Los Angeles herald., 1909-01-09

WI ASHINGTON, Jan. S.-Ater hav-
w ing made him the target all day
for criticism, with here and
there words of commentator, the
house of representatives tonight by
vote of 212 to 50 cenSured the president
by tabling so much of his message as
reflected on members of congress IN
connection with his recommendation
regarding the secret service detectives,
and also declaring it to be the sense of
the house that it shall decline to con-
slider any communication from any
source that is not in its own judgment
respectful
Having given consideration to the
presidents further views regarding the
secret service contained in his message
to the house of representatives last
Monday, the special committee appoint
ed to deal with the subject today
brought in its final report early.
Accompanying it was the resolution.
When Chairman Perkins OF New
York rose to make his report he faced
an almost full membership, while the
galleries were packed with interested
spectators.
Messrs. Tawney, Smith of Iowa, Shir-
lev and Fitzgerald were on the floor
prepared by word of mouth to resent
what they deemed to be the lnSlnua-
tons of the president upon them as
members of the committee on appro-
priations. They we're not alone in
their indignation.
Indeed, for some time past, the feel
ings of the members had been grow
ing more and more intense and some
of them have been giving way to
their sentiments in language which
fully testified to their wounded pride.
Following the speech by Mr. Dris-
coll of New York, defending the presi-
dent, Mr.. Gardner of Massachusetts,
sprang a surprise by offering an
amendment striking out the whole
text of the report and setting forth
''that the house has the utmost con-
fidence in every member of the COM
mittee on appropriations"
The amendment was lost % to 225.
The roll by unanimous consent was
then called on the adoption of the
resolution, which was carried by
vote of 212 to 35.
Numerous speeches were made de-
nouncing the language employed
in the presidents message relative to
the lower house and much bitter
language was INDUCED in.
Mr.. Perkins Address
Mr.. Perkins addressed the house as
follows:
To your committee were referred certain
passages contained in the annual message
of the president. We were to decide whether
in our opinion these portions of the message
were couched in such form that proper
regard for the dignity of a great legislative
body should forbid their reception.
We are of the opinion that some portions
of the message do constitute a breach of the
privileges of this house, and that, therefore,
following the precedent set in similar cases,
the house should decline to consider them.
With the merits of the question in regard
to the use of secret service men, this
mittee has nothing to do. We fully realize the
right of the president to express his dis
approval of legislation adopted by the con-
gress, to point out its defects and to ask
that they be remedied.
The question will doubtless be considered
by congress and such action taken may
seem to be in the public interest
But your committee has to consider the
criticisms made by the president upon the
motives of congress in its action last ses-
sion to consider his suggestions to future
legislation and to report whether congress
with proper self respect can receive them.
1t is said in the message that the chief ar
guInent in favor of the provision that
the congressman did not themselves wish to
be investigated by secret service men, and
this is repeated in the annual message. If
this were the chief argument it must have
been by this argument that a majority of
the members were led to vote in favor of the
offending provision.
Cannot Share Belief
Your committee is unable to share in this
belief In the argument in the house the
gentleman from Kentucky, speaking in favor
of the amendment, asked if it intended
that if a member of congress was guilty of
unbecoming conduct the department would be
warranted in investigating his conduct by
secret service men,
And the gentleman from New York, opposing
the amendment stated that all know, as
lawyers, that we were not federal officers;
that we were component members of the gov
eminent, and there one over us.
Then the gentleman from Kentucky said
Notwithstanding the views of The gentleman
from New York, the private conduct of a
member of congress had once been investi-
gated by secret service men; but the gentle
man from New York denied even this one
cation in this case cited had not been made by
a member of the secret service, but by a
police officer of Washington.
We do not think that even the most tirnor-
Gus of congressman could have been induced
by these arguments to vote in favor of the
amendment from fear that if he voted mo
the secret service might ferret out his secret
sins.
Nor does it seem that statements made in
1904, even by newspaper reporter, are con-
vincing evidence Of ting motive which actu-
ated congressman in their votes in 1908. The
statement made in newspapers are sometimes
questioned even at the White House.
Has but One Meaning
The statement contained in the message
that the chief argument in favor of the pro-
vision that the congressman did not
themselves wish to be investigated can have
but one meaning. 1t that congress
voted for the measure from improper mo-
tive. Any congressman whose vote can be
determined by unwilingness to have his
conduct investigated by secret service
men, or by any other men, must surely be in
fear of the law
Il it was believed that a majority of this