizona 41 41 26 25 1 19 18 38 2 41 22 8 Arizona 25 2 3 6 1 4 5 2 1 1 California 418 3 410 7 412 3 416 2 192 142 368 41 419 1 404 8 California 292 14 50 121 10 25 93 13 9 3 Colorado 180 1 180 1 179 1 178 3 117 50 159 19 178 1 176 1 Colorado 115 2 19 44 6 15 47 6 [?] 2 1 Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming First Choice Second " Third " Total Yes Total No Total Vote Cast[*F*] [*Cf T*] WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON. My dear Mr. Loeb: I am directed by the Secretary to inclose you herewith copies of letters which he has today written to Senator Scott and Mr. New. Very sincerely yours, Fred W. Carpenter Private Secretary. Hon. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President. Inclosures.[*F*] [*Cf T*] WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON. My dear Mr. Loeb: I am directed by the Secretary to inclose you herewith copies of letters which he has today written to Senator Scott and Mr. New. Very sincerely yours, Fred W. Carpenter Private Secretary. Hon. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President. Inclosures.[*[For 2 encs see 4-25-08]*][*Ackd 4-28-08*] The New York Times Times Square OFFICE OF THE EDITOR OF THE SATURDAY REVIEW OF BOOKS April 25., 1908. The Secretary to the President, The White House, Washington. Dear Mr Secretary: May I trouble you once more in the matter of the article descriptive of the President at work? Mr Putnam, who is bring it out in a little book, is anxious to use the title "A WEEK INK THE WHITE HOUSE WITH THEODORE ROOSEVELT: A Study of the President at the Nation's Business." Would there be any objection to the employment of this title? I am, dear Mr Secretary, Yours sincerely, Wm Bayard Hale [[shorthand]]G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS PUBLISHERS, BOOKSELLERS, AND STATIONERS 27 AND 29 WEST 23D STREET, NEW YORK 24 BEDFORD STREET, STRAND, LONDON [*Ackd 4/27/08*] The Knickerbocker Press [*ppf*] [*P*] Putnam's Monthly APR [May] 25, 1908. Dear Mr. President:-- I am writing to report that I have arranged with Mr. Bayard Hale, who has recently had the honor of personal association with yourself, for the republication, in book form, of the monograph that he is bringing into print in the "N. Y. Times" and elsewhere, which gives a personal study of our President at work, and of the methods employed by him in the conduct of the executive business of the nation's government. I need hardly say that I have a personal pleasure, as well as a business interest, in associating the imprint of our New York and London Houses with so sympathetic a study of my valued friend and author. Knowing Mr. Hale as I do, it is not necessary for me to ask for a confirmation of the statement printed in the "Times" that the monograph as worded has met approval of the President. I have suggested to Mr. Hale the addition of one or two paragraphs that seem to me to be requisite in order to complete the picture of the average day and of the average week of our strenuous executive. These will be submitted to you, I am, with much respect, Yours faithfully, Geo. Haven Putnam President Roosevelt.COPY. WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON. April 25, 1908. PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL. My dear Mr. New: Some discussion has arisen as to the Temporary Chairman of the Republican Convention. I believe the custom is for the Chairman of the Natoinal Committee to name the Chairman, subject possibly to the approval of the Sub-Committee on Arrangements and of the National Committee. Lest there be any misunderstanding as to my attitude in the matter, I send the inclosed note to Senator Scott, who was discussing the subject with me the other day. I find that he is out of town, but I transmit a copy of the note to you. Very sincerely yours, Wm. H. Taft. Hon. Harry S. New, Indianapolis, Ind. Inclosure. [*[Enc. in Carpenter 4-25-08]*]COPY. WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON. April 25, 1908. PERSONAL. My dear Senator: I have had a talk with the President, with reference to the temporary Chairmanship. You are fully aware of the action which has been taken by him. Since our conference of a day or two ago, I have been giving the matter a good deal of though, and I have reached this conclusion: That it would be most unwise to have a controversy over the temporary Chairmanship, and it would be still more unwise on my part to take any part in such controversy, if unfortunately it is to arise. After talking with the President, I have not the slightest objection to the selection of Senator Beveridge, nor indeed have I the slightest objection to the selection of Senator Dolliver. I think that either would make an admirable temporary Chairman. I am entirely willing to submit it to the discretion of the committee, with which really the responsibility lies, whether I am willing to do so or not. I am anxious, and you will readily understand why, to avoid even the appearance of taking part in the issue. Very sincerely yours, Wm/ H. Taft. Hon. N. B. Scott, United States Senate. [*[Enc. in Carpenter 4-25-08]*](Copy) Ritch, Woodford, Bovee & Butcher, 18 Wall Street, New York April 25, 1908. My dear Mr. Woodruff: Yours of April 14th instant, is this morning received. It followed me to the West and only reaches me now. You need not be at all embarrassed about your application for funds. I shall subscribe nothing towards the expenses of our State Convention. That Convention hurt Governor Hughes and hurt him badly. It has been accepted all over the country as indication that our delegation at Chicago is only for him in name; against him in fact; and really for our good friend Secretary Taft. It has cost me much hard work and some little money to repair the damage. But the damage will be required and we will be in line at Chicago. The gentlemen in our State Committee and Convention who succeeded in creating this impression, whether intentionally or not, can well afford to pay the bills of the State Convention. As to the expenses at Chicago, Governor Hughes' friends are honorably bound to bear their part. How much will the expenses be? Is it at all necessary to take to Chicago any such outfit as you suggest? While it may add to the dignity of our State demonstration, will it affect a note? As soon as you will give me the outside figure I will consult with my colleagues, Mr. Low and Mr. Hazard (Mr. Butler will be in Europe until June 1st) and we will at once answer you. I am sure they will agree with me in wishing to do just what is right. Very truly yours, (Sgd) Stewart L. Woodford. Honorable Timothy L. Woodruff, Chairman Republican State Committee, 12 East 30th Street, New York City. [*[Enc. in Woodruff 4-29-08]*]Senator Beveridge wants President to know that "Senator Nixon is wavering against the battleship matter." [*V*] 2.15 pm April 25, 1908[*AcKd 4/29/08*] UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE PHILIPPINES Personal. April 27, 1908. My dear Mr. Loeb:- I am writing simply to remind you of our conversation of a few days ago. I need not say to you that I dislike extremely to take up with the President the question of small appointments in the government service and for this reason I have refrained absolutely from bringing to his attention the question of Massachusetts appointments at the Government Printing Office. I appreciate fully the great pressure which was brought to bear upon Mr. Stillings and which is now being exerted upon Captain Bryan to secure the retention or reinstatement of employees and I fully realize also that some reduction has been necessary in the interests of economy and good administration. Realizing this I have refrained in a large majority of cases from making any recommendation at all while in my other cases I have simply written formal letters in response to urgent requests from friends at home. There have been, however, in the last two years a number of cases in which I took a real and personal interest and which have been brought again and again to the attention of the appointing officer. The result has been that the two Massachusetts men holding the highest offices in the Printing Office have been practically shorn of all power and since Mr. Stillings was appointed not one request for promotion, retention or reinstatement bearing theUNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE PHILIPPINES endorsement of Senator Crane or myself has been granted. This is shown without any doubt by the careful records which have been kept in our offices. Even with a reduced force there have been of necessity vacancies occuring in the force as retained and I am unwilling and unable to believe that in every case my friends an I have been led to endorse unworthy or incompetent men, not can I believe that the skilled men in every branch of the printing business are to be found exclusively in states outside of Massachusetts and New England. There are two cases in which I am especially interested at the present time. The first is that of Mr. W. W. Brady who was employed in the bindery but is now in the Bureau of Engraving and who came to me with letters of highest recommendation from the best binders in Cambridge and also from personal friends of mine including President Elliot of Harvard. The second case is that of Mr. Mc Carthy, brother of the Surveyor of the Port of Boston. He was demoted and on account of the heavy laborer's work which he was forced to perform he was compelled to send in his resignation a short time ago. I will not take your time and mine to go into the details of these cases which Captain Bryan has absolutely refused to consider but if there is any way in which these two reinstatements can be brought about without taking the matter to the President I should be very greatly obliged. Very truly yours, H. C. Lodge William Loeb, Jr., Esq.[*navy*] [*[ca 4-27-08]*] [*[Plan B approved & Sent Navy 4/27/08]*] It is considered that the most important duty to be performed by the Atlantic Fleet during its cruise from San Francisco to Hampton Roads is to carry out its Autumn target practice in Manila Bay in November. This practice can be carried out without much hurry if but one squadron is called upon to visit a Chinese port. For political reasons, however, it may not be considered advisable to treat one country differently from another and, therefore, in these plans the whole Fleet is kept together in all its visits. Plan A. This contemplates a stay of the whole Fleet of six days at Auckland, Sydney, Melbourne, Albany, Yokohama, and Chefoo, coating to be at Auckland, Albany, and Chefoo. It is believed that six days is the minimum time that should be spent at Yokohama in order that the visits of ceremony that must be exchanged at Yokohama and at the seat of the Chinese Government at Tokyo may proceed in an orderly and dignified manner. Plan B. If Amoy is substituted for Chefoo as the Chinese port to be visited the itinerary can be laid out for the whole Fleet to visit Sydney, Melbourne, Yokohama, and Amoy for a visit of seven days each, and Auckland and Albany six days, arriving at Manila Bay about November 8th for the fall target practice. Plan C. If the visit to China could be dispensed with altogether a more desirable itinerary could be laid out by which the whole Fleet would visit Sydney, Melbourne, and Yokohama for a visit of eight days each, arriving at Manila Bay about November 4th, for fall target practice. With either of these plans adopted it is recommended that the ALABAMA and MAINE shall proceed across to Manila Bay independently of the Fleet and that these vessels continue on leisurely to the United States via Suez Canal.(Copy) Plan B. INITERARY ATLANTIC FLEET. Port Arrive Sail Distance to At sea In port next port. San Francisco - - - - July 7 2100 9 - - - - Tues. Honolulu July 16 July 23 3850 16 + 1 7 Thursday Thursday Auckland August 9 August 15 1284 5 6 Sunday Saturday Sydney August 20 August 27 575 3 7 Thursday Thursday Melbourne August 29 September 5 1350 6 7 Saturday Saturday Albany Sept. 11 Sept. 17 3300 14 6 Friday Thursday Philippines October 1 October 10 1750 7 9 Thursday Saturday Yokohama October 17 October 24 1343 5 7 Saturday Saturday Amoy 2nd Sqd. October 29 November 4 666 3 6 Thursday Wednesday Manila 1st Sqd. October 31 Saturday Manila 2nd Sqd. November 7 Saturday April 27, 1908. Approved THEODORE ROOSEVELT.[*[For 1. attachmt see Memo (RB) ca 4-27-08]*]Memoranda [*[ca 4-27-08]*] I learned from Mr. Wu that it would be perfectly satisfactory, if only half the fleet should visit China - so I hope that itwill not be found necessary to send more than 8 ships to Away Plan B to be carried out - R.B.This meets with Sec'y Root's approval.[*[attached to ca-4-27-08 "It is considered..."]