ve, is regarded to-day as
the most cultivated man in the Senate. He is a scholar, an author,
and a noted historian. He is a very able man in any position in
which he is placed. Judged by the standard of his great predecessor
in the Senate from Massachusetts, Daniel Webster, he is not an
orator, but he is a very effective speaker and a good debater. He
is one of the very active members and has always taken a prominent
part in the disposition of matters coming before the Upper House.
He is always ready to work, and when I desire any matter to be
disposed of without delay, I refer it to Senator Lodge as a
subcommittee, with confidence that it will be attended to quickly
and correctly.

He is a strong, active Republican, and a politician (using that
term in its higher sense) of no mean order. For years in Republican
National Conventions he has been a conspicuous figure; and twice
at least--once at Philadelphia in 1900, and again in Chicago in
1908--he has been permanent chairman. On both occasions--and I
attended both conventions--he proved himself to be a splendid
presiding officer. He regards his position as the senior Senator
from Massachusetts, the successor of Webster and Sumner and a long
line of noted men, as even a higher honor then the Presidency
itself.

I have seen it repeatedly stated that Senator Lodge is unpopular
in the Senate,--that he is cold and formal. From my long acquaintance
with him, extending over some seventeen years, I have not found
this to be true. In times of trouble and distress in my own life,
I have found him to be warm and sympathetic.

I hope that he will remain in the Senate for many years to come.
Should he retire, his loss would be severely felt both as a member
of the Committee on Foreign Relations and as a member of the Senate.

Senator Augustus O. Bacon, of Georgia, is now the senior member of
the minority on the committee; and should the control of the Senate
pass into the hands of the Democrats, he will, if he remain in the
Senate, naturally become its chairman. He is an able lawyer, and
if subject to criticism at all, I would say that he is a little
too technical as a jurist. I do not say this to disparage him,
because in the active practice of his profession at the bar this
would be regarded to his credit rather than otherwise; and even as
a member of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate, this disposition
to magnify technicalities makes him one of the most valuab