Watch booktv this weekend and every weekend on cspan2. The cspan cities tour is exploring the american story as with the booktv and American History tv on the road. Benefit clause i suppose in the ncaa rulebook. It specifies that athletes are not permitted to accept anything of value really. Related to their status as an athlete. That means a fan, a a booster,e wouldbe agent, a coach is not permitted to give anything of value be on what is specified in basically the ncaa consultation, x number of dollars for your books, et cetera, et cetera. Anything beyond that is not permissible and will get you in trouble with the ncaa policeman. The ncaa open an investigation of that, as for unc to cooperate in that investigation. And by the end of the summer of 2010, it was was clear the also academic violations that were included in this initial investigation. I would say it really wasnt until the summer of 2011 that the scope of the ugliness really came to light. It reared its head. We began to suggest how bad things evidently were. This was in large part because there was one player, one Football Player whod been suspended from the team in the fall of 2010 who was trying to get his eligibility back and he was suing the ncaa and unc to get his eligibility back on the grounds that the honor court to which some of his work have been referred have found he committed only minor violations in the paper he had written. They found it had been heavily plagiarized. No one had noticed this before, no one caught this including the honor court, including the Athletic Director and chancellor. What eventually came out in part because of that lawsuit and in part because of dogged investigative reporting by the News Observer was that a system had been contrived in the african and africanamerican studies department by two people. It doesnt involve everybody in that department, by two people. A system had been contrived around 1990 or so that allow the Administrative Assistant in the department to schedule courses that werent really courses. They would register for the course, wouldnt attend any classes, would have no contact with an instructor but would turn in a paper of some specified length, 15,20 pages at the end of the semester. It was often plagiarized. It was often very shoddy work , but the Administrative Assistant gave a good grade to the paper , for the class and in fact gpa boosting classes. And it took a long time toget to the bottom of it , but by late 2014, thanks to the wayne scene report was released in october, we realized that thousands of students were involved in this scam area hundreds of classes and then created. And hundreds more independent studies. That were basically fraudulent, had also been controlled in the 1990s and 2000, up toabout 2009. The initial courses were almost exclusively for mens basketball which was of course another of the more embarrassing aspects of the scandal because mens basketball is the crown jewel of ncaa athletics and hardly Anyone Around here wanted much attention focused on that as you can imagine. But by the end of the 1990s, all sports were involved. The revenue sports socalled, mens basketball, when womens basketball, all were well represented among the students but there were also students from la crosse and swimming and all the rest so everybody was getting in on the scene. And the university was willing to concede that this fraud had occurred but for the longest time, they wanted to deny that athletics was in any way a driver of the scandal but the revenue sports brought in roughly 90 millionayear unc, thats a lot of money and it pays of course commensurate with all the other sports, all the other sports are able to operate at high level thanks to all that revenue football and mens basketball in particular bring in. And so yes, its about this is one reason why unc and other bigtime institutions were always reluctant to look closely at whats going on over in athletics because you dont want to inherit that revenue stream. So the only people for example lost jobs as a result of the scandal in 2015 were a handful of academic advisors in athletics area one and one tenured professor in the fm department. And the person who had succeeded the initial Administrative Assistant, that person had very minimal involvement in the scandal but he was go to so there was, they made a show of letting some people go. Ushering them out thedoor but no one at a highlevel position no coach, no administrator. No one was called to account. So to this day, we dont really have the full picture of who knew what and when. For what reason and whether we truly corrected the culture here. Its not entirely clear. Theyre not any more transparent today than they were in 2012. My coauthor and i happen to think. I believe are mistreated, theyre mistreated, hence the name of the book. This book which we started out as a thinking really it would be mainly about exposing corruption in the inner University Administration eventually turned into an advocacy project because we wanted to point out that athletes are going to get a raw deal in the system. And they were in fact the victims of what happened here at unc they were the perpetrators of fraud, they were the victims of. The fact is were exploiting them and their labor and their bodies while theyre on our campus for four years. And if theyre not being paid while theyre here, theyre not going to get paid a later , and were not educating them properly, i would say thats not a victimless crime. That is what system. University should not be engaged in. At least not with a clean conscience. They should be working continually to make it a fairer, better, more rewarding system to the athletes who are in the pipeline. The universitys reaction was