Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1909-01-05

ItGr1eltlnS; and that the law should De
made more rigid than ever in this re-
Ispect.
Incidentally l may say that in my
judgment there is ample legal author
lily for the statement that this ap-
preparation law to which reference
Twas made imposes no restrictions
whatever upon the use of the secret
Iservice men, but relates solely to the
expenditure of the money appropriate
ed Mr.. Tawney in the debate stated
that he had in his possession "a letter
from the Secretary of the Treasury re-
ceived a few days ago. in which the
ISecretary of the Treasury himself ad-
mits that the provisions under which
the appropriation has been made have
been violated year after year for Il
humber of years in his own Depart
lrlent." l append. herewith as Appen-
ldiN A the letter referred to. 1t makes
no such admission as that which MIR.
lTawney alleges. 1t contains on the
contrary, as you will see by reading it,
an emphatic protest against any such
labridgemcnu of the rights delegated to
the Secretary Of the Treasury by eX-
listing law" and concludes by asserting
that he is quite within his rights in
thus employing the service of these
lasents' and that the proposed modi-
fcatiCn which Mr.. Tawney succeeded
in carrying through would be dis
ltinctly t. the advantage OF violaters OF
criminal statutes OF the United States.
| call attention to the fact that in this
letter of Secretary Cortelyou To Mir.
TaWney, as i'll my letter to the Speak
or quoted below, the explicit statement
is made that the proposed change will
be for the benefit of the criminals d
statement which l simply reiterated iii
public form in my message to the
Congress this year, and which is also
contained in effect III the report OF the
Secretary of the Treasury to the Con-
gress.
\ careful reading of the Congress
innal Record will show that practically
the only arguments advanced in favor
of the limitation proposed by Mr.. Taw-
ney's committee, beyond what may be
supposed to be contained by implica
ton in certain sentences as to 'abn-
SEES which We're not specified, We're
those contained in the repeated state
ncnts Of Mr.. Sherley. Mr.. Sherley sta
ted that there had been pronounced
abuses growing out of the use nf the
Secret Service for purposes other than
those intended putting his statement
in the form Of a question, and in the
same form further stated that the
private conduct" of "Members Of
Congress. Senator's" and others ought
not to hc investigated by the Secret
Service, and they should not in
vestigate a Member of Congress
| wi hpnn # H.
duct unbcconina gentleman and
Il Member of Congress-" In addition
to these assertions couchcd as Gues-
lions, he made one positive declara-
ton, that This Secret Service at one
time was used for the purpose of look
ing into the personal conduct of q
Member Of Congress-" This argument
Of Mr. Snerley, the only real argu-
ment as to the merits of the question
made on behalf of the Committee on
Appropriations will be found in
columns / and of page 1855, and col
t,mn l Of page BOO of the Congressional
, Record. In column / of page 5556 Mr.
Sherey refers TO the improperly ri
permitting the secret service men to
investigate men in the departments.
officers OF the army and navy, and
|
= he refers to officers of the navy and
Members of Congress; III column /.
page 55,7, he refers only to Members
. of Congress. His speech puts most
weight on the investigation Of Mem
aers Of Congress.
What appears in the record is filed
out and explained by an article which
appeared in the Chicago Inter- Ocean
1 hi
headline, and which marked the be-
ginning of this agitation against the
Secret Service. 1t was special arti-
lie of about 5000 words, written. as |
was then informed and now under
tand, by Mr. l.. w. Busbey, at that
time private secretary to the Speaker
If the House. ] inclosc Il copy Of GER
tain extracts from the article marked
Appendix Il. 1t contained an utterly
unwarrantcd attack on the Secret Ser
vice Division of the Treasury Depart
ment and its chief. The opening par
graph includes. for instance, state
mcnts like the following:
He Uhe chief of the division) and his
rlcn are DESTROYS of doing the secrt t
detective work for the whole Govern
,nent and are not particular about
| UIdNlllS ne line between Iue INV MIX =
,rs and the lawbraakerS. They are
ready to shadow the former as Well as
I he latter
Then. after saying that Congress will
insist that the men shall only be used
10 stop countcrfeting, the article goes
en-
Congress does not intend to have a
Fouche or any other kind of minister
ut ponce to lie used by the eXecuuvu
departments against the Legislative
| ranch of the Government. 1t has
cen 50 used, and il is suspected that
il has been so used recently
The legislative branch of the Govern
Elcnt will not tolerate the mcddlng Of
detectives. whether they represent the
President Cabinet officers. or only
themselves. :" Congressman re-
scented the secret interference of the
secret service men. who for weeks
Swallowed some of the most respected
members of the House and Senate :
When it was discovered that
Tie secret service men We're shadowing
congressman there was a storm of in