The Topeka state journal. [volume], January 04, 1909, LAST EDITION, Page 3, Image 3

About The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980

Image provided by: Kansas State Historical Society; Topeka, KS

                
THE TOPEKA DAILY STATE JOURNAL I.IONDAY EVENING, JANUARY 4, 1909.
J!'
FOR THER0AD.
Prospects That the Fort LeaTen
worth and Fort Riley
Military Thoroughfare Will Be
a Reality.
PRISONERS TO BE USED
i But Municipalities and Farmers
Will Help.
Mr. Anthony Confident That
Law Will Soon Be Passed.
Washington, Jan. 4. "The federal
government had decided to branch out
again in the construction of military
roads." said George S. Wagner of Kan
as City. Mr. Wagner is a contractor
and is watching the proposition with
the eyes of a practical highway build
er.
"The first one to be built," continued
Mr. Wagner, "will run from Fort Leav
enworth to Fort Riley, a distance of 140
miles. Another one is projected in
Iowa. The "bill authorizing the con
Btruction of the Kansas highway will
be soon reported by the house commit
tee, on military affairs, and its author.
Congressman Dan R. Anthony. feels
certain that it will become a law
the present session. The war depart
ment is backing the proposition.
"The road will cost about J250.000, but
the government will not have to spend
that much money. Farmers along the
proposed route have formed an assocl
ation and entered into an agreement
tc supply all the rock necessary for the
road free of cost to the government.
The various townships and municipali
ties have also agreed to aid financially
in the building of the road. Congress
man Anthony believes that it will 'not
cost over $100,000 in actual cash.
"Not only is the road a military ne
cessity, but the department of Justice
ays it is a necessity from a prison
tandpoint. More than 1,000 federal
prisoners are now confined in the Uni
ted States penitentiary at Leavenworth
For the past five years they have found
employment in the erection of the new
prison. That institution is now about
completed, and when it is finished there
Will be nothing for the prisoners to do,
"It is proposed to put them to work
on the military road. This will also be
the first time in many years that the
government has worked its prisoners
outside of a prison. Prison authorities,
however, claim that it is entirely feasi
ble, and that outside work will improve
the health of the prisoners. Stockades
will be built along the road to house
the prisoners at night."
Senator Chester I. Long has present
ed a bill in the senate authorizing and
directing the secretary of the treasury
to pay to the Watson Mill company of
Wichita the sum or $2,000.50 to reim
burse it for losses suffering through the
fumigation by officers or agents of the
United States marine hospital service
of 3.500 sacks of flour. The flour had
been shipped from the city of New Or
leans. La., to ban Juan, iorto Kico, on
the steamships San Juan and Arkadia
in August and September. 1905, which
fumigation was done with sulphur
fumes, which destroyed the gluten in
the flour and so diminished its value.
when it should have been done with
formaldehyde, which is not Injurious.
Senator Curtis intrcduced a bill di
recting the postmaster general to credit
the accounts of Frank Wyman, post
master at St. Loius, in the sum of
J4.039.13. due to the government on ac
count of money order funds embezzled
by Elmer Smith, clerk at Stoddard sta
tion, of that city, in the years 1904 and
1905.
Mrs. Chester I. Long, wife of the
Kansas senator, entertained at a dance
New Year's evening in her Massa
chusetts avenue home, in honor of her
niece. Miss Copley of Kansas City, who
has been spending the holidays with
her. and her nephew, Frank- Copley,
who is just on his way home to Kansas
City from a long stay abroad.
The guests were from among the
younger set in official society, and the
affair was quite informal. Miss Copley
is a student in the University of Kan
sas, and not yet in society. A small
orchestra played during the evening
and there were about forty couples
present.
Mrs. Long wore a charming directoire
costume of pale blue satin, and the
guest of honor wore an empire gown of
yellow chiffon cloth, and Miss Vera
Clemes. another niece of Mrs. Long,
who makes her home with her, was in
pink mousseline de soie.
Mrs. Long will be at home to visitors
n Thursday, as usual, hereafter, and
ill have the ladies of the Kansas dele
Jgaiion with her on the first Thursday
afternoon,, after Kansas Day.
