district but was actually living there then. He explained, says
Roosevelt, "first, that he had not written the letter; second,
that he had forgotten he had written the letter; and, third, that
he was grossly deceived when he wrote it." Grosvenor at length
accused Roosevelt of a lack of humor in not appreciating that his
statements were made "in a jesting way," and declared that "a
Congressman making a speech on the floor of the House of
Representatives was perhaps in a little different position from a
witness on the witness stand." Finally he rose with dignity and,
asserting his constitutional right not to be questioned elsewhere
as to what he said on the floor of the House, withdrew, leaving
Roosevelt and the Committee equally delighted with the opera
bouffe in which he had played the leading part.

In the Roosevelt days the Commission carried on its work, as of
course it should, without thought of party. It can be imagined
how it made the "good" Republicans rage when one of the results
of the impartial application system was to put into office from
the Southern States a hundred or two Democrats. The critics of
the Commission were equally non-partisan; there was no politics
in spoilsmanship. The case of Mr. Grosvenor was matched by that
of Senator Gorman of Maryland, the Democratic leader in the
Senate. Mr. Gorman told upon the floor of the Senate the
affecting story of "a bright young man from Baltimore," a Sunday
School scholar, well recommended by his pastor, who aspired to be
a letter carrier. He appeared before the Commission for
examination, and, according to Mr. Gorman, he was first asked to
describe the shortest route from Baltimore to China. The "bright
young man" replied brightly, according to Mr. Gorman, that he
didn't want to go from Baltimore to China, and therefore had