■',a/u^ 
 
 FORUM OF THE PRESIDENTS. 
 
 Committee on Election of 
 
 President and Vice-President, 
 
 House of Representatives, 
 
 Tuesday, March 29, 1910. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, 1 thank you for your 
 kindness in ailording- me this opportunity of laying before you the 
 merits of the bill which 1 introduced in the Sixtieth Congress and 
 again in this in relation to a forum of the Presidents. It is a very 
 simple bill. At the time that I introduced it in the Sixtieth Congress 
 the only former President living was Mr. Cleveland, a Democrat, and 
 the Republican President had announced his intention of retiring at 
 the end of his term, so that I assumed that there would be two former 
 Presidents, a Democrat and a Republican, to whom the bill would 
 apply and therefore that there could be no accusation of partisanship. 
 The aim of the bill is to provide a dignified forum for the expression 
 of the views of former Presidents. 1 think that there is a general 
 feeling that a man who has occupied the position of the President 
 never again becomes a private character. His views on public ques- 
 tions are always heard with respect and have great weight. This was 
 certainly so regarding Mr. Cleveland and is unquestionably true in 
 relation to Mr. Roosevelt. Former Presidents ought not to be driven 
 to the columns of magazines for the expression of their views on 
 public questions. It is unfair to them and in a way unfair to the 
 people. 
 
 The knowledge that a man gains in the presidency is a national asset 
 and the property of the whole people, and the experience ought to be 
 of benetit therefore to the country at large. I think everyone will 
 agree with me that the sixteen j^ears that John Qiiincy Adams devoted 
 to public legislation in the House of Representatives were of infinitely 
 more value to the country than his four years in the presidency, and 
 largely because of his four years in the presidency. I think that a 
 former President, occupying a seat in the House of Representatives 
 by the gift of the whole people, would be as nearly nonpartisan as it 
 is possible to be. For instance, he would be as nearly nonpartisan as 
 the justices of the Supreme Court are, for, of course, a man carries 
 with him onto that bench the acquired views and experience of a life- 
 time. It has been suggested that a former President on the floor might 
 inaugurate a policy in opposition to the President in the White House, 
 and around these foci parties might be built up. I do not think that 
 would occur, but if it did it would not be a bad thing. This country 
 is governed by parties, and, in my opinion, the best judgment of the 
 majority is that it siiould be continued to be governed by parties. The 
 46887—10 
 
2 FORUM OF THE TKESIDENTS. \)^^ h^ri^A^'^ 
 
 trouble with our parties at present is that they are not divided on any 
 great questions of principle: the line of demarcation is too indistinct. 
 
 There is too much following of men, and too little opportunity to 
 combine with others in the effort to foster a principle, and while 1 do 
 not think that anything of the kind would occur with the ex-Presidents 
 taking part in the delil)erations of Congress, 1 can not see any ill 
 results if the}^ do. 
 
 Mr. Hardwick. In other words, if he lost his nonpartisan character, 
 the results, according to your idea, would be good all the same? 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Yes. 1 do not think he would. I think he would 
 appreciate the great honor conferred on him, not by a party, because 
 he is not elected to Congress, but conferred on him by the whole 
 people, because he has held the highest office in their gift. 
 
 Mr. Hakdavick. When he came to the discussion and determination 
 of questions that were essentially partisan, or were often partisan, in 
 their character, would he not naturally be governed by tlie opinions 
 he had entertained all his life, and would he not be foi'ced into the 
 attitude of standing up for the convictions he has alwa3's had, and thus 
 would he not lose the very thing for which you praise him now? 
 
 Mr. Bennett. To the same extent that a judge on the Supreme Court 
 bench throughout his term of office is influenced by the habit of mind 
 and the political doctrines in which he believed- yes; but further than 
 that 1 do not think so. 
 
 Mr. (tillespie. Do you think he would be as nonpartisan as a 
 judge ? 
 
