dollars) and 20 years in prison.
Thus, while “espionage” is usually defined as a clandestine activity of getting secret information
and passing it on to the enemy, the law vastly extended the meaning of the term to include
also the openly carried expressing of political opinions, without revealing any secret, and by
persons who had no connection with the enemy - as long as the expressing of such opinions was
construed as helping the enemy.
The legislation was passed at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson, who feared any widespread
dissent in time of war, thinking that it constituted a real threat to an American victory.
Source: Excerpt from the Wikipedia article on the Sedition Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_
The Sedition Act of 1918 (May 16, 1918) was an amendment to the Espionage Act of 1917 passed at the
urging of President Woodrow Wilson, who was concerned that dissent, in time of war, was a significant
threat to morale. The passing of this act forbade Americans to use “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the United States government, flag, or armed forces during war. The act also allowed the Postmaster General to deny mail delivery to dissenters of government policy during wartime.
114
Questions:
1. Sourcing: Where did these documents come from? What do you know about this source?
2. Sourcing: How reliable do you consider these documents?
3. How could you corroborate the information from these documents?
Schenck v. United States – Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
Source: Excerpt from a Supreme Court decision in the case of Schenck v. United States, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Schenck was a socialist who opposed the draft in World War I and passed out pamphlets comparing it to slavery. He was prosecuted under the Sedition Act and appealed his case to the Supreme Court, arguing that his pamphlet activity was protected by the 1st Amendment, under freedom of speech. In the decision below, the Supreme Court decided that Schenck was guilty, and that during wartime, the government may limit freedom of speech.
The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. The most
stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting “Fire!” in a
theatre and causing a panic...
The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of
such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive
evils that Congress has a right to prevent...
When a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance
to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight and that no Court
could regard them as protected by any constitutional right.
1918 Speech – Eugene V. Debs
Source: Eugene Debs delivered the following speech in June 1918. He visited three Socialists who were in prison for opposing the draft, and then spoke, across the street from the jail, for two hours. The excerpt below is only a small segment of a much longer speech.
Comrades, friends and fellow-workers, thank you for this very cordial greeting, this very hearty
reception.
Three of our most loyal comrades are paying the penalty for their devotion to the cause of the
working class. They have come to realize, as many of us have, that it is extremely dangerous
to exercise the constitutional right of free speech in a country fighting to make democracy safe
in the world.
Every one of these Wall Street conspirators and would-be murderers claims to be an arch-
patriot; every one of them insists that the war is being waged to make the world safe for
democracy. What humbug! What rot! What false pretense! These autocrats, these tyrants,
these red-handed robbers and murderers, the “patriots,” while the men who have the courage
to stand face to face with them, speak the truth, and fight for their exploited victims—they
are the disloyalists and traitors. If this be true, I want to take my place side by side with the
traitors in this fight.
Wars throughout history have been waged for conquest and plunder. In the Middle Ages when
the feudal lords who inhabited the castles, the poor, ignorant serfs had been taught that it was
their patriotic duty to fall upon one another and to cut one another’s throats for the profit and
115
glory of the lords and barons who held them in contempt. And that is war in a nutshell. The
master class has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles. The
master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject class has had nothing to
gain and all to lose—especially their lives.
In all the history of the world you, the people, have never had a voice in declaring war, and
strange as it certainly appears, no war by any nation in any age has ever been declared by the
people.
Yours not to reason why; Yours but to do and die.
That is their motto and we object on the part of the awakening workers of this nation.
If war is right let it be declared by the people. You who have your lives to lose, you certainly
above all others have the right to decide the momentous issue of war or peace.
It is the minorities who have made the history of this world. It is the few who have had the
courage to take their places at the front; who have been true enough to themselves to speak
the truth that was in them; who have dared oppose the established order of things; who have
espoused the cause of the suffering, struggling poor; who have upheld without regard to personal
consequences the cause of freedom and righteousness.
They are continually talking about your patriotic duty. It is not their but your patriotic duty
that they are concerned about. There is a decided difference. Their patriotic duty never takes
them to the firing line or chucks them into the trenches.
In passing I suggest that we stop a moment to think about the term “landlord.” “LANDLORD!”