largely negative. The reaction to the book, to my working on the book, to my nikki watts of Public Comments about the scandaland so on. When the book was published for the first time in march 2015, it got absolutely no coverage. Here on campus. Was never mentioned in any official university publications, the university for example paid no attention to it. So there it just wasnt all that surprising them in the battles ive fought administrators through the years. I would say what most surprised me about how the university chose to respond to or react to the book was what happened when i created a course, a new course in the history of bigtime College Athletics and the rights of athletes which i found, i think i taught about four times. That after the first two times i thought it, to make a long story short, administrators who havent been paying attention started paying attention. And they made efforts to force my Department Chair to pull the course from our class roster. And i indeed had to delay teaching the course for one semester and only one my right to teach it in the semester i thought it by filing a faculty grievance against the university which i won and we got a lot of attention in the press and which put more pressure i think on our administrators. They eventually relented and i havent been bothered in the past year or so and i hope now that the course is inoculated and i wont face the moreharassment over. Many individuals i named book and individual instances of wrongdoing are enumerated. What is not what we want you to take away from this book, not about what individuals did and how corrupt they may or may not have been really want you focused on the system. How the system operates. How it forces good people to do bad things or at least to consider doing bad things. The pressures are just so enormous and Athletic Program that those who have a sympathy for athletes or who are sports fans or who like to be helpful are going to be enticed to do shady things from time to time and sometimes it can more into fraud. It is a system that requires repair. And thats probably the dominant message like you to take away fromthis book. Class howard lee was the first africanamerican elected mayor in the majority white southern city. , we sit down with mister lee to talk about serving as chapel hills mayor in the1960s and 70s and the challenges faced while in office. Mayor, why did you decide to run for mayor of chapel hill . Was probably more of an accident than it was on purpose. I went to a friend of mine and asked him if he would consider running for mayor because i didnt think ablack person at any of the elected mayor of chapel hill. He did not want to do that and couldnt persuade me to do it. And what he did was to go to the local newspaper and tell them he had a soup which his i plan to run for mayor without even checking printed that story of a frontpage headline and that of course splits the Chapel Hill Community and following that i had pressure on both sides. Pressure from one group thinking it was the most exciting thing is winning the ncaa championship and another group thinking it would be the dumbest thing anybody can think of doing and even in the black community was concerned that if i were to run for mayor it wouldnt do much of anything except exacerbate the race problem in chapel hill which has certainly beenugly through the years. And i only ran finally because of one person who said to me you should run for mayor because the time is right. And i have been hearing that all my life. As a black person living in the south growing up, ive always been told that the time wouldnt be right and i just decided lets make it right and thats when i declared i would run for mayor. Thats how it all started, but i chose to run for mayor not necessarily to win because i frankly still didnt think i had a prayer of winning but then i won. And from that point on, it was a whole different light for me. And i remember turning to my wife at the time, the victory was announced and said okay, now that ive got it, what the heck am i going to do with . But it was the beginning of a new life so it has certainly been agood life. Where did you grow up . I grew up in a little town in southeastern atlanta called laconia. It was a town that was, the site of a big rock quarry. They produce a lot of grain and rock that wereshipped all over the world. That was the main source of jobs in laconia it was actually kind of a country. And on a sharecroppers farm when i was born. I lived on that farm with my grandparents until i was eight years old. Before moving more into the urban area of that section of the state. Throughout in the segregated south , where there moments where you realize that you were your life was part of some other peoples and there you are being separated from other folks . Yes, but there had come a time when i realized that we just werent being treated fairly. Number one, the georgia clan was organized six miles in Stone Mountain georgia from where we live. And every friday afternoon, the clan would hold a rally in a big field across from my house and burnacross. Course planted in my mind the idea that this was a dangerous group of us but we were also being intimidated and bowling and i didnt like that. But then i became very, i had my first very best friend was a white boy. And he and i were inseparable on until we reached the age of 15. And when we reached the age of 15 his parents told him he could no longer be my friend. That he as a white boy was better than me and therefore he and i could no longer hang out together. He came to me and told me that story whichwas amazing. And he was, he felt horrible about it but he had no basis for not obeying his parents that split us up. We