 Mr. Bennett. I think so; I do not see why not. There are few 
 occasions when a man goes out of the presidency and strives to get 
 back later; they are extremely rare. Mr. Cleveland did, and was suc- 
 cessful. Mr. Grant did trj- unsuccessfully. Just at the moment I do 
 not recall any other man who went through the presidenc}^ and after 
 he was absolutely out of office reall}" strove to again become a candi- 
 date. I ma}' be in error in my recollection. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Bennett, let me make this suggestion. You 
 cite the case of Mr. Cleveland, who is now dead. 1 believe there is no 
 passionately hostile feeling against him, either on the part of Repub- 
 licans or on the part of those members of his own party who at one 
 time so widelv ditiered from him. If he had been in the House of Rep- 
 resentatives during the years from the time he left the presidency 
 until his death, do you not think it would have been unfair to the 
 Democratic Members of the House who did not agree with Air. Cleve- 
 land's position on the money question? 
 
 Mr. Bennett. I do not think it would have been any more unfair 
 than to have Mr. Cle\'eland expressing the opinions which he did, and 
 he always expressed his opinions, tis he did outside of Congress; be- 
 cause you will doubtless recall that on financial and other questions he 
 made his views public. But my point is, it is much more dignified, 
 and would be much better for our institutions, and would be appreci- 
 ated by the people generall}' if a forum to take the place of the 10- 
 cent magazines were provided for the expression of the views of the 
 ex-Presidents. 
 
 Mr. DiEKEMA. Do you think the Congressional Record is calmer in 
 expression than the magazines? 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Yes: even the Congressional Record is calmer than 
 the pag'es of some of the magazines. 
 
 JU!\! 
 
 7,Q 
 
FOEFM OB' THE PRESIDENTS. 3 
 
 The Chairman. What was in mj mind also in connection Avith the 
 instance I suggested a moment ago was this, an ex-President of the 
 United States who would have the right to a seat in the House, and 
 the salary of a Member, would, I take it, have the dut}^ to attend. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. He would have the privilege of attending whenever 
 he thought that his views would be of service to the country. 
 
 The Chairman. I think we would all feel that he ought, as a gen- 
 eral proposition, to be present paying attention. 
 
 Mr. Hardwick. Because he could not tell what time it would be 
 necessaiy. 
 
 The Chairman. 1 think we all agree that an opportunity has always 
 with it its correlative dut3^ 
 
 Mr. Bennett. An obligation. 
 
 The Chairman. An obligation. I think a man who has held an 
 office in the gift of a party has sacrificed a great deal of his right to 
 oppose that party, for the reason that his opposition to the party is more 
 then than his personal opposition. He has a chance, by opposing his 
 party, to do it more injury, vastly more injury, than his views stand- 
 ing merelj^ upon their own weight could possibly accomplish. Would 
 it not put a former President of the United States in a ver}^ embarrass- 
 ing position, where his sense of dutv to his own beliefs, his intellect, 
 would conflict ver}^ much with his sense of duty to the part}' which put 
 him in power? To illustrate what I mean: I have the highest respect, 
 and alwaj^s will have, for Grover Cleveland, and yet I always felt that 
 the Democratic party had a right to complain of Grover Cleveland's 
 use of the almost overwhelming influence and publicity of the high 
 office he had held, against that partJ^ It is a thing -I could not have 
 done. I do not sa}^ he did wrong, but my sense of obligation to the 
 people who had taken a chance on advancing me would not permit me 
 to do that kind of thing. 1 will go a little further. I could go out 
 of here now and be interviewed by one of the great Democratic news- 
 papers against the Republican part}^, and I could obtain for my views 
 an amount of publicity and discu.ssion and importance that the}' are 
 wholly unentitled to — a degree of importance that would never be given 
 to a similar interview in behalf of my part3^ 
 
 Mr. Bennett. The answer to that, it seems to me, is this: That the 
 only ex-President who ever came back to the House came back as a 
 Member for sixteen years, and he came back, as I read history, as an 
 extremely independent Member. 1 think there were times when he 
 stood out against the whole House, both sides, and jet it is the unani- 
 mous verdict of history, I think, that John Quincy Adams's sixteen 
 years of service in the House were of infinite!}' more service to the 
 country than his four years in the presidency, anil that they were 
 largely so because of the knowledge he had gained in the presidency. 
 