*]Cincinati, Ohio, April 28, 1908. President Theodore Roosevelt, Washington D.C. Dear Sir: Surely you are not indifferent to the truth that there are hundreds and hundreds of thousands of men out of e yment and hundreds of thousands of families living in miserable des tion. This thing continuing big families as well as little ones will m be starving to death. What is Dives - our Uncle Samuel, boastful of his wealth and his land of Liberty and of his "Americanism" if you please - going to do about it? If I were his exponent as you are, I would utmost to these people from their torments and to forever prevent a ro of such a thing. If a tree is known by its fruits why should not a system of busine be known by its fruits? Now if you know of one more damnadle the the one we are living under please keep it to yourself; do not uncover it. From childhood I was taught to pray "Thy Kingdom come, Thy wi done in earth as it is in heaven!" and I am still prayi for it. It is a prayer of needs and I think God sees we never need more than we need it today. Do you imagine there will be that pro upon one another in that kingdom of his, where his will is done, there is in this, where man's will is done? The essential teachi of the Bible - God's word - is that all men, small and gre at all times and every where do his will. 2152.. Not to do his will is to disobey - is to come short of that humility that opens the Kingdom for us - to disobey is to transgress, to transgress is sin and the wages of sin is death. But we all want to live, here and now, and hereafter - in the world to come. We are all here at God's pleasure, to live pleasing to him, and falling so to live we have made a failure of life no matter what wealth we have won or what great works we have done. Salvation lies not in these things but in delieving on the Lord Jesus Christ when God the Father sent. When we have thus believed we are found doing the work of God and all other work will be a joy and a source of happiness. Life is a matter of right relationships toward God and men; and "Love is law" in both. We have never learned the right way to live together. Instead of loving one another and being helpful and kind and compassionate and having things so ordered that they will be contributory to such a way of living, facilitating justice and diminishing temptation, we live in indifference, in hate, in exploitation one of another, in oppressing the weak, the widow, and the fatherless, working injustice and wrong and calling such things right, and are found all the while multiplying and strengthening temptations to evil. To such a state have we come in seeking inventions - substitutions for God's way - that we have gone almost wholly over to Mammon and about the only religion known in the United States today is the worship of Mammon. You occupy a unique position as a Christian at the head of the most worldly, Godless, Christian (?) nation of civilization. It is a wonder Christianity and Worldliness do not each lay hold of a leg and a foot 2163.. and walk off in such away as to rend you assunder. Seems to me that every once in awhile you must find yourself so set upon that you would like to release some of the strenuosity you are accredited with, in weilding that big stick you are pictured with, upon a system that contems God and harpies manhood of the race. Mr. President you have my sympathy, and if you had my hatred for the system we live under, that makes for the destruction of the rich and poor, high and low, there would soon be abroad in this land one of the biggest and most effective revolutions the world has ever know; with the result that, money grubbing and property getting, and want and the fear of want, would cease and everybody would work, everybody have abundance, evil and the temptation to evil be largly done away, and the God of heaven be glorified. Doing this you would be letting your light shine, and so unique is your position that I am of opinion that who have been President before you none ever had so great opportunity to achieve results for the nation, and all mankind by consequence, as have you. Your influence for good or evil no man can estimate. The great common people are hungering, longing, groaning for deliverance from poverty and wretchedness, and the establishing of justice and brotherly kindness, whereby they may be fed, clothed, housed, educated, elevated and developed into the best men and women - citizens - possible, and life here and now, and the hope of life hereafter, be made surer to them. No sacrifice is too great in order to the production of such a result. Shall love of property or of power to dominate our fellows, hinder the introduction of so great a good? Shall selfishness, and ignorance, and covetousness the synonym 2174.. of bestly idolatry further defer our entering into the promised land? The church where I sometimes attend has on one of its walls "Christ our only dread," and on the opposite wall "The Bible our only faith and practice," and I imagine they think these things along with taking the name Christian make of them a "peculiar" people - Christians. It seems to me church people ought to found doing things, doing peculiar things, as for instance living to make the world better, being in the world but not of the world, declaring the whole gospel of God that destruction may not wait on any man or woman through not having the whole gospel proclaimed to them, for there are things that men and women may not do as well as things they must do if they are to live, and both these they should hear. Interest and increase is forbiden church people and the laying up of treasures upon the earth whether rent or other sources. As a man should be ashamed to hold his fellow man in bondage so he should be ashamed to own or desire to own his fellow man's home. These some of covetousness and are in violation of the law and the prophets, as is also the wage system and profit taking, not to mention franchises and special privileges, though yielding to ones self to them is to be endued with thrift which is so great a virtue in some men's eyes. Thrift, one of the insidious by-ways by which wrong starting at one and becomes right at the other. The Church is bold, tolerably bold, towards this one evil of the world - the liquor truffle, and it deplores the social evil, but it is sycophantic in the presence of banking and big business and special privilege, and blind to the general cussedness of business, on the principle I suppose that its members like the twelve jurymen who set the hog thief free have each [a little heart] 2185.. a little of the hog. The church takes the name of Christian and has very great respect of persons; it is such a decotee of Mammon that Midas and his business may come in and remain in the world at the same time, but the saloon keeper having repented must change his business. Church members the country over are heard saying that men and women can not live any better than do so long as conditions remain as they are. They know that they ought to live better, that they are held to do God's will whatever the conditions, that they want to live better, but it never seems to occur to them to change the conditions; pups do get their eyes open after nine days; and it does seem people ought to get their eyes open after 1900 years when so much depends upon it. What is hindering? Ignorance. The church is apologetic and is discounting God's word. The church is apostate; and today is institutional - attend on the services and the sacraments and contribute liberally and you are a good church member, How can we say Christian? Let the church turn and proclaim the whole word and insist on obedience and there will be no lack of men and means and no question that a way will be found to bring the Kingdom of heaven. No man can do more than you to help this turning. Let us not every great and good agency to work for the realization of our highest interest which is a common interest. In closing this long letter in the interest of a grander and greater humanity, let me ask you to reach Zachariah 7, 8-12 and look up the references. Here is a gem with references to Luke 12, 15, and Heb. 12, 5: "Incline my heart unto thy testimonies And not to covetousness." Character is what God wants in men. In old times hebrew kings were required to take away the high places and work for righteousness among the people. If their work was grand how shall we characterize yours, considering the age, 2196.. the greatness of the people, and the far reaching effects. The sabbath was made for man not man for the sabath. The church was made for man not man for the church. The Constitution was made for man not man for the Constitution. Governments are made by and for men not men for governments and I hold with the Declaration of Independence that when a government becomes destructive of inalienable rights it is the duty of the people to abolish it and to institute a new government wherein dwelleth Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity culminating in Righteousness. These men that want to live now and hereafter are your brothers. Lead on. Most respectfully, H. C. Babbitt. I have kept this a long time. I only wish when you had the place and the power you had had clearer vison. Read The Truth About Socialism, by Allan Benson. Best Wishes H.C.B. [*220*]be premature to do so. I think you might be attracted, while in Uganda, by the striking snow mountain Rwenzori, which lies to the West, with its very striking scenery & vegetation. But whatever you do, you should not get down with the stifling climate of the Upper Nile until November. I have just heard from Bryce on the same topic. I shall continue to write to you from time to time if I do not worry you. I am pleased to notice that Mr Taft to whom you did 28 April STATION, WOODFORD. KNIGHTON, BUCKHURST HILL. [*Ackd 5/11/08*] My dear Roosevelt I am so glad to notice that you begin to enjoy the pleasures of anticipation. July August and September are excellent months in British East Africa the climate being very exhilarating at that time. There is no doubt you will have the best of a good time with my varied itinerary- Forest, plain, bush and mountain - and the richest fauna in the world. Col Hayes Sadler shall there is no doubt take a great delight in putting you through. I have not felt justified of course in writing to him yet until you authorize me to do so. I have however written to Hesketh Bell of Uganda as to the proper route from Entebbe on the Victoria lake northward to Gondokoro, and southward from the same in case you should choose to go that way. I have certain maps but the routes are not plainly set out. I also enquired about the means of conveyance. The maps & information I will send later. I did not mention your name as I fancied that it wouldSTATION, WOODFORD. KNIGHTON, BUCKHURST HILL. me the honour of presenting me, is very likely to fulfill the prophecy you then made. - i e 3 years ago. I am enclosing an article of Winston Churchill's. Though a distinguished politician I do not think he is a very sound sportsman as I daresay you will discover if you read it but it is a bright picture. With warm regards yours always faithfully E N Buxton Clare thanks you for your kind messageAckd 4/29/08 EDWARD E. HIGGINS, PRESIDENT O.S.MARDEN, VICE-PRESIDENT FREDERIC L.COLVER, SECRETARY DAVID G.EVANS, TREASURERS Success Magazine A PERIODICAL OF AMERICAN LIFE ORISON SWETT MARDEN,EDITOR NEW YORK UNIVERSITY BUILDING WASHINGTON SQUARE April 28th, 1908. [no enclo filed] To the President, Washington, D. C. My dear Sir In accordance with your wish, as expressed in conversation last Thursday, I have much pleasure in transmitting to you herewith a copy of the detailed schedule of the vote by states made by our Life Subscribers - summary of which you have already received in the advance proofs of our article in May SUCCESS MAGAZINE entitled "The Voice of the People". Very respectfully yours, Edward E Higgins [*[Higgins]*] EEH-MS[*[for enc. see Higgins 4-24-08]*] [*[attachment " " " "]*]MACLENNAN HOTEL THE HOME OF COMFORT ALEX C. MACLENNAN, PROPRIETOR 715-717 13TH STREET, N. W. WASHINGTON, D. C. April 28--1908 190 Mr. Loeb White House Dear Sir One of your clerks I R. Smith has been Rooming in my house the past 9 months he at present owes me $ 83 % which I have not been able to collect I take the liberty to ask you to speak to him of it Thanking you in advance I am Fraternally yours Alex C . MacLennan CfmG. P. PUTNAM'S SONS PUBLISHERS, BOOKSELLERS, AND STATIONERS 27 AND 19 WEST 23D STREET, NEW YORK 24 BEDFORD STREET, STRAND, LONDON The Knickerbocker Press Putnam's Monthly [*F*] April 28, 1908. Dear Mr. President: I am glad to receive your courteous and very explicit letter of yesterday (busy man as you are, you absolutely the promptest of my personal correspondent) in regard to Dr. Hale's monograph. it is, of course, very much in order for you to insist upon the text of the volume that we are now to bring into print, making quite clear that the responsibility for the wording of the opinions as quoted rests not with the President, but with the author of the book. I have made a fresh examination of Dr. Hale's text, and it seems to me that he has very carefully met this requirement. In our own announcements and descriptions of the book, we shall again emphasize the fact that the monograph represents the results of Dr. Hale's impressions. He was in the White House not as a reporter, but as a student of an interesting human phenomenon. The results of his study will, I think, be found of interest by a good many of the fellow citizens of said phenomenon. I am, with much respect, Yours faithfully, G. H. Putnam[*[For 2 enclosures see ca 1.-1908]*] P.S. Dr. Hale reports that he had taken pains to submit for the inspection of yourself and of Mr. Loeb, two or three additional paragraphs in relation to your contests with my friend, Jusserand and others, and to your athletics generally. He has also submitted a wording suggested by myself for the main title and for the sub-title of our volume. I hope that Mr. Loeb will kindly let us have at once his report concerning this suggested title. We need it for our head-lines. President Roosevelt. s.