ractice of the law.
He was elected Judge of the Superior Court at Cincinnati, and later
became a candidate for Governor. The occupant of many civil
positions of importance in his State, a prominent figure in national
convention after national convention, nominating Senator Sherman
for the Presidency in 1884 and 1888, and placing in nomination Mr.
McKinley in 1896, Senator Foraker had established a record in public
life, and had gathered a wealth of experience, sufficient to satisfy
the ambitions of most men, before his great public career really
commenced as a member of the United States Senate, in 1897. He
also nominated McKinley in 1900.

Senator Foraker was one of the most independent men with whom I
ever served in the Senate. He was a man of such ability and
unquestioned courage that he did not hesitate to take any position
which he himself deemed to be right, regardless of the views of
others. It would inure to the advantage of the country if there
was a more general disposition among public men to adhere to their
own convictions, regardless of what current opinion might be.
Senator Foraker always made up his mind on public questions and
clung to his own opinion in the face of all criticism. The most
striking instance of this trait was when he, the only Republican
Senator to do so, voted against the Hepburn Rate Bill, because he
believed it to be unconstitutional. The very fact that he stood
alone in his opposition to that bill did not seem to bother him in
the least.

On the recommendation of President Roosevelt, the Committee on
Immigration of the Senate attempted to pass a very drastic Chinese
exclusion law. I examined the bill and became convinced at once
that it was absolutely contrary to and in violation of our treaties
with China. I was very much surprised at the time that even Senator
Lodge, one of the most conservative of Senators, supported the
bill. I was deluged with telegrams from labor organizations, as
I knew Senator Foraker was, favoring the passage of the bill; but
he, with Senator Platt of Connecticut, and some others in the
Senate, whom I assisted as best I could, led the opposition to the
bill reported by the Committee on Immigration and defeated it.
Senator Foraker very well knew that his opposition to this bill
would not strengthen him at home, but he disregarded that fact and
opposed it because he believed it was contrary to our treaty
obligations.

A more recent case in which