The Garland globe. [volume] (Garland, Utah) 1906-191?, 1909-01-09
BIG STICK SMASHES;
ROOSEVELT DEFENDS
THE SECRET SERVICE
In Message to House President De-
clares His Statements in Previous
Words to Congress Were Gross
ly Misunderstood.

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
congressman 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.
"1f you will turn TO the Congressional
Record for May 1 last, pages $3.50 to $780,
inclusive, you will find the debate on this
subject. MIR. Tawney OF Minnesota, Mr.
Smith of Iowa, Mr.. Sherley 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 lead
ers Of those who opposed the adoption
Of the amendment and upheld the right OF
the government to use the most efficient
means possible I'm order to detect Grim
inals 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 recorded, so
| am unable TO discriminate by mention
Ing the members who voted for and the
members who voted against the provision,
but its passage, the journal records, was
greeted with applause. | am well aware,
however, that In any case Of this kind
many members who have no particular
knowledge of the point at issue. are con-
tent simply to follow the lead of the
committee 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, with
out having had the opportunity to know
very much rs to the rights and wrongs
| Of the question.
Chip Is Knocked OF
Roosevelt's Shoulder.
att Il,
way TO discriminate between members of
| the house. but as objection has been TIA
ken to my language In which ] simply
| spoke of the action of the house as n
whole, and as apparently there Is de-
| sire that should thus discriminate. ! will
| state that I think the responsibility rest
ed on the committee on appropriations,
under the lead of the members whom
have mentioned.
Now as to the request of the congress
| that / give the evidence for my state
mcnt that the chief argument In favor
| OF the provision was that the congress
| men did not themselves wish to be inves-
| tlgated by secret service men.
1.-THE part of the Congressional Record
to which have referred above entirely
| supports this statement. Two distinct
lines of argument were followed In the
debate. one concerned the question
| whether the law warranted the employ
| ment OF the secret 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 merits of the service. whether law
| fully or unlawfully 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
| Swallowed or investigated members Of
| congress and other officers OF the govern
| ment. II we examine the debate in de-
| tail Il appears that most OF what was
| urged in favor Of the amendment took the
| form of the simple statement that the
| committee held that there had been a
violation of law by the use Of the secret
| service for other purposes than suppress
| ing counterfeitng land one or two other
| matters which can be disregarded), and
| that such language was now to be used
as would effcctually prevent all such 'vio-
| lation OF law hereafter. Mr.. Tawney, for
| instance, says: 1T was for the purpose
of stopping the use of this service in
| every possible way by the departments of
| the government that this provision was
| inserted and Mr.. Smith says: Now, that
was the only way In which any limitation
| could be put upon the activities of the
secret service Mr.. Fitzgerald followed In
| the same vein. and by far the largest
| part of the argument against the employ
| ment OF the secret service was confined
to the statement that II was In violation
| OF law OF course, such statement Is
not in any way an argument in favor of
the justice OF the provision. 1t is not an
| argument for the provision at all. II Is
| simply "A statement of what the gentle
men making 1t conceive to have been the
law.
| rdinn RSstrintiano Of