Norwich bulletin. [volume] (Norwich, Conn.) 1895-2011, 1909-01-05


Of the secret police of Napoleon~5. The
article declares that the secret service
bureau exists without warrant of con-
gressional action and that congress has
always been antagonistic TO the bu-
reau.1 1t contained an utterly unwar-
ranted attack on the secret service
division of the treasury department
and its chief. The opening paragraph
includes, for instance, statements like
the following:
He (the chief Of the division) and his
men are DESTROYS Of doing the secret de-
tective work for the whole government
and are not particular about drawing the
line between the lawmakers and the law
breakers They are ready to shadow the
former as well as the latter
Then, after saying that congress will
insist that the men shall only be used
to stop counterfeiting, the article goes
on:
Congress does not intend to have a
Fouche or any other kind OF minister OF
police to be used by the executive de-
partments against the legislative branch
of the government. 1t has been so used,
and It Is suspected that X has been 80
used recently. The legislative
branch of the government will not toler-
ate the meddling OF detectives. whether
they represent the president. cabinet off,
GERS or only themselves. Con-
Rress1nen resented 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 the secret
service men were shedowing congress-
If fr,IF- H. ~
the capitol and the bureau came near
being abolished and the appropriation
for the suppression OF counterfeiting cut
of At another time the chief Of
the secret service had his men shadow
congressman with q view to involving
them in scandals that would enable the
bureau to- dictate 70 them as the price of
silence. The secret service men
have shown an inclination again to
shadow members Of congress. knowing
them to be lawmakers, and this is no
joke Several Of the departments have
asked congress for secret funds for in
vsstigation, and the treasury department
wants the limitation removed from the
appropriation for suppressing counter
feiting This shows a tendency toward
Foucheism and a secret watch on other
officials than themselves.
At the time of this publication the
work of the secret service which was
thus assaied included especially the in
vestigation of great land frauds in the
west and the securing of evidence to
help the department of Justice in the
beef trust investigations at Chicago,
which resulted in successful prOsecu-
tons.
In view Of Mr.. Busbey's position I
have accepted the above quoted state
ments as fairly expressing the real
meaning and animus OF the attacks
made in general terms on the use OF
the secret service for the punishment
Of criminals. Furthermore, in the per-
Torrance OF my duty to endeavor to
find the feelings of congressman on
public questions Of note 1 have fire.
quently discussed this particular mat
ter with members of congress, and on
such occasions the reasons alleged to
me for the hostility of congress to the
secret service, both By those who did
and by those who did not share this
hostility, were almost invariably the
same as those set forth in Mr.. Busbey's
article. l may add, by the way, that
these, allegations as to the secret serv-
ice are wholly without foundation in
fact.
Real Issue Named.
But all of this is of insignificant i'm
portance compared with the main, the
real, issue. This issue is simply, Does
congress desire that the government
shall have at its disposal the most
efficient instrument for the detection
Of criminals and the. prevention and
punishment Of crime, or does it not?
The action of the house last May was
emphatically an action against the in
terest of justice and against the inter
est of law abiding people and In its eff
feet of benefit only 10 lawbreakers. 1
am not now dealing with motives.
Whatever may have been the motive
that induced the action Of which 1
speak, this was beyond all question the
effect Of that action. Is the house now
willing to remedy the wrong2
For a long time contented myself
with endeavoring to persuade the
house not to permit the wrong. speak
ing informally on the subject with
those members who, 1 believed, knew
anything OF the matter and commu-
nicsting officially only in the ordinary
channels, as through the secretary of
the treasury. In letter to the speaker
Dn April 30. protesting against the cut
ting down Of the appropriation vitality
necessary II the interstate commerce
commission was to carry into effect
the twentieth section of the Hepburn
law, 1 added: '"The provision about
the employment of the secret service
men will work very great damage to
the government In its endeavor TO pre-
vent and punish crime. There is no
more foolish outcry than this against
Spies Only criminals need fear our
detectives" Il inclose copy Of the
whole letter, marked Appendix c."
The postscript is blurred In my copy
book, and tive or three Of the words
cannot BE- deciphered) @ppendix @
Is letter dated April 80 1905, from
President Roosevelt TO Speaker Can
non protesting against the cutting
down In the s1ndty civil bill OF the APP
preparation for secrst service work
The only people benefited would be
the very worst of the big railroad men
whose misdeeds we are trying to pre-
vent or correct" were the words Of the
PRESIDENT These methods proved I'M
awaiting TO prevent the wrong. Messrs.
Tawuev and Smith and their fellow