[*[ca 4-28-08?]*] [*ppf B Carded*] Kermit has returned the African mem. and they are in the Presidents' office desk. L [*Nothing in presidents desk now *][*F*] UNITED STATES SENATE, WASHINGTON. [*Personal*] April 29, 1908. My dear Mr. President:- Obeying my universal rule of standing by those who stand by us, I want to again call your attention to Hansbrough, who, to my personal knowledge for the last two years had been one of the most faithful and loyal of your friends and who, as you know, left his sickbed at very great danger to himself to vote for four battleships. Won't you please read the enclosed memorandum over? You know I did not used to be favorably disposed towards Hansbrough--thought he was with the wrong crowd, and generally had the wrong impression of him. But since we got together on the statehood bill two years ago I have watched him most carefully and no man in the Senate, not even excepting myself, has shown more loyalty to you and your policies than he has, nor more unflinching nerve in standing up for them. They are giving him a hard fight, just as they gave Gamble a hard fight. The poor fellow is very ill in the hospital; nevertheless, I think he is going to win out beyond any doubt. But he deserves all the help which you can properly give him--I know that you feel exactly this way from what you said to me or, of course, I would notUNITED STATES SENATE WASHINGTON -2- write you this letter. My only excuse for not bringing [him] this memo down in person is that I have got to put in every minute of my time in catching up on my neglected work of last week. The boys in the Senate to whom you wrote got your letters and are delighted with them. Faithfully, Albert J. Beveridge To the President, White House.[*[For encl see 4-29-08]*]DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE QUI PRO DOMINA JUSTITIA SEQUITUR G-R Office of the Attorney General Washington, D.C. April 29, 1908. [*cf J*] The President, The White House. Dear Mr. President: I am in receipt of complaints from the Office of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to the effect that routine business is falling into arrears by reason of the vacancy in the office of Solicitor. At the present moment it is said that two hundred and fifteen application for compromise cannot be acted upon, because, under the law, the personal approval of the Solicitor must be obtained in every such case. It has been my understanding that you had certain persons under consideration for this position. If such is your desire, I can submit some suggestions in the premises. Pray believe me, as ever, Yours most respectfully and truly, Charles J. Bonaparte, Attorney General. [[shorthand]][for attachment see ca 4-29-08][Gamez] [*[Colombia]*] Translation CONFIDENTIAL Managua, April 29, 1908. Mr. Minister: You are no doubt aware of the turn of the policy of the Republic of Colombia with relation to Panama and the United States, chiefly in regard to the opening of the canal, tending at present to make closer their relations with Japan and showing overtly their intentions to enter formerly into negotiations having to do with a canal south of the Panama Canal, and to induce Japanese immigration into their territory, etc. We are well acquainted with the desires of aggrandisement of the Japanese Empire and the spirit of the Government of Colombia, which never will forget the secession of its important Department, influenced by the United States, and which in its excited desire to win back what it has lost gasps at any project whatsoever which is offered to it as a realization of its hopes. In view of this it is not impossible that what is now considered doubtful may later be consummated, if possible obstacles do not interfere. Nicaragua can not remain indifferent before such eventualities. As you know positively, the canal through our country offers at all times various advantages over that of Panama, and that it was international policy which resolved the selection of this latter route; also, that the present proposal of the Colombians presents innumerable disadvantages. But even withdrawing from this point of view and supposing, as2 as is most likely, that in the end, the Panama Canal will be the only canal, yet we have to take into account that the United States fears, and rightly, that another or other Powers may render null and void a great part of their tremendous labor; and in this sense it is indubitable that Colombia or Nicaragua may obtain no inconsiderable political advantage from the insecure or it may be false position in which the United States finds itself. Now: through the instrumentality of a certain English Consul to this country -- who may be well informed in the premises -- we have learned that Great Britain and Japan have lately concerted the idea of the Canal by way of Nicaragua, and also that this was known in Mexico by Dr. Fernando Sanchez (the Nicaraguan Minister) who, although he possibly has exaggerated his information in the telling, may have secured data which on the whole is worthy to be considered. It is my wish, therefore, that you in an absolutely personal character, and with the greatest possible care and discretion, should talk with the Japanese Ambassador in Paris, saying that, although you are not in possession of instructions from your Government to the effect, you would venture if the Government of Japan should send Agents to Nicaragua the overture which they might make in connection with this important matter would be very well received. All this without putting a paper a single word of your conversations. You are not to forget that this matter is of the utmost confidence, for as you will plainly understand, if the United States3 States were prematurely to get wind of our proceedings, whatever we might do in the matter would cost us dear. If success is ours we shall secure at the very least most enviable political advantages, above all greater consideration and respect from the United States, and it may be an enviable position in regard to Central America. I feel certain that you will not remain unconscious of the great importance of this matter and that you will treat it with the secrecy and diplomatic prudence that it demands, giving me frequent account of the progress of your labors, and consulting me whenever the nature of the questions whereof you treat would seem to require it. Yours respectfully etc., (signed) J.D. Gamez. Minister of Nicaragua, Sr. Crisanto Medina, Paris. (From the Copy-book of the Foreign Office, 1908, page 233)AMERICAN EMBASSY, LONDON. April 29, 1908. CONFIDENTIAL. [*Dear Mrs Roosevelt:*] Dear Mr. President: In the rush of work which followed the practical suspension of Government for two or three weeks here over the reorganization of the Cabinet, the Easter vacation, and the funeral of the late Prime Minister, one of the amusing and perplexing interludes has been the effort suddenly to crowd twenty-seven dear republican ladies, who wish to grace His Majesty's Court, into the eight places we have at the two Courts which have lately and unexpectedly been announced for successive weeks, May 15th and 22nd! In the absence of Carter, who generally relives me of the work of following up these applicants, ascertaining their whereabouts and extorting from them the facts as to whether they can or cannot come at the time specified, I have had the side occupation of doing it myself. I think it will amuse you, as it has us, to see how completely our best efforts are sometimes thwarted by the fair personages themselves. In fact, I think you will be particularly amused at the case I am going to tell you about. On May 23d, 1907, you wrote to me from the White House, introducing Mrs. Falconer Grant, and saying that you wrote in behalf of a young Virginia girl, Miss Charlotte Berkely Coles, who would be staying withe her, and who would much desire to be presented at Court. So we went into the subject. Mrs. Falconer Grant at once said she did not want her niece presented that year (in fact, I believe it was already too late), but did want her presented in May,1908, if possible. Subsequently, after ascertaining that an earlier Drawing Room was easier, because of the number of applicants was then less, she decided that2. she would like to have the presentation made at a February Court, and promised that she would keep the Embassy informed of her arrival and of any change in her plans. All this was duly noted in our records. When the February Drawing Room was announced we could find no record of any address she had furnished, or any statement of her plans, and in my absence Carter let the early Drawing Room go by. When these last ones were announced, we hunted again, and could find nothing, and could not find anywhere that she had acted on her promise. Then I sent a Secretary to their previous address in London, and could get no trace of them there. Then I cabled to MIss Coles at the only American address we had for her at the University of Virginia, and got the answer that no such person was known. Then I cabled in care of Mrs. Falconer Grant, and the Embassy has just received the enclosed response from the cable office on that! After a careful rereading of the President's original letter of a year ago, which mentioned that Mrs. Falconer Grant had a brother-in-law here, Lord Ashbourne, I have decided to try and get in communication with him, though where he may be at the moment nobody knows. He has not been seen out of late at any of the functions, and for the past fortnight or three weeks everybody who could get out of London has been out. But i am going to send a secretary to his town address to see if we can get any information there. I wanted you to know that your request was not forgotten, and that we did the best we could to act on it; but I don't want you to think that the case of the young lady you commended is in any way particular. We have three or four more exactly like it at this moment, and have been spending the Government's money (not to say anything of a considerable amount of my own) in reckless cabling to get hold of people who had been most earnestly3. secured long beforehand that they must keep us advised of their European address and movements, to enable us to communicate with them at the earliest moment after a Court was announced. To-day, for example, I am just cabling to Governor Hoke Smith and to Senator Bacon, reminding them that neither they nor the Southern ladies they commended in strong letters, have paid the slightest attention to my earnest request to give me at the earliest possible moment their European address and date of arrival. So far as we can now judge, the two Courts suddenly sprung on us for the 15th and 22d are the last for the year; and, if so, we have exhausted the possibilities of furthering Governor Hoke Smith's wish and Senator Bacon's, without being given the least chance to arrange for what they want! It isn't their fault, of course, any more than the case of Miss Coles is your fault. The dear, delightful, irresponsible ladies simply won't take the trouble to make it possible for us to communicate with them; though I think you may safely bet on their generally making remarks afterwards about our negligence! My dear Mrs Roosevelt: I began this for the President, and with the intention merely of telling him why I had been unable to carry out his wish about Miss Coles. But on second thoughts it strikes me he is too busy for such things now. On the other hand, I fancy that it may be of interest and possibly of some amusement to you. I am sure where we have one experience of the trouble unbusinesslike people can make about such matters here, you have a hundred at the White House, and there I know you will sympathize with our little trials.4. If it were not for the real pleasure that I know these presentations sometimes give, I should be tempted to wish the whole business abolished. But just fancy the outcry if such a thing were done! Believe me always, Very sincerely yours, Whitelaw Reid. [*P.S. We've just run the Coles case to a finish. Lord Ashbourne couldn't be found but Lady Ashbourne was. She didn't know her sister's address, didn't believe she was coming over this year, & as for Miss Coles, could only suggest cabling to the University of Va & when told that we had been vigorously doing this, & the result, she said (over)*]her advice to us was to give ourselves no further trouble, & drop the subject! "Au' these 7' are", as Dooley philisophizes! W. R.at each of the following places, Carthagena Valencia Alicante Malaga and Barcelona. This will give us a chance to see most of the important places in Spain and combined with our trip in the north five years ago give us a very good idea of the country [*P.F cf W*] Gibraltar, April 29 08 Dear Mr President., We returned a few days ago from a trip in Southern Spain, going as far north as Madrid and visiting Granada, Sevilla, Cordoba, Toledo, Escorial and Madrid. The country is beautiful and travel is very comfortable, good hotelsand kind considerate people. The mts are still covered with snow well down and the weather clear and cool. Southern Spain may well be called a land of flowers. The country is covered with them. Cultivation is excessive and good where possible I saw many of the Spanish troops in Madrid, good material as a rule but I should say badly handled in most instances. The men are small but strong. We leave tomorrow for