Lord of the Land! The lord of the land is indeed a superpatriot. This lord who practically
owns the earth tells you that we are fighting this war to make the world safe for democracy—he
who profiteers at the expense of the people who have been slain and mutilated by multiplied
thousands, under pretense of being the great American patriot. It is he, this patriot who is in
fact the archenemy of the people; it is he that you need to wipe from power. It is he who is a
far greater menace to your liberty and your well-being than the Prussian Junkers (Germans)
on the other side of the Atlantic ocean.
Yes, in good time we are going to destroy all enslaving and degrading capitalist institutions
and re-create them as free and humanizing institutions. The world is daily changing before our
eyes. The sun of capitalism is setting; the sun of socialism is rising.
In due time the hour will strike and this great cause triumphant—the greatest in history—will
proclaim the emancipation of the working class and the brotherhood of all mankind.
Questions:
1. Sourcing: What type of document is this? When was it written?
2. Sourcing: Who is the audience?
3. Contextualization: What was happening in the United States and Europe at this time?
4. Contextualization: Imagine what the scene might have looked like as Debs delivered this speech.
Describe it in a few sentences.
5. Close Reading: What is Debs’ main message? What does he try to convince his audience?
Section Questions
1. Corroboration: Considering all of these documents, do you think Debs was guilty of violating the Espionage and Sedition Acts? Why?
116
2. Do you agree with the Espionage and Sedition Acts? Should the government be able to limit free
speech during wartime?
8.3 The League of Nations Debate
After the end of World War I, in January 1919, the Allied Powers met at the Paris Peace Conference to
decide on the terms of the treaty that would be presented to the defeated Central Powers. The Allies
also created the League of Nations, an inter-governmental organization charged with peacefully resolving disputes between nations, promoting disarmament, and protecting human rights.
After the Paris Peace Conference, President Woodrow Wilson returned to the U.S. and tried to persuade
Congress to ratify the treaty and join the League of Nations. The first document below is a speech given by Wilson in support of the League. The second is a speech by Republican senator Henry Cabot Lodge,
who opposed the league.
League of Nations Speech – Woodrow Wilson
Source: Speech given by President Woodrow Wilson in Pueblo Colorado, September 25, 1919. Wilson
toured the country to rally popular support for the treaty of Paris and the League of Nations.
My fellow citizens, as I have crossed the continent, I have perceived more and more that men have been busy creating an absolutely false impression of the treaty of peace and the Covenant of the League of
Nations.
At the front of this great treaty is the Covenant of the League of Nations. Reflect, my fellow citizens that the membership of this great League is going to include all the great fighting nations of the world, as well as the weak ones.
And what do they unite for? They enter into a solemn promise to one another that they will never use
their power against one another for aggression; that they never will violate the territorial integrity of a neighbor; that they never will interfere with the political independence of a neighbor; that they will abide by the principle that great populations are entitled to determine their own destiny; and that no matter what differences arise between them they will never resort to war without first submitting their differences to the consideration of the council of the League of Nations, and agreeing that at the end of the six months, even if they do not accept the advice of the council, they will still not go to war for another three months.
I wish that those who oppose this settlement could feel the moral obligation that rests upon us not to turn our backs on the boys who died, but to see the thing through, to see it through to the end and make good their redemption of the world.
For nothing less depends upon this decision, nothing less than liberation and salvation of the world.
You will say, “Is the League an absolute guaranty against war?” No; I do not know any absolute guaranty against the errors of human judgment or the violence of human passions but I tell you this: With a cooling space of nine months for human passion, not much of it will keep hot.
We have accepted the truth of justice and liberty and peace, and this truth is going to lead us, and through us the world, out into pastures of quietness and peace such as the world never dreamed of before.
Vocabulary
Territorial integrity borders of a country
117
Abide accept
Redemption save from evil
Questions:
1. Sourcing: Who is giving this speech? When?
2. Sourcing: What do you predict he will say?
3. Contextualization: What else was going on at this time?
4. Close Reading: What word would you use to describe the tone of this speech? Provide a quote to support your answer.
5. Close Reading: What do you think is Wilson’s strongest argument for the League of Nations?
League of Nations Speech – Henry Cabot Lodge
Source: A speech given by Henry Cabot Lodge in Washington, D.C. on August 12, 1919. Cabot Lodge was a ferocious Republican opponent of the Democrat President Woodrow Wilson. Deeply suspicious of any attempt to unnecessarily involve the U.S. in international political matters Cabot Lodge campaigned against U.S. participation in the League of Nations. Cabot Lodge’s viewpoint eventually won and the U.S. never joined the League.
