The National tribune., 1906-06-21

| ing CALLING to gentlemen VINO nave d
! right to feel that they are quite as able.
quite as devoted to the public interests,
and quite as remote from being influ-
enced by improper considerations as
Theodore Roosevelt.
As might be expected from such q
man as Capt j W. Wadsworth, the
President received the following reply:
| Committee on Agriculture House of
Representatives, U. s..
Washington. D. c.. June Is, 1906.
MY Dear Mr.. President: 1 received
your letter last night. You are wrong.
| the Committees bill. 1t is as perfect A
piece of legislation to carry into effect
| your own views on this question as was
| ever prepared by a Committee of Con-
greSS. Every member of the Commit
| tee is absolutely as honest and sincere
as yourself in his desire to secure the
passage of a rigid Meat Inspection bill.
They know the meaning of the Engisn
| language.
ITO show you how unreliable the in
| formation is upon which you base your
opinion of the bill. j call your attention
to the following language in your letter:
There is no provision for making
tne pants accessible dl All nouFS " thc
Inspectors
"If you will turn to page of the bill
(copy inclosed). line 2, you will find the
following words:
land for the purposes of such ex-
animation and inspection said inspectors
shall have access at all times to every
part of said establishment
Can the English language be made
any palmer?
Turn also to page 6, line 16, and you
will find this language:
The Secretary of Agriculture shall
cause an examination and inspection of
all cattle, sheep, swine and goats, and
the food products thereof, slaughtered
and prepared in the establishments
hereinbefore described for the purposes
of Interstate or foreign commerce, to
be made during the nighttime. as well as
during the daytime, when the slaugh-
tering of said cattle. sheep, swine and
goats or the preparation of said food
products, is conducted during the night
time
Therefore. in at least one of the two
criticisms you make of the bill yoU must
admit that you are absolutely wrong.
You say:
Doubtless it suits the packers. who
object to a thoroughgoiug inspection
81 told you on Wednesday night, when
submitted the bill to you that the
packers insisted before our Committee
on having rigid inspection law passed.
Their life depends upon it, and the
Committee will bear me out in the state
ment that they placed no obstacle what
ever in our way, but, on the contrary.
gave us many valuable suggestions,
based upon their practical knowledge OF
their business.
your other actual criticism of the
amendment refers to the 'court-review'
clause. The worst that can be said of
this clause is that 1t is perhaps unnec-
sary-that 1t is already covered by ex-
isting law. / have always been taught
to honor the judiciary of my country.
I have always been taught to respect
the rights of its citizens and to respect
the rights of property and L cannot be-
lieve that the mere repetition of a pro-
vision which guarantees to the citizen
the privilege of an appeal to the courts
OF the land when he believes his prop
erty rights are threatened can be justly
or properly objected to.
"The rest of your letter deals with
generalities and general condemna-
ton of the Committees bill. If you or
your advisers will point out specifically
wherein it actually fails to accomplish
your purpose, / can assure you it will
be promptly remedied.
"You say further along in your let
ter:
"tAnd I cannot even promise to sign
1t, because the provisions are so bad
that, in my opinion, if they had been
deliberately designed to prevent the
remedying of the evils complained of.
they could not have been worse
81 regret that you, the President of
the United States. should feel justified.
by innuendo at least, in impugning the
sincerity and the competency Of Com
mittee of the House of Representatives.
You have no warrant for II.
Very truly yours
~. w. Wadsworth"
'To Theodore Roosevelt, President of
the United States
Palpably Capt. Wadsworth had much
the best Of the President In this corre-
spondence, and the President hastened
to set himself right as to a certain por-
ton by laying the blame for misinfor-
nation upon Senator Beveridge. This
will not commend itself to most people,
inasmuch as they will think that the
President should certainly have read the
bill carefully before he started in to
write such scorching letter.
He replied to Capt. Wadsworth as
follows:
Ine w nlte House,
Washington, June Is, 1906.
my Dear Mr.. Wadsworth: In the
first place 1 wish promptly to acknowl
edge the one portion of your letter in
which you are in the main right. / was
in error in the statement, which l ac-
cepted from Senator Beveridge, that
there was no provision for making the
plants accessible at all hours to the In
spectors. The provision was put in in
another place; but it is not as good as
the original provision. The court pro-
vision is the one to which most object;
although by no means the only one to
which l object, 1t Is one OF many. AS
regards this I wish to repeat that If de-
liberately designed to prevent the reme
dying of the evils complained of this is
the exact provision which the friends of
the packers and the packers themselves
would have provided. 1t is absurd to
assert that any such provision is need
ed. Why have you not put such pro-
vision in the Post Office law as 1t af-
fects fraud orders; in the law as it af-
fects fraudulent entries of homesteads,
etc, etc? Congress cannot take away
the constitutional right of the packers,
or of any one else, to the protection of
the courts.
"But such a provision as that under
consideration does not represent a de-
sire TO secure the constitutional rights
of any man. 1t represents, doubtless, in
some cases, an honest though wholly
mistaken conviction; in other cases II
represents deliberate purpose to inter-
fere with effective administration by
in reality do administrative work which
thay would ha the fret IN SSart THAR