The debate over the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 revealed bitter controversies on a number of issues that had been developing since the penning of the Constitution. The writers of the document knew that over time the needs of the nation and its people would change, and therefore provided for its amendment. But by not expressly delegating powers to specific organizations, whether the federal government, state governments, or the people themselves, they inadvertently created a major problem in the years to follow: Constitutional interpretation.Shortly after the Constitution's ratification, two distinct camps formed, each believing in opposite manners of interpretation. One group, the Federalists, led by the newly appointed Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, thought that the Constitution should be interpreted very loosely. He claimed that the Constitution contained powers other than those delegated or enumerated. These unspecified powers were implied powers.
To explain these powers, Hamilton said it would be natural - or implied - that the federal government would gain control over any territory gained through conquest of purchase, although the Constitution made no mention of territorial control. In essence, Hamilton wished to use the implied powers to build a strong and authoritative central government.In 1789, the Minister to France Thomas Jefferson, to Francis Hopkinson of Pennsylvania, protesting that "I am not of the party of the federalists. But I am much farther from that of the anitfederalists." However, the situation was so sensitive that he could not help but chose a side. In 1795, Jefferson wrote to a congressman from Virginia, William Giles, that he "held "t honorable to take a firm and decided part." The group he sided with, the Democratic-Republicans, favored a strict interpretation. As their leader, Jefferson argued that all powers not enumerated by the Constitution belonged to the States. The basis for his argument was the old English "compact" theory.
This theory stated that various individuals, in this case the states, joined together in a formal agreement of government. Since the states had drawn up the contract and given power to the federal government, it should be up to them to decide who received the power, not the body they created.This debate over interpretation thus sparked one of the first and major issues that eventually led to the Alien and Sedition Acts: should a strong central government be formed (federalist desire), or should the individual states have control. And wild attacks of the ensuing debate also ignited the second issue, public defamation, which led to the Sedition Act.
“It’s not tyranny we desire; it’s a just, limited, federal government.” Alexander Hamilton. When Hamilton said this he was expressing the way he felt about central government. Hamilton and Jefferson both had very different views on government. Hamilton wanted a strong central government and Jefferson wanted all of the power to belong to the states. Alexander Hamilton’s views on government were better for what the United States would become.
Thomas Jefferson was the chief opponent of the Federalists. He despised Hamilton’s plan. He and the rest of the Democratic-Republican party believed that it weakened their revolutionary ideals, specifically the idea that “all men are created equal,” because Hamilton’s plan favors insiders. They also believed that his plan divided the American people, geologically and economically. This goes against the idea of a United States of America. When writing to George Washington about Hamilton’s plan, Jefferson says, “His system flowed from principles adverse to liberty, and was calculated to undermine and demolish the Republic, by creating an influence of his department over the members of the Legislature” (Jefferson). In a letter written after Pinckney’s and Jay’s treaties were put into action, Jefferson says, “In place of that noble love of liberty, & republican government which carried us triumphantly thro’ the war, an Anglican monarchical, & aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object is to draw over us the substance...of the British government” (Jefferson). This statement shows the hostility that Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans have towards the control that the Federalists have over their government and communications with other countries. The two parties have a lot of pressure and hostility between each other because they both think they believe
On February 25th, 1793, Washington held his first full Cabinet meeting with Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of War Henry Knox, and Attorney General Edmund Randolph. Once in office the two immediately made it clear they’ll never truly see eye to eye. Hamilton, a true believer in a strong central government, felt he needed to limit democracy and make the U.S. a powerful nation “It has been observed . . . that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this.” (Hamilton, speech-urging ratification of the Constitution in New York June 17, 1788). He turned to Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution, which allows Congress to have the power "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." utilizing it to make his America; this was also known as the elastic clause or as he called it, Broad Construction. In order to expand the powers, he broadly interpreted the meaning of the Constitution. Jefferson could not contend with any of Hamilton’s ideals. He believed in Strict Construction. He
Thomas Jefferson's strict interpretation not only stretched on political views, but religious views as well. Creating the Virginia Statue of Religious Freedom, Jefferson gave states the right to make those decisions, and the federal government had no say in religion (1). Politically, Jefferson was of strict interpretation, yet he did through-out his presidential terms made loose interpretations of the Constitution. This was mainly shown in the purchase of Louisana. At first, Jefferson wanted only New Orleans to keep the mouth of the Mississippi out of French possesion. If that would fail, he was even willing to make an alliance with Britain. When hearing that the United States had bought all of the Louisana Territory, Jefferson soon began to fret over whether it was unconstitutional (a loose interpretation). When Jefferson first took office, he appointed a new Treasury Secretary Gallatin, and kept most of the Federalist policies laid down by Alexander Hamilton in place. All the ideas the Democratic-Republicans were against, Thomas Jefferson kept all of them except for the excise tariff. Against war, Jefferson decided to size down the army during his administration. But the pasha of Tripoli declared an outrageous amout of money by the United States, and with the United States saying no, cutdown the flagstaff in front of the U.S. Consolate (4). Jefferson was forced to go against his views, and build up the army against the North African Barbary States in the First Barbary War (4). And last, but not least, Jefferson's Embargo Act of 1807 not only changed from strict to loose interpretations, but changed New Englanders minds as well (1)(5).
