The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-03-21
Democrats, However, Are Bitterly OPP
posing Protection of the President
from the Class They
GEN. HAWLEY WANTS A TARGET
HE WILL GIVE $1,000 FOR A GOOD
SHOT Al A. ANARCHIST.
Vote to BE Taken on the Bill To-Day
MIR. Bellamy DenOunces the
Crumpacker Resolution.

WASHINGTON. March M~.-Throughout
to-day's session of the Senate the bill pro-
viding for the protection of the President of
the United States was under discussion.
Just before adjournment an agreement was
reached TO vote on the measure and pend
ing amendments at 4 o'clock tomorrow.
The speakers to-day we're Messrs. Pettus.
of Alabama; Hawley, of Connecticut. and
Nelson, of Minnesota, in support of the
bill, and Messrs. Rawlins, of Utah; Nc
Cumber, of North Dakota; Mallory, of
Florida; Carmack, of Tennessee, and Money
and McLaurin. of Mississippi, in opposition
to it. This speeches in the main were a re-
enforcement of arguments that nave been
advanced HERETOFORE. few new points being
raised. The principal point made by the
opponents Of the measure was that federal
officials ought to be treated in the courts
precisely as are other citizens. Three sub
%stitutes for the bill are pending and will be
pressed when the voting begins tomorrow.
In his speech to-day Mr.. Mallory doubted
whether a military or any other sort of a
guard could have prevented President Nc
Kinley's assassination at Buffalo. He be-
leved that a competent guard Of civilians
was better and more in line with our in
stitutions than a military guard.
Mr.. Hawley expressed his establishment
that some senators should persist in mis-
representing the measure, in misunderstand-
ing the Constitution and splitting hairs over
inconsequential matters. He saw no reason
why the Senate should hesitate for five
minutes to pass the pending bill. In his
opinion 1t was well considered and thor
oughly matured. In conclusion he said: II
have an utter adherence of anarchy and
would give a thousand dollars to get a good
shot at an Anarchist"
Mr.. Nelson vigorously supported the pend
ing bill. In defense of the provision for
the protection, not only of the President,
but of all those who, by law, are in line
or succession to the presidency. he said
there might be a conspiracy to assassinate
every one of those men. When President
Lincoln was murdered there was a project
involving the assassination of several MEM
bers of his Cabinet. A conspiracy might be
formed a. any time for the wrecking of
the entire executive branch of the govern
ment. To guard against such a contin-
gency the government ought to be equipped
with power 10 protect not only the Pres
ident and the succession to the presidency,
but the very life of the government through
them.
Mr.. McCumber, while he had no doubt
of the authority of Congress to enact the
proposed legislation, said he did object TO
some of the bills provisions. He did not
believe. for instance, that an attempt to
take the life of the secretary of the in
terror ought TO be punished with death
merely because of his official position. He
did not think such a provision was in ac-
cord with either reason or justice. The
people OF the United States were not eX-
pecting that kind of legislation for the pro-
lection of the President. He hoped a bill
would be differed to protect the President
and the goVernemnt against anarchy and
Anarchists. That was the legislation de-
manded by the American people. AS the
bill stood he could not support it.
Mr.. Carmack said his objections to the
bill did not apply to the question of its con-
that it is bad i'm principle and utterly and
absolutely unnecessary. No more futile,
no more unnecessary law ever encountered
the statute books of this country than the
measure we now have under considera-
ton Discussing the proposal to estab-
llSh a military guard around the President,
he declared that President Roosevelt, for
instance, would not endure it for a mo-
ment. 1t would be absolutely intolerable
to him. T escape such a guard, when
he wanted TO go out for a quiet stroll"
said he. 1.-The President would climb out a
back window. get out of the grounds by
the back gate and go up a back alley"
Laughter.
mitted that it was the product of hysteria
produced by President McKinley's assas-
sinatiOn. He objected to it because it's eff
feet would be to establish the inequality of
men before the law. The bill was simply
another tendency toward an imperial gov
rnment Mr.. Money denounced anarchy
and Anarchists, saying that if a measure
could be devised that would rid the coun-
try of Anarchists he would support it.
They ought to be stamped out as are YER
min. but Congress, actuated by hysteria,
ought not put upon the statute books a
law that could not and would not be en-
forced.
Mr.. McLaurin, of Mississippi, after ex-
pressing his own and his peoples abhor-
renee of Anarchists and of anarchy, said
that he could not support the pending
measure. In its present shape he believed
the bill to be unconstitutional; it would
establish inequality before the law, and to
his mind it would be entirely ineffective.
Another objection he had to the measure
was that it attached the death penalty
not only to mere manslaughter, but even
10 an attempt to commit manslaughter
The state laws were amply sufficient to
protect the President.