155

1803 Freedom of the Press + First Amendment Legal Case Jefferson v Alex Hamilton

Currency:USD Category:Collectibles Start Price:2,800.00 USD Estimated At:4,500.00 - 5,500.00 USD
1803 Freedom of the Press + First Amendment Legal Case Jefferson v Alex Hamilton
Federal Period
“Freedom of the Press” and “First Amendment” Historic Landmark 1803 Libel Case Thomas Jefferson v Alex. Hamilton
1804-Dated Federal Period, Rare Imprint “The Speeches at full length of Mr. Van Ness, Mr. Caines, the Attorney-General (Ambrose Spencer), Mr. Harrison, and General (Alexander) Hamilton, in the great cause of the people, against Harry Croswell, on an indictment for a libel on Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States.” 78 pages, Complete, New York, Very Fine.
An exceedingly rare important “Freedom of the Press” and “First Amendment” related “Croswell Libel Case 1804” Imprint, measures about 5.5” x 9” with 78 pages, bound in later red leather with gold gilt title on its spine reading: “Croswell Libel Case 1804”. This important record is of the speeches presented before an Upstate New York Court during hearings that historic First Amendment case in 1803, pitting Thomas Jefferson against Alexander Hamilton, one more time before Hamilton's death the following year. This case arose out of attempts by Jefferson to use the Sedition Law against Federalist publishers that attacked the policies of his administration.

In this case, the government charged Harry Croswell (1778-1858), publisher of the political newspaper periodical “The Wasp,” with Criminal Libel for publishing articles stating that Thomas Jefferson hired James Callender to publish unfounded accusations of crimes committed by Presidents George Washington and John Adams during their administrations, particularly in the infamous tract, “The Prospect Before Us.”

Alexander Hamilton, and the other lawyers defending Croswell, argued that the “freedom of the press” must include the freedom to print the truth, regardless of how it reflected on its subjects - and directly contrary to English libel law. For Hamilton, the Croswell case was an opportunity not to be missed. First, and perhaps foremost, it gave him a chance to strike back at President Jefferson, his old rival in the George Washington administration. Second, it provided Hamilton with a means to further his view of “American Constitutionalism”. This work also includes another strong argument along the same lines by William Van Ness, who Served as Alexander Hamilton's “Second” in the unfortunate fatal duel with Aaron Burr. The acquittal of Croswell established “Truth as a defense against Libel” in New York and eventually at the Federal level, and served as Hamilton's last political victory over Jefferson. See: Cohen 13322. Ford, Hamiltonian 90. Sabin 17677.

Note: The front cover blue paper page of the pamphlet has been reinforced with archival tape along the inside edge, otherwise the imprints pages uncut as made and in fine clean condition. We have not been able to locate another copy available to the public.

A memoir based on Croswell's diaries was published by F. B. Dexter, assistant librarian of Yale University, in the Papers of the New Haven Colony Historical Society (vol. IX, 1918). For an account of the Croswell Libel Trial, see this currently offered Imprint titled: “Speeches at full length of Mr. Van Ness, Mr. Caines, Mr. Harrison and Gen. Hamilton in the great cause of the People against Harry Croswell (1804)”.
Harry Croswell (1778-1858): Journalist; in 1802 founded a Federalist newspaper, Wasp, in Hudson, N. Y.; tried and found guilty of libel against the Republicans of the county; started another paper in Albany, N. Y., but it failed and he was jailed for debt; entered the ministry and was ordained in the Episcopal Church, 1814; became rector of Trinity Church in New Haven, Ct, (1815-1858).

Harry Croswell, diarist, journalist and clergyman, was born in West Hartford, Connecticut, in 1778, the seventh child of Caleb and Hannah Croswell. He was privately educated, and included as part of his education one year at Noah Webster's house doing odd jobs in exchange for instruction. Having launched himself on a journalistic career in Catskill, New York, he married Susan Sherman of New Haven, Connecticut, in 1800 and moved to Hudson, New York.

