John Allen [Federalist] from Connecticut gives a speech defending the Sedition Act. (July 5th 1798)

I hope this bill will not be rejected. If ever there was a nation which required a law of this kind, it is this. Let gentlemen look at certain papers printed in this city and elsewhere, and ask themselves whether an unwarrantable and dangerous combination does not exist to overturn an ruin the government by publishing the most shameless falsehoods against the representatives of the people of all denominations [opinions] , [charging] that they are hostile to free governments and genuine liberty, and of course to the welfare of this country; that they ought, therefore, to be displaced, and that the people ought to raise an insurrection against the government . . .

Gentlemen contend for the liberty of opinions and of the press. Let me ask them whether they seriously think the liberty of the press authorizes such publications? The President of the United States is here called “a person without patriotism, without philosophy, and a mock monarch,” and the free election of the people is pronounced as “jostling him into the Chief Magistracy by the ominous combustion of old Tories with old opinions and old Whigs with new.”

If this not be a conspiracy against the government and people, I know not what to understand from the “threat of tears, execrations [curses], derision [scorn], and contempt.” Because the Constitution guarantees our right of expressing our opinions and the freedom of the press, am I at liberty to falsely call you a thief, a murderer, an atheist? Because I have the liberty of locomotion, of going where I please, have I the right to ride over the footman in the path? The freedom of the press and opinions was never understood to give the right of publishing falsehoods and slanders, nor of exciting sedition, insurrection, and slaughter, with impunity. A man was always answerable for the malicious publication of falsehood, and what more does this bill require?

1. On what grounds did Allen think the Sedition Act was necessary?

2. What statements did he quote to indicate the need for such a bill?

Albert Gallatin – Republican Minority Leader in the House of Representatives

Speech given July 5th 1798 in response to John Allen’s comments on the Sedition Act.

The gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Allen], in order to prove the existence of a combination against the Constitution and government . . . communicated in the House –

What? a number of newspaper paragraphs; and even most of those were such as would not be punishable by the bill as it now stands. The object of that gentleman, in wishing a bill of this nature to pass extended far beyond the intention of the Senate who had sent down this bill; far beyond the . . . idea of any other member upon this floor, besides himself. His idea was to punish men for stating facts which he happened to disbelieve, or for enacting and avowing opinions, not criminal, but perhaps erroneous. . .

Look at the laws passed during his session. Look at the alien bill, at the provisional army bill; look at the . . . influence acquired by so many new offices, and then deny that the powers of the Executive have not have not been greatly increased. As to the increased rate of expenditure, and the propensity of these gentlemen to vote money, they would not themselves deny it . . . .

This bill and its supporters suppose, in fact, that whoever dislikes the measures of Administration and of a temporary majority in Congress, and shall, either by speaking or writing, express his disapprobation and his want of confidence in the men now in power, is seditious, is an enemy, not of Administration, and is liable to punishment. That principle, Mr. G. said, was subversive of the principles the Constitution itself. If you put the press under any restraint in respect to the measures of members of government; if you thus deprive the people of the means of obtaining information of their conduct, you in fact render their right of electing nugatory; and this bill must be considered only as a weapon used by a party now in power, in order to perpetuate their authority and preserve their present places.

1. What was Gallatin’s opinion of the statement s Allen cited?

2. What did Gallatin believe were the real goals of the Federalists?

From the Annals of Congress, 5th Congress, 2d Session (July 5,10, 1798)