Mr. President:
The first step to world service is the maintenance of the United States. You may call me selfish
if you will, conservative or reactionary, or use any other harsh adjective you see fit to apply, but an American I was born, an American I have remained all my life. I can never be anything
else but an American, and I must think of the United States first.
I have never had but one allegiance - I cannot divide it now. I have loved but one flag and
I cannot share that devotion and give affection to the mongrel banner invented for a league.
Internationalism is to me repulsive.
The United States is the world’s best hope, but if you fetter her in the interests and quarrels of other nations, if you tangle her in the intrigues of Europe, you will destroy her power for
good and endanger her very existence. Leave her to march freely through the centuries to come
as in the years that have gone.
We hear much of visions, but when words describe a present that doesn’t exist and future that
no man can predict, they are as unreal and short-lived as steam.
No doubt many excellent and patriotic people see a coming fulfillment of noble ideals in the
words ‘league for peace’. We all respect and share these aspirations and desires, but some of
us see no hope, but rather defeat, for them in this murky plan. For we, too, have our ideals,
even if we differ from those who have tried to establish a monopoly of idealism.
Our first ideal is our country. Our ideal is to make her ever stronger and better and finer,
because in that way alone can she be of the greatest service to the world’s peace and to the
welfare of mankind.
Vocabulary
Reactionary a person who opposes political reform
118
Allegiance loyalty
Mongrel a mutt; a cross-breed
Repulsive disgusting
Fetter restrain with chains
Intrigues secret plans
Aspirations hopes
Murky dark and dirty
Questions:
1. Sourcing: Who is giving this speech? When?
2. Sourcing: What do you predict he will say?
3. Close Reading: What word would you use to describe the tone of this speech? Provide a quote to support your answer.
4. Close Reading: What do you think is Lodge’s strongest argument against the League of Nations?
Section Question:
1. Corroboration: Based on both documents, why do you think Henry Cabot Lodge won this debate?
Provide quotations to support your answer.
8.4 Prohibition
Since the founding of the republic, some Americans advocated temperance—limits on the consumption
of alcohol. Temperance organizations formed and then unified into the American Temperance Union
in 1833. In the early 20th century, the cause morphed into the Prohibition movement, which had the
support of diverse constituencies including Progressives, many southerners and women, pietist Protestant denominations (for example, Methodists), and the Ku Klux Klan. The 18th Amendment to the Constitution
passed in 1919, prohibiting the manufacture, sale, and transport of alcohol. It was repealed in 1933. The documents below include the 18th Amendment, several prohibitionist posters, and an article from the New York Times. Read these documents to find out what problems some people saw in society and why they
favored Prohibition.
The 18th Amendment
Source: The United States Constitution.
The US Senate passed the 18 th Amendment on December 18, 1917. It was ratified on January 16, 1919, after 36 states approved it. The 18 th Amendment, and the enforcement laws accompanying it, established Prohibition of alcohol in the United States. Several states already had Prohibition 119
laws before this amendment. It was eventually repealed by the 21 st Amendment on December 5, 1933. It is the only amendment that has ever been completely repealed.
Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, transportation, importation or exportation of intoxicating liquors in the United States and all its
territory is hereby prohibited.
Section 2. The Congress and the several States shall both have power to enforce this article by
appropriate legislation.
Section 3. This article shall have no power unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment
to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution,
within seven years from the date of the submission to the States by the Congress.
Vocabulary
To ratify to confirm or pass something, such as an amendment
Intoxicating liquors alcohol
Article a section or item in a written document. Until enough states ratified this amendment, it was known as an article.
Questions:
1. What is your first reaction to the 18th amendment?
2. Do you think this amendment could be passed today? Why or why not?
3. Why do you think some Americans in 1918 might have wanted this amendment?
Prohibition and Health
Source: Read at the Eighth Annual Meeting of the National Temperance Council, Washington D.C.,
September 20, 1920. The National Temperance Council was created in 1913 to work for Prohibition. (Figure
PROHIBITION AND HEALTH
Alcohol poisons and kills; Abstinence and Prohibition save lives and safeguard health.
