Years ago, when the passions born of our Territorial troubles were yet fiercely burning, I heard it said that Kansas was “the child of Massachusetts.” The “Old Bay State,” it is true, contributed her full quota towards moulding that public sentiment whose enthusiastic impulses sent so many immigrants to people our prairies, and her firm friendship for Free Kansas did very much to break down the intolerant domination of slavery within our borders. The voice of Massachusetts, then as during the Revolution of our forefathers, was eloquent and courageous, and her action swift, vigorous and determined. But Sam and John Adams, a century ago, had Benjamin Franklin and Robert Morris, representatives of the “Old Keystone State,” as their most efficient coadjutors, and so in the struggle which made Kansas free, the zeal, the courage, and the constancy of Pennsylvania’s sons were conspicuously illustrated. If Kansas could properly be called the child of any State, she is the daughter of Pennsylvania. But Kansas is really cosmopolitan. The blood of all States and all Nations runs in her veins. The East and the West, the North and the South, all sections and all nationalities have sent their sons and daughters to swell her population and contribute to her development. There is a wonderful aggregation of peoples in the citizenship of this young Commonwealth; and out of these has grown a remarkable community—a people homogeneous, yet diverse; combining the sturdy independence, firm convictions and all-conquering energy and industry of the North with the intense enthusiasm and fine courage of the South. It is difficult to estimate what the result of such fusing of bloods and temperaments will be in the future, but I believe it will produce as strong, intelligent and vigorous a manhood as this Continent or the world ever saw. I do not intend, however, to discuss physiological questions. This is Pennsylvania’s Day in our city, and I want to trace the connection of Pennsylvania and her sons, as briefly as may be, with the history and development, political and material, of Kansas. But first let me ask, did any of you ever notice the striking similarity in the appearance of the two States, Pennsylvania and Kansas, as shown upon the map? In size, shape and general outlines, this resemblance is remarkable. In no other two States of the Union is the conformation of outlines and appearance so noticeable. Three sides of each, and the same three sides—north, south and west—are squarely cut, while the eastern boundary of each is irregular and formed mainly by the course of a river. Pennsylvania has a territorial area of 46,000 square miles, and is 315 miles east and west by 160 miles north and south. Kansas is a larger State, having a territorial area of 81,000 square miles, and being 400 miles east and west by 200 north and south. Both are longer, in about equal proportions, than they are wide.