Alma record. (Alma, Mich.) 1878-1928, 1909-01-07
' spoke OF the action OF the house

as whole, and as apparently there Is
desire that / should thus discri,n-
mate / viii state that ! think rhe re
sponsibility rested on The committee
on appropriations under he lead OF tho
members whom / have mentioned.
Replies to Request For Evidence.
Now as TO the request Of the con
gress that ! give the evidence for my
statement that the chief argument in
favor Of the provision was that the
congressman did not themselves wish
30 be investigated by secret service
men.
The part Of the Congressional Record
to which | have referred above en-
tirely supports this statement. Two
distinct lines of argument were fol
lowed In the debate. One concerned
the question whether the law war
ranted the employment 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 lipe OF argument went to the
merits OF the service, whether lawfully
or unlaw fully employed, and here the
chief If not the only argument used
was that the service should be cut
down and restricted because its mem
bers had Swallowed or Investigated
members OF congress and other officers
OF the government. IL we examine the
debate In detail it appears that most
Of what was urged in favor Of the
amendment took the form of the sim
pie statement that the committee held
that there had been a violation of
law by the use OF the secret service
for other purposes than suppressing
counterfeiting (and one or two other
matters which can be disregarded) and
that such language was now to be
used as would effectually prevent all
such violation of law" hereafter. Mr..
Tawney, for instance. says, ut was
for the purpose of stopping the use OF
this service in every possible way by
that this provision was inserted" and
Mr.. Smith says, Nov, 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 EN-
ployment of the secret service was con-
fined to the statement that It was In
violation of law" OF course such a
statement IS not I'm any way an argu
ment in favor Of the justice OF the
provision. 1t is not an argument for
the provision at all. 1t is simply a
statement of what the gentlemen max
Ing IL conceive TO have been the law
There was both by implication and
direct statement the assertion that It
was the law and ought to be the law.
that the secret service should only DO
used TO suppress counterfeiting and
that the law should be made more
rigid than ever in this respect.
No Restrictions on Service.
Incidentally | may say that in my
judgment there is ample legal author
ity for the statement that this appro-
priation law to which reference was
made imposes no restrictions whatever
upon the use of the secret service men,
but relates solely TO the expenditure OF
the money appropriated Mr.. Tawney
in the debate stated that he had In his
possession "a letter from the secretary
Of the treasury received a few days
ago" In which the secretary of the
treasury himself admits that the pro-
visions under which the appropriation
has been made have been violated year
after year for a number OF years in
his own department" I append here
with as Appendix A the letter re-
ferred TO. [Appendix A is a letter from
Secretary of the Treasury Cortelyou to
the chairman Of the committee on APP
preparations Of the house OF represent
atlvcs. dated April %. 1908. protest
Ing against the proposed law abridg
Ing the right Of the secretary OF the
treasury TO detail secret service men
to work In other divisions Of his de
partment. Such abridgement, he de-
clared, would be distinctly to the ad-
vantage of violators of criminal stat
utes of the United States"l 1t makes
no such admission as that which Mr.
Tawney alleges II contains. on the
contrary. as you will see by reading it,
an emphatic protest against any such
abridgement of the rights delegated to
the secretary OF the treasury by ex-
listing law" and concludes by assert
ing that he lis quite within his rights
I'm thus employing the service Of these
agents. and that the proposed modifi
cation which Mr.. Tawney succeeded In
carrying through would be distinctly
TO the advantage Of violators OF crimi-
nal statutes Of the United States"
call attention to the fact that in this
letter of Secretary Cortelyou to Mr.
Tawney, as in my letter to the speaker
quoted below, the explicit statement
Is made that the proposed change viii
be for the benefit OF the criminals. n .
statement which | simply reiterated in
public form In my message to the con-
gress this year and which Is also con-
tanned in effect In the report of the
secretary Of the treasury to the con
gress.
@Private Conduct" Of Members
A careful reading of the Congression-
al Record will also show that practical
ly the only arguments advanced in ia
vor of the limitation proposed by Mr..
Tawney's committee beyond what may
be supposed to be contained by impli-
cation In certain sentences as to
ABUSES" which were not specified
were those contained In the repeated
statements OF Mr. Sherley Mr.. Sher-
ley stated that there had been PRO