George W. Pratt has been appointed
postmaster at Shook, Harper county,
Kan., to succeed W. Barber, resigned.
Ida G. Simmons was named for the of
fice at Collyer. TVego conuty, In the
place of J. W. Hickman, resigned.
Mr. and Mrs. G. W. Martin of Topeka
are guests at the New Willard hotel.
NEEDFUL KNOWLEDGE
Topeka People Should Ix ani to Detect
the Approach of Kidney Disease.
The symptoms of kidney trouble are
so unmistakable that they leave no
ground for doubt. Sick kidneys ex
crete a thick, cloudy, offensive urine,
full of sediment, irregular of passage
or attended by a sensation of scalding.
The back aches constantly, headaches
and dizzy spells may occur and the vic
tim is often weighted down by a feel
ing of languor and fatigue. Neglect
these warnings and there is danger of
dropsy, Bright's Disease, or diabetes.
Any one of these symptoms is warn
ing enough to begin treating the kid
neva at ohce. Delay often proves fa
tal". Tou can use no better remedy than
Doan's Kidney Pills. Here's Topeka
proof: -
Mrs. Mary E. Taylor, 432 E. 18th
St.. Topeka, Kan., says: "Doan's Kid
ney Pills have been used In our family
and fully liyed up to the claims made
for them, soon bringing relief from a
severe case of kidney trouble. Know
ing as I' do, the great merit of this
remedy. I do not hesitate to recom
mend it."
F-or sale by all dealers. Price 50
cents. Foster-Milburn Co.. Buffalo,
New York, sole agents for the United
States. : -
Remember tht name Doan s and
take no other
IN SELF DEFENSE.
(Continued from Page One.)
in question was of benefit 'to no one
excepting to these criminals, and it seri
ously hampers the government In the
detection of crime and the securing of
Justice.- Moreover, it not only affects
departments outside of the treasury,
but it tends to hamper the secretary of
the treasury himself in the effort to
utilize the employes of his department
so as to best meet the requirements of
the public service. It forbids him from
preventing frauds upon the customs ser
vice, from investigating Irregularities
in branch mints and assay offices, and
has seriously crippled him. It prevents
the promotion of employes In the secret
service, and this further discourages
good effort. In its present form the re
striction operates only to the advantage
of the criminal, or the wrongdoer.
"The chief argument in favor of the
provision was that the congressmen did
not themselves wish to be Investigated
bv secret service men. Very little of
such investigation has been done in the
past: but it is true that the work of
the secret service agents was partly re
sponsible for the indictment and con
viction of a senator and a congressman
for land frauds in Oregon. I do not be
lieve 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 tne past seven
years prosecuted and convicted such
criminals who were in the executive
branch of the" government, so in my be
lief we should be given ample means
to prosecute them If found in the leg
islative branch. But if this Is not con
sidered desirable a special exception
could be made in the law prohibiting
the use of the secret service force in in
vestigating members of the congress. It
would be far better to do this than to
do what actually was done, and strive
to prevent or at least to hamper effec
tive action against criminals by the-ex
ecutive branch of the government."
Xothinjr to Warrant It. y
A careful reading of this message will
show that I said nothing to warrant
the statement that ' the majority of the
congressmen were in fear of being In
vestigated by the secret service men,
or that congress as a wnoie was
actuated by that motive." I did not
make any such statement in this mes
sage. Moreover I have never made any
such statement about congress as t
whole, nor. with a few inevitable ex
ceptions. about the members of con
gress, in any message or article or
speech. On the contrary I have always
not only deprecated but vigorously re
sen ted the practice of indiscriminate
attack upon congress, and indiscrimi
nate of all congressmen, wise and un
wise, fit and unfit, good and Dad alike.
