side him at his desk one forenoon-the competent and devoted Miss Josephine Stricker, his secretary, being a third- and listened to scores of letters which had come to him, and listened also to the tactful, sympathetic replies which he dictated. The mot is told of him, in this connection, that he found certain critical people hard to please. "If I go down from my office or come up to it, in the front elevator, they say that I am ostentatious. And if I go or come in the rear elevator, they say that I am secretive."

At this period, and later, he wrote many editorials for the Kansas City Star. Through these various channels and by numberless speeches - he was incessantly in demand - he carried on his patriotic leadership of the best thought of the nation. Together with all this public activity ran purely and happily the parallel current of his private home life. His work for the nation did not prevent him from meeting, with great wisdom and matchless fidelity, the demands upon him of his nearest of kin. The same lofty key of family life at Sagamore Hill was kept throughout its master's life. Mr. Bishop gives, in a letter, a story which is striking but in no way exceptional, as to the high quality of the home life of the Roosevelt family.

During Roosevelt's tour in Europe on his return

from Africa, the ex-President and Mrs. Roosevelt were staying with the Crown Prince and Princess of Sweden. At dinner one day, the Crown Princess turned to Roosevelt and asked, “Is it true that Mrs. Roosevelt would not receive the Russian Grand Duke Boris when he was in America?" Her guest met her frank question with a reply equally frank.

"We were at Sagamore Hill, not at the White House, when the incident occurred which you have in mind. The Grand Duke had led a scandalous life in America. This was known to everybody. The Russian ambassador asked permission to bring the Grand Duke to our home. I could not courteously refuse this request. Mrs. Roosevelt shared my disapproval of the Grand Duke's notorious conduct and felt that his presence in our house would be an insult. Accordingly, when the two dignitaries arrived, she had gone out. The ambassador expressed regret at not finding her at home. And I did not explain further than to say, 'Mrs. Roosevelt has gone out to lunch, Mr. Ambassador; she is not in the house.""

With that fine courtesy which characterized them, Mr. and Mrs. Roosevelt never mentioned the affair. "But," adds my fun-loving classmate, in Mr. Bishop's narrative, “apparently the Grand Duke and the Ambassador were not able to conceal

their feelings and expressed their chagrin to a sufficient number of people to insure the matter getting into the papers, which it accordingly did."

It is a delightful little tidbit of social news, especially agreeable to democratic ears. The man Roosevelt-backed by his wife, who shared his life nobly, beautifully- was a real man, with a love of integrity and purity not only in his public career, in brilliant letters and speeches, but also in his private life, down through the simple, personal details of his daily living. Thirty years ago I heard President Arthur Hadley of Yale say in a public address upon social problems, "Society alone has the power to correct the evils which society creates." True words which have remained in my memory. And while many good people, themselves high-minded, hesitate or fail to make a stand against social moral laxities which they personally and feebly disapprove, not so acted — Theodore Roosevelt. The moral idealism of the man was fundamental; it was expressed not only in words, as he stood on the platform with applause punctuating his appeals for truth and justice, but in deeds, even amid the smallest punctilios of a clean, cultivated, social code.

In the earlier and even in the mid-life periods of my great friend's career, his record stands, in my memory, as in the black-and-white sketches of