work. And this should be no 'off year.' It should be one of labor for the cause of right and justice, and that the people may be delivered from the terrible oppression under which they now labor. Gentlemen, I repeat my thanks, and with that I am done."

During the summer after my nomination and whilst engaged in the canvass, the following correspondence took place :

"WASHINGTON, D. C., August 15, 1890.

"HON. JOHN M. PALMER, Springfield, Illinois: My Dear Sir-I have read what purports to be extracts of speeches made by you in regard to legislation proposed and passed by the present house of representative, and believing the people will take more interest in it and understand public questions better if they were jointly discussed, I therefore very respectfully invite you to meet me in joint discussion upon the questions which have been pending in the fifty-first congress. I desire to maintain that the action of the Republican party on the silver, tariff, national election, anti-trust and pension legislation have been more for the interest of the people than any similar legislation offered or passed by the Democratic party during its last four years of power.

"I suggest these questions, as I desire to discuss live issues, but will take up any other question you may desire, comparing the record of the two parties. I am sure no personalities will be indulged in, and I am led to believe you will receive this communication in the spirit in which it is written.

"Please do not think me presumptuous. I know your experience and ability as a lawyer and as an orator, and trusting nothing to my own ability but wholly to the justice of my cause, I desire to meet you in joint discussion as suggested herein.

"Very respectfully yours,

WM. E. MASON."

"SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, August 18, 1890.

"HON. Wм. E. MASON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, "WASHINGTON, D. C.

"My dear sir-I have to acknowledge the receipt of yours of August 15, 1890, in which you say: 'I have read what purports to be extracts of speeches made by you in regard to legislation proposed and passed by the present house of representatives, and believing the people will take more interest in, and understand public questions better if they were jointly discussed, I therefore very respectfully invite you to meet me in joint discussion upon the questions which have been pending in the fifty-first congress,' and you express a desire to maintain in such joint discussion that the 'action of the Republican party on the silver, tariff, national election, anti-trust and pension legislation have been more for the interest of the people than any similar legislation offered or passed by the Democratic party during its last four years of power. The Democratic party of Illinois. share with you the belief that the people take more interest in, and understand public questions better, if they are jointly discussed in their presence, and the Democracy of nearly every county in the state gave expression to that belief when, in their primary meetings, they declared that sound policy dictated the nomination of a candidate for a senator in the congress of the United States, and did me the honor of expressing their preference for me as such candidate; and it was a source of profound regret and something of a surprise not only to the Democracy, but to many Republicans, and to the large class of voters who are not in harmony with either of the leading political parties, that the Republican state convention not only declined to nominate a candidate for the senate, but refused to designate a distinguished citizen whose name I am informed was sug gested, to jointly discuss with me the political questions that most deeply interest the people.

"Understanding from these facts that the Republican

leaders of Illinois, in declining to name any one of its distinguished men (yourself included) for whom they are willing to be responsible in joint discussion such as you propose, I am not able to see what public advantage would result from an acceptance of your invitation.

"It will readily occur to you that our relations to the people of the state are essentially different. A very large number of the electors of the state, by nominating me as a candidate for a seat in the United States senate, have made themselves responsible, not only for my political opinions and conduct, but for all the important acts of my public life, while on the other hand, the political party to which you are attached have declined making itself responsible not only for you, but for all others of its public men.

"I beg to assure you that I entertain none but feelings of personal friendship and respect for you, and I know no gentleman in this state more capable of vindicating, if vindication were possible, the measures to which you refer, and it would afford me the greatest satisfaction if the Republican party should, before the election, accept your view of the value of the joint discussion of public questions, and name you as a candidate for the United States senate. In such an event it would be my duty, upon an intimation of your wishes, to accept an invitation to engage in such joint discussion as might be arranged. "Respectfully,

"JOHN M. PALMER."

The legislature assembled on the Tuesday after the first Monday in January, 1891, and cast one hundred and fifty-three ballots for senator, and on the one hundred and fifty-fourth ballot I was elected, March 11, 1891.

The legislature consisted of one hundred Republicans, one hundred and one Democrats, and three populists who voted for their candidate, Mr. Streeter. The Republicans voted for Governor Oglesby on a great many bal

lots, but finally, with the aid of Dr. Moore and Mr. Cockrell, Populists, I was elected.

I am largely indebted to the speaker of the house, Hon. Clayton E. Crafts, the one hundred and one Democrats who so faithfully adhered to me for one hundred and fifty-four ballots, and hosts of other friends, remembered if not mentioned.

CHAPTER XXIX.

Take my seat in the senate-Funeral of Senator Plumb-Speech on election of senators by the people-Discussion with Mr. Chandler.

I took my seat as senator from the State of Illinois on December 7, 1891, and was assigned to the following standing committees: "Military Affairs," "Pensions,' and on "Railroads," and the select committee "to inquire into all claims of citizens of the United States against the government of Nicarauga.”

Preston B. Plumb, a senator from Kansas, died on December 20, 1891, and I was appointed one of the committee to accompany his remains to Emporia, Kansas, with Senators Peffer, Dolph, Paddock and Gordon. We proceeded to Emporia by way of Indianapolis, Terre Haute, St. Louis, Kansas City and Topeka, and there buried our late associate.

From the assembling of congress after the holidays, I took part in the debates upon all the important questions that came before the senate. I advocated the admission of Fred T. Dubois to a seat in the senate from the State of Idaho. Mr. Dubois was opposed upon

the ground that he was elected on December 16, 1890, which was the second Tuesday after the organization of the legislature of Idaho.

The senate of Idaho had assembled and elected a speaker pro tempore and a secretary, and adopted the rules of the last territorial assembly, and provided for the drawing of seats by the senators.

I maintained that the senate of the State of Idaho was organized for the purposes of the act of congress of 1866, and that the election of all the officers of the legislature were pro tem as long as the legislature would continue them in office. Mr. Dubois was admitted to his seat in the senate.