Of course, Mr. Frank H. Hitchcock was chairman of the Republican National Committee in 1908, which committee, with the aid of “a very limited campaign fund,” as one colossally profound “stumper” put it, steered the votes to Judge Taft and himself to his present exalted position. Now, this experience of Mr. Hitchcock may or may not have especially qualified him for ready, quick and comprehensive understanding of all that the Postoffice Department needs to _make it yield even a half of what the people of this country are today paying for_. It may have done so. Thoughtful people, however, are numerously entertaining a private opinion, and thousands of them are publicly expressing it, to the effect that, so far, Mr. Hitchcock’s voluminous talk about the affairs, methods, needs and “deficits” of his department displays a knowledge of the subjects he talks about far more comprehensive than comprehending. That is, he has talked assertively or persuasively, as his auditor or audience fit into his purpose, upon numerous departmental phases of administration, regarding which final analysis in the crucible of “plain hoss sense” shows he knows little. And he knew _less_ when he talked than he now knows. The periodical publishers of the country have been “handing him” some information, _after they got notice of what he was trying “to put over,” since he went to President Taft not later than October or mid-November last_. I say that, because President Taft _covered Mr. Hitchcock’s idea_ (or scheme) _of removing the postal department deficit in his December message for 1910_. Now, did Mr. Hitchcock influence President Taft, or did President Taft influence Mr. Hitchcock? That is the question; whether it is better to be the “influenced” or the “influencer.” The above query may be awkward, or even an uncouth way to state the question, but in evidence that it is a question with thoughtful people--_informed people_. I desire here to quote some statements written by [1]Samuel G. Blythe. With no thought of discriminating praise I can positively say that Samuel G. Blythe _stands with the best of you boys who are doing so much for our enlightenment_--FOR OUR EDUCATION--IN MATTERS RELATING TO OUR NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. Is not that right, boys? I hear a unanimous “aye.” In this connection, however, I wish to remind you boys that many of you--most of you, probably--have done as much to help the people of the country in your _local_ fields of interest and activity as you have done to enlighten us as to Washington’s politics, policies and _tangential peculiarities_.