 Mr. Haruwick. During that time he represented a constituency 
 with the same responsibility that any other Member has. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. We could not pass a statute going to that extent. I 
 think the gentleman from Georgia will agree with rae in this, that to 
 have- stayed here sixteen years Mr. Adams must have owed some obli- 
 gations to his constituency, which it was more or less of a drag on him 
 to have discharged, but he must have discharged them or he would 
 not have stayed here sixteen years. 
 
 Mr. Hardwick. Undoubtedly. 
 
4 FORUM OF THE PRESIDENTS. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Now, 3-011 put an ex-President in the House, free 
 from all obligations whatever, and kno\vino- that he comes, not from 
 anj' constituency, and not from an}' part}-. Republican or Democrat, 
 but is given the place as a gift to him from the whole people — it seems 
 to me if anything could operate to divest a man of partisanship, that 
 kind of a selection would. It would divest him from partisanship and 
 give Congress and the people the chance to utilize the tremendous 
 sources of information that come to ever}- President. 
 
 Mr. DiEKEMA. Here is another thing. Probabl}- the reason why 
 ex-Presidents are so well considered b}- our whole people is the fact 
 that they are not dragged into that partisanship. If, on the other 
 hand, they are dragged into it, which they must be — a man who has 
 been President, elected by his party, remains either a Republican or a 
 Democrat — if he is dragged into this general discussion the opposite 
 party must continue to attack him; that would be their plain duty. 
 
 Mr. Hardwick. They will not hesitate to do it, either. 
 
 Mr. DiEKEMA. A man who is an ex-President is not a saint; he is 
 still a human being, with partisan feelings, the same as he had l)efore, 
 and instead of ceasing to attack such a man and use every possible 
 opportunity to extol him, the opposite would be the situation, and the 
 ex-Presidents would die, not as the nation's heroes, but as party heroes. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. I think 3-ou magnify that, Mr, Diekema. Our 
 ex-Presidents who remain in private life have not been char}^ in ex- 
 pressing their opinions through the avenues of the public press, and 
 everything like that. Still, there is not one of them who has been 
 divested of his character as a great ligure in contemporary histor}", 
 not one of them, although, as you suggest, if they were Democrats 
 and expressed views that did not meet the approbation of the Repub- 
 lican partv, we disagreed; if thev were Republicans and suggested an}- 
 views that did not meet the approbation of the Democrats, they disa^ 
 greed. But I think we overlook the fact that the people are pretty 
 good jurymen after all, and that they disregard the chaif and look to 
 the merits, and that they make the proper and necessary allowance 
 for the exigencies of partisanship which arise with the necessity for 
 party government. That does not essentially detract; that is my 
 answer to that. In other words, I think at times we do not give 
 enough credit to the real feeling of the people and do not have enough 
 appreciation of the fact that most of them, if not the majority of 
 them, aie just as smart as we are, and in many instances smarter, and 
 that they weigh these things, and that they expect a certain amount 
 of partisanship. 
 
 Mr. Gillespie. It seems to me President Roosevelt understood the 
 situation. He himself saw the necessity of cutting himself loose from 
 home politics, quitting the country — practically getting disassociated. 
 His stand was, "Let my policies be tried; " and you people are engaged 
 in trying to preserve the good of his policies and throwing oil' what is 
 })ad, and all that. It seems to me that the bill will tend to perpetuate 
 personal rule, apart from the merit of the pi-oposition; that after a man 
 has been President eight years, and had tim(> to advance his policies, 
 and put his whole administration behind him. that then the people at 
 least ought to be free from any personal weight belonging to him by 
 virtue of the office and tiie confidence everybody has expressed in him. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Let me ask you this question: Assuming what for 
 a moment I do not believe, that Mr. Roosevelt should come back here 
 
FOEUM OF THE PRESIDENTS. O 
 
 and not be satisfied with Mr. Taft's administration. He is one of the 
 editors of a publication. We all know that the columns, not only of 
 that publication, but any publication in the countr}^ would be open to 
 him for an3'thing he might want to sa3^ If he wanted to criticise the 
 Taft administration, and therefore increase his personal following, if 
 that course would do that, he could do it anyway, as 1 said a moment 
 ago. The power inheres in him, not because of his position, but 
 because of the office he has held. We can not really take from that or 
 add to it, but would it not be infinitel}'^ better for the country that in 
 the highest legislative forum of the country, Mr. Roosevelt, if he had 
 views to express, could express them, and that those who did not agree 
 with him could get up and oppose them? 
 
