It's not clear to me how proposing a new constituiton would have constituted 
treason. In any event, the names of the participants at the Constitutional 
Convention were publicly known, so writing the Federalist Papers anonymously 
wouldn't have helped them with that problem (assuming it did exist).

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul@gmail.com>
To: "Bill Maurer" <wmaurer@ij.org>
Cc: <election-law@mailman.lls.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: [EL] interesting question regarding Priorities USA

On 4/29/11, Bill Maurer <wmaurer@ij.org> wrote:

Steven,

An interesting question.  As Silence Dogood, Publius, A Federal Farmer,
George Kennan and others could point out, there are plenty of reasons
why a speaker may wish to remain anonymous and why revelation of their
identities would cause them to silence themselves.

In the case of those certain Federalist Paper writers, the
Constitutional Convention had exceeded its powers and had the
Constitution not been ratified, such acts might have been punishable
by sanctions up to and possibly including treason.  (It would be
different had the Constitutional convention not exceeded its charter).

As someone said, successful treason is not treason.  (Assuming the
above did or could rise to that level).

-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul@gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law 

_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law