No one realizes more than I the im
portance of co-operation between the
executive and congress, and no one
holds the authoritv-and dignity of the
congress of the United States in higher
resDect than I do. I have not the slignt
est sympathy with the practice of
judging men, for good or for ill, not on
their several merits, our in a mass, aa
members of one particular body or one
caste. To put together all men holding
or who have held a particular office.
whether it 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
dividual differences, as good or bad.
seems to me utterly indefensible: and
t is equallv indefensible wnetner tne
good are confounded with the bad in a
heated and unwarranted championsnip
of all. or in a heated and unwarranted
assault upon all. I would neither at
tack nor defend all executive officers
mass, whether presidents, gov
ernors, cabinet officers, or officials of
lower rank: nor wouin i auacK or at
tend all 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 can not thus dis
criminate if he Is persuaded to pass
Judgment upon a man, not with rerer
ence to whether he is a fit or unfit pub
ic servant, but with reference to
whether he is an executive or legis
lative officer, whether he belongs to one
branch or the other of the govern
ment. Failed to Understand.
This allegation in the resolution.
therefore, must certainly be due to an
entire failure to understand my mes
sage, s
The resolution continues: inai me
t be reauested 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 congressmen did not them
selves 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 vou will turn to the congressional
Record for May 1 last, pages 5553 to
5560, inclusive, you will find the de
bate on this subject. Mr. Tawney of
Minnesota. Mr. Smith of Iowa, Mr.
Sherlevof Kentucky, and Mr. Ftizgerald
of New York, appear in this debate as
the special champions of the provision
referred to. Messrs. farsons, nennei,
and Driscoll were the leaders of thof-e
who oonosed the adoption of the
amendment and upheld the right of the
government to use the most emcient
means possible in order to detect crlm-
nals and to prevent ana punisn crime.
The amendment was carried In the
committee of the whole, where no votes
of the individual members are recorci-
d. so I am unable to discriminate oy
mentloning the members who voted
for and the members who voted
c-ainst the nrovision. but its passage.
the Journal records, was greeted with
pplause. I am well aware, however.
that in any case of this kind many
members who have no particular
knowledge of the point at issue, are
content simply to follow the lead of
he committee which had considered
the matter, and I have no doubt tnat
many members of the house simply
followed the lead of Messrs. Tawney
and Smith, without having had the
pportunity to know very much as to
the rights and wrongs of the question-.
I would not ordinarily attempt in tnis
way to discriminate between members
f the house, but as oDieciion nas Deen
taken to my language, in which I sim
ply spoke of the action of the house
as a whole, and as apparently there is
desire that I should thus discrimin
ate, I will state that I think file re
sponsibility rested on the committee
n appropriations, under the lead of
the members whom I have mentioned.
Now as to the request of the con
gress that I give the evidence for my
tatement that tne chief argument in
favor of the provision was that the
congressmen did not themselves wish
to be investigated by secret service
men
Two Lines of Argument.
The part of the Congressional Record
to which I have referred above entirely
supports this statement. Two distinct
lines of argument were followed in the
ebate. One concerned the; question
whether the law warranted the em
ployment of the secret service in de
partments other than the treasury, and
this aid not touch the merits of the ser-
tce in the least. The other line of ar
gument went to the merits of ' the ser
vice, whether lawfully or unlawfully
RcPRC&ttiTATivt JamcsA
TWO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
LIMITING THE
Employed, and here the chief if not the
nly argument used was that the ser
vice should be cut down and restricted
because its members had "shadowed"
or Investigated members of congress
and other officers of the government.
If we examine the debate in detail it
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
violation of law" by the use of tne
secret service for other purposes than
suppressing counterfeiting (and one or
two other matters which can be dis:-e-garded)
and that such language was
now to be used as would eneciuaiiy
prevent all such "violation of law
hereafter. Mr. Tawney. for instance.
says: "It was for tne purpose oi slip
ping the use of this service in every
possible wav by the departments of the
government that this provision was in
serted;" and Mr. Smith says: iNow,
that was the only way in wnicn any
limitation could be put upon the ac
tivities of the secret service." mr.