 Mr. Gillespie. But j^ou have put him in a political position where 
 issues are being fought out. If you give him a chance to retire, he 
 could exercise his own judgment about when he should come in. The 
 position would not force him into the fight. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. So can he under this bill. He can exercise his option 
 as to when he shall speak and when he shall remain silent, just as he 
 does as a private citizen. All that this bill does is to substitute, if 
 any ex-President desires it, the public forum for the private forum — 
 newspapers and magazines. 
 
 Mr. Gillespie. 1 do not say I favor it, but if you give him the 
 franking privilege and a salaiy as an ex-President, it seems to me it 
 would cover the idea you have far better than to make him a Member of 
 Congress, except for the voting. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Except there is a certain dignity attached to the 
 expression of one's views in the House, which I think we all appreciate. 
 
 Mr. Gillespie. I do not see it that wa3^ 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Otherwise we could not struggle to get here, as 
 most of us do. And in relation to the people at large, it is certainly 
 a much more dignified thing that the ex-President should express his 
 views in the people's forum rather than at so much a line or so much 
 a word through the columns of the highest bidder among the maga- 
 zines or the newspapers. That is the part 1 do not like. I never 
 liked to see ex-President Cleveland's name associated with an adver- 
 tisement to increase the sale of a magazine. 
 
 Mr. Gillespie. 1 agree with you on that. 
 
 The Chairman. I think we are all thoroughly agreed on that 
 proposition. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. That is something that grates on my sensibilities, 
 and, gentlemen, unless you give an ex-President this sort of an outlet 
 you drive him into the other. 
 
 Mr. Hardwiok. The only question is whether this would not be 
 worse for him than the other. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. I do not think so. 1 never liked to see Mr. Cleve- 
 land's portrait printed in a magazine only a column separated from 
 advertisements for tooth powders and other things. But I recognize 
 that the countr}^ demanded expression from him, and that is the only 
 medium that is provided. If he wants to say anything he has nowhere 
 else to go except in the magazines and newspapers. My idea is, let us 
 give him a place where he can meet the demand which alwa3^s exists 
 for the views of an ex-President, particularly on great questions which 
 are not necessarily partisan at all. 
 
6 FORUM OF THE PRESIDENTS. 
 
 This railroad bill that has come up is not necessarily partisan, any 
 naore than the Hepburn bill was in the Fifty-ninth Congress. The 
 great questions of conservation will be hard to tight out along party 
 lines, and although the}- succeeded in dividing on the postal savings 
 bank in the Senate on party lines, I do not see how there is really an}^ 
 great question of moral principle involved. On these great adminis- 
 trative questions there will l)e no man in the United States whose 
 judgment has been l)etter educated than that of an ex-President, no 
 matter who he is, and this gives him a chance to express himself. I 
 thank j^ou, gentlemen, for your courtesy, and that is all I have to ssij, 
 unless there is some other question you would like to ask me. 
 
 Mr. Hakdwick. Do you think it is a good idea or not, or have you 
 formed an opinion on the subject, for us to adopt the English plan of 
 having secretaries — that members of the Cabinet have, at least, seats 
 on the floor of the House, with an opportunity to advise the House? 
 
 Mr. Bennett. I have not given it enough thought. 
 
 Mr. Hardavick. I have been very much interested in that question. 
 Of course, we would get a vast deal of information at first-hand in 
 that wa}^ from these people about these bills we are passing. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Yes. I never saw but one Cabinet officer come 
 down on the floor to work for a bill, and he was successful. Of 
 course, he had not the right to speak. 
 
