Evening star., 1901-10-31

For the Protection of the President.
From the Philadelphia Inquirer.
The commission which is engaged in codi-
flying the federal statutes is said to have
drafted a bill intended to promote the safe
ty of the President by increasing the Sc
verify of the punishment to be inflicted on
those who make an assault, successful OF
otherwise, upon his life. By this bill it is
made a felony for which the prescribed pen
atty is a $1,000 fine to threaten vio-
lence to the President, while an assault
upon his person is declared to be a capital
offense, without regard to its effectiveness
Another clause provides that accessories
before the fact shall be held to an equal
responsibility with the actual criminal, and
shall be punished with a like severity, a
provision which would bring those who had
inspired the crime, anarchists or others
within the scope of the projected statute.
This is legislation whose object responds
to the prevailing sentiment, and which goes
some way toward meeting the demand for
the rectiicatfon Of what has been recog-
ntzed as defect IN the law Unfortunate
ly, the infliction of the proposed penalties
Is restricted by clause which provides
that the threat or the assault must have
been inspired by something which the
President had done or had failed to do in
the discharge of his official duties. That
clause very seriously impairs the value OF
the bill. 1t might happen that the assassi-
nation of the President would be threat
cIleu Ut attempted OF 6IIecIeQ on account OF
some specific act and that it would be prac-
ticable to prove the connection between
such act and the crime, but that case would
certainly be infrequent. Motives are scarce
ly susceptible Of demonstration, anyhow,
and to condition penalties upon motives is
faulty legislation. Could the assassin OF
Lincoln or Of Garfield or of Mckinley have
been brought within the scope of such an
act? 1t may be gravely doubted.
That an assault upon the President or a
threat to assault the President Is inspired
by his occupation of the presidential chair
ought to be made a presumption Of law.
Every such threat, every such assault
should be deemed to have been inspired by
some presidential act and to be within the
scope Of the law whose terms are under
discussion 1t is said that this cannot be
done because In his personal capacity the
President has the same standing before the
law as any other citizen. An assault upon
him does not essentially differ from an as
sault on any one, and Is an offense whose
punishment belongs to the state authorities.
That Is the argument in support Of the
necessity for including the condition de-
scribed in the bill under consideration, and
1t Is not a convincing one. II Congress pos
sesses the constitutional power to enact
that bill as restricted, 1t has a right to go
servedly under the protection Of federal
statute and of the federal courts.
NO halfway measure In this connection
Will suffice. There ought to be enough, Ie-
gal ability in Congress to surmount what
ever constitutional difficulties the subject
presents, and to furnish that complete pro-
lection, so far as completeness in this con-
nection is attainable, which experience has
SHOWN to be indispensable.