ROOSEVELT V. CONGRESS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 327, 20 January 1909, Page 4

ROOSEVELT V. CONGRESS.

THE WORDS THAT ABE OBJECTED TO. The paragraph in the President's Message whicli has aroused the ire of Congress reads:—"Last year an amendment was incorporated in whicli provided that there should be no detail from the Secret Service and no transfer therefrom, it is not too much to say that this amendment has been of benefit only to the criminal classes. If deliberately introduced for the purpose of diminishing the effectiveness of wa', against ci'iine it could not have boon better devised to this end. it forbade the practices that had been followed to a greater or less extent by the executive heads of various departments for twenty years. To those practices we one the securing of the evidence which enabled us to drive great lotteries out of business and secure a quarter of a million of dollars in fines from their promoters. "These practices have enabled us to discover some of the most outrageous frauds in connection with the theft of f.'overninent land and (.'overnniont limber by great corporations, and by individuals. These practices have enabled us to get some of the evidence indispensable in order lo secure the conviction of the wealthiest and most formidable criminals ivilh whom the Ooveniinont. has to deal, both those operating in violation of the anti-trust law and others. Tlie amendment in question was of benefit to no one excepting to those criminals, and it seriously hampers the (iovernmenl in the detection of crime and the securing of justice. Moreover it not only nll'oi-ts Departments ontsid.' of the Treasury, but it tends lo hamper the Secretary of the Treasury himself in tl Il'ort to utilise the employees of his department so as to best meet the requirements of the public service. I|, forbids him from preventing frauds upon (lie Customs service, from invostigaing irregularities in brunch mints and assays offices anil has seriously crippled him. It prevents the promotion of employees in the Secret Service and this further discourages good efforts. In its present form the restriction operates only to tlie advantage of the'criminal, of the wrong-door. "The chief argument in favor of Hie provision was that the Congressmen did not Iheniselves wish to be investigated by the Secret Service men. Yory'littlc of such investigation has boon done in the past ; but it is true that the work of the Secret Sendee agents was partly responsible for the indictment and co-i----viction of a Senator and Congressman for laud frauds in Oregon. I do not believe that it is in the public interest to protect criminals in any branch of the public service, and exactly as we have again and again during the past seven years prosecuted and convicted siichl criminals wlio were in the executive branch of the (lovernnient. so, in my belief we should he given ample means to prosecute them if found in the legislative branch. But if this is not considered desirable a special exception could be made ill the law prohibiting the use '..f Secret Service force, in investigating members of the Congress. It would be far belter to do this than to do what actually was done, and strive to prevent or at least to hamper effective action against criminals by the executive branch of the (lovernnient."

The House of Representatives nn December 10 appointed a committee of five —Messrs Perkins (New York), Ilonbv (Michigan). Weeks (Massachusetts), Willinius (Mississippi), and Lloyd (Missouri)—to consider tlie proper means of dealing with Hie latter portion of tlie President's Message. In presenting the resolution, Mr Perkins said :—''lt is of importance to the Republic ilia I all of the co.ordhiale branches of lh« Oovcrnment should possess in a high degree Hie confidence ami respect of the people, f yield to none in mv respect for the Chief lixoeiitivc of the United Stales, ami 1 yield (o no nap. in mv respect for the Congress of the United Slates. To tl„. Congress is "rallied great power, and upon it are imposed great respnnsiliililies. We cannot neglect our duties nor shirk our rcs| sihilifios. The digaitv of Iha I hod.v should not he punctiliously insisted upon, hut it should he properly maintained. Tin. slateinent made hv Ihe I'resideiil cannot lie lighllv disregarded. 'J'hev in:iv he so construed liv the public as lo lessen the dignify and thereby impail 'lie usefulness of the Congress of tin- United States. 1|; can be justly said, 1 -think, that these expressions were unfortunate. Whether it is enough lo say this, or whether some more forma] action .should he taken, it will he I for Congress, exercising n wise and discreet judgment, to decide." Some nicnilicrs of Congress have also been pressing for an 'enquiry into the administration of the Secret Service funds. As if to 'emphasise the need for a Secret Servici' organisation, the United States was startled on Dec her 21) by lliegrcal Customs evasion frauds revealed before the Turin" Committee.