 Mr. Hakdwick. You have seen the British Parliament in session? 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Hakdwick. You know very often, at almost eveiy critical 
 juncture, a cabinet minister advocates or opposes the subject. 
 
 The Chairman. In the English system of government not only is 
 what you have said true, but the initiative of most legislation, and the 
 control of it, its progress through the House of Commons, is in the 
 hands of the Government. 
 
 Mr. Hakdwick. In some respects that makes more intelligent legis- 
 lation. 
 
 The Chairman. Oh, 3^es, that is a very tine system, but it is radi- 
 cally opposed to our own, that seeks to have the dissociation entirely. 
 
 Mr. Hardwick. Exactly, of everything except the influences that 
 spring from the people themselves. 
 
 The Chairman. We want the legislative power to be entirely dis- 
 tinct, and they put their executive officers in their legislative bodies. 
 
 Mr. Gillespie. Theirs is an open way; ours is kind of a covered 
 way. We do that, all the same. Any party that is in power will go 
 to the President and the Cabinet and confer with them. Really it 
 comes from them. If it was out in the open and the opponents were 
 given an opportunity to cross-examine, it seems to me it would be 
 safer and more candid. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. I am not sure but what it would be a good idea, 
 Mr. Hardwick. 
 
 Mr. Hakdwick. I am inclined to that opinion myself. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. 1 have not thought the thing through at all, and, I 
 think, there would be disadvantages, of course. When you think of 
 that, the Cabinet officer would have a tremendous advantage on the 
 floor. He would have all sources of information. 
 
 Mr. Hardwick. Reall3^ Mr. Bennett, to be candid with you, he 
 would not have near as much advantage over a Member as some tre 
 mendous personality like ex-President Cleveland, whose name has 
 
FORUM OF THE PRESIDENTS. 7 
 
 been mentioned, or our present ex-President, Mr. Roosevelt. Any 
 Member who undertook to hitch up with Mr. Koosevelt just at present 
 would be taking a bigger chance than with anj- Cabinet officer. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. He would get his name in good company'. 
 
 Mr. Hardwick. And he might possibly be ruined, too. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. I am in favor of anything, 1 will sa} , generally 
 speaking, that will bring the maximum amount of information to the 
 House of Representatives before it decides, from all sources, and, as 
 far as any indication goes, I would be inclined to think there is a good 
 deal of merit in that suggestion, but of course it would be reversing 
 our policy entirely, and unless one has thought it out thoroughly he 
 ought not to express an opinion. 
 
 Mr. Gillespie. Would not this meet your views ^ Suppose you 
 authorize the ex-Presidents, an}^ time they wish to express themselves 
 on any public questions, to reduce their views to writing and send 
 them to the Speaker of the House and authorize him or require him 
 to put them in the Congressional Record ? 
 
 Mr. Hardwick. That is practically what happens now. 
 
 Mr. Gillespie. A Member can get up and put it in now. This 
 would require the Speaker, just as if it is submitted like the Presi- 
 dent's message, to have it printed in the Record. That would give 
 them a forum. 
 
 Mr. Bennett. Yes; that gives a start toward it, and if you add to 
 that the franking privilege, I do not know but what that is as much 
 as you can get at this session of Congress for a new project. 1 am 
 alwa3\s for a dicker. [Laughter.] Seriously, I think even that, if 
 the committee would not go further than that, would be a valuable 
 thing, because it would give the ex-President a forum, which I think 
 he ought to have, and then, if he went into the magazines and the 
 newspapers, he could not say, " 1 have no other place to go," because 
 we could sa}^, "We have opened the columns of the Congressional 
 Record to 3^ou, and we have given j^ou the right to send through the 
 mails free." That would not go as far as I would like to see it go, but 
 it would go toward meeting what I have in mind, and 1 think it would 
 be a very advantageous thing. 
 
 The Chairman. We are very much obliged to 3'OU, Mr. Bennett. 
 
 (Thereupon, at 11. -10 o'clock a. m. the committee proceeded to other 
 business.) 
 
 o 
 
LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 799 480 6 O