Fitzgerald followed In the same vein,
and by far the largest part of the argu
ment against the employment of the
secret service was confined to the
statement that It was in "violation of
law." Of course such a statement is
not in any way an argument in favor
of the Justice of the provision. It is
not an argument for the provision at
all. It is simply a statement of what
the gentlemen making it conceive to
have been the law. There was both by
implication and direct statement the
assertion that it was the law, aim
ought to be the law. that the secret
service should only be used to suppress
counterfeiting; and that the law should
be made more rigid tnan ever mi w.o
respect.
AmplO JXUtnoniy.
Incidentally I mav say that in my
judgment there is ample legal auth
ority for the statement mai una ap
propriation law to wnicn reierenuo
was made imposes no iru-ivin
whatever upon the use of the secret
service men, but relates solely to me
expenditure of the money appropriat
ed. Mr. Tawney in the debate stated
that he had in his possession "a letter
from the secretary of tne treasury re
ceived a few days ago in wnicn tne
secretary of the treasury "himself ad
mits that the provisions under which
the appropriation has been made have
been violated year after year for a
number of years in his own depart
ment." I append herewith as appen
dix A the letter referred to. It makes
no such admission as that which Mr.
Tawney alleges. It contains on the
contrarv. as vou will see by reading it.
an. "emphatic protest against any such
abridgment ot tne rignis aeiegaiea iu
the secretary of the treasury by exist-
r.g law, and concludes py asserting
that he "is quite within his rights in
thus employing the service of these
agents" and" that the proposed modifi
cation which Mr. Tawney succeeded
n carrying through would be "dis
tinctly to the advantage of violators of
criminal 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 speak
er quoted below, the explicit statement
Family Washing
"Rough Dry" Bo lb.
"Special Flat" 4o lb.
"Wet Wash" 2o lb.
Strictly Fine Wor fe
See our New List for Full Par-
. . . ticulars.
Shirts, Collars and Cuffs
THAT PLEASE.
Cleaning, Dyeing, Pressing.
Topeka Laundry Co.
Phone IBS. Second and Quincy.
m!m7A&s A nm -
Tayn.?
WHOM PRESIDENT B00SEVELT HOLDS RESPONSIBLE FOB LAW
SCOPE OF THE SECRET SERVICE DEPARTMENT.
is made that the proposed change will
De ror tne benefit of the criminals, a
statement which I simply reiterated in
public form in my message to the
congress this year, and which is also
contained in effect in the report of the
secretary of the treasury to the con
gress. . , ..
A careful reading of the Congres
sional Record will also show that prac
tically the only arguments advanced in
favor of the limitation proposed by Mr.
Tawney's committee, beyond what may
be supposed to be contained by implica
tion in certain sentences as to abuses'
which were not specified, were those
contained "in the repeated statements of
ir. sneriey. Mr. snerley- stated tnat
there had been "pronounced abuses
growing out of the use of the secret
service for purposes other than those
intended," putting his statement in the
form of a question, and in the same
form further stated that the "private
conduct" of "members of congress,
senators," and others ought hot to be
investigated by the secret service, and
that they should not Investigate a
"member of congress" who had been
accused of "conduct unbecoming a gen
tleman and a member of congress." In
addition to these assertions couched ,as
questions, he made one positive declar
ation, that "This secret service at one
time was used for the purpose of look
ing into the personal conduct of a
member of congress." This argument
of Mr. Sherley, the only real argument
as to the merits of the question made
on behalf of the committee on appro
priations, will be found in columns 1
and 2 of page 5,556. and column 1 of
page 5,557 of the Congressional Record.
In column 1 of page 5,556 Mr. Sherley
refers to the impropriety of permitting
the secret service men to investigate
men in the departments, officers of the
army and navy, and senators and con
gressmen: in column 2 he refers to of
ficers of the navy and members of con
gress: in column 1. page 5.557. he re
fers only to members of congress. His
speech puts most weight on the Investi
gation Of members of congress.
Where It Started.