In 1798, the Alien and Sedition Acts were created under President John Adams due to tensions with France. The Sedition Act made it illegal for anyone to publish anything that could defame or speak badly of the United States government. The Alien and Sedition Acts were repealed after President Adams’ presidential term was over. The Espionage and Sedition Acts, created from 1914 through 1921, made it illegal to cause disloyalty in the military forces and also prohibited any opposition to the government and their decisions in war. These acts were declared unconstitutional. Both were repealed after conflicts died down. The U.S. Patriot Act, created to investigate and protect against terrorism, made it legal for the United States’ government to search the records of citizens without their
Hamilton, Madison, and Jay argued that limitations on governmental power were built into the Constitution with a series of checks and balances. The two different parties, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists, interpreted the Constitution in a way to support the cause for ratification or rejection. The Federalists saw the new government in a way that would guarantee the rights of the governed. The Anti-Federalists saw it in such a manner that would make no such guarantee. While the Constitution was eventually passed, it was the Anti-Federalists who ensured that it would eventually contain a Bill of Rights to protect individuals, as such Federalists and supporters of the central government as Alexander Hamilton argued that a Bill of Rights was
In the final copy of the Constitution, many compromises were made between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The main goal of the Federalists’ was to ratify and publish the Constitution; however, the unanimous ratification by all thirteen states needed to publish the Constitution set their progress back, as the Anti-Federalists had many issues with the standing draft of the Constitution. The primary topic of discourse between the two factions was over the addition of the Bill of Rights. Another topic of contention held was the Anti-Federalists’ demands for full and fair representation in the government. Their argument was that the Constitution would give an overwhelming amount of power to the federal government, and leave the state and local governments deprived of power. They feared that the federal government would be too absent in governing to represent the citizen, as a
Hamilton and the Federalist party sided with the British; this was quite frowned upon by Jefferson and his party. For example, he implied in a memo that Hamilton was not only a monarchist, but supported Britain, a monarchy based upon corruption (Document 1). Jefferson’s point of view in this memo is entirely anti-British, and anti-Hamilton. He is attempting to tell the people reading it that Hamilton could be corrupt. On the other hand, Hamilton did not agree with Jefferson, Madison, and the Democratic-Republicans siding with the French. For instance, Alexander Hamilton suggests in a letter that these men are untrustworthy and dangerous due to their bond to France and hatred toward Great Britain (Document 2). The implication of Jay’s Treaty with the British furthered the disagreements over foreign relations. As previously stated, Democratic-Republicans were pro-French, while Federalists were pro-British; this caused obvious problems over Jay’s Treaty. For example, the Democratic-Republicans feared this negotiation would sell out their country and force southern planters to pay for a majority of pre-revolutionary debts. On the flip side, Federalists were in support of a stronger alliance with Britain and would earn benefits from it; Federalist shippers were being repaid for the damages left during British seizures
The Alien and Sedition Acts were not merely intended for immigrants who spoke out against the government but more to detain the growth of the Democratic - Republican Party. These four Acts coercively lessoned the likelihood of the party mounting power by eliminating its majority group; soon to be citizens. Many issues led up to the creation of the Acts. This Cause and Effect can be traced all the way back to George Washington's Presidency; a few years after the creation of the Constitutional government after the Articles of Confederation were expulsed.
The debate of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 revealed bitter controversies on a number of issues. Most of the controversies had, however, arose even before these acts; as far back as the penning of the Constitution. The writers of the Constitution knew that as time proceeded, the needs and demands of the nation and of the people would change, leading to controversy. By not assigning specific powers to specific groups/parties, governments, they unintentionally created a vast problem in the years to come.
As a federalist Alexander Hamilton wanted to establish a stronger federal government under a new Constitution. He met in Philadelphia with other delegates to discuss how to fix the Articles of Confederation that created a weak central government. During the meeting, Hamilton expressed his view that a dependable current source of revenue would be crucial to develop a more powerful and resilient central government. Although Hamilton played a diminutive part in the writing of the Constitution itself, he did heavily influence its ratification. In cooperation with James Madison and John Jay, Hamilton wrote fifty one of eighty five essays under the joint title The Federalist “The Federalist Paper.” In the essays, he cunningly explained and defended the newly drafted Constitution prior to its approval. In 1788, at the New York Ratification Convention, two thirds of delegates opposed the Constitution, however Hamilton was a powerful advocate for ratification, effectively arguing against the anti Federalist persuasion. His efforts succeeded when New York agreed to ratify, which led the remaining eight states to follow. He had a proposal for the new government that was modeled on the British system, which Hamilton considered the best.
In 1798, when Congress passed both the Alien and Sedition Acts, it was very much constitutional. These acts were definitely in the best interest of America. America was a significantly young nation, at the time, and could not afford to create problems caused by foreigners coming to America. They did not have enough national power to sustain order if everyone was attacking the newly created laws, and many of those rebels being citizens from foreign countries, nevertheless.
During World War I, congress would authorize two controversial pieces of legislation: the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition act of 1918. The Espionage Act was ratified in order to “suppress the spread of alleged disloyalty and to maintain the public image of remarkable national unity behind the war effort” (James and Wells, 71). The act inhibited the freedom of speech and freedom of the press, and some of which seems the antithesis of the First Amendment of the Constitution. Most of the Espionage Act would be in effect only during times of war, but two of the provisions stayed in effect during times of peace.
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.
In various political addresses, Jefferson was seen as inseparable with strict interpretation and a contender for state rights. He tried to affirm the belief that domestic policies should be decided by the states and fears that the Federalists will change the Constitution (docum. A). By the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, Jefferson and Madison asserted that states were the foundation of the nation and therefore had suprem...