The daily morning journal and courier., 1902-03-19

MT. Bacon Oppose the Measure, but MT
 Hoar and MT. Mason Support It-Mr
 Pettus Objected to the BAH Because H.
 Was Against the Re-enactment of th'
 Old SeditioM Laws.
 Washington, March 1S.-For three
 hours day the senate had under con-
 sideration the bill providing for the pro-
 lection of the president of the United
 States and for the punishment by Unit
 ed States courts of those who commit
 accaults on him. Mr. Bacon, of Geor-
 gia. opposed the bill and MT. Hoar, of
 Massachusetts, and Mr. Mason, of llli-
 nois, supported it. MT. Bacon's argu-
 ment followed the lines of his speech
 delivered ten days ago. MT, Hoar' s
 speech was largely legal and constitu-
 tional. He maintained the right of the
 government to protect itself against as
 saults upon it's sovereignty through the president MT Mason made an attack upon anarchy and it's methods, and in- cidentally sharply criticised an amend
 ment to the bill offered by MT. Bacon
 He denounced it as opening the door to
 special pleading for the benefit of as-
 sassns of the president. This drew MT,
 Bacon's fire. He considered MT. Mason's
 criticism a personal reflection on him | self and resented it with heat. An eX-
 planation by the Illinois senator cleared l the atmosphere.
 Earlier in the day q lively debate was precipitated by the effort of MT. Raw
 lins, of Utah. to have printed as doc
 ument some Philippine correspondence. Eventually the matter was ordered | printed as requested.
 | When the bill for the protection of the president of the United States was laid before the senate MT. Pettus, of Alabama, said he would be forced to vote against the bill. as he objected to the re-enactment of the old sedition laws.
 MT Bacon, of Georgia, offered an amendment to the first paragraph of the bill providing the penalty of death for an assassin of a president, if the assault on the president were commit ted because of his official position or for the purpose of destroying the gov ernment or impairing the exercise of it's constitutional powers.'
 Briefly discussing the amendment, Mr. Vest, of Missouri, suggested the possibility of federal jury acquitting an assassin of the president because the motive. as specified by MT, Bacon's amendment, had not been proved. In such a case, he asked would the assas- sin be liable to indictment under the state laws?
 MT. Bacon said an assault on the pres ident might be a crime against the per- son and it might be a crime against the government. The purpose of his amend ment was intended to differentiate be- tween the two crimes.
 Mr. Bacon contended that an assault on the president as a person ought to be punished precisely as any similar of fense against any other citizen was punished; otherwise an official class ! would be created In the United States. | The foundation stone of our govern ment, he maintained, was absolute | equality before the law.
 Mr. Mason, of Illinois, said the pend ing bill was but the formation and shape of public opinion, which thrice had been aroused by the murder of the president To his mind it was a we'll COIlSluGIGu anu tnplpuS lily mat measure, and the amendment offered by MT. Bacon, he thought, was not war ranted by the conditions or by the law.
 "The towards and sneaks" he insist ed, "who take the advice they receive in dark halls and kill the president of the United States ought to pay the pen alty as provided in this bill.
 In the course of a legal and constitu- tonal argument in support of the bill MT Hoar replied to some of the points made by MT. Bacon He suggested that MT Bacon's amendment and his obiec- tions to the bill were founded, not on a, special rule of law, but special rule of escape for the criminal specified by the measure.
 MT Bacon took sharp exception to he criticism of. MT. Hoar, asserting hat the Massachusetts senator's state I nents Were "unjustfabe' and "mis- his argument; MT Hoar said he was willing to sub nit to the senate whether he or the t senator from Georgia was right In 2 conclusion MT. Hoar maintained that he bill would afford real protection to 7 he president, and said it would safe ,uard the interests of the government o have such crimes against the presi- lent punished by the government of the Jnited States. MT. Bacon replied with some heat to he criticism of his amendment made | " MT. Mason-criticism which, he said, ; e felt reflected on him personally. He emanded to know whether there was
 senator on the republican side who elieved he could be guilty of defend lg anarchists or their schemes, or a enator who believed he had presented thing that would afford method of . scape of anarchists from just punish ? lent when guilty of an assault on the v resident. Il MT. Mason replied; What I said was W hat the amendment offered by the sen tor from Georgia was a basis of spe- T. " lal pleading for men who shall be v aueht in the act of taking the life oe ' le president It opens wide the door u or special pleading. What I said did ot reflect directly or remotely on the onor of the senator"
 Without concluding the debate the w " enate a It 4:35 D. m. went into executive of 9ssion and at 4:45 r. m. adjourned. re