Repressive Jurisprudence in the Early American Republic: The First Amendment and the Legacy of English Law

426 Pages·2010·1.51 MB·English

by  Phillip I. Blumberg

This page intentionally left blank
REPRESSIVE JURISPRUDENCE IN THE EARLY AMERICAN
REPUBLIC
TheFirstAmendmentandtheLegacyofEnglishLaw
ThisvolumewillenablereaderstounderstandhowtheRevolutionaryAmerican
society dedicated to the noble aspirations of the Declaration of Independence
andtheBillofRightscouldhaveadoptedoneofthemostwidelydeploredstatutes
inAmericanhistory,theSeditionActof1798.Itdemonstrateshowthewholesale
incorporation by the new states in 1776 of the full body of English law into
the American law also meant the adoption of the English repressive common-
lawjurisprudencethathadbeenfashionedtosupporttheEnglishmonarchical
political system that had been repudiated in the American Revolution. The
unhappyresultwasthatinthenewnationaswellasinEngland,strongcriticism
of the executive (King or President), the legislature (Parliament or Congress),
thejudiciary,andChristianitywascriminalized.DespitetheFirstAmendment,
freedomofspeechandpressweredramaticallyrestrictedfor150yearsasAmerican
courtsenforcedtherepressivejurisprudenceuntilwellintothe20thcentury.This
bookwillbeofkeeninteresttoallconcernedwiththeEarlyRepublic,freedom
ofspeech,andtheevolutionofAmericanconstitutionaljurisprudence.Because
itaddressesthemuch-criticizedSeditionActof 1798,one ofthemostdramatic
illustrations of this repressive jurisprudence, the book will also be of interest to
Americansconcernedwithpreservingfreespeechinwartime.
Phillip I. Blumberg is Dean and Professor Emeritus at The University of Con-
necticut School of Law. After two decades of law practice on Wall Street and
serviceastheCEOofaNewYorkStockExchange–listedfinancialcorporation,
heturnedtolegalteachingandscholarship.Heisthecountry’sleadingauthority
oncorporategroupsandtheauthorofpath-breakingbooksincludingTheMulti-
nationalChallengetoCorporationLawandthemagisterialfive-volumetreatise
BlumbergonCorporateGroups(2ndedition).Sixyearsago,hestartedhisstudy
oftheearlyAmericanjurisprudence;thisvolumeistheresult.
Tomygrandchildren, Andrew,Emily, Phillip, Gwen, Sarah,
Kathryn, Elizabeth, Christopher, Alexander, andCaroline, and to
all thenation’s otherchildrenwhowill determine itsfuture
Repressive Jurisprudence
in the Early American Republic
THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND THE LEGACY
OF ENGLISH LAW
Phillip I. Blumberg
SchoolofLaw,TheUniversityofConnecticut
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore,
São Paulo, Delhi, Dubai, Tokyo
Cambridge University Press
The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK
Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521191357
© Phillip I. Blumberg 2010
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the
provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part
may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published in print format 2010
ISBN-13 978-0-511-78990-8 eBook (NetLibrary)
ISBN-13 978-0-521-19135-7 Hardback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy
of urls for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication,
and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.
Contents
Acknowledgments pagexiii
1 PoliticalandJurisprudentialWorldsinConflictintheNew
Republic 1
2 PoliticsintheNewRepublic 23
A. Introduction 23
B. TheThreatof“Factions,”theRiseofPoliticalParties,andLack
ofaConceptofa“Loyal”Opposition 23
C. CorruptionofthePress:FinancialSupportfromPolitical
LeadersandForeignPowers 27
1. ThePoliticizedPressoftheNewRepublic 29
2. SupportofthePartisanPressbyPoliticalPatronage 32
a. GovernmentPrintingContracts 32
b. TheFlowofForeignMoney 35
D. PartisanVirulentSpeechandtheDemonizationof
Opponents 36
E. PartisanViolenceintheNewRepublic:AnInheritancefrom
theStruggleswiththeBritishCrown 40
F. ThreeInsurrectionsThreateningtheStabilityoftheNew
Nation 42
1. Shays’sRebellion(1787) 42
2. TheWhiskeyTaxRebellion(1794) 44
3. TheFriesInsurrection(1799) 49
G. Conclusion 50
3 CriminalLibelintheColonies,theStates,andtheEarly
RepublicDuringtheWashingtonAdministration 52
v
vi Contents
A. Introduction 52
B. EnglishSeditiousLibelandCriminalLibelLaw:TheLawofthe
AmericanColonies 54
