Los Angeles herald., 1909-02-22
chief EXECUTIVE
DEFENDS USE OF
SECRET SERVICE
REPLIES VIGOROUSLY TO RE-
PORT OF HEMENWAY
SENATOR'S VERDICT BRANDED
UNTRUE AND MISLEADING
Roosevelt Declares Only by Aid of
Federal SIeuths Has Conviction
of "Higher Up" Criminals
Been Possible
Continued from Page Onel

tice had it not been in large part nulli-
fed by the prompt action of the de-
partment of Justice on its own init1a-
tive, and without any further legisla-
tion of any kind by the congress, in
providing a species of secret service
in the department of justice itself.
Report Contradictory
your committee, in its report, states
it has never been the intention of the
congress to build a spy system. The
next sentence, however, advocates the
building up of precisely this spy sys-
TEN in the department of justice.
mot only have I again and again re-
quested that the secret service be placed
under the department of justice, but the
chief of the secret Servic has himself
specifically requested on different occa-
sions that the same course be followed
CAS- regards the general policy which
should be followed, therefore, your COM
mittee has declared for the policy the
adoption of which l have urged, and all
difficulties would be met by providing
specifically and amply for carrying out
that policy.
"Chief Wilkie should be transferred
TO the department of justice and put at
the head of the force therein organized
But in your report, and the subse-
quent debate, direct and indirect at
tac1s are made upon the secret service,
with curious persistency and a curl
Gus indifference to the fact that your
committee recommends that a. precisely
similar secret service to the one at
tackled be now established in the de-
partment of justice, and be it observed
that no limitation is proposed for the
new secret service; so that the limita-
tion is only imposed on the secret serv-
ice which already has shown it's effi-
cheney and already has become an OBJ
ject of terror to criminals.
An Army of SIeuths
Senator Hemenway states that
there are more than 5000 men now in
the secret service and inspection work
of the government and that in the
last few years the number has trebled
and that if they were to march through
the streets of Washington they would
make an army, while it was also stat
ed in the same debate that at the close
of President McKinley's administration
there were only 167 such men on the
payroll, whereas it was alleged that we
now have over 5000, and that the ap-
propriations on that account for the
last year amounted to about $4,000, 600.
These statements are not in ac-
you herewith a substantially although
not entirely accurate statement of the
number of men employed on secret
service or criminal investigation work
during the year that has just passed,
as compared with the years 19OL-02
Owing to the very brief period
which l have had to get at these fig
ures, it was impossible to get them
with entire accuracy, but they are not
out of the way a score or more in either
direction.
Increase of One=HaIf
According to these figures it ap-
pears that in the neighborhood of 1900
men of this type were employed seven
years ago, and somewhat over 1900
now; that is, instead of having trebled
in number, as one Of the statements
made above, instead of having in
creased nearly twenty-fold, in accord
ance with the other statement, they
have increased but a little over one
half, a little over 30 per cent.
Moreover, of this increase consid-
erably over half was in the number of
men used in securing the punishment
of violators of the internal revenue
laws, a matter wholly outside of that
discussed by any of the gentlemen who
have objected to the use of the secret
service.
THE remaining increase is due to
such causes as the natural growth of
the postoffice department, the appoint
ment of individuals to enforce the pure
food and meat inspection laws, the
more rigorous enforcement of the safe
ty appliance act, the suppression of the
liquor traffic among the Indians; the
protection Of the public lands and tim
Der and the like.
L call your especial attention to the
fact that the great majority of these
men are. not primarily or mainly, or
indeed, originally engaged in secret
service or criminal investigation or
inspection work at all; have employed
these terms merely because they were
so employed by members of your COM
mittee and others in the course of the
debates in the house and senate.
Terms Are Misleading
1.-THE terms are entirely misleading in
so far as they give an impression that
the chief work of the men mentioned
was of the character assigned it by
Senator HemenWay and others in the
quotations given above and in similar
statements.
'As regards nineteen-t of
these men, the proportion of their time
given to secret service work or criminal
investigation is, although insignificant,
only an occasional incident to their or
binary duties.
"To speak of these men as having
become an army or as 5000 men en-
Eaged in secret service and similar
work. is comically out of accord with
the actual facts.
THE increase was 700 men, of whom
but q, score or two are habitually en-
gagged in secret service work AS for
i.
the debate in both houses are so exag-
gerated as to bear no reference what
ever to the actual figures
Thus it was stated that tWo-thirds
of the money appropriated for the de-
partment of justice was spent in GRIM
inal investigation
GAS a matter of fact the attorney
general reports to me that the appro-
priation so spent construed on the most
liberal possible basis, was in reality
1.07 per cent, so that the statement in
question was a thirty-fold exaggera-
ton.
I'm the same way it was stated that
$10,000,000 (or as one gentleman put il
that $20,000.000) represented the amount
expended for this secret service work
while the totals of another set of
figures amount to $32, 900 as money
which could have been expended for
such work.
"A table carefully compiled covering
all the departments shows the amount
actually expended during the first six
months Of the present fiscal year in al
work that can by any possibility be
considered to come under this heading
as a little less than $764,000, an esti-
mated total for the entire fiscal year
of approximately 81. 100000. which goes