The Topeka state journal., 1909-01-08
TURNED DOWN.
Special Committee of the House
Makes Report
Declining to Receive the PreSl-
dents Message.
DIGNITY is JARRED
BY Passages Referring to the
Secret Service.
Insists on Its Own Interpreta-
tiOn of His Language.

Washington, Jan. S.-Having given
consideration to the presidents turth-
er views regarding the secret service,
contained in his message to the house
of representatives last Monday the
special committee appointed to deal
with the subject today brought in its
final report
Accompanying it was a resolution
which declared it to be the sense of
the house that it shall decline to con-
slider any communication from any
source which is not respectful. recon-
mending that the Objectionable por-
ton of the presidents annual message
be laid on the table and that similar
action be taken with respect to the
message of last Monday because of its
being ''unreSponsfve to the inquiry or
the house." as to what the president
meant when he said referring to the
limitation placed upon the field of
operations of the secret service that
the chief argument in favor of the
provision was that the congressman
did not themselves wish to be investi-
gated
When Chairman Perkins of New
York OF the special committee arose
to make his report he faced an almost
full membership while the galleries
were packed with interested specta-
tors MeSsrs. Tawney Smith (Iowa)
Sherley and Fitzgerald were on the
floor prepared by word of mouth to
resent what they deemed to be the in
situations of the president against
them as members of the committee of
appropriations. They were not alone
in their indignation. Indeed, for some
time past the feelings of the members
had been growing more and more in
tense and some of them have been
giving way to their sentiments in Ian
guage which fully testified to their
wounded pride.
Perkins Speaks.
Mr.. Perkins addressed the house as
follows:
''To your committee were referred
certain passages contained in the an
rsuaI message of the president. We
We're to decide whether in our opin-
ion, those portions of the MESA ge
were couched in. such form that
proper regard for the dignity of
great legislative body should forbid
their reception. We are of the opinion
that the portions of the ge do
constitute breach of the privileges of
this house and that therefore follow
ign the precedent set in similar cases
the house should decline to consider
them.
with the merits of the question
with reference to the use of the secret
service men, this committee has moth
ing to do. We fully recognize the
right of the president to express his
disapprovaI of legislation adopted by
the congress to point out its defects
and to ask that they be remedied. The
question will doubtless be considered
by congress and such action taken as
may seem to be in the public interest.
''But your committee has to con-
slider the criticisms made by the presi-
dent upon the motives of congress in
its action last session to consider his
to report whether congress with
proper respect can conceive them. 1t
is stated in the messag ge that the chief
argument in favor of the provision
Oft m n No
themselves wish to be investigated by
secret service men and this is re-
peated in the annual message. If this
was the chief argument it must have
been by this argument that the ma
iority of members were led to vote in
favor of the offending provision. Your
committee is unable to share in this
belief. In the argument of the house
the gentleman from Kentucky speak
ing in favor of the amendments asked
if it was intended that if a member
of congress was guilty of unbecoming
conduct the department would be
warranted in investigating his con-
duct by secret service men. And the
gentleman from New York, opposing
the amendments stated that we all
knew as lawyers, that we were not
federal officers; that We were COM
ponent members of the government
and there was no one over us. Then
the gentleman from Kentucky said,
Notwithstanding the views of the gen
conduct of a member of congress had
once been investigated by secret ser
vice men but the gentleman from
New York denied even this one sol
itarv instance and stated the in
vestigation in the case cited had not
been made by a member of the secret
service but by a police officer of
washington
Nobody Was Scared.
I'VE do not think that even the most
r.
been induced by these arguments to
vote in favor of the amendments from
fear that if he voted mo- the secret
service might ferret out his secret sins
s'Nor does it seem that statements
made in 1904, even by a newspaper re-
porter are convincing evidence of the
motive which actuated congressman in
heir votes in 1908. The statements made
IN newspapers are some times question
"a even at the White House.
1.-THE statement contained in the mes
sage that the chief argument in favor
,f the provision was that the congress-
men did not themselves wish to be in
vestigated can have but one meaning
from an improper motive. ANY
whose vote can be deter
mined by unwillingnesS to have his own
.onduct Investigated by secret service
men or by any other men must surely
ne in fear of the law.
ssTf it was believed a majority of this
,ody were in fear that their acts might
1e investigated and their. crimes dis
covered the respect OF the people which
+ is important for the republic that
,ongress should possess would be inn
paired if not destroyed.
s.Tt is dangerous to the republic that
, large portion of our people should
ave their confidence shaken in the
1dres who interpret the law: it is |
.o11aIIy dangerous that their confidence
lhouId be impaired in those who enact