Mr. Watling was introduced by Mr. Bering of the State Supreme Court (a candidate for re-election), who spoke with deliberation, with owl-like impressiveness.  He didn’t believe in judges meddling in politics, but this was an unusual occasion. (Loud applause.) Most unusual.  He had come here as a man, as an American, to pay his tribute to another man, a long-time friend, whom he thought to stand somewhat aside and above mere party strife, to represent values not merely political....  So accommodating and flexible is the human mind, so “practical” may it become through dealing with men and affairs, that in listening to Judge Bering I was able to ignore the little anomalies such a situation might have suggested to the theorist, to the mere student of the institutions of democracy.  The friendly glasses of rye and water Mr. Bering had taken in Monahan’s saloon, the cases he had “arranged” for the firm of Watling, Fowndes and Ripon were forgotten.  Forgotten, too, when Theodore Watling stood up and men began, to throw their hats in the air,—­were the cavilling charges of Mr. Lawler’s Pilot that, far from the office seeking the man, our candidate had spent over a hundred thousand dollars of his own money, to say nothing of the contributions of Mr. Scherer, Mr. Dickinson and the Railroad!  If I had been troubled with any weak, ethical doubts, Mr. Watling would have dispelled them; he had red blood in his veins, a creed in which he believed, a rare power of expressing himself in plain, everyday language that was often colloquial, but never—­as the saying goes—­“cheap.”  The dinner-pail predicament was real to him.  He would present a policy of our opponents charmingly, even persuasively, and then add, after a moment’s pause:  “There is only one objection to this, my friends—­that it doesn’t work.”  It was all in the way he said it, of course.  The audience would go wild with approval, and shouts of “that’s right” could be heard here and there.  Then he proceeded to show why it didn’t work.  He had the faculty of bringing his lessons home, the imagination to put himself into the daily life of those who listened to him,—­the life of the storekeeper, the clerk, of the labourer and of the house-wife.  The effect of this can scarcely be overestimated.  For the American hugs the delusion that there are no class distinctions, even though his whole existence may be an effort to rise out of once class into another.  “Your wife,” he told them once, “needs a dress.  Let us admit that the material for the dress is a little cheaper than it was four years ago, but when she comes to look into the family stocking—­” (Laughter.) “I needn’t go on.  If we could have things cheaper, and more money to buy them with, we should all be happy, and the Republican party could retire from business.”

He did not once refer to the United States Senatorship.