"What appears in the record is filled
out and explained by an article which
appeared in the Chicago Inter-Ocean
of January 3, 1904, under a Washing
ton headline, and which marked the
beginning of this agitation against the
secret service. It was a special article
of about 3.000 words, written, as I was
then informed and now understand, by
Mr. L. W. Busbey. at that time pri
vate secretary to the speaker of the
house. I inclose a copy of certain ex
tracts from the article, marked Ap
pendix B. It contains an utterly un
warranted attack on the secret service
division of the treasury department
and its chief. The opening paragraph
includes, for instance, statements like
the following:
"He (the chief of the division) and
his men are desirous of doing the se
cret detective work for the whole gov
ernment and are not particular about
drawing the line between the lawmak
ers and the lawbreakers. They are
ready to shadow the former as well as
the latter."
Then, after saying that congress will
insist that the men shall only be used
to stop counterfeiting, the article goes
on:
"Congress does not intend to have
a Fouche or any other kind of a min
ister or police to be used by the execu
tive departments against the legisla
tive branch of the government. It has
been so used, and it Is suspected that
it has been so used recently. -
The legislative branch of the govern
ment will not tolerate the meddling of
detectives, whether they represent the
president, cabinet officers, or only
themselves. Congressmen
resented the secret interference of the
secret service men. who for weeks
shadowed some of the most respected
members of the house and senate.
When it was discovered that the
secret service men were shadowing i
congressmen there was a storm of in
dignation at the capitol and the bu
reau came near being abolished and
the appropriation for the suppression
of counterfeiting cut off. - At
another time the chief of the secret
service had his men shadow congress
men with a view to involving them in
scanaais tnat would enable the bureau
to dictate to them as the price of si
lence. The. secret service
men have shown an inclination again
to shadow members of congress,
knowing them to be law makers, and
this Is no joke. Several of the depart
ments have asked congress for secret
funds for investigation, and treasury
department wants tne limitation re
moved rrom the appropriation for
suppressing counterfeiting. This shows
a tendency toward Foucheism and a
secret watch on other officials than
themselves."
Land Frauds.
At the time of this publication the
work, of the secret service, which was
thus assailed, included esDeciallv the. in
vestigation of great land frauds in the
west, and the securing of evidence to
neip tne department of Justice in the
Deer trust investigations at Chicago,
which resulted in successful nrosec.u-
tions.
in View of Mr. Busbey's nosition. I
have accepted the above quoted state
ments as fairly expressing the real
meaning and animus of the attacks
made in general terms on the use of the
secret service for the punishment of
criminals. Furthermore, in the per
formance of my duty, to endeavor to
nna tne reelings or congressmen on
public questions of note. I have fre
quently discussed this particular matter
with members of congress: and on such
ocoasions the reasons alleged to me for
tne Hostility or congress to the secret
service, both by those who did and by
those who did not .share this hostility,
were almost invariably the same as
those set forth in Mr. Busbey's article.
I may add. by the way. that these al
legations as to the secret service are
wholly without -foundation in fact.
But all of this is of Insignificant im
portance compared with the main, the
real issue. This issue is simply, Does
congress desire that the government
shall have at its disposal the most effi
cient instrument for the detection of
criminals and the prevention and pun
ishment of crime, .or does it not? The
action of the house last May -was em
phatically an action against the interest
of Justice and against the interest of
law-abiding people, and in its effect of
benefit only to lawbreakers. I am not
now dealing wth motives; whatever may
have been the motive that Induced the
action of which I speak, this was be
yond all question the effect of that ac
tion. Is the house now willing to rem
edy the wrong?
For a long time I contented my
self with endeavoring to persuade
the house not to permit the wrong.
speaking informally on the subject
with those members who, I believed,
knew anything of the matter, and
communicating officially only in the
ordinary cnannels, as through the
secretary of the treasury. In a letter
Millionaires
Eat
Grape-Nuts
It has helped some of them
make their money.
"There's a Reason"
to the speaker on April 30, protesting
against the cutting down of the
appropriation vitally necessary If the
Interstate Commerce commission -was
to carry Into effect the twentieth sec
tion' of the' Hepburn law, I added:
"The provision . about the employ
ment of the secret service men will
work very great damage to the gov
ernment In Its endeavor to prevent
and punish crime. There la no more
foolish outcry than this against
"spies'; only criminals need fear our
deteotlves." (I inclose copy of the
whole letter, marked "Appendix C."
