The Trial of James Callendar
Actions before the Trial
James Callender, a journalist, strongly believed in First Amendment protections, and utilized them before his trial, encouraging him to be defended by the public. In 1795, three years before the Sedition acts were passed, he said that one of the most important right was “the right of discussing and expressing an opinion on public men or measures”.1 As a journalist, it makes sense for a core belief of his to be freedom of press, which he frequently utilized to criticize politicians. Callender would go on to write a book titled The Prospect Before Us in 1800, a book full of slander against President Adams and other Federalists.2 In that book, he said that “The reign of Mr. Adams has been one continued tempest of malignant passions. As President… the grand object of his administration has been to exasperate the rage of contending parties, to…destroy every man who differs from his opinions”.3 Clearly, Callender directly opposed the Sedition Act, as he believed that John Adams was attacking anyone who spoke against him. This was soon proven, as this book led to his indictment under the Sedition acts. Callender’s open criticism of the administration and support of the First Amendment freedoms make him an excellent candidate to be politically supported, as these actions make Callender seem fearless to speak against those in power.
James Callender's Defense
Callendar’s defense, presented by his attorney, drew attention to the illogical and unconstitutional nature of the indictment which reinforced that Callendar is a victim of the Sedition acts. Rather than focusing on Callendar’s specific case, his attorneys were primarily concerned with the constitutionality of the Sedition acts. Mr. Wirt, one of the attorneys made the argument that the court should be allowed to consider the constitutionality of the law, saying “the jury [has] a right to consider the law, and since the constitution is law, the conclusion is certainly syllogistic, that the jury have a right to consider the constitution”.4 Mr. Wirt attempts to convince the court that this law is unconstitutional, and cannot be enforced by the court, and thus Callendar’s trial is unfair. Callender’s other attorney, Mr. Nichols took the argument even further, and said that “if an act of congress contravene[s] the constitution of the United States, a jury [has] a right to say that it is null.5 Nichols says that it is the duty of the court to defend against encroachments on the constitution, with Callender being the victim of those. Throughout the defense of James Callender, he is painted as a casualty of the Sedition act, and thus becomes a martyr.
Imprisonment and Aftermath
James Callender’s martyrdom aided the Republican cause and thus bolstered the First amendment protections, as that party was against the Sedition act. In the aftermath of the Callendar trial, the Federalist party was in a rough spot, as they had essentially authored their own demise according to James Madison.6 Many voters were angry over the Sedition act and its impacts on people like Callendar. Republicans were quick to use this trial as an election platform.7 In prison, Callender published a second volume of his infamous book The Prospect Before Us, further cementing his martyrdom for the Republican party.8 The Republican party would go on to win the election of 1800, and the Sedition act would expire in 1801.9 The Callender trial and his position as a martyr aided in ending the tyranny of the Sedition act.
1 Callender, Popular Societies. From a Correspondent,” Aurora, 2 Mar. 1795, as quoted in Bird, "Criminal Dissent: Prosecutions Under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798”, 311
2 Bird, “ Criminal Dissent: Prosecutions Under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798”, 304
3 "UNITED STATES V. CALLENDER: INDICTMENT FOR SEDITIOUS LIBEL." Virginia Circuit Court (1800), 1-2
4 "UNITED STATES V. CALLENDER: INDICTMENT FOR SEDITIOUS LIBEL." Virginia Circuit Court (1800), 29
5 "UNITED STATES V. CALLENDER: INDICTMENT FOR SEDITIOUS LIBEL." Virginia Circuit Court (1800), 30
6 Bird, “ Criminal Dissent: Prosecutions Under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798”, 310
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Ragsdale, Bruce A. "The Sedition Act Trials." Federal Judicial Center (2005), 7