1. Eighteenth-CenturyEnglishLaw 54
2. TheColonialExperience 55
C. CriminalLibelintheStatesAftertheRevolution:TheEnglish
InheritanceandtheRoleofBlackstone 57
1. TheReceptionStatutes 57
2. TheRoleofBlackstone 59
3. TheIsolatedCasesBeforetheAdamsAdministration 66
4 FederalistPartisanUseofCriminalandSeditiousLibel–
StatutoryandCommonLaw–DuringtheTumultuousAdams
Administration 72
A. CollapseofRelationswiththeFrench,theAdams
AdministrationPreparingfortheImminentOutbreakofWar,
andtheBitterPoliticalClimateintheSpringof1798 72
B. PortentofFutureEvents:FederalistPartisanProsecutionsof
RepublicansUnderFederalCriminalCommonLawEvenBefore
PassageoftheAct 73
1. UnitedStatesv.SamuelJ.Cabell,Congressmanfrom
Virginia 73
2. UnitedStatesv.BenjaminFranklinBache,Editorofthe
PhiladelphiaAurora 77
3. UnitedStatesv.JohnDalyBurk,EditoroftheNewYorkTime
Piece 80
4. UnitedStatesv.Dr.JamesSmith,Co-PublisheroftheNew
YorkTimePiece 81
C. TheEnactmentoftheSeditionAct,July14,1798 82
1. IntroductionoftheBill 82
2. TheActionoftheCongress 84
3. TheApprovalofPresidentAdams 90
D. TheFederalistsDividedovertheAct:TheReactionofSuch
FederalistsasGeorgeWashington,AlexanderHamilton,
OliverEllsworth,andJohnMarshall 92
1. GeorgeWashington 93
2. AlexanderHamilton 94
3. ChiefJusticeOliverEllsworth 95
4. JohnMarshall 95
Contents vii
E. TheFirstCasesUndertheAct:ProtectingNationalSecurityby
ProsecutingThreeDisorderlyDrunksforVulgarRemarksAbout
PresidentAdams 99
F. TheMajorFederalistOnslaught:NineCasesAgainstEditors
andPublishersofJeffersonianNewspapers 101
1. UnitedStatesv.MatthewLyon,CongressmanfromVermont
andEditoroftheVermontJournal 102
2. UnitedStatesv.AnthonyHaswell,EditoroftheVermont
Gazette 107
3. UnitedStatesv.ThomasAdams;Commonwealthv.Thomas
Adams(Mass.);Commonwealthv.AbijahAdams(Mass.),
EditorandBookkeeper,Respectively,oftheBoston
IndependentChronicle 110
4. UnitedStatesv.CharlesHolt,EditoroftheNewLondonBee 112
5. UnitedStatesv.AnnGreenleaf;Peoplev.DavidFrothingham
(N.Y.),EditorandEmployee,Respectively,oftheNewYork
Argus 114
6. UnitedStatesv.WilliamDuane,EditorofthePhiladelphia
Aurora 116
7. UnitedStatesv.ThomasCooper,EditoroftheSunsburyand
NorthumberlandGazette 122
8. UnitedStatesv.JamesThomsonCallender,Polemicist 125
9. UnitedStatesv.WilliamDurrell,EditoroftheMt.Pleasant
Register 131
G. ThreeCasesInvolvingRepublicanActivists 134
1. UnitedStatesv.DavidBrown;UnitedStatesv.Benjamin
Fairbanks,theDedham,Mass.,LibertyPoleActivists 134
2. UnitedStatesv.JedidiahPeck,NewYorkLegislator 137
3. UnitedStatesv.Dr.SamuelShaw 138
H. UnconfirmedCases 139
1. UnitedStatesorNewJerseyv.DanielDodge;UnitedStatesor
NewJerseyv.AaronPennington 139
2. UnitedStatesv.JudahP.Spooner;UnitedStatesv.James
Lyon 140
3. UnitedStatesv.ConradFahnestock;UnitedStatesv.Benjamin
MoyerorMayer 142
4. UnitedStatesorCommonwealthv.JamesBell 143
5. Dr.JohnTyler;Dr.JohnVaughan 143
viii Contents
I. JudicialConsiderationoftheConstitutionalityoftheSedition
Act 144
J. Conclusion 145
5 CriminalLibelDuringtheJeffersonandMadison
Administrations,1800–1816 148
A. Introduction 148
B. AmbivalenceoftheJeffersonians:TheFederalGovernment 149
1. TheAccessionofJeffersontothePresidency,1801 149
2. TheDemiseofCriminalLibelandFederalCriminal
CommonLawintheJeffersonandMadison
Administrations 150
3. SuppingwiththeDevil:RepublicanPartisanUseofCriminal
LibelAgainstFederalistCriticsintheConnecticutFederal
CourtsUnderFederalCriminalCommonLaw 156
4. TheConstitutionalIssue:DidtheFederalCourtsHave
CriminalCommon-LawJurisdiction? 166
a. TheExperienceintheFirst25YearsoftheEarly
AmericanRepublic 166
b. TheConstitutionalIssueResolved:Hudson&Goodwin
(1812) 181
c. JeffersonandCriminalLibel 184
6 PartisanProsecutionsforCriminalLibelintheStateCourts:
FederalistsAgainstRepublicans,RepublicansAgainst
Federalists,andRepublicansAgainstDissidentRepublicansin
StrugglesforPartyControl 187
A. Introduction 187
B. RepublicanUseofRepressiveDoctrinesAgainstFederalistsand
DissidentRepublicansAlike 188
1. Pennsylvania 188
a. RepublicansAgainstFederalists 188
b. RepublicansAgainstRepublicans 194
2. NewYork 203
a. TheFederalistInterlude 203
b. TheRepublicanEra 204
3. OtherJurisdictions 214
C. FederalistUseofRepressiveDoctrinesAgainstRepublicans 215
1. Connecticut 215
2. Massachusetts 222
3. NewJersey 233