The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1909-01-09

made any such statement about
Congress as a whole, nor. with few
inevitable exceptions, about the mem
bers of Congress, in any message or
article or speech. On the contrary L
have always not only deprecated but
vigorously resented the practice of
indiscriminate attack upon Congress,
and 1ndiscriminate condemnation of
all Congressman, wise and unwise, fit
and unfit, good and bad alike. No
one realizes more than l the impor-
lance of cooperation between the Elk
ecutive and Congress, and no one
holds the authority and dignity of the
Congress of the United States in high
err respect than l do. l have not the
slightest sympathy with the practice
OF judging men, for good or for i'll,
not on their several merits, but in a
mass, as members of one particular
body or one caste. To put together
all men holding or who have held a
particular Office, whether 1t be the
office of President, or Judge, or Sena-
tor, or Member of the House of Rep
resentatives, and to class them all,
without regard to their individual diff
terences, as good or bad, seems to me
utterly indeGensible; and it is equally
tndefensible whether the good are
confounded with the bad in a heated
| and unwarranted championship of all,
or in heated and unwarranted as
sault upon all. l would neither attack
nor defend all executive officers in a
mass, whether Presidents, Governors,
Cabinet officers, or officials of lower
! rank; nor would 1 attack or defend
all legislative officers in a mass. The
safety of free government rests very
largely in the ability of the plain, ev-
eryday citizen to discriminate between
those public servants who serve him
well and those public servants who
serve him i'll. He can not thus dis
criminate If he is persuaded to pass
Judgment upon a man, nor with ref
ence to whether he is a fit or unfit
| public servant, but with reference to
whether he is an executive or legis-
lative officer, whether he belongs to
one branch or the other of the Gov
eminent.
This allegation in the resolution,
therefore, must certainly be due to
an entire failure to understand my
message. -
If you will turn to the Congressional
Record for May l last, pages 5553 to
$780,, inclusive, you will find the de-
bate on this subject. Mr.. Tawney of
Minnesota, Mr.. Smith of Iowa, Mr.,
Sherley of Kentucky, and Mr.. Fitz-
gerald of New York, appear in this
debate as the special champions of
the provision referred to. Messrs.
Parsons, Bennett, and Driscoll were
the leaders of those who opposed the
/ adoption of the amendment and up
! held the right of the Government to
use the most efficient means possible
in order to detect criminals and to
prevent and punish crime. The
amendment was carried in the Com
mittee of the Whole, where no votes
of the individual members are record
| ed, so l am unable to discriminate by
mentioning the members who voted
| for and the members who voted
against the provision but it's passage,
the Journal records, was greeted with
applause. l am well aware, however
that in any case of this kind 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
| an Dan,