never had contact again. I became very angryas a result of that. And then engaged in my first protest. On saturday morning, ill never forget. I was in the town of laconia and wanted to go to the bathroom and went in to what was at that time all the colored bathroom. It was a unisex bathroom and it was dirty with all kinds of oil and grease and tires in the bathroom and i just didnt use it. I dont know why but on that particular occasion i simply said im not using it so i went into the white mens bathroom. Used the white mens bathroom and should have come out and going on my way but i decided while im here i might as well check out the white womens bathroom so i went in the white womens bathroom and i was discovered by the owner of the store and when i came out a group of men were waiting. They had pushed me around and started beating me up. One thing that my dad had told me in the south as a black boy, youve got to learn how to run and on that case it served me well because i could outrun these guys and my whole life was reshaped from that one incident. Until that point my goal was to grow up, moved to new york , anywhere outside of the south. I just knew i didnt want to be in the south but my life changed in such a way that after that experience i committed to myself that i would never, ever leave the south and i would stay and do whatever i could to make sure that i gained ownership of my home area and the second promise i made to myself is that i would never try to take the system had on again. I would be smart enough to go around and tackle problems i felt needed to be dealt with without being confronted in the process of doing it so that was the beginning i think of what ultimately transformed me into the person i became for the rest of my High School Years and then on through college until this point. What did you do at chapel hill . Graduate school. I finished my graduate work and do offered me a job as a researcher a foundation funded program. We had planned to go back to georgia and they offered me more money than i ever dreamed. And we accepted, i accepted the job and came along with that job was a possibility of living in the forest which at that time was a very Prestigious Development around Duke University we for some reason decided we wanted to stay inchapel hill. How would you describe chapel hill at that time . Chapel hill was a schizophrenic community. It was schizophrenic because it had this liberal image. And thats what sucked us in and there were definitely a strong progressive liberal community in chapel hill. That really was trying to break down the racial barriers. But then this if one looks closer it was also one of the most discriminatory communities in the area. Because there was no middle class. All the black lived in the western section of chapel hill. And they would, they were the ones who did most of the media work in chapel hill because the job inventory was notvery broad. Most of the townspeople who were not University Connected were old line southerners who really had anywhere from mild prejudicial attitudes to very strong prejudicialattitudes. My wife and i on moving to chapel hill have difficulty buying house which we force into selling and after we moved in, we moved under the threat of death for the better part of the year for both ourselves and our children. So chapel hill was very segregated so when we bought our house in colony woods which was the eastern part of chapel hill, that was the first time a black man and bought a house outside of the traditional community. And it was very tenuous because black folks bought we thought we were too good to live in the black community. And they really didnt see that if we can open up opportunities and show that housing could be available to people regardless they can make a difference in terms of how a community resolved Community Conflict read over time it did come tothat. And of course the University People were very proactive because all these folks were coming here where they just simply did not buy into the southerntradition of segregation. The restaurant had by the time we got here had started to break down the discriminatory barriers. And most of the demonstrations which were some of the nastiest innovations in North Carolina took place in chapel hill. Including on one occasion where a group of kids was sitting in at a restaurant and a waitress goes in the bathroom, urinates in a cup and comes back and starts pouring it on the heads of thedemonstrators. That was embarrassing to the community, even the most ardent people will close the instructions anything that was a proper thing to do and did indeed criticize that and that not a lot of criticism in chapel hill as a well as well as across South Carolina but things started to improve and the improved quickly. 1969, what is the reaction to you winning becoming mayor of chapel hill . First reaction was mine to my wife. I did not write a concession, i need an acceptance speech. I did not commence a celebratory event. I was sitting around Smoking Cigars and getting ready to go home and get back to my position but then i won, look at my wife and said now that ive gotit, what am i going to do with it . And it was such a joy and such elation in chapel hill. Not just in chapel hill, once the word got out that i was on the verge of waiting, people started coming here, even some folks from raleigh, some folks from greensboro because several of the colleges in greensboro and sent students down on the campaign. And i was not here when unc won its first ncaa championship but i was told that the crowds in the street were absolutely amazing. What happened the night of my lecture. And the reaction was mixed. There were some people who at some newspapers printed