The postscript Is blurred in my copy
book, and two or three of the words
can not be deciphered.) These meth
ods proved unavailing to prevent the
wrong. Messrs Tawney and Smith,
and their fellow members on the
appropriations committee paid no
heed to the protests; and as the
obnoxious provision was incorporated
in the sundry civil bill. It was im
possible for me to consider or discuss
it on its merits, as I should have
done had it been In a separate -bill.
Therefore I have now taken the only
method available, that of discussing it
In my message to congress; and as all
efforts to secure what I regard as
proper treatment of the subject with
out recourse to plain speaking had
failed, I have spoken plainly and di
rectly, and have set forth the facta In
explicit terms. '
Covered Wide Range.
Since 1901 the investigations covered
by the secret service division under
the practice which had been for many
years recognized as proper and legiti
mate, and which had received the sanc
tion of the highest law officers of the
government have covered a wide
range of offenses against the federal
law. By far the most important of
these related to the public domain, as
to which there was uncovered a far
reaching and widespread system of
fraudulent, transactions involving both
the Illegal acquisition and the illegal
fencing of government land; and, in
connection with both these offenses, Xhe
crimes of perjury and subornation of
perjury. Some of the persons involved
in these violations were of great wealth
and of wide political and social In
fluence. Both their corporate associa
tions and their political affiliations, and
the lawless character of some of their
employes, made the investigations not
only difficult but dangerous. In Colo
rado one of the secret service men was
assassinated. In Nebraska it was
necessary to remove a United States
attorney and a United States marshal
before satisfactory progress could be
made in the prosecution of the of
fenders. The evidence In all these cases was
chiefly secured by men trained In the
secret service and detailed to the de
partment of Justice at the request of
that department and of the department
of the interior. In the state of Ne
braska alone sixty defendants were in
dicted; and of the thirty-two cases thus
far brought to trial twenty-eight have
resulted In conviction; two of the prin
cipals, Messrs. Comstock and Richards,
men of wealth and wide Influence, be
ing sentenced to twelve months In Jail
and fined $1,500 each. The following
secret service memorandum made in
the course of a pending ease illustrates
the ramifications of interest with
which the government has to deal:
"Charles T. Stewart, of Council
Bluffs, was . indicted at Omaha for
conspiracy to defraud the govern
ment to the title to public lands in
McPherson county. Neb.; also In
dicted for maintaining an unlawful in
closure of the public lands, and also
under Indictment for perjury in con
nection with final proof submitted by
him on lands filed on by him as a
homestead. In his final proof he
swore that he and his family had (re
sided on the lands in McPherson
county (which are within his unlawful
inclosure). when as a matter of fact
his family has at all times resided in
Council Bluffs. Iowa. He is engaged
in the wholesale grocery business, his
store, being located in Omaha, In the
wholesale district there. He is re
puted to be quite wealthy. Stewart's
attorneys are Harl & Tlnley, of Coun
cil Bluffs, Iowa, who are also the at
torneys of that place for the Omaha
and Council Bluffs Street Railway
company, in which company Harl
holds considerable stock. Stewart be
ing also a stockholder and possibly a
director of the company. He is also
represented in Omaha by W. . J. Con
nell, one of the attorneys there for
the same company. Stewart - is also
represented in his perjury case by
'Bill' Gurley, of Omaha, Neb., who at
one time was quite closely connected
in a political way with the U. P. R.
R. company; Stewart is also closely
associated with C. B. Hazleton, post
master at Council Bluffs. Harl &
Tinley and Hazleton are all members
of the same lodge. Another close per
sonal friend of Stewart's Is Bd Hart,
alias 'Waterworks' Hart, president of
the Council Bluffs Water company,
and interested in the street railway.
Stewart's father was interested in,
and practically owned and controlled,
during his lifetime, a large ranch
along the U. P. R. R. In Nebraska,
and did a great deal of business with
that road."
Concerning this case the United
States attorney at Omaha states:
"There are three cases against
Stewart, one for fencing, one con
spiracy, one perjury, all good cases
and ehances of conviction good."
