In November 1637, Anne Hutchinson stood alone before the governor of Massachusetts and argued Puritan theology on the record — without counsel, without allies, without precedent. For two days she out-reasoned the magistrates on Scripture and procedure, demanding named laws and precise charges. She lost not because she was outargued, but because she gave the court one theological opening and the court took it. The trial transcript, preserved and digitized at UMKC, remains one of the earliest documents in American history in which a woman confronts institutional power and compels it to answer her. This is entry 27 of Courage and Consequence, and the first in the new category Colonial Conscience.

What would the Founding Fathers think about freedom of the press in America today? In Federalist #84, Alexander Hamilton argued that explicitly protecting press freedom was unnecessary. But Benjamin Franklin—America’s first great newspaperman—and Thomas Paine—whose Common Sense went viral before the word existed—knew better. In these imaginary letters, the printer and the pamphleteer speculate about a future where the press multiplies beyond counting while the village gazette dies of neglect. They built the fortress. Did we forget to man the walls?

What would the Founding Fathers think about cable news and social media? In this imaginary exchange rooted in their actual writings, Hamilton and Jefferson—both savaged by the same scurrilous journalist—debate whether a free press is worth its abuses. Jefferson declared he would prefer newspapers without government; Hamilton later defended a printer’s right to publish truth even against a president. Their letters imagine a world of instant news and pocket printing presses. The conclusions they reach will challenge assumptions across the political spectrum. Read their exchange, then ask yourself: in a world where falsehood travels faster than truth, how do free citizens govern themselves?