Dr. S.S. Goldwater, formerly Health Commissioner of New York City, stated the decision of
science, the final opinion of our nation after a hundred years of education upon the subject of
alcohol.
“It is believed that less consumption of alcohol by the community would mean less tuberculosis,
less poverty, less dependency, less pressure on our hospitals, asylums and jails.”
“Alcohol hurts the tone of the muscles and lessens the product of laborers; it worsens the skill
and endurance of artists; it hurts memory, increases industrial accidents, causes diseases of
the heart, liver, stomach and kidney, increases the death rate from pneumonia and lessens the
body’s natural immunity to disease.”
Justice Harlan speaking for the United States Supreme Court, said:
“We cannot shut out of view the fact that public health and public safety may be harmed by
the general use of alcohol.”
120
Figure 8.1
Vocabulary
Abstinence Stopping yourself from doing something (e.g., drinking)
Consumption eating or drinking
Questions:
1. Sourcing: When was this document written? Was this before or after the passage of the 18th
Amendment?
2. Sourcing: Why might the National Temperance Council still meet in 1920? What do you predict
they will say?
3. Close Reading: What does the National Temperance Council claim is caused by alcohol? Do you
find these claims convincing?
“Hooch Murder” Bill – New York Times
Source: The New York Times, November 14, 1922.
‘HOOCH MURDER’ BILL DRAFTED BY ANDERSON
Anti-Saloon Head Aims to Reach Those Whose Drinks Cause Death.
William H. Anderson, State Superintendent of the Anti-Saloon League, announced in a state-
ment yesterday that the organization would sponsor a measure at the upcoming State Legisla-
ture. The measure would be known as the “Hooch Murder” bill. It says a person can be tried
for murder, and punished accordingly, if they are suspected of selling alcohol that resulted in
the death of the person drinking it. Commenting on the measure, Mr. Anderson said:
121
“This bill is intended for whoever it may hit, but it is especially directed at the immoral
foreigner, usually an alien, who had largely stopped killing with a knife from hate or with a
gun for hire, and has gone into the preparation and thoughtless selling of poison for profit.”
....
Vocabulary
Hooch slang term for alcohol, commonly used in the 1920s to refer to illegal whiskey
Alien a foreigner who is not a citizen
Questions:
1. Sourcing: When was this document written? Was this before or after the passage of the 18th
Amendment?
2. Close Reading: What is the “Hooch Murder Bill”?
3. Close Reading: Based on this document, who is the Anti-Saloon League blaming for the sale of alcohol during Prohibition? Why do you think they’re singling out this group?
Alcohol and Degeneracy
Source: Poster published in 1913 by the Scientific Temperance and American Issue Publishing Com-
pany. (Figure 8.2).
Figure 8.2
Vocabulary
Degeneracy being in decline; having qualities that are not normal or desirable
122
Children in Misery
Source: Poster published in 1913 by the Scientific Temperance Federation and American Issue Publishing Company. (Figure 8.3).
Figure 8.3
Questions:
1. Sourcing: When were these posters made? Was that before or after the passage of the 18th Amendment?
2. Sourcing: Who published these posters? What was their perspective?
3. Close Reading: According to these posters, what are two reasons why Prohibition is a good idea?
4. Close Reading: Look at the words used in Document C. These were considered “scientific” cate-gories. What does that tell you about science at this time?
5. Context: Using these posters, explain some of the beliefs about children that were common in the early 20th century. Do you think these beliefs are silly or reasonable? Explain.
Section Question:
1. People who supported Prohibition thought it would solve a lot of society’s problems. Use the docu-
ments to explain what problems they saw in society and why they thought Prohibition would solve
these problems.
8.5 Chicago Race Riots
The textbook excerpt below provides introductory information about the Chicago Race Riots of 1919.
Read that and then the documents that follow, thinking about what the textbook leaves out. According
123
to each document, what caused the riots?
American Vision Excerpt
Source: The 2006 edition of The American Vision, a high school textbook.
In the summer of 1919, over 20 race riots broke out across the nation. The worst violence
occurred in Chicago. On a hot July day, African Americans went to a whites-only beach. Both
sides began throwing stones at each other. Whites also threw stones at an African American
teenager swimming near the beach to prevent him fr