happened that Mr. Straus, as your friend, expressed himself in his communication to Harper's Weekly in a manner which made me as well as others believe that he spoke by authority. It is evident that he, in fact, did consider himself authorized to represent you as he did.
If now, differently situated as you are, you declined to communicate with me on the matter in question, upon the ground that, after mature consideration, you had changed your mind, or that you did not remember having given your friend the authority which he thought he had received, I should have nothing more to ask. But I owe it to myself decidedly to object to your now putting your refusal upon the ground that you had reason to question my good faith or the rectitude of my motives in addressing you as I did in response to a public call made upon me by your spokesman. You will admit that I might well have expected different treatment as between gentlemen.
If there are politicians who, under the pretense of seeking the public good, work themselves into the confidence of others with the intention of abusing that confidence for partisan purposes, I have, I trust, by my public life of thirty years fairly earned the right of not being classed with tricksters of that kind.
As you seem to be in the dark as to my party relations, permit me to say that I am “out of politics” and bound to no party. I count myself one of those who think it vastly more important that the Government be well administered, than that it be administered by this or that set of men; and who, while recognizing the usefulness of party as a means to a good end, support whatever appears to them of public benefit, and oppose whatever they consider bad, no matter what party label it may bear. This position may seem very eccentric to the hot partisan on either side, but I assure you it may be conscientiously and also usefully maintained, especially considering the present