Genoa by a coast line steamer with stops of a daywell up on them, active and clean cut, and withal a most kindly man. Tho' I am on leave, I hope you will not hesitate to call me home if there is anything going on which will require troop power my debt or my service 5 The children and nurses remained here where the fine cool weather has done them a lot of good. The English everywhere have been most kind and done all possible to add to our pleasure and comfort. At Malta and here wehad a chance to see something of the English troops and sailors, They are as a rule a very fine lot of men, smart and strong. The Duke of Connaught, who is at heart a real soldier has just finished up his annual inspection here. Where [combined] exercises, between army and navy took place, landings, night operations & much night firing at rapidly moving targets {Sea) The old Duke was as civil as could be and extended every courtesy and hospitality. He is very keen on all military matters anddefenses, etc. can be obtained from my J.K. These from now at Fort Logan H. Korts or Major Hodges in inft who returned on the McClellan These officers are just from the islands and were in direct charge of this work and know all about it, and their 8 in any way, my great object this summer is, as I have written you, to see the French manoeuvres and if possible the German. The Collier possibly, as a looker on in plain clothes if they will let me. I also want to perfect my French, This, before the manoeuvres. SpanishI know fairly well and can read write and speak it, with more or less facility. All these plans count for nothing in comparison with service, if anything is going on. If you should want any details about conditions of fortifications work at Manila, Col Abbot Lyman before now in the Office of Chief of Engineer has recently returned can give you anything you want. Our motto there, in my opinion, should be never trust the Jap and work by day and work by night until our defenses are ready. Details of land13 information is based on study on the ground. Mrs Wood joins me in kindest regards to Mrs Roosevelt and to you As Ever, Yours Sincerely Leonard Wood [*[Leonard Wood]*] P.S. I'm so sorry about the opposition to the 4 battleship plan we want not only 4 but 14 if we can getthem, until we have a pacific as well as an Atlantic fleet we shall be weak in the Pacific, fatally so,RITCH, WOODFORD, BOVEE & BUTCHER, Thomas G. Ritch Stewart L. Woodford C. N. Bovee David F. Butcher. Charles L. Foster Frederick C. Tanner. 18 Wall Street, New York, April 29, 1908. Mr. Charles W. Anderson, Internal Revenue Service, Collector's Office, Second District of New York, New York City. My dear Sir: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your good letter of April 28th, instant, with its gratifying assurance that you will attend our conference on April 30th, instant, and that from this time until the meeting of the National Convention you will do all in your power to advance the interests of New York's candidate for President. I have known you so long and admired your ability so greatly that I am sure you will not misunderstand me when I frankly tell you that I regret that you are a delegate to the National Convention. If there ever was a time when Federal office holders should not be in evidence at our Republican Convention, that time seems now. With all the scandal evoked by the bickering and fighting conventions at the South during the last two months, I believe that the presence of any Federal office holder in our nominating convention at Chicago is an injury to himself and a distinct weakness to our party. But of this you have probably formed your own judgment and come to your own decision. There is another matter more pertinent to yourself: The Brownsville incident may come up for discussion on the floor of the Convention, or in the corridors of the hotels. If you side against the soldiers of your race in that matter there will inevitably be men unkind enough to say that your judgment is influenced by your job. If you stand for the soldiers of your race others may say that you are ungrateful to the appointing power. In either event I fear you weaken that enduring influence which is the surest possession of a public man. For your sake I am sorry that you are going to the Convention. Your friend, STEWART L. WOODFORD.[*[Encl in Anderson 5-1-08]*][*[For 2 enc. see Woodford 4-25-08 & Brazza 2-3-08]*] REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE TWELVE EAST THIRTIETH STREET NEW YORK TIMOTHY L. WOODRUFF CHAIRMAN April 29th, 1908. [*Ackd 4-30-08*] To the President, Washington, D. C. My dear Mr. President: I saw Secretary Taft last evening and read to him a letter I had received from General Woodford. He has me if I would not send you a copy of it. Please consider it strictly confidential. It is in reply to a letter I wrote him telling him the the expenses of the State Convention, at which he had been elected a delegate-at-large, had been advanced and must be repaid. I appealed to him and the other delegates-at-large, who had been honored by the Convention, to assist us financially. I beg to remain, with best wishes Yours respectfully, Timothy L. Woodruff Enclosure: [[shorthand]][*[ca 4-29-08]*] [[shorthand]] Hold Solicitorship of Internal Revenue until Middle of May Also hold up Oklahoma Judgeship [until middle] indefinitely [[shorthand]][*[attached to Bonaparte 4-29-08]*][*[ca 4-29-08]*] An impartial investigation will show that James Shea, U.S. Marshal for North Dakota, has disgraced the important position he holds by executing the commands of Mr. McKenzie, going from place to place in the state striving in every way, in cooperation with representatives of the corporations, to influence the result of county caucuses and conventions. I have no doubt that when the facts are places before the President he will remove Shea from office. His removal would have a wholesome effect upon the minds and morals of the people of my state, and dispel the very general belief among many reputable citizens, who have been witnesses to Shea's operations, that he is acting for the administration in behalf of Secretary Taft. North Dakota is absolutely save for Taft, all factions being committed to him, making the work of Shea, under direction of McKenzie, wholly unnecessary, even if it were excusable. Shea,being an officer of the government, having the drawing of juries and the subpoenaing of witnesses entirely in his hands, is regarded by many as the representative of the administration. His influence, therefore, is such as to make him an important factor in the politics of the state. He has used his power far beyond the limit of decency. The mere fact that he is the obedient political messenger and agent of McKenzie is ample justification for this conclusion. The man who investigates Shea should be absolutely irreproachable. No investigation is preferable to a "white-wash".[*[Encl in Beveridge 4-29-08]*]April 30 1908 AR 1733 N. Street [*OK✓*] [*ppf*] [*c*] [*2:30 PM*] [[shorthand]] Dear Mr. Loeb Will you ask the President from me if he could allow Lady Isabella Howard's two children just to shake hands with him some day this week Lady Isabella is leaving she fears permanently & says she would hate not to have allowed her children to see the President.The Knickerbocker Press G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS PUBLISHER, BOOKSELLERS, AND STATIONERS 27 AND 29 WEST 23D STREET, NEW YORK 24 BEDFORD STREET, STRAND, LONDON Putnam's Monthly April 30, 1908 Dear Mr. Loeb:- Dr. Hale reported that the latest suggestion from the White House for the main title of our monograph was A WEEK IN THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE WITH THEODORE ROOSEVELT. I quite understand why it is considered desirable to make clear that our little volume is to present the working side of the life of our Chief Executive. The publishers are entirely in accord with Mr. Roosevelt and with his advisers in regard to the importance of emphasizing the special reason for the publication of such a monograph. It may be said that the voters of the country have a right to know something of the manner in which their "chief servant" gives attention from day to day to his official responsibilities. It is my judgement, however, that the title as I had worded it did make sufficiently clear the fact that it was a study not of the social, but of the official or working life of the President. The use in the main title of the word "office" is ugly, as far as the typography is concerned, and gives harsh effect phonetically. I do not want to trouble the President himself with a direct inquiry. Dr. Hale is himself averse to having further correspondence in regard to such a detail. He is, however, in accord with me in the wish thatThe Knickerbocker Press G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS PUBLISHER, BOOKSELLERS, AND STATIONERS 27 AND 29 WEST 23D STREET, NEW YORK 24 BEDFORD STREET, STRAND, LONDON Putnam's Monthly -2- the word "office" may be omitted. I may recall that the title as I had recalled it reads -- A WEEK IN THE WHITE HOUSE WITH THEODORE ROOSEVELT: A STUDY OF THE METHODS OF WORK OF THE PRESIDENT IN THE NATION'S BUSINESS. May you not yourself be prepared to take the responsibility of authorizing us to omit the word "Office". Our references to the book and our descriptions will, as said, continue to emphasize the fact that Dr. Hale's observations had to do with the work of the office. In our experience as publishers, we know the importance of having a title that shall not only be exact in its descriptions, but shall be smoothly or phonetically worded. The detail may be one of material importance. Troubling you with this further inquiry, I am Yours faithfully, G. H. Putnam Mr. Wm. Loeb, Jr. I am enclosing with this an inquiry which it seems [needed] necessary to submit to the President, of a different matter. A volume of similar purpose and character issuing in London would doubtless carry the title of "A Week in Downing Street with Mr. Balfour, or Mr. Asquith, as the case might be. The excellent photograph of the Secretary has come to hand. Thanks!(COPY) UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE PHILIPPINES April 30, 1908. My dear Senator Hale:- I am leaving tomorrow for the Isthmus to be gone for some days. I wish in my absence that there be no doubt as to my views on Senator Lodge's amendment to the Sundry Civil bill. Regarding the matter from all points of view I believe it to be [(in the interests?) of] good public policy and economy to purchase two large ships for the Isthmian Canal Commission and I favor the proposition to give preference to American ships. Very truly yours, W.H. TAFT Hon. Eugene Hale United States Senate.Copy War Department April 30 - 1908 - My dear Senator - I am just leaving for Panama & write this note to say that I approve of your amendment to the Sundry Civil Bill in regard to the purchase of two ships for the Panama trade & for the preference for American bottoms - Very Sincerely Yours (Signed) W.H. Taft Hon. Henry Cabot LodgeEnc. in Reid 5-1-08 4-30-08MR. CHURCHILL'S ADDRESS. The following address was drawn up by the President of the Board of Trade last evening for submission to the electors of Dundee:-- To the Electors of Dundee. Gentlemen,--The Manchester Reform Club is scarcely 300 yards from the Town-hall, yet as I entered it immediately after the declaration of last Friday's poll I was handed a telegram from Dundee. This spontaneous act of kindliness and succour will ever be gratefully remembered by me; and without the slightest disparagement of other proposals by which I have been honoured, I have accepted the unanimous invitation of your executive to contest the City of Dundee at the impending by-election for the Liberal and free-trade cause. I do not need in this letter to enter upon a catalogue of measures and issues. The policy of his Majesty's Government is plain. My own personal views upon the great controverted questions of the day have been set forth abundantly during the strenuous selection which has just been decided. I shall come among you to justify them, and I only claim the fullest opportunity. Upon the maintenance of our free-trade system, upon the temperance cause and its conflict with the organized forces of the liquor trade, upon the hope of a concordat in education which shall give us in England the freedom of conscience and secular efficiency you in Scotland have so long enjoyed, upon the land reform in town and country, upon South Africa, upon Ireland, I avow myself entirely unrepentant. You will be asked to endorse the appeal of the coal-miners for a little larger share of life and sunlight, and thereby to take another practical step in the long movement which seeks to make all processes of economic production conform to the laws of health and science. You will be urged to fortify the Government against the arbitrary and irresponsible partisanship of the House of Lords; to approve an orthodox and thrifty administration of the public finances; and to bang, bar, and bolt the door against protective and preferential taxes upon bread and meat, no matter upon what pretext they are imposed. It would be foolish for us not to recognize that British democracy is now confronted by a vigorous Tory reaction. The social battle swings to and fro in uncertain decision. The fate of important legislation, conceived in the highest interests of the labouring