Kingsbury County independent. (DeSmet, Kingsbury County, S.D.) 1894-1929, 1909-01-15
PRESIDENTS MESSAGE
ON SECRET SERVICE
Calmly Reveals Tenor Of
Debate-Didn't Mean to
Hurt Feelings.

'''No 49,
maintaining a calm, digniied attitude,
President Roosevelt today transmitted
20 the house a reply TO the resolution
Ealing for an explanation.
Mr.. Roosevelt stands firmly upon his
original position that the government
requires a detective organization for
1he investigation Of suspicious OF fraud
IN any branch OF the public s~ervicel
he declares he did not mean TO make
any nsinuatuions regarding any mem
Der of congress.
TO support his view. he quotes from
4he Congressional Record from the de-
bate regarding the secret service p
proprlation. in which the members of
The appropriations committee took the
leading part.
The message closes with an appeal
.or a higher salary for the chief of the
secret service. The message in part
follows:
I have made no charges OF corruption
against congress nor against any member
81 the present House. II / had proof OF
Iuch corruption affecting any member OF
The House in any matter as to which the
FEDERAL government has Jurisdiction, action
gould at once be Drought, as was done In
NE cases Of Senator's Mitchell and Bur
on, and Representatives Williamson,
hermann and briggs, at different times
since / have been president. This would
simply be doing my duty in the execution
ana enforcement OF Tie idWS "llilOuI z
spect to persons. But I do not regard it
as within the province or the duties OF the
president to report to the House "alleged
selinquencies" of members, or the sup
posed Corrupt action OF a member I'm
iis official capacity" The membership OF
he House is by the constitution placed
within the power of the House alone. In
the prosecution Of criminals and the en-
forcement OF the laws the president must
resort to the courts of the United States.
A careful reading OF this message will
show that I said nothing to warrant the
statement that 1.-THE majority OF the con-
gressmen were I'm fear of being inVesti-
gated by the secret service men, or that
congress as a whole was actuated by that
motive" / did not make any such state
ment In this message. Moreover / have
never made any such statement about
congress as a whole, nor, with a few In
svitable exceptions, about the members OF
congress, In any message or article or
speech. On the contrary ] ave always
not only deprecated but vigorously resent
sd the practice Of indlscriminate attack
upon congress-, and indiscriminate con-
domination of all congressman. wise and
unwise, At and unfit, good and bad alike.
No one realizes more than l the import
ADce Of cooperation between the execu-
live and congress, and no one holds the
authority and dignity OF the congress OF
the United States in higher respect h 1
40. 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.
Some Evidence.
Tho resolution continues: That the
president be requested to transmit to the
House any evidence upon which he based
his statements that the chief argument in
favor of the provision was that the con-
gressmen did not themselves wish to be
investigated by secret service men, This
statement, which was an attack upon
no one, still less upon the congress, Is
sustained by the facts.
IL you will turn to the Congressional
Record for May 1 last, pages $3.50 to $3.50,
inclusive. you will find the debate on this
subject. Mr.. Tawney Of Minnesota, Mr..
Smith OF Iowa, Mr.. Sheriey of Kentucky
and Mr.. Fitzgerald OF New York, appear
In this debate as the special champions Of
the provision referred to. Messrs. Par
sons, Bennett and Driscoll were the leaders
of those who opposed the adoption of the
amendment and upheld the right Of the
government to use the most efficient
means possible In order to detect GRIMM
ais and to prevent and punish crime. The
amendment was carried in the
tee of the whole, where no votes of the
individual members are recorded, so / am
unable to discriminate by mentioning the
members who voted for and the mem
bers who voted against the provision, but
its passage, the Journal records, was
greeted with applause. / am well aware,
however, that in any case or this kind
many members who have no particular
knowledge of the point at Issue. are con-
tent simply to follow the lead OF the
which had considered the mat
ter, and / have no doubt that many mem
bers OF the House. simply followed the lead
OF MesSrs. Tawney and Smith, without
having had the opportunity to know very
much as to the rights and wrongs or the
question.
| would not ordinarily attempt In this
way to discriminate between members OF
the House, but as objection has been taken
TO my language, In which simply spoke
OF the action of the House as a whole, ana
as apparently there is a desire that |
should thus discriminate, l will state that
j think the responsibility rested on the
committee on appropriations, under the
lead OF the members whom l have men
toned.
Now as to the request Of the congress
that I give the evidence for my statement
that the chief argument In favor or the
provision was that the congressman dld
not themselves wish to be investigated by
secret service men.
Right in Record.
The part of the Congressional RECORD 10
which / have referred above entlrely sup
ports this statement. Two distinct lines or
argument were followed In the debate.
One concerned the question whether the
law wal ranted the employment or the Sc
cret service in departments other than the
treasury, and this did not touch the merits
OF the service in the least. The other line
of argument went to the metrlts OF tne
service, whether lawfully or uniawru,Iy
employed, and here the chief II not the
only argument used was that the service
should be cut down and restricted because
its members had ''shadowed' or investi-
gated members of congress and other ofr-
GERS of the government
A careful reading OF the Congressionel
Record will also show that practically the
only arguments advanced In favor OF the
limitation proposed by Mr.. Tawney's com
mlttee. beyond what may be supposed to
be contained by implication In certain
sentences as to abuses which were not
specified, were those contained In the re-
peated statements OF Mr.. Sherley. Mr..
SherIey stated that there has been pro
nounced abuses growing out OF the use
OF the secret service for other. purposes
thar those intended" putting his state
ment in the form of a question, and In the
same form stated that the private con-
duct of members of congress, senator's"
and other ought to be investigated by
the secret service. and that they should
not investigate a member OF congress
who had been accused of conduct I'M
becoming a gentleman and a member of
congress"
Attack on SIeuths.
what appears In the record is filed out
and explained by an article which ap-
reared in the Chicago Inter-Ocean of
January 3, 1904, under a Washington head
Lire, and which marked the beginning or