The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1909-01-07

ftifN HtffA iNA MtiH NaitNlMAatfff az a. Ntls
Nser and 3 eonffrs gipan for land fraud.
n Crugen 80 rot helsevt fhai a Il
N ihe pshiie mitrsst ~ protect rrlsa,
aals N any braneh nf the pullio servioe
} ans exactly AZ WE have again ana arclF
during The pew sever years prosecuted
ana convicted such criminals Who wrrs
IN the executive hranch of the govern.
ment ~ IN my belief W. shoeia be glven
SIMPLE meAne 10 prosecute them N FOUND
To fhr legislative branch But Il this is
moi considered desirable 3 special oxcvp.
tion could b. madt ia tho las prohibit.
INK the use 81 The secret service force IN
Investigating members of ,he coneress
II wpnia ha far better 20 90 this than 10
50 What actually was done and strive 10
prevent or ~ least 90 hamper effective
sctipn against criminals W the executive
branch ~ the government
Asks Careful Reading ef Message,
A careful reading Of this niessa e
WIN show that | said nothing 10 war
rant the statement that "the majority
~ the congressman were IN fear Of
being investigated by the secret serv.
Ice men" or "that congress as whole
was actuaied by that motive" | did
not make any such statement In tiis
message. Moreover | have never made
any such statement about congrcss rs
q whole nor, with few inevitable cx-
eepti0ns, about the members Of cen.
gress IN any message or article or
speech. ON the contrary. ! have ~.
ways not only deprecated. but vigor-
ously resented, the practice of indss.
/ crimlnate attack upon congress and
indiseriminate condemnation Of nll
congressman. wise and unwise, tit and
unfit, good and bad alike No one real
ICES more than the Importance Of
cooperation between the executive
/ and congress, and no one holds the au-
I thority and dignity of the congress OF
the United States IN higher Nepect
than | do. have not the slightest
sympathy with the practice Of judging
men for good or for III not on their
several merits, but In a mass, as mem
bers Of one particular body or one
caste. To put together all men holding
or who have held particular office.
whether II be the Office Of president
or Judge or senator or member of the
house Of representatives, and to class
them all, without regard TO their In
divdual differences. as good or bad
seems 10 me utterly indefensible and
1t IS equally indefensible whether the
good are confounded with the bad IN
a heated and unwarranted champion.
- All L.,
ranted assault upon all. ! would uel.
ther attack nor defend all executive |
officers In mass, whether presidents, |
governors cabinet officers or officials |
defend al legislative officers IN a mass.
The safety Of free government rests |
very largely In the ability of the plain,
everyday citizen to discriminate be-
tween those public servants who serve
him well and those public servants
who serve him Ill. He cannot thus
discriminate If he Is persuaded to pass
judgment upon man not with refer
ence 10 whether he Is a ut or unfit /
public servant. but with reference to
whether he is an executive or lepisla-
tive officer, whether he belongs TO one
branch or the other Of the goyernn ent
Says Message Is Misunderstoc Z.
This allegation III the resolution,
therefore, must certainly be due 10 an
entire failure to understand my mes
sage.
The 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 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.
If you VIII turn to the Congressional
Record for May last, pages 5553 to
$500, inclusive, you Will find the de-
bate on this subject. Mr., Tawney Of
Minnesota, Mr. Smith Of Iowa, Mr..
Sherley Of Kentucky and Mr. Fitzger- |
aid Of New York appear In this debate
rs the special champions Of the pro
vision referred TO. Messrs. Parsons, {
Bennett and Driscoll were the leaders I
of those who opposed the adoption Of
he amendment and upheld the right Of ,
he government 10 use the most Ell
lent means possible In order to de- q
ect criminals and to prevent and pun
sh crime. The amendment was car ,
led In the committee OF the whole, I
where no votes OF the Individual mem
lers are recorded, so | am unable to I
by mentioning the mem +
,ers who voted for and the members 4
who voted against the provision. but l
Is passage. the journal records, was {
'reeted with applause. l am well t
ware, however, that In any case OF {
his kind many members who have no Z
'artlcular knowledge Of the point at c
ssue are content simply to follow the '
cad Of the committee which had con u
idered the matter, and | have no u
oubt that many members Of the house 7
imply followed the lead Of Messrs. c
'awney and Smith without having had q
he opportunity TO know very much as a
0 the rights and wrongs Of the ques- q
lon i
would uot ordinarily attempt Ia this 4
ray to discriminate between members y
the house, but as objection has been n
,ken 10 my language. In which sim q
ly spoke Of 1e action OF the house G
$ whole, and as apparently there Il :
desire that ! should thus discriln y
late ] viii state that think the re- g
rested on the committee =
D appropriations under the lead OF the !
lembcrs whom have mentioned. z
Replies TO Request For Evidence. &
Now as 70 the request Of the on q,
ress that give the evidence for my NJ
latenient that the chief argument IN q,
lyor Of the provision was that the "A
oneressmen did not themselves wish :.
, be Investigated by secret service g,
len
The part OF the Congressional Record
, which have referred above en-
rely supports this statement Two : 4
fgffrat ffu.a ~ arf,tt,gsa.tf ,tsara faf y.