Much Land Recovered.
In connection with the Nebraska pros
ecution the government has by decree
secured the return to the government of
over a million acres of grazing land; in
Colorado of more than 2,000 acres of
mineral land, and suits are now pending
involving 150,000 acres more.
All these investigations in the land
cases were undertaken in consequence
of Mr. Hitchcock, the then secretary of
the interior, becoming convinced that
there were extensive frauds committed
in his department; and the ramifications
of the frauds were so far-reaching that
he was afraid to trust his own officials
to deal in thoroughgoing fashion with
them. One of the secret service men ac
cordingly resigned and was appointed
in the interior department to carry on
this work. The nrst thing he discover
ed was that the special agents' division
or corps of detectives of the land office
of the interior department was largely
under the control of the land thieves;
and in consequence the investigations
above referred to had to be made by se
cret service men.
If the present law. for which Messrs.
Tawney, Smith, and the other gentle
men I have above mentioned are respon
sible, had then been in effect, this ac
tion would have been Impossible, and
most of the criminals would unques
tionably have escaped. No more strik
ing Instance can be Imagined of the de
sirability of having a central corps of
skilled investigating agents who can at
any time be assigned, if necessary in
large numbers, to investigate some vio
lation of the federal statutes, in no mas
ter what branch of the public service.
In this particular case most of the men
investigated who were public servants
were in the executive branch of the
government. But in Oregon, where an
enormous acreage of fraudulently alien
ated public land was recovered for the
government, a United- States senator,
Mr. Mitchell, and a member of the lower
house, Mr. Williamson, were convicted
on evidence obtained by men trans
ferred from the secret service, and an- i
other member of congress was indicted-
,
From 1901 to 1904 a successful in
vestigation of naturalization affairs
was made by the secret service, with,
the result of obtaining hundreds of
convictions of conspirators who were
convicted of selling fraudulent papers
of naturalization. (Subsequently,
congress passed a very wise law pro
viding a special service and appro
priation for the prevention of natural
ization frauds; but unfortunately, at
the same time that the action against
the secret service was taken, congress
also cut down the appropriation for
this special service, with the result of
crippling the effort to stop frauda In
naturalization.) The fugitives Greene
and Gaynor, implicated in a peculiarly
Dig government contract fraud, were
located and arrested In Canada bv the
secret service, and thanks to this they
have since gone to prison for their
crimes.
The secret service was used to assist
In the Investigation of crimes under
the peonage laws, and owing partly
thereto numerous convictions were se
cured and the objectionable practice
was practically stamped out, at least
in many districts. The most extensive '
smuggling of silk and opium In the
history of the treasury department
was investigated by agents of the se
cret service in New York and Seattle
and a successful prosecution of the of
fenders undertaken. Assistance of the
utmost value was rendered to the de
partment of justice In the beef trust,
investigation at Chicago, prosecutions
were followed up and fines inflicted.
The cotton-leak scandal in the agri
cultural department was investigated!
and the responsible parties located.
What was done in connection with lot
tery investigations is disclosed in a
letter Just sent to me by the United
States attorney for Delaware, running
as follows:
"The destruction of the Honduras Na
tional Lottery company, successor to the
Louisiana Lottery company, was entirely
the work of the secret service.
This excellent iwork was accomplished by
Mr. Wllkie and his subordinates. I
thought It might be timely to recall this
prosecution. -v
Fines Collected.
Three hundred thousand dollars In fines
were collected by the government in the
lottery cases. AgpJn. the ink contract
fraud in the bureau of engraving and
printing (a bureau of the treasury de
partment) was investigated by the secret
service and the guilty parties brought to
justice. Mr. Tawney stated in the debate
that this was not Investigated by the
secret service but bv a clerk "down there,"
conveying the impression that the clerk
Was not In the secret service. As a matter
of fact, he was in the secret service; his
name was Moan, and he was promoted
to asisstant chief for the excellence of his
work in this case. The total expense for
the office and field force of the secret
service last year was XL35.OQ0; and by this
one investigation they saved to the govern
ment over J100.000 a year. Thanks to the
restriction imposed bv congress it Is now
very difficult for the secretary of the
treasury to use the secret service freely
even in his own department: for instance,
to use them to reoeat what they did so
admirably in the case of this ink contract.
