cerning the Presidency to help in securing at least an opposition House of Representatives. While an anti-imperialist majority in that body will, in my humble opinion, with a Republican Administration, not be able to “bring about every practical result the opponents of imperialism have in view,” it may find opportunity for rendering valuable service.
Returning from a hurried journey to Wisconsin, I find on my table your letter of the 25th inst., in reply to mine of the 2Oth. Taken together, the two letters seem to set forth very clearly the attitude of that large number of voters who four years ago elected President McKinley, and who now are dissatisfied with the result of so doing. You, in your reply, forcibly indicate the course the more extreme of this class propose to pursue at the polls a week from to-morrow; while I, in my letter of the 2Oth, endeavor to point out a method to go with you all lengths in opposition, yet think we see a way to securing much. For this reason I shall avail myself of your permission to publish the correspondence.
I think you greatly underestimate the consequences of the election of an opposition House of Representatives at this juncture. The common-sense of the country would, I am convinced, accept such a result as equivalent to a vote of want of confidence in an Administration which, under existing conditions, could not safely be displaced. Thus the act could hardly fail to be productive of far-reaching effects; nor do I think an Administration so continued in office would find it the easy matter you suggest to manipulate such a House so as to make it further the policy it was, when chosen, pledged to oppose.
However this may be, one thing is clear—a large proportion of the dissatisfied element of 1896 cannot reconcile themselves to a transfer of the National Government from those now in