classes of Britain, hangs in the balance. An electoral blow which should sweep the Liberals from power would fall with aggravated force upon Labour representation in all its degrees. Let us be united. By inviting me to be your candidate in the place which ill-health has caused our respected friend Mr. Edmund Robertson to relinquish, you have chosen, as you are well aware, to fight in a situation of exceptional dispute. In order to sustain the cause of progress, the Liberals of Dundee have set aside all personal considerations. Citizens whom a life-long knowledge of your industries and particular interests have equipped, and whose position in public esteem had entitled to represent you, have sacrificed, unasked and unhesitating, their honourable aspirations. It has been your choice to play a direct part in national affairs rather than to seek the gratification of local needs; and to strike a blow in the cause of the common good rather than to gain a special advantage for Dundee. Believe me, I am deeply sensible of this. If I were to press my personal claims upon you I should feel indeed that my case was weak. But I, too, have come, gradually and with widening knowledge, to serve great causes, and unborne by them I feel an ample confidence and authority. The levers of social progression are still in the grasp of the Liberal party. We have but to set them forward to govern the destinies of Britain and guide the onward march of peoples. Shall we be given the strength? That is the question I have come to ask Dundee. I am, Gentlemen, yours faithfully, WINSTON S. CHURCHILL. Board of Trade, April 30, 1908.to advise your order of proceeding So much depends on what time of year you are able to start. There are of course other people than those I have named but these are the top people in each Protectorate except Uganda where there is a Commissioner whose name I forget. I beg you not to worry to answer this. I shall be writing again presently if I don't bore you. I am yours always Sincerely E. N. Buxton [*[ca apr ? 1908]*] STATION, WOODFORD. KNIGHTON, BUCKHURST HILL. [*F B*] My dear Roosevelt I now supplement what I wrote a few days by sending you a live adventure to a young cousin which happened a few weeks ago in BEA I hear that his arm is still without sensation but he is otherwise all right. I also send a letter of another cousin a young naturalist. This is very mis appreciated as you will see, but fresh & spontaneous. I am looking up some Maps for you. As to your question about the responsible people in Each Territory they are as follows Mayor general Sir F Wingate Governor general Soudan Lieut Col Hayes Sadler Governor British East Africa Sir A Sharpe Governor British Central Africa R. T Coryndon gov Swaziland and Basuto Land All these will of course help you with enthusiasm. They control all the best places and are very good fellows but I suggest you leave that to me when you see your way clearly.From an article by "K" in the American Magazine for April, 1908. "For Roosevelt never leads: he always follows. He acts, but he acts only when he thinks the crowd is behind him. His understanding of us leads him rarely astray: and when he does go astray, he instantly acts in the opposite manner -- and gets in again with the crowd. Upon all the great issues which he has championed, the country was prepared before he entered the arena. The country was big with the ideas which he merely helped into the world. [x x x x] Unlike the great reformers, he has always been with the crowd, never against it." White House Washington. October 13, 1903. My dear Mr. Baldwin: Would it be possible for you to get up something in the nature of a petition that would justify me in saying there was a genuine movement in the State itself to have the forest rangers made game wardens? I can only show you my attitude in the matter by the analogy of the Yosemite. I think the Yosemite should be under national control. A lot of good people in California think so too; but until there is strong sentiment - is possible a predominant sentiment - to that effect, I should do damage by advocating it, for I should merely arouse hostility. It is just the same thing with these forest reserves. I want to go just as far in preserving the forests and preserving the game and wild creatures as I can lead the public sentiment. But if I try to drive public sentiment I shall fail, save in exceptional cases. Occasionally, where I have deemed the case wholly exceptional, I have gone, and in the future in such cases I shall go, directly contrary to public sentiment, and sometimes I have had public sentiment turn right around and support me: but in a government like ours the wisdom of an extreme step of this kind is directly proportionate to its rarity. Sincerely yours, Theodore Roosevelt. Very truly yours, Roger S. Baldwin.From a letter of Roger S. Baldwin of New Haven, Connecticut, to Mark Sullivan: "In the fall of 1903 I was serving as forest ranger in the newly created Pine Mr. and Zaca Lake Forest Reserve, Southern California. I had noticed with regret the rapid extermination of the deer and grouse in the district I patrolled. The state game laws were amply sufficient to protect if enforced, but there was no organized public opinion behind them, and the local wardens were appointed from the riff-raff. As the hunting season drew to a close, I wrote to the resident submitting a detailed statement of the number of does and fawns killed, also of crippled deer left to perish, and urged that the forest supervisors be directed to have their federal rangers enrolled as state game wardens, and then that a strict policy of enforcement be adopted. [*Ackd & enc retd 5/2/08*] [*A*] (Personal) INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, 2D DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, COLLECTORS OFFICE, NEW YORK, N. Y., May 1, 1908. Hon. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President, Washington, D. C. My dear Mr. Loeb: Please note the enclosed letter from General Stewart L. Woodford. As you will see, he uses the same argument that Milholland and Humphreys have been using. This indicates that they are all in the same combine. At the conference yesterday, I called attention to the fact that the Governor could not be nominated, unless he secured some votes now pledged to other candidates, and that these candidates would not be likely to throw any votes to a man whose representatives have been paying colored men to organize bolts throughout the South, and to hold mass meetings, denouncing one of the candidates for President, and even the President of the United States himself. I said that I thought the real friends of Governor Hughes ought to disassociate his boom from his work. Of course, I referred to Milholland and Humphreys, although I did not mention them by name. General Woodford did not like my talk at all, although, nearly all of the others present agreed with me. I am now satisfied that the General is not only aware of everything Milholland and Humphreys are- 2 - are doing, but is himself helping to raise the funds for their work. Humphreys was at the conference when I reached there, although he could not remain when we went into executive session. He explained that he was there as the guest of General Woodford, although not a delegate or alternate himself. I regret to say that I am absolutely certain that the old General is mixed up in this dirty combine. I had thought all along that he was above this sort of business. You will notice by the papers that Governor Woodruff and I took the lead in the conference. In short, as Mr. Parsons will tell you, we soon had things our own way. Both President Low and General Woodford, althoughly individually intelligent, were absolutely childish when the attempted to discuss party policy, and we, therefore, found it an easy task to make our ideas prevail. Please return the General's letter after you have read it, and [call] called its contents to the attention of the President. Yours truly, Charles W. Anderson (Enclosure) P.S. A. B. Humphreys & Oswald Garrison Villard were two of the white men present at the "freak dinner".[*[For 1 encl see 5-1-08]*] No. OFFICE OF COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE, 2d District of New York, New York, N.Y. 190 Collector Subject: No. of Inclosures, Officers of Internal Revenue must fill out the indorsement and brief on the back of each letter to the Department.hundred thousand dollars additional, which he promised to provide for. Very sincerely yours, Geo. B. Cortelyou [*[Cortelyou]*] The President, The White House. [*F*] [*cf*] TREASURY DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON. Confidential. May 1, 1908. Dear Mr. President: Referring to your letter of April 19, regarding the coin at San Francisco, and to my several conversations with you some weeks ago on this subject, I beg to say that it has taken some time to get the data so as to act intelligently and to enable me to make a proper presentation to the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee. We have had no appropriation to move any considerable amount of the coin. Yesterday I had a confidential talk with Chairman Tawney, and he promised me that the appropriation upon which we would have to draw for such transfer of coin will be increased by an amount sufficient to move at least two-thirds of the amount now in San Francisco. I asked for three REPUBLIC DE CUBA. INTERVENCION GENERAL. Habana, May 1, 1908. Capt. F. R. McCoy, 3rd Cav. A. D. C., City. My dear Captain McCoy: As a result of the trip to Cienfuegos, and after carefully weighing the conversation held with all classes of the people, rich and poor, black and white, and amongst others the presidents of two colored men's clubs, one of 137 and the other of 400 members, I have arrived at the following conclusions: 1st. The water problem of Cienfeugos is a burning one, which requires prompt and immediate solution. 2nd. The people of Cienfeugos want the aqueduct built and water brought to the city no matter at what cost or my whom. 3rd. The majority believe that if the Central Government was to do the work it would be done quicker and deprive the "politicians" of the opportunity of using the aqueduct question for political purposes. 4th. They all ridiculed the idea that there would be any kind of public disturbance if the Reilly Contractors were to execute the work. 5th. The only person who intimated that there would be any disturbance if the Reilly people executed the work was Dr. Figueroa. Most sincerely yours, (Signed) ALEX GONZALEZ, Deputy Auditor for the Republic of Cuba.[*[Encl in McCoy 5-8-08]*][*Ackd 5/2/08*] The Knickerbocker Press G.P. PUTNAM'S SONS PUBLISHERS BOOKSELLERS, AND STATIONERS 27 AND 29 WEST 23D STREET, NEW YORK 24 BEDFORD STREET, STRAND, LONDON Putnam's Monthly May 1, 1908 Dear Mr. President:-- We have an application from the "N.Y. World" for permission to utilize in the "World", printed as a series of sketches, citations from certain of the volumes that we publish for you. Their first thought was apparently that the advertisement of the books should constitute a sufficient consideration to offset the business value to them of the publication. The publishers took a different view, and they have finally offered a payment for the use of these citations of Three Hundred Dollars. Your publishers have taken the responsibility of making some previous more or less similar arrangements for the special use of extracts from your books. In this case, however, as the paper is issued in New York and is one of some importance, we prefer to secure your approval. The amount due would, according to the usual routine, be divided between the author the owner of the copyright, and the publishers, the owners of the publishing rights of the book in question. The "World" is asking for an immediate decision. Awaiting your report, I am, with much respect, Yours faithfully, G. H. Putnam President Roosevelt.[*P.F.*] [*Cf R*] AMERICAN EMBASSY. LONDON. May 1, 1908. PERSONAL. My dear Mr. President: This contains nothing that need detain you a moment if business presses. But I know you know Winston Churchill, and have you opinion of him, and so I have fancied you might care to have a few points about his present spectacular performance. You know, of course, that he was tremendously pushed in Manchester, and that in his desperation he came pretty near being all things to all men. He made some statements about Ireland which it is difficult to square with the attitude of the Cabinet; and he said that he spoke with the concurrence of the Premier. When the Premier was "heckled" about it in the House yesterday, he tried to avoid committing himself to the extreme Irish ground Winston had taken, and yet to avoid throwing Winston over. Clever as he is, the effort was not successful, and has been everywhere received with derisive laughter. Meantime, Winston, instead of taking refuge in a safe seat which was offered him, has preferred to contest Dundee. The majority there was large when two Liberal candidates were running, but with one and with a Conservative candidate, a Labor candidate, and possibly a Socialist candidate against him, together with the enraged and exultant suffragettes on the war path against him, the chances are that he will have in the next week another I have seen Laszlo & his wife, at the speaker's, at a luncheon to Clemenceau. I hear wonderful things of the picture. Arthur Lee has asked me to dinner to see it next Tuesday. Unluckily I'm engaged but he's going to let Mrs Reid & me come in in the afternoon to see it. W.R.2. extremely strenuous time. I have not seen anybody yet who ventures to predict a second defeat for him, but it is certain that he will come back if at all by a majority greatly reduced from that of his predecessor. As you will see from his card to the electors, herein enclosed, he is defiant, unrepentant, and fairly plausible. He is one of the very best men in all England for immediate popular effect on the stump. The situation has its amusing side for me. One thinks of him naturally as half American anyway, on account of his having an American mother; and besides, it is a droll thing that I shall be at liberty to regard him as my own particular representative in the House in case he should be elected--since when I spoke at Dundee a year or two ago, they solemnly invested me with the freedom of the city. As a citizen of Dundee, therefore, I shall be one of his constituents. Asquith has spoken extraordinarily well, in the main, during the last few days, and has greatly increased his personal hold on the House irrespective of parties. But there is a general feeling that he is fighting a losing game. There is a good deal of amusement over the attitude of the House towards the Lords. Till lately they were bent on either mending or ending it, and yet under "C.