The government Is further crippled by the
law forbidding it to employ detective
agencies. Of course the government can
detect the most dangerous crlmn, and
punish the worst criminals, only by the
use. either of the secret service or of
trivate detectives: to hamper it in using
he one. and forbid it to resort to the
other, can inure to the benefit of none
save the criminals.
The facts above (riven show beyond pos
sibility of doubt that what the secretary
of the treasury and I had both written,
prior to the enactment of the obnoxious
provision, and what I have since written
in my message to the congress, state the
facts exactly as they are. The obnoxious
provision is ot benefit only to the criminal
class and can be of benefit only to the
criminal class. If it had been embodied
in the law at the time when I became
president all the prosecutions above men-,
tloned. and many others of the same gen
eral tvne. would either not have been un
dertaken or would have been undertaken
with the government at a Kreat disadvan
tage; and many, and probably most, of
the chief offenders would have gone scot
free instead of being punished for their
crimes.
Such a body as the secret service, such
a bodv of trained investigating agents, oc- '
cupying a permanent position In the gov
ernment service, and separate from local
investigating forces in different depart
ments, is an absolute necessity if the best
work Is to be done against criminals. It
is by far the most efficient instrument
possible to uee against crime. Of course
the more efficient an instrument is, the
more dangerous it Is if misused. To the
argument that a force like this can be
misused it is only necessary to answer
that the condition of its usefulness If
handled properly is that it shall be so effi
cient us to be dangerous if handled im
properly. Any instance of abuse by the
secret service or other Investigating force
in the- departments should be unsparingly
punished: and congressi should hold itself
ready at any and all times to Investigate
the execulave deoartments whenever there
Is reason to believe that any such in
stance of abuse bas occurred. 1 wish to
emphasize my more than cordial
acquiescence In the view that this Is not
only the right of congress, but emphati
cally its duty. To use the secret service
in the investigation of purely private or
political matters would be a gross abuse.
But there has been no single instance of
such abuse during my term as president.
In conclusion. I most earnestly ask, in
the name of good government and decent
administration. In the name of honesty
and for the purpose of bringing to Justice
violators of the federal Taws wherever
they mav be found, whether In public or
private life, that the action taken by the
house last year be reversed. When this
action was taken, the senate committee,
under the lend of the late Snator Allison,
having before it a strongly-worded protest
(Appendix B) from Secretary Cortelyou
like that he had sent to Mr. Tawney, ac
cented the secretary's views; and the sen
ate nassed the bill In the shape presented
bv Senator Allison. In the conference,
however, the house conferees Insisted on
the retention of the provision they had
inserted, and the senate yielded.
The chief of the secret service Is paid
a salary utterly inadequate to the im
portance of his functions and to the ad
mirable way In which he has performed
them. I earnestly urge that It be Increased
to 16.000 per annum. I also urge that the
secret service be placed where It proper
ly belongs, and made n bureau In the de
partment of Justice, as the chief of the
secret service has reteatedly requested;
bt whether this Is done or not. It should
be explicitly provided that the secret ser
vice can.be used to detect and punish
crime wherever It is found.
The White House. January 4, 1909.
WHKN Grandmother Gray wish
ed a new bed, she put some
eggs under an old goose and
waited patiently until the goslings
came forth, then she cooped them
up on rainy days and chased them
from the garden on sunshiny days
until they had reached the age of
maturity, then -from time to time
she plucked the feathers and in a
year or two she had saved enough
to make a bed. Tou find that the
mattress man has provided you a
much better bed and has it right
at hand. Do you use
WESTON BREAD
or are you back In grandmother's
time on the bread question? Tou
will find it wrapped in waxed pa
per. The Ideal Bakery
Ths Place That's Different
Hell A Schieter, Props. Telephone 1 90
.121 West Sixth Street