New-York tribune., 1906-06-17

public, but he believes that as Mr. WadswOrth
saw Mt to publish the beginning Of the corre-
spondence it is only fair that the rest of it be
printed.
Mr Wadsworth gave out the first letter he re-
ceived from the President and his reply TO tho
same last evening just before leaving here
for New York The letter made public to-day is
in reply to the written by Mr Wadsworth.
and, the Presidents friends believe. effectualy
dispoSes Of the chairman's contentious.
THE PRESIDENTS LETTER.
The letter from the President is as follows:
White House Washington June 15 1905
My Dear Mr.. WadsWCrth. In the first place,
wish TO promptly acknowledge the one portion
OF your letter in which you are in the main
1 accepted from Senator Beveridge that there
was no provision for making the plants accessi-
Die at all hours to the inspectors. The prOvis-
ION was put in in another place, but il is not
as good as the original provision.
The court provision is the one TO which most
object, although by no means the only one TO
which object; II is one of many AS regards
this 1 wish TO repeat that if deliberately de-
signed 10 prevent The remedvins of the evils
complained Of this is the exact provision which
the friends of the packers and the packers them
selves would have provided. 1t Is absurd TO
assert that any such provision is needed Why
nave you not put such a provision in The POST
office law as IL affects fraud orders; in the law
as 1T affects fraudulent entries of homesteadss
etc, etc? Congress cannot take away the con-
stitutiOnal right of the packers or of any one
else, 10 the protection of the courts But such
a provision that under consideration does not
represent a desire to secure the constitutional
rights of any man. 1t represents doubtless, IN
some cases, an honest though wholly mistaken
conviction in other cases il represents deliber-
ate purpose 10 interfere with effective admin
istratiOn by trying TO provide that the courts
shall in reality do administrative work which
they would be the first 70 assert their inability
TO perform
tee we're enacted into law you would have the
functions of the Secretary Of Agriculture mar
rOwly limited. TO be purely ministerial; and
when he declared a given slaughter house unsani-
tary, a given product UNIV hOesome, acting on
the Judgment Of the government experts. you
would put on the Judge who had no knowledgs
whatever of the conditions. the burden of stat
ing whether not the Secretary was right. In
Chicago for instance, you would make any
Judge whom the packers chose to designate. and
not the experts Of the Department of AgricuIt-
ure, the man to decide on any question of any
kind which the packers thought it worth while
10 dispute t1ou may possibly remember the
recent judicial decision in Chicago in which the
packers were concerned-) wish 10 repeat that
thls provision Is IN my Judgment, one which, Y
enacted into law. viii nullify the major part OF
the good which can be expected from the enact
ment of this law You assert that the packers
insist upon having rigid inspection law passed.
IL they sincerely desire rigid inspection law
they will insist upon this provision being taken
out Leaving il in is Incompatible with securing
To so much of your letter as speaks Of nv
having made. innUendOes about committee OF
the House, or of your knowledge of the English
language, etc. il is not necessary TO make any
i
point out specifically wherein the bill fails TO
accomplish my purpose 1T will be promptly
remedied-" I am happy to tell YOU that have
to-day seen member or your committee. Mr.
Adams. seeing him by request OF the Speaker.
and went over with him. together with Mr..
McCabe and Mr.. Reynolds. the various points
in which the bill as you have reported il fails
to accomplish our purpose. and made the spe-
cifc recommendation necessary in each case to
remedy the failure; and in each case Mr. Adams
stated that he personally would accept the al
teratiOns we proposed He agrees with me that
~, a
He agrees to the dozen other changes which
think should be made. II these changes.
which Mr.. Adams says he thinks should be-
adopted, are adopted, your amendment viii be-
come as good as the Beveridge amendment-iu
Mr.. McCabe's opinion somewhat better than the
Beveridge amendment is if unchanged
care not whit for the language Of the
amendment. What am concerned with is TO
have it accomplish the object 1 have in view
namely. a thorough and rigid. and not a sham
inspection In my Judgment the amendment as
reported by YOU fails to accomplish this object.
whereas the BeVeTidge amendment and the
House amendment with the changes which Mr.
Adams has stated he will gady accept. both
substantially accomplish the purpose I have in
view. 1 will accordingly gladly accept either.
or accept any alteration OF either or OF both
which will accomplish this end Yours truly.
Hon James w Wadsworth, chairman Commit
tee on Agriculture.
MR.. BEvERIDGE'S STATEMENT
Senator Beveridge made the following state
ment in reference 70 the controversy between
the President and Mr.. Wadsworth regarding the
night inspection clause of the amendment to tha
Agricultural Appropriation bill reported by Mr..
Wadsworth's committee:
In my opinion the Wadsworth substitute does
make the omission referred To- 1t provides to
use it's exact language, an examination and in
spectiOn of ali meat food products. . and
for the purposes Of such examination and in
SpectiOn said inspectors shall have access at all
times 10 every part Of said establishment" The
Wadsworth substitute does not permit inspec-
tors in the packing houses for any other pur-
pose
But at night time. when work is supposed
10 be done and no meat supposed to be inspected
is the time when improper practices are said %
occur in the packing houses. Certainly then ia
the time when any improper practices would
occur.
Therefore my bill provides that the inspector
shall have access during the night time as well
during the day time TO every part Of any es-
tablishment hereinbefOre described without re-
speCt TO whether not any slaughtering or
other work is being done therein" The pur-
pose of this was TO put the packing houses un-
der the surveillance Of the inspectors when
closed we'll when open This provision
which deem most important. the Wadsworth
substitute ouits.
Mr. Wadsworth thinks his Language covers this