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…

Text Analysis -- Resolution of the Stamp Act Congress, October 19th, 1765

1. What is the author arguing?

The author is arguing that the colonists don’t deserve to be taxed by the British crown. The author wants the parliament to repeal the stamp act because they don’t deserve to be taxed without representation.

2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?

The author writes in a calm manner. His words are very polite but also very direct. He writes in a humble manner, complimenting the Parliament and the British crown, although he is upset about the taxes. He emphasizes the colonist’s loyalty and respect to the crown, and how it’s not right for them to be taxed when they have no say in it. The author believes that the colonists are their own people and not property of the British any longer despite any lingering ties they may have. In between the compliments and polite words, the author lists the things he is not happy with. Basically
1. The colonists deeply respect the British

2. The colonists can’t be represented in the Parliament

3. It is unreasonable for the British to impose taxes on them when the colonists are no longer a part of Britain.

3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

The historical significance of this document is that it shows America’s split with Europe. This document shows that the American colonists are taking initiative to become their own country with their own rights and liberties. Also, they acknowledge that they are no longer a part of Europe, which I think is significant, because they were still struggling for complete independence.

4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?

I find the authors argument very convincing! I think mainly because the author remained so calm, and didn’t write a paper filled with angry remarks. He maintains a high level of respect while arguing his point. This makes him seem more informed of the situation and makes him sound more convincing to me. Also, I don’t think it was fair that they were being taxed because they are a separate entity and the British can’t act so superior and take their money. The colonists have their own government and rules, the British can’t continue to be in charge of them.

Why were some New Englanders accused of being witches?

FOR 4/14's CDL ! -- Why were some new Englanders accused of being witches?

Summary:

In today’s discussion reading, it talks about the fiasco of the Salem witch hunt. Since Puritans believed in supernatural spirits, people could legally accuse others of being a witch. In 1691-1692, an epidemic of accusations began in Salem. A witch was defined as someone who had become possessed by Satan. Through the law, nineteen ‘witches’ were legally executed. Most of the accusations were against old ladies, and people wouldn’t accuse family members or strangers, but they’d accuse a good neighbor. If you denied the accusation, your punishment would be greater. Many people would give names of other witches, to win the sympathy or a reduced punishment from officials. In trials, accusers would usually account some misfortune they had suffered at the hands of the accused witch. Looking back now, those misfortunes were quite silly, and witch hunts were results of overactive imaginations, emotional distress, or just accidents. In the end, the idea of witches made it easier for Puritans to believe they could be a saint rather than a sinner.

Q1. Do you think that the witch accusers faked the supposedly cursed/possessed symptoms?

Q2. Why did the people would accuse their good neighbors and not strangers they didn’t know? Do you think they truly believed their good neighbors and friends to be witches?

Q3. Do you think people would have still accused each other of witchcraft if the Puritan religion wasn’t so embedded in everyone’s lives?

--Julie