Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1909-01-04
upon the Congress. is sustained BY the
facts.

upon the Consrea "a sustained BY The
CITIES THE RECORD.
n You win turn to the Confessional
Record for May ] last. pages 5553 90
$780, Inclusive. you viii hnd the deiiata
on THE subject M rawney Of Mine
I ncaotn. MI Smith OF Iowa. Mr.. ShoI-
/ ioy OF Kentnci.v aud Mr Titzseraid Of
/ New York. appear 700 this debate az
the special champions ~ the provision
referred TO- Mcssrs. Parsons Bennett
and Driscou we're the leaders of those
who opposed the adoption or the
amendment and uphold the right of the
government 90 use the most efficient
means possible Dob order Co. detect crime
lnais and TO prevent and punish crime.
The amendment was carried Dob the
committee OF the whole where no
votes OF the Individual mombcrs are
recorded SO J am unable t0 discrm-
inato by mentoning the meme
bers who voted for and tine
provision. but its passage, the journal
records. was greeted with applause
am well aware. however. that in any
case 0f this knid many members who
have no particular knowledge Of The
point at issue. are content simply tO
follow the lead OF the committee which
had considered the matter aud have
TO WNMnN AlIiN NNNNWN IN|NHN'AH NN NNN'
house simply followed the lead of
Mcssrs Tawney ana Smith, without
having had the opportunity 20 know
very much ~ 10 the rights and wrongs
OF the question.
would not ordinarily attempt In
this way to discriminate between mem-
beers OF the house. but as objection has
been taken 10 my language, in which
I simply spoke Of the action Of the
house as a whole, and as apparently
there Is a desire that / should thus dis
criminate. I VIII state that / think tho
responsibility rested on the commit
tee ON appropriations. under the lead
OF the members whom / have mention
ed
Now as to the request Of the Con-
~rcss that I give sne evidence for my
statement that the chief argument in
favor OF the provision was that the
congressman did not themselves wish
TO be investigated BY secret service
men.
his STATEMENT SUPPORTED.
The part OF the Congressional Record
Ia which have referred above entire
~ supports this statement Two dis
tinct lines Of argument were followed
IA the debate. one concerned the Quos-
tion whether the law warranted the
employment OF the secret service IN
departments other than tho treasury
and this DID NOT touch the merits OF
the service in the least. The other line
Of argument went to tho merits Of the
service. whether lawfully or unlawful
Is employed. and here the chief 81 not
the only argument used was that the
service should be cut down and re-
stricted because it's members had
Swallowed" on investigated members
OF Congress and other officers of the
government if we examine the de-
D. 70 u 10 fsaf or
what was urged IN favor OF the amend
ment took the form OF the simple
statement that the committee held that
there had been a. violation Of law by
the use Of the secret service for other
purposes than suppressing counterfeit
Ink land one or two other matters
which can be disrcga rded.) and that
such language was now 90 be used as
would effectfully prevent all such
violation Of Law hereafter Nj. Twncy,
for instance, says: 1T was for the pur-
pose Of stopping the use Of this ser
vice In every possible way by the de-
partmcnts OF the .Nverument that this
provision was inserted" and Mr..
Smith says; NOW, that was the only
way I'm which any limitation could be
put pnon the activities Of the secret
service Mr. Fitzgerald followed in
the same VEIN and 10y far the
largest part OF the argument against
the employment OF tho secret service
was confined to the statement that IL
was In violation Of law" OF course
such a statement Is not IN any way
an argument in favor OF the Justice OF
tho provision. IL Is not an argument
for the provision at all IL is sim-
ply statement OF what the gentle
men making Il conceive TO have been
the law. There was both by impn
cation and direct statement the as
sertion that II WAS the law, and ought
TO be the law that the secret service
should only be used to suppress coun-
terfeiting; and that the law should
be made more rigid than ever in this
respect.
USE OF SECRET SERVICE MEN.
incidentally I may say that In my
judgment there Is ample legal au-
thorty for the statement that this APP
propriatiOn law to which reference /
was made imposes no restrictions
whatever upon the use Of the secret
service men, but relates solely to the
expenditure OF the money appropri
ated MIR. Tawney in the debate stat
ed that he had IN his possession "a
letter from the secretary of the treas
ury received a few days ago in which
the secretary Of the treasury himself
admits that the provisions under which
the appropriation has been made have
been violated year after year for a
number OF years in his own depart
ment" ! append herewith as APP
pendN A the letter referred 20. 10
makes no such admission as that which
Mr.. Tawney alleges IL contains on
the contrary, as you will see by read
Ing H. an emphatic protest against |
any such abrdEment OF the rights |
delegated 10 the secretary Of the treas
ury By existing law" and concludes
by asserting that he lis quite within
bis rights Ia thus employing the SER
vice OF these agents and that tho pro- |
posed modification which Mr. Tawnoy |
succeeded ia carrying through would |
be distinctly 90 the advantage of yiO- |
laLnI. OF criminal .LaLnIaa nl Tho LLnlL-