-B." they made five or six new peers certainly not greatly superior to the existing ones; and have now made two more. The two they have just sent up are John Morley and Edmund Robertson, both men who have heretofore opposed the Lords. There is universal gratification, even among Conservatives, at Morley's acceptance, since he is greatly admired both for his general ability and for his good management of the India Office. Robertson is also recognized as a man of ability, but he will not get such a welcome, and is sure to have a good many rods put in pickle for him. Yours sincerely, Whitelaw Reid.[*PF Root*] [*Secretary of State MAY 1 1908*] Mr. Dean, Query. Have not Messesrs. Gary, Griggs Fuller been notified that they were reappointed to the Hague Tribunal last year? May 1./08 Mr. Secretary: Yes - They were duly notified in Nov, 1906. CRD. No! We are not so pithecoid as we look ER. [*[Root]*]1 / V 1908 Achilleion, Corfu. My dear President Roosevelt Your kind letter of April 5th reached me a few days ago & has given me real pleasure & satisfaction. You are quite right in thinking that it has been my constant wish to promote & foster the friendship between the United States & Germany. I have done it because I consider it to be in the interest of the two great nations that have so much in common, & I sincerely hope that the good will between our two countries will continue in its constant development I thank you most heartily for the very effective work you have done in this direction. That the way in which my Ambassador has fulfilled my instructions, has not withheld full approval gives me lively satisfaction. I trust that his health will permit him to continue in his endeavors & to further enjoy your confidence as well as that of the American people. I need not assure you, that Mr. Hill will meet with a sympathetic reception in Berlin, like any representative honoured by your confidence, & that he will be most welcome 12The punctual arrival of the U. S. Fleet in Magdalen Way must be a matter of great satisfaction to you & the country. Admiral Evans has again proved his fine qualities as seaman & leader, & the officers & crews not forgetting the engine room staff, have shown themselves well trained & up to the mark. May I offer my sincerest congratulations on such a fine performance. I see by your letter that the new Chinese minister in Washington has not taken any steps yet referring to a "declaration of Secy", in the question of Chinese integrity & the open door. I have just heard from my minister in China, that the Vice-President of the Wai-wu-pu, Liong-tun-you, will be sent in about 2 months time to the U. S. & to Germany in order to lay proposals before our governments. I sincerely hope & trust that we shall be able to come to an agreement about such a "statement of policy", which will assure the maintenance of integrity of China & the open door to the trade of all nations. With the sincerest wishes for the further success of the United States, & for the welfare of your family believe me my dear President Ever your sincere friend William I.R. [*[Orig. in bound volume "Letters from Emperors, Princes and Others"]*]May 2 - [*1908*] [*F*] [*ppf*] [*C*] 1733 N. Street My dearest Mr President Just a line to tell you that your two small Harvard boy guests went home radiant with joy. the oldest one assured his brother they had both given back their presents & added "but he gave them to Ellen for us" & dear Lady Isabella has put them away with the choicest treasures, she toldme with perfect seriousness only to send the two oldest children as the youngest was really too young to remember the [honor?] her husband & I nearly died over this the youngest being four months old — Ever devotedly Bye [*[Cowels]*][*[5-2-08]*] 1601 K Street [*F*] [*D*] Theodore Roosevelt The President - My dear Mr. President, I thank you, from my heart, for your beautiful and kind letter of yesterday. I was so gratified by your commendations . Thatthat I could not resist the pleasure of letting a few of my friends know of them. In this world you have not a more devoted friend than George Dewey. May second. 1908 [*Ackd 5/4/08*] [*G*] EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT THE CENTURY MAGAZINE UNION SQUARE NEW YORK R.W. GILDER, EDITOR R.U. JOHNSON, ASSOCIATE EDITOR C.C. BUEL, ASSISTANT EDITOR May 2. 1908 My dear Mr. President, The announcement as to your plans after your retirement a year from now lead me to write to you in a "business sense." When Mr Chichester and I called on you some time ago, you said you could then promise to the Century only one thing - your Reminiscences. As to other matters - once when I bothered you rather earnestly you said you did not feel like committing yourself while in the White House - and hence I have not bothered you - (except at long distance.) I hope you have not forgotten about the Reminiscences. The conversation was upstairs, as you were getting ready to go out & [ride]; and those present were Mr. Chichester & myself & Mr. Cortelyou & yourself. As to big game — in the line of your former papers in the Century - how greatly we would be pleased to have that series! Or anything else! A historical work! For instance. Thankfully, R.W. Gilder [*[Gilder]*] To President RooseveltEDITORIAL DEPARTMENT THE CENTTURY MAGAZINE UNION SQUARE NEW YORK R. W. GILDER, EDITOR. R. U. JOHNSON, ASSOCIATE EDITOR. C. C. BUEL, ASSISTANT EDITOR. May 2nd 1908 My dear Mr. President, Many thanks for your letter about the Lincoln cabin. There is no objection on my part to you quoting from my letter in writing to the Colliers, kindly omitting the reference to Mr. Robert Lincoln & kindly including what I said as to entire confidence in their good faith. I believe there was an intermediate exhibitional owner. Respectfully & faithfully R. W. Gilder [*[Gilder]*] To President Roosevelt[*F*] Douglas Robinson, Charles S. Brown & Co. DOUGLAS ROBINSON, President. CHARLES S. BROWN, 1st Vice President. WM. H. WHEELOCK, 2nd Vice President. Real Estate. 146 Broadway, New York, W. R. BUCHANAN, Treasurer. ARTHUR W. WEED, Secy. & Asst. Treas. Uptown Office, 570 Fifth Avenue. Cable Address, "Robur," New York. May 2nd, 1908. Dear Sir: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your favor of May 1st enclosing cheque for $126.67, signed by the Century Company, to be placed to the credit of the President's principal account, which has been done. Yours very truly, Douglas Robinson s William Loeb, Jr., Esq., Secretary to the President, White House, Washington, D. C. W.W. D. Brickell Room 60 Ruggery Building Columbus, Ohio. Columbus Ohio, May 4th, 1908. Ralph W.Tyler, Washington, D.C. Friend Ralph:- Your favor to hand and I hear you do not understand me. If I were to go back in the harness, I wanted Sater confirmed before doing so. The Senator is in a peculiar situation regarding this appointment, and I was trying to see if I could not arrange for a settlement between the President and the Senator so that neither one would feel humiliated. What I thought was, that the President might suggest to you that he would appoint the Zanesville man to some position, if the Senator wished, and then I could fix Senator's approval of Sater and he would offer the Zanesville man what the President had tendered, thus satisfying all parties. The Senator would not care if his party declined the position. This could not be done after I get back into the harness. If accomplished before, I could then be free to help Taft, as my position would be declared in advance. Now, if anything can be done let it be done at once, and let me hear from you. Your friend, W D Brickell[*[Enc in Tyler 5-6-08]*]ANDREW CARNEGIE 2 EAST 91ST ST. [*copy sent to Emperor by Von Sternburg*] New York; May 4, 1908. His Majesty the Emperor, Since the President likes this introduction, I venture to send a copy [to] by my friend von Sternburg. I send also the President's note, since it is so highly characteristic. It never strikes him that a humble citizen like myself might be somewhat abashed driving by his side thru the cheering masses to the ceremony, but perhaps he remembers that I've been hobnobbing recently with Your Majesty and King Edward. My answer may also amuse your Majesty. Maybe some day somebody here may ask me to write and introduction for the American Edition of your Majesty's speeches, and I may receive another similar note. The two would command a high price. I wonder what my last paragraph would be of the supposed introduction. I think I know its general tenor--something like this-- "Here then we have the evident Man of Destiny. Never has God entrusted to man, since the World began, his chosen prophets not excepted, the power for good or evil that this keen, able, pute, God-fearing Emperor of Germany wields today. He has only to ask Britain and United States to join him in decreeing that no civilized nation hereafter shall resort to War without first offering peaceful arbitration to its adversary; this refused, the United Powers will look to the adversary. The Peace of the World is no longer to be at the mercy of any one power. "Other nations should be asked to join this league (they willANDREW CARNEGIE 2 EAST 91ST ST. 2 New York gladly do so. (Who dare refuse!) making it irresistible. Not a shot need ever be fired. "Is the Man of Destiny to pass his days, busy with trifles, passing into history as only one of a line of commonplace Emperors, not men of achievement but only of titles? Or, is he some morning as he awakes to behold the vision and perform his mission - the greatest ever bestowed upon man? The Sybil is silent." With every good wish, Always your obedient servant CarnegieMay 4 -1908 1733 N. Street [*Ackd 5-4-08*] Dear Mr Loeb - Can you tell me if President Hadley of Yale is invited to the White House dinner on May 12th he is one of those coming to the conference that week, but, I do not know in what plan they are asked to the dinner & I forgot to speak of it with my brother. I wishto ask Mr Hadley here but, do not want to choose a night he is already asked to the White House Sincerely Yours Anna Roosevelt Cowles[*Ackd 5-6-08*] [*G*] ENSE PETIT PLACIDAM SUB LIBERTATE QUIETEM Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Executive Department, Boston, May 4, 1908. Strictly Private. Hon. Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States, Washington, D. C. Dear Theodore:- Mrs. Guild has shown me all your kind messages sent at the time when people feared that the terrible attack of rheumatic fever from which I have been suffering would carry me off. I have not only managed to beat the grisly gentleman with the scythe and hour glass but, as one of my doctors put it, I have cleaned out all the tomato cans, broken horse-shoes, straw baling, old hoop-skirts and other refuse that has been accumulating for twenty-seven years and am prepared to make a fresh start. I am now able to walk about the house and have just taken my first drive and expect to be fit for any kind of a fight in a few weeks more. Congressman Powers has been telling me what a pleasant time he had at the White House and I join with him in trusting that you are satisfied with the result in Massachusetts.-2- The physicians think it unwise for me to attempt a railroad journey as early as May 13th, so I must reluctantly decline your kind invitation to dinner. It will also be necessary for Massachusetts to be represented by the three experts whom Acting Governor Draper has designated. It is a great disappointment to me but I am sure that you and the public understand the matter. More power to your elbow. Affectionately yours, Curtis Guild, Jr. P [*P.F L*] Will you please ask your secretary to note that my best & permanent address is as below? Letters sent to the House of Commons are apt to go astray as there are other members - whose names somewhat resemble mine. [*Noted.*] TELEGRAPHIC ADDRESS "OPTIMISTIC LONDON" TELEPHONE 1835 MAYFAIR. 10, CHESTERFIELD STREET, LONDON, W. May 4. 