There his career took a political turn when, in 1802, he founded a Federalist newspaper, the Wasp, which was highly critical of the dominant Republican forces in the county. He was eventually brought to trial for libel by the Republicans and in the ensuing proceeding Alexander Hamilton came to testify on his behalf. Despite the illustrious intervention, Croswell was found guilty and was forced to suspend publication of the Wasp . Encouraged by Federalist support, he moved to Albany, New York, where he started another paper, but since the support was verbal rather than financial, the paper failed, and Croswell was jailed for debt.

Historical Society of the New York Courts:

Excerpt from People v. Croswell: Alexander Hamilton and the Transformation of the Common Law of Libel:

Before judgment could be pronounced, Croswell’s attorneys quickly moved for a new trial, arguing initially that the truth should be permitted in evidence as a justification and thus that Chief Justice [Morgan] Lewis had erred in denying the motion for a further adjournment, and that the court had misdirected the jury. Following accepted practice of the time, the motion for a new trial would be heard by the entire five-justice Supreme Court — somewhat like an appeal of the judgment in modern practice. The defense attorneys would employ a legal device called the “case stated.”

By “making a case,” essentially a set of facts to which the prosecution and defense stipulated, all objectionable matters, including any not in the record proper such as the jury charge which at the time was a matter outside the record, could be considered by the full Court. Following certain adjournments, the case was finally heard in February 1804 with the Supreme Court sitting in Albany. In accord with the practice of the day, the parties would not exchange briefs before the argument.

The defense team used the time to regroup. The Federalists sought out Alexander Hamilton who, according to Justice (later Chancellor) James Kent, was “universally conceded” to be the preeminent lawyer of the era.27 As early as June 23, 1803, they had persuaded General Philip Schuyler, Hamilton’s father-in-law, to write the former Secretary of the Treasury for help.

The rabid Federalist Schuyler described the case as “a libel against that Jefferson, who disgraces not only the place he fills but produces Immorality by his pernicious example.”28 Although there is some evidence that Hamilton played an advisory role in the Croswell trial in the Circuit Court, other matters had precluded his appearing there. Now he was ready to enter the proceedings in person, gratis.

To a modest degree, Hamilton’s strategy was affected by recent events that had occurred in Virginia. On July 17, 1803, Croswell’s potential star witness, James Callender, apparently in the midst of a drinking spree, fell (or perhaps was pushed) out of a boat and found a final resting place, as one contemporary put it, “in congenial mud,” at the bottom of the James River.29 But Callender did leave behind his papers, including letters Jefferson had written expressing his approval of The Prospect Before Us, evidence that could potentially be used by Hamilton if the Court were to grant a new trial.

Indeed, theoretically at least, at any retrial Hamilton might try to subpoena Jefferson himself, or at least to secure Jefferson’s affidavit on the truth of the Callender matter. Any retrial might prove embarrassing to the President.

Hamilton’s Opportunity...

For Hamilton, the Croswell case was an opportunity not to be missed. First, and perhaps foremost, it gave him a chance to strike back at Jefferson, his old rival in the Washington administration. Second, it provided Hamilton with a means to further his view of American constitutionalism.

Although far from a populist, Hamilton did understand that a free press was more critical in America than in Britain, and that freedom of the press was a great issue on which to win back to the Federalist cause the favor of the electorate. Hamilton could argue for a cautious view of freedom of the press, in which the motive of the author would be the critical component in assessing liability.

The Croswell case also gave Hamilton an opportunity to highlight his brilliance as a thinker and orator in a case that was far more understandable to the general public than his typical practice of maritime insurance cases or land grant disputes.

Hamilton was “skilled in the rhetoric of dress and behavior” and this asset only enhanced the persuasiveness of his legal argument.30 Finally, for Hamilton — who was now known as General Hamilton, for his service as acting commander of the American army between 1798 and 1800 in the so-called Quasi-War with France — a big victory in Croswell might restore a portion of his lost reputation. Hamilton expected, and even desired, a war with Napoleon’s France — a real possibility in 1804 — and the press coverage of Croswell could only raise his stature in the minds of the Federalist leaders.

Hamilton assembled a formidable defense team. He retained the services of William W. Van Ness, who had appeared for Croswell in the Circuit Court. Hamilton also recruited his old friend and fellow Federalist Richard Harison, who had served as an Assistant Attorney General during the Washington administration.