stories chapel hill elected a black power mayor. Some said the radical mayor of chapel hill so those were the responses but there were others that recognize a historic aspect that had just occurred. I didnt know until that night that there had never been a black mayor or a majority white municipality. We dont think ever about the circumstances of reconstruction and that started to make headlines. But the even more expensive part is that even my hometown paper had a positive story. As manager, have a positive story and i was confident that my election certainly puts a small times on the fact that Martin Luther king had laid the groundwork and had made a sacrifice andhad set the stage for this to happen. And i think if it had happened, chapel hill was the place it should happen. Im just obviously very delighted that i was the person who was in the middle of that. Attorney rufus edmonton was the deputy chief counsel onthe Senate Watergate committee. Next he recalls the day he servedpresident Richard Nixon with a subpoena. When i subpoena the president 46 years ago on july 23, it was the first time in the history of the country at a committee of the congress ever issued a subpoena to apresident. Was electrifying because washington was just filled with anticipation. They didnt know whether or not the president was going to be totally indicted, what was going to happen to him area and then and those dates were finallyrevealed , that was the way it had been removed mister nixon from officevoluntarily. They saw that his own words convicted him. What was your role . I was in a heavy chief counsel of the Senate Watergate committee my job was sort of what i would describe as the chief operating officer. I was there to be senators righthand man as you might call it to assume that things work very well, the Training Camp running. I would coordinate hearings. Who the witnesses would be, how they would be handled. And its a big job to run a committee with competing personalities, a lot of competing staff and it was my job to see that things work well and i was in battle. I was 31 years old. Which nobody should have ajob like that 31 years old. And i said when i was elected attorney general 32 nobody should have a job like that 32 years old. But it sort of worked out. So i was an experiencedperson on capitol hill. I had been there almost 10 years as i began with sort of urban 1964 so when the committee was set up, i knew the ropes of chapel hill. I knew the procedures, i knew what they needed to do so simple thing like Getting Office base when you have committee and got over hundred Staff Members to together almost every month, most of the time imagine putting together a staff hundred people together. The way the Watergate Committee was set up, it was on the committee in the congress in the senate. That was looking at watergate, my commands will of montana new that you couldnt have here and fragments there. You put all the authority in the Senate Watergate committee. Senator baker of tennessee, the cochair, that is one of the marvelous things about watergate. The two of them work together. In the beginning they said to one another were going to make this thing work. We will not disagree about things privately because they didnt. No hearing since watergate has succeeded like watergate did because you didnt have to compatible people that reached across and try to make one another work. Thats the primary difference today and when it was in the years of watergate. They worked together. And you dont find that now. You can hardly hear anything of major importance with the parties work together. Can we talk about how it came about that you became thepresident. When did you, when it was first decided that were going to send the subpoena to president nixon and how were you chosen todeliver it then . That senator met in his office in private with the Committee Members and said were going to ask the president if he will voluntarily turn over the tapes when they discovered there was a taping because of the revelation of butterfield and heres a side story. That we were in there and the senator said to me he said rufus, go get the president on thephone. Go pick up that loaf of bread , you know, go get the president on the phone so i went into the little anteroom and got Rosemary Wood on the phone. I knew the men down there to him and i said the president , the senator urban and senator baker would like to the president and she said hold on. Ill be back with you. Well, youve got to remember all during that time president nixon had been saying the committee is out to get me area unknown to me, the president gets on the line and says senator urban, this is Richard Nixon. And he was talking to me, i blurted out unconsciously i said mister president , senator urban wants to get you. On the phone. And so we took the president on with senator urban and senator baker and they asked him, they said under the separation of powers that he should honor the subpoena and turn over, im not even talking about subpoenas at that time, he can turn over the tapes voluntarily and he said no and thatswhen the Committee Said they would have to subpoena the president. And then since there was no procedure for delivering a subpoena because it had never been done before, as the chief operating officer of the Senate Watergate committee i chose myself and he wanted to know the exact truth, i chose to deliver the subpoena and i thought well, youve got to have a couple. A couple exciting things to do that so i got in the back of a police car. Down pennsylvania avenue and 200 newspeople following, we got the executive office building. And there was another crowd of reporters there and we had already called to make arrangements for mister