1908 Dear Mr. President This is only say that your portrait has arrived and now hangs in the place of honour. I find it absolutely convincing as a likeness — indeed it is almost uncannily like and alive, and whilst the characterisation is not at all restless it is vibrating with suppressed energy. As a psychological study it is as penetrating as László always is, and on the whole I like the expression - although it is not the one that I am most used to. Still I have often observed it — for instance when Harrison or the Senate have come up for discussion — and I quite understand the emotions that it excited in the breasts of one or two Wall St. gentlemen who saw it in New York! One man actually told Knoedler that if he had brought his gun with him, he would have blown the picture's head off. A striking illustration of thedesperate courage that animosity the financial Brigand, when his enemy is face to face with him - on canvas! I cannot tell you how pleased I am to have this picture, and how relieved I am to find that it is such a complete success from my point of view. Both my wife and I feel that you have really come to stay with us, and the number of visitors who have already called to see you make me realise the truths of Mr. Cowles' description of the manner in which your visits to her house enliven the neighborhood and wear out the door bell. I am proud too, for Laszlo's sake, that the portrait is such a success, because it will help him very much in the difficult task of winning his way in London. Our people over here will also be immensely interested to know what you really look like, as, so far, they have seen nothing but caricatures - and bad ones at that. So I feel that good work has been done all round, and I can only say again how very grateful I am to you. I am going to have the portrait reproduced in the best way possible & will of course send some copies for you & your family. With all best wishes to you & Mrs. Roosevelt. Yours very faithfully Arthur LeeJ. E. ROOSEVELT. GEORGE C. KOBBE. JAMES A SPEER. LAW OFFICES OF ROOSEVELT & KOBBÉ BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING. 44 & 46 WALL STREET. CABLE ADDRESS: "ROOSKOB" NEW YORK. [*Ackd 5/6/08*] [[shorthand]] NEW YORK. May 4, 1908.----[190]--- President Theodore Roosevelt, White House, Washington, D. C. Dear Theodore:- We have commenced a suit for another accounting in the estate of Uncle Corneil[e], over eight years having elapsed since the last accounting. You are a necessary party by reasons of your remainder interest, and, as you are a non-resident, the summons would have to be published against you unless you appear in the suit. I would like to ask therefore whether you will authorize someone to appear for you, and, if you have no one in view, would suggest Mr. Robert F. Manning, 40 Wall Street, who is associated with Strong & Cadwalader, and who will appear for several others in the same situation as yourself. I enclose form of letter which, if signed, will be sufficient authority, which can be either sent direct or, if returned to me, I will see that it reaches its proper destination. I trust all goes well with you and that we will soon see something of you on Long Island. With very best wishes, believe me, Sincerely yours, J E RooseveltTELEGRAMS: FRISKNEY. STATION: WAINFLEET. G.N. RY. TOFT MILL HOUSE, FRISKNEY, S.O., LINCS. England. May 4th 1908. [*Ackd 5-15-08*] [**ppf "S"*] To Mr. President Theodore Roosevelt White House, Washington, D.C. , U.S.A. Sir, In your kindly appreciation letter respecting. my book, "Modern Sporting Gunnery", you remarked upon the utility of the ball and shot gun as described in Chapter X therein. With this type of gun, firing shot or bullet, I have killed most kinds of British game - deer, grouse, partridge, pheasant, hare and wild duck. For the hunter of big game it may be considered an ideally handy weapon, and if it were my good fortune ever to visit the African forests a 12-bore ball and shot gun would be my most constant companion, day and night. Of course I do not mean to imply that powerful "express" rifles would not be taken, for these would be necessary for special purposes. Still, with a truly effective ball & shot gun in hand one would always be ready for whatever turned up, from quail or duck to lion or buffalo. For collecting specimens of various birds or small animals, or for killing meat for camp use, the ball and shot gun proves most useful. I have also shot a good deal with a ball & shot gun of 28-bore, a remarkably light and handy gun; and I have recently heard that a hunter in Africa has even shot lions with this small bore. I gather that it is your intention to proceed to Africa next year for some big game shooting, and should you desire to possess arms of the above mentioned description - or, indeed of any other class — I should be most happy if I could be of any assistance to you in procuring them. I have had many guns and rifles built to my own specification, and if you wished I would personally supervise the building of any weapons that you might require, and P.T.O. when ready I would myself shoot them at the target, and see to the loading of the most suitable ammunition for them. The most scrupulous attention thus given to every detail of construction within and without the gun, and to the preparation of its ammunition, might insure - so far as maybe humanly possible - the utmost exactitude as regards the serviceability of the arms, and the safety, certainty, and reliability of the ammunition. Only weapons [of] and ammunition of ascertained reliability should be taken into those situations where a man's life may be at stake, as, for instance, in the hunting of lion or buffalo, and if I can be of service to you, Sir, in [this] the direction indicated, I shall feel honoured. I would suggest that in the event of your deciding to have guns of this description they should be put in hand at once, as thus they could be ready for use this coming autumn and so give you the opportunity to become accustomed to their use before taking them abroad. I beg to subscribe myself, My dear Mr. President, Yours most respectfully Henry Sharp P.S. One fact respecting the remarkable adaptability of the ball and shot gun I had almost forgotten to mention. It is that guns of this class - at all events those that I have had built for my own use - are precisely as possible shot guns in form, substance, and balance. The obvious advantage of this is that with such guns two quick shots may be take at, say, moving deer with greater ease and certainty than with a rifle. Whilst with shot cartridges in this arm winged game may be killed with the same precision and speed as with the shot gun proper. H.S.[*xtra copies in portfolio*] Copy TOFT MILL HOUSE Friskney, S.O. Lines, England, May 4th 1908. To Mr. President Theodore Roosevelt, White House, Washington,D.C., U.S.A. Sir: I your kindly appreciative letter respecting my book, "Modern Sporting Gunnery," you remarked upon the ability of the ball land shot gun as described in Chapter I therein. With this type of gun, firing shot or bullet, I have killed most kinds of British game - deer, grouse, partridge, pheasant, hare and wild duck. For the hunter of big game it may be considered an ideally handy weapon, and if it were my good fortune every to visit the African forests a 12-bore ball and shot gun would be my most constant companion, day and night, of course, I do not mean to imply that powerful "express" rifles would not be taken, for these would be necessary for special purposes. Still, with a truly effective ball & shot gun in hand one could always be ready for whatever turned up, from quail or duck to lion or buffalo. For collecting specimens of various birds or small animals, or for killing meat for camp use, the ball and shot gun proves most useful. I have also shot a good deal with a ball & shot gun of 28- bore, a remarkably light and handy gun; and I have recently heard that a hunter in Africa has even shot lions with this small bore. I gather that it is your intention to proceed to Africa next year for some big game shooting, and should you desire to possess arms of the above mentioned description - or, indeed, of any other class - I should be most happy if I could be of any assistance to you in procuring them. I have had many guns and rifles built to my specifications, and if you wished I would personally supervise the building of any weapons that you might require, and when ready I would myself shoot them at the target, and see to the leading of the most suitable ammunition for them. The most scrupulous attention thus given to every detail of construction within and without the gun, and to the preparation of its ammunition, might insure - as far as may be humanly possible - the utmost exactitude as regard the serviceability of the arm, and the safety, certainty, and reliability of the ammunition. Only weapons and ammunition of ascertained reliability should be taken into these situations where a man's life may be at stake, as, for instance, in the hunting of lion or buffalo, and if I can be of service to you, Sir, in the direction indicated, I shall feel honored. I would suggest2 that in the event of your deciding to have guns of this description they should be put in hand [at] once, so thus they could be ready for use this coming autumn and give you the opportunity to become accustomed to their use before taking them abroad. I [beg] to subscribe myself, my dear Mr. President, Yours most respectfully HENRY SHARP. P.S. One fact regarding the remarkable adaptability of the ball and shot gun I had almost forgotten to mention. It is that guns of this class - at all events those that I have had built for my own use - are precisely as possible shot guns in form, substance, and balance. The obvious advantage of this is that with such gun two quick shots may be taken at, say, moving deer with greater ease and certainty than with a rifle. Whilst with short cartridges in this arm winged game may be killed with the same precision and speed as with the shot gun proper. H.S.[cF] [*F*] Douglas Robinson, Charles S. Brown Co. Real Estate. 146 Broadway, New York, DOUGLAS ROBINSON, President. CHARLES S. BROWN, 1st Vice President. WM. H. WHEELOCK, 2nd Vice President Uptown Office, 570 Fifth Avenue. W.R. BUCHANAN, Treasurer. ARTHUR WEED, Secy.& Asst.Treas. Cable Address "Robur," New York. May 5th 1908. Dear Sir: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your favor of May 2nd enclosing cheque for $38.55 signed by Harper & Brothers, to be deposited to the credit of the President's principal account. Yours very truly, Douglas Robinson William Loeb, Esq., Secretary to the President, White House, Washington, D. C. C."cum grans salis." If you do happen to go to Alaska I should like to be with you once more in that fine country, but in any case my private notes & maps of the unexplored regions there may be of use to you if you are in quest of any particular kinds of game; as although I wrote a book on sport in Alaska, needless to say, I did not give away all the best things for the benefit of the public to whom I am indebted for nothing. [*[5-6-08]*] [*R*] [*Ackd 5-18-08*] Hyde Wareham. 6.5.08 Dear President Roosevelt It is some time since I have heard any personal news from you, but as I am constantly reading various reports about your conjectured future movements, I am writing on the chance of one of these yarns being correct. I refer to a rumour that you intend to visit England before long.now, if you really do come over to this country I would like to be amongst the first to extend you some small hospitality in order to pay off some of my debts of gratitude to you for your kindness to me when last I was in Washington No doubt, you will be overwhelmed with similar invitations, but if you can afford a few days at the quiet country home of an English sportsman I hope you will honor me with a visit here. If it is in summer, i can only offer you good fishing as an amusement, but if in winter, I can give a few typical days of pretty good English small game shooting, & it would give me great pleasure to see you here. I see it reported one day that you are going to E Africa for big game, & again in another paper that you are off to Alaska. But I am accustomed to take all newspaper reports2. Hyde, Wareham. I know that just now you must be strenuously busy, but if you can spare time to send me a line one day I should much like to know if there is a prospect of seeing you ere long in England. With kind regards Believe me Sincerely yours C.E. Radclyffe .[*rewritten 5/6/08*] Washington, D.C. May 1908. Mr. Robert F. Manning, 40 Wall street New York City. Dear Mr. Manning:- Will you please appear for me in the suit for accounting, in New York Supreme Court, by W. Emlen Roosevelt and John E. Roosevelt, as executors of and trustees under the last will and testament of Cornelius V. S. Roosevelt, deceased, plaintiffs, against, me, Theodore Roosevelt, and others, defendants, and do whatever is necessary to safeguard my interests therein, and much oblige. Yours truly, [*[J. E. Roosevelt ?]