The Alien and Sedition Acts
1. What is the author arguing?
These readings don’t really seem like arguments, but more along the lines of a statement of authorization, since these laws were put into effect.
Alien Act:
The author is saying that the president has the authority to apprehend, restrain, secure, or deport resident aliens if their home countries are at war with the United States. At that time, war was considered likely between the U.S. and France.
Sedition Act:
The author is saying that it is a crime to write, print, utter, or publish any false, scandalous, or malicious writings against the U.S. government/officials with intent to defame them. If tried against a court, the person who committed this crime would be fined up to 2000 dollars or sent to jail for up to 2 years. It was preplanned for this act to expire on March 3, 1801.
2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?
Logos:
Everything the author wrote seems to be solid and backed with sufficient force to support this law. In the Sedition act, the author writes “And the jury who shall try the cause, shall have a right to determine the law and the fact, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.”. This seems very fair to me, because under this law the person guilty of the crime has equal opportunity to defend him/herself. Nothing he writes seems out of place or exaggerated which makes me think his reasoning is very logical and sound.
Pathos:
I don’t really feel much emotional quality in these Acts. They just sound very official and government oriented to me. But if I were to find any emotional quality, it would be a cautious demeanor, especially from the Alien Act. The law states that in the case of war, alien residents from the opposing country can be deported or apprehended based on the judgment of the president. They don’t want to take any chances that enemy aliens could harm their country and that the government wouldn’t become weakened by seditious material.
Ethos:
Again, I don’t really see a much personal style in this writing. If I were to guess what the person who wrote this was like.. I’d guess qualities like formal, follows the rules, supports the president. But these are written with opinions from many decision making officials, not just the one person who put it in words.
3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?
The historical significance of these documents is that the alien and sedition acts were used as political ammunition in elections against the federalists. Also, the alien act is what justified sending the Japanese to internment camps later in world war II. Oh and the alien Act is still intact today. Another addition to the pool of laws and rights, and another responsibility of the president.
4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?
Personally, I think that the sedition act was appropriate at the time, but for modern times it doesn’t fit. Now its all about free speech and expressing your opinions, so our society runs off the opposite of the sedition act now. I think the alien act is kind of over the top, but I think that being a U.S. citizen should mean something, and that if we were at war with another country, it makes sense to want to deport people native to that country, (unless they are naturalized citizens). But I don’t think internment camps should ever exist again. Since relationships between countries is a lot more open now (at least compared to when the acts were written), its not as necessary to worry about people from other countries now, because our technology is better and we can investigate issues more thoroughly. But then again, you never know what could happen. I guess not going to war would solve all our issues :). We wouldn’t even have to worry about this kind of stuff… hahahaha…
These readings don’t really seem like arguments, but more along the lines of a statement of authorization, since these laws were put into effect.
Alien Act:
The author is saying that the president has the authority to apprehend, restrain, secure, or deport resident aliens if their home countries are at war with the United States. At that time, war was considered likely between the U.S. and France.
Sedition Act:
The author is saying that it is a crime to write, print, utter, or publish any false, scandalous, or malicious writings against the U.S. government/officials with intent to defame them. If tried against a court, the person who committed this crime would be fined up to 2000 dollars or sent to jail for up to 2 years. It was preplanned for this act to expire on March 3, 1801.
2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?
Logos:
Everything the author wrote seems to be solid and backed with sufficient force to support this law. In the Sedition act, the author writes “And the jury who shall try the cause, shall have a right to determine the law and the fact, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.”. This seems very fair to me, because under this law the person guilty of the crime has equal opportunity to defend him/herself. Nothing he writes seems out of place or exaggerated which makes me think his reasoning is very logical and sound.
Pathos:
I don’t really feel much emotional quality in these Acts. They just sound very official and government oriented to me. But if I were to find any emotional quality, it would be a cautious demeanor, especially from the Alien Act. The law states that in the case of war, alien residents from the opposing country can be deported or apprehended based on the judgment of the president. They don’t want to take any chances that enemy aliens could harm their country and that the government wouldn’t become weakened by seditious material.
Ethos:
Again, I don’t really see a much personal style in this writing. If I were to guess what the person who wrote this was like.. I’d guess qualities like formal, follows the rules, supports the president. But these are written with opinions from many decision making officials, not just the one person who put it in words.
3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?
The historical significance of these documents is that the alien and sedition acts were used as political ammunition in elections against the federalists. Also, the alien act is what justified sending the Japanese to internment camps later in world war II. Oh and the alien Act is still intact today. Another addition to the pool of laws and rights, and another responsibility of the president.
4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?
Personally, I think that the sedition act was appropriate at the time, but for modern times it doesn’t fit. Now its all about free speech and expressing your opinions, so our society runs off the opposite of the sedition act now. I think the alien act is kind of over the top, but I think that being a U.S. citizen should mean something, and that if we were at war with another country, it makes sense to want to deport people native to that country, (unless they are naturalized citizens). But I don’t think internment camps should ever exist again. Since relationships between countries is a lot more open now (at least compared to when the acts were written), its not as necessary to worry about people from other countries now, because our technology is better and we can investigate issues more thoroughly. But then again, you never know what could happen. I guess not going to war would solve all our issues :). We wouldn’t even have to worry about this kind of stuff… hahahaha…
posted by Julie at
10:35:00 PM
8 Comments