*]Enc. in Roosevelt to TR. 5-4-08][*[For 2 enc see Tyler 5-6-08 & Brickell 5-4-08]*] [*PF*] [*cf T*] TREASURY DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF AUDITOR FOR THE NAVY DEPARTMENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 5/6/08 Dear Mr. Loeb: - I know you know best whether this matter enclosed should be brought to the President's attention and I submit it to you first for youropinion. Of course I seriously doubt that what is asked could be done, yet it is a question with me whether or not the President should be advised. I submit it to your good judgement. Sincerely, Ralph W Tyler Hon. Wm. Loeb, Jr. Secy to the President.OFFICE OF AUDITOR FOR NAVY DEPARTMENT IN ANSWERING REFER TO NO. TREASURY DEPARTMENT WASHING May 6/08. Dear Mr. President:- I am enclosing you herewith letter from Mr. W. D. Brickell, president of the Columbus, Johnstown & New Albany, Ry., and former owner of The Columbus Evening Dispach, the paper on which I served for 17 years. By way of explanation I might state that Mr. Brickell is preparing to secure control of the leading Democratic Daily in Central Ohio, with the intention of making it an independent Democratic newspaper, but supporting the Republican national ticket, in a certain contingency, which is, as he expressed to me, the harmonizing of factional differences within the party in Ohio. Mr. Brickell was here some days ago, and I understand spent an evening with Senator Foraker, and the result of that evening spent is that he feels that the Senator can be disuaded by him from continuing his opposition, if it is possible to give some recognition to Judge Adams, the man whom the Senator recommended for the Ohio Judgeship. I might say that Mr. Brickell is not now, and never has been active in politics, being simply a business man of considerable means and influence. Reading between the lines, as it were, it would appear that the Senator, like Barkis, is willing to retire if he can only find some door through which (2) which to make an exit. In transmitting this letter to you, I am only doing it to let you be advised. Very respectfully, Ralph W Tyler Hon. Theodore Roosevelt, President, The White House.[*[Enc. in Tyler 5-6-08]*][*ppf S*] [*PF*] EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT THE CENTURY MAGAZINE UNION SQUARE NEW YORK R. W. GILDER, EDITOR. R. U. JOHNSON, ASSOCIATE EDITOR. C. C. BUEL, ASSISTANT EDITOR May 7, 1908 My dear Mr. President: I note with great pleasure what you say about the Memoirs and I hope that after the "big game" articles are written you will really feel like taking up your Life in sections. And after you do your "big game" work, is it not likely that you may make a survey of the globe, reporting its contents appropriately for the Century Magazine? Very faithfully yours, R W Gilder [*[Gilder]*] P.S. Mr. Johnson who, as you know, has been so active, persistent and faithful in the matter of the forests, will, at my request, represent the magazine in this great and notable gathering that you have brought about. I have lately talked a good deal on this subject with Mr. Carnegie and Drs. McGee and Holmes. It is a tremendous theme and the Century is going to keep up this fight in the most telling way possible. To the President, The White House, Washington, D. C.[*Encl rctd & letter of introduction sent 5/11/08*] [[shorthand]] [*L ppf*] HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WASHINGTON May 7, 1908. Hon. William Loeb, Jr., Secretary to the President, The White House, Washington. My dear Mr. Loeb: I enclose you a letter from Mr. August Herrmann, a great friend of mine, and one of the strong political forces in Cincinnati. As you know, the Germans cast more than one-third of the total vote in the city of Cincinnati, and this year they are somewhat disgruntled at the Republican Party and especially the Governor for the drastic temperance legislation that has been recently enacted, and we want to use every possible means to get them to vote the Republican ticket next fall. The various German athletic societies are very influential among the Germans, and if the President should see fit to say a word upon the subject, as suggested by Mr. Hermann, I think it would do a very great deal of good. Will you kindly call the matter to the President's attention when he returns, though you might in your discretion leave out the fact that a bottle of champagne hinges upon the result. Very sincerely yours, Nicholas Longworth. (Enclosure.)[*Magoon*] [*PF*] [*Cf M*] OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR REPUBLIC OF CUBA UNDER THE PROVISIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNITED STATES Havana, Cuba, May 7, 1908. My dear Mr. President: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the first instant suggesting that I secure Captain Dougherty's active cooperation in obtaining an early settlement of the Santiago Church property matter. I have sent for Dougherty and he will be in Havana next Tuesday provided the strike the Firmeza iron mines at Daiquiri is settled. I do not see how Dougherty can be of assistance in this matter, but shall be glad to secure assistance from any source. Possibly you do not understand fully the difficulties to be overcome. The Church property question in the diocese of Havana was simple because it involved but four or five pieces of property which were well known and boundaries clearly defined, and all of them located in the City of Havana. The Church property in the archdiocese of Santiago, as referred to in the appendices to the option, consisted of 493 pieces of property, practically none of which is accurately described, and they are scattered throughout the province of Oriente. For more than three hundred years the Church had been acquiring property in this province - either by gifts, bequests, or location; by "location" I mean that a Bishop would "take up" a tract of land, and his action would be brought to the attention of the-2- Spanish crown and approved or disapproved as the superior authority saw fit. Sometimes a Royal grant would be issued and sometimes not. There were no public land registers and the national archives in which the documents showing ownership were deposited were carelessly kept and exposed to destruction by damp, tropical insects, and the ravages of war, and many of them were destroyed by one or all of these means. In the documents executed the description was usually vague; for instance, "The hog lot of the Santa Rosa estate", another would be "Three lots in Mercedes Street, Santiago", and another "Two hundred caballerias of land near Manzanillo". In all cases the Church relied upon possession as sufficient public notice of title. In 1841 the Spanish Government confiscated these estates, whereupon vague inventories were formed by the State, but no effort was made to secure evidence of title or accurate description of the property. The Church being deprived of the benefits of the property lost interest therein; in fact gave the matter no further attention excepting to demand indemnity, or restoration, from the Spanish Government. From 1856 to the close of the Spanish-American War, Cuba was the scene of practically constant guerilla warfare during which many towns, edifices, houses, and church structures where burned, thereby destroying many of the documents relating to the title of the property. An earthquake destroyed the City of Santiago de Cuba-3- occasioning the loss of other documents. When the Spanish army and officials retired from the Island many records and official documents were either carried away or destroyed. In 1861 a Concordat between the Spanish Government and the Pope provided for the restoration to the Church of a portion of the property in Cuba and the payment of the salaries of the clergy in lieu of property which was used or needed for State purposes, or had been granted to others. Practically nothing was done under this agreement in the way of restoring property in Santiago, but the salaries were paid. The fact is that even at that time it had become difficult, if not impossible, to locate the property involved. The difficulties have increase every year since that time. A large number of the pieces of property were described as houses or buildings which have been utterly destroyed. When the Military Government of Cuba was established the Church presented the matter to General Wood. He appointment a Commission to locate the properties, investigate titles, and fix values. Such information as I can get shows that this Commission did nothing, and finally when called upon for immediate report, that report was written in Havana, without investigation, and therefore affords no basis for estimate or further research. This was the situation when the Provisional Government was established. The existing option originally-4- entered into by General Wood is considered by Secretary Taft as being for the purchase and sale of certain properties in said Province. Apparently the view taken by the Church is that said option is an agreement to pay to the Church a specified indemnity for property seized by the Spanish Government. A serious objection to the view taken by the Church is that, beginning with the Peace Conference in Paris, the United States, and thereafter the Republic of Cuba, denied liability for claims of this character against Spain, and the Cuban Constitution prohibits the Cuban Congress from recognizing or paying such a claim. The Provisional Government is dealing with the matter in accordance with the view of Secretary Taft. To do this it is necessary to locate the property and estimate the value. It is impossible to locate all of the property referred to in the option agreement; for example, a piece of property is described as a certain field of a certain estate. Even the estate cannot be located because the buildings were destroyed years ago and the entire estate is now overgrown with vegetation and has reverted to the jungle. Often the same estate is referred to by different names. As to a number of pieces which can be located, investigation shows that the Spanish Government had sold them prior to the time the option was entered into by General Wood. In order to locate any of these pieces of property it has been necessary to go through the archives not only -5- of the Government in Havana and in the several provinces, but also the Court records, and archives of various public and private institution such as libraries, schools, convents, etc., and this was done without the aid of indices - simply for the chance of finding something which would afford information. In addition the rural estates must be visited in order to obtain an idea of their extent and value. An accurate survey and valuation are out of the question as they would take many months. You will see that this investigation is limitless and although three experts have been constantly engaged in this matter for more than six months, they have not examined all documents in all places which may possibly shed light on the subject, nor have they been able to visit all the estates located. Archbishop Aversa, upon his return from Rome last Fall, advised me that he had been returned to Cuba to close up this matter; having been successful in closing up the Havana diocese property question, and that he was anxious to bring it to a speedy conclusion because he would thereupon be transferred to a higher and more agreeable station. I explained the difficulties, as then known, and asked for his assistance, but received none. The Church officials have rendered no aid whatever in locating this property. I was advised that a French priest in Santiago knew a good deal about this-6- property and sent for him, but he professed entire ignorance. I told Archbishop Aversa about it and asked him to induce this Priest to help us, but if the Archbishop made any attempt it proved fruitless. This failure on the part of the Church to render assistance was not the result of unwillingness, but of inability, because they did not have the information and could not secure it. I refer to it to show the disadvantage under which the Provisional Government labors. The best I can do is to close the investigation and report on what has been found. This I will do. I had intended the investigation should proceed until early in June; not closing it until necessary to complete my report and have it considered in Washington prior to June 30th, when the option expires. I will at once begin a report based on such data as has been found. I am extremely busy getting the electoral machinery required by the new law for the forthcoming municipal elections started and therefore cannot give my exclusive time and attention to the report on this Church property. For this reason it will be about two weeks before the report is completed, although the work could probably be performed in two days of continuous effort. Respectfully submitted. Your obedient servant, Charles E. Magoon. The President, The White House, Washington, D. C. [*For enc. see 5.-08]*] [*ppf W*] [*Ackd 5/11/08*] May 9th, 1908 "THE HOMESTEAD" GENESEO, LIVINGSTON COUNTY, N.Y. Dear Theodore I am asked to testify as to Col Sam 'R. Jones' work at Manila It was good. He was a quiet hardworking officer who attended strictly to his own business and had the added virtue of not attempting to attend to that of others. He was put in a hard place in Greene. I camp owing to lack of transportation facilities, but he always arranged to mow away whatever I could pitch and we kept the men wellsupplied. Then he showed savey in making bamboo platforms with shelter tents on top to keep the soldiers out of the mud (sick report small) and handled his native labor well and was not afraid to take responsibility. He is an old officer and a good officer and entitled to any rank, consideration or promotion which would fairly come to him. Sincerely W A Wadsworth