nixons parents counsel because he had had of having Different Councils when they would know what he said to do. He would fire them and get another one. So mister darby delivered it and i did this little sneaky thing. Could you actually explain what exactly is the impeachment process, and to Many Americans will understand how the system works . When you say impeachment, most people think that includes moving the president. The impeachment process is sort of like a grand jury. The grand jury, when you are arrested for crime and you go before a grand jury to see if theres probable cause to arrest you are not in charge with a crime, thats not the same thing but almost the same thing. The impeachment confers charges against the persons being impeach, in this case it was president nixon, president clinton, and now will be President Trump, if they follow through on it. Then its up to the senate entirely to take the charges, sitting like a jury, a regular jury of your peers, they are not peers, they are presided over by the chief justice of the Supreme Court to decide whether the charges, and they take those charges only, they dont take other charges. They take the charges that come over from the house of representatives and they decide, like a jury, whether not they are valid enough to remove a president. The impeachment process is not the entire impeachment and removal, but thats what most people think when you say impeachment, that they mean, thats part of removing the president. Impeachment is one step, step one of making the charges. And they are both very important and very unique to their forms of government. It sort of anything it anywhere else in the world. And the system did work, and work, one basic reason. Senator durbin and senator baker said it worked. Im not sure we are there yet in todays proceedings. The procedure is not going to do that because you saw the storming of the secret room the other day by members of the republican party. That is hardly working together. It is not set up institutionally. You needed to have one now, senator burr of North Carolina is doing the hearing the right way. The Senate Intelligence committee. Hes conducting the hearings in a very nonpartisan way and that everybody should proud of. He and the senator from virginia decided they would have nonpartisan hearings. It cant be done if you people at the top agreeing to do it and sticking with it. On the outside i see nothing but acrimony. Sure, in watergate you had turmoil. You and people who like what we were doing. We were receiving by the way over 40,000 pieces of mail a week. Thats astounding. And i said mail, not email, not text, you know, horse and buggy mail. It was very controversial, but at the same time it did not have on capitol hill the hatred that we have today. Thats another difference between now and the watergate era. In the clinton impeachment there was a lot of acrimony there, but still you had a a system there that was not all bifurcated, try for katie, if theres another word, claude refrigerated, if thats what happened to all these different committees. Youd Senate Judiciary. If i were sitting to think up i at one committee in the senate. I would at one committee in the house with input from the others but now you seem to have a system thats going to follow everything in the Senate Judiciary committee, which i find it hard to believe it can work that will because you have people that are chirping. Chirping is always tremendously volatile thing on the capital. Dont mess with my hearings. They are my hearings. Its my show and you getting a lot of shows on capitol hill today. The system is working with ragged edges. Give it a little time. The patient and tries yourself not to be so partisan. Show a little empathy for the other side, try to put yourself in their shoes, which is a pretty good guide for life if you can put yourself in someone elses shoes. Its hard to do in this political haymaker, i call it a haymaker because everybody is so mad at one another. But be patient and try to let the system work. In the end it will work. Join us the first and third weekend of each month as we take tv and American History tv on the road to watch video from any of the cities we visit go to cspan. Org citiestour and follow us on twitter cspancities. The cspan cities tour, exploring the american story. Cspan cities tour is on the road exploring the american story. We continue our feature on chapel hill with author kevin levin. For quite a long time americans in maine white americans had remembered of war, civil war, that pitted brave white soldiers on both sides against one another that were fighting for the respective causes but we will not talk what those causes were. But by the 1970s coming out of the Civil Rights Movement you begin to see more people, scholars tight but the importance of emancipation, the history of american slavery, its much darker side and especially the story of guys dates colored troops, those africanamericans who fought roughly 180,000, for the United States army during the civil war. And so this narrative emerges, black Confederate Party soldier come you find people in the Confederate Heritage community were worried about not being able to celebrate their confederate ancestors without having to deal with the issue of slavery and emancipation. The black confederate narrative is a way for them to get right, they can bounce up the moral scales if you will. Its important to remember that both the United States at the confederacy in 1861, the worst article both sides as a white mans war. In other words, the army would include only white men. Because the war dragged on for so long, into 1863, of course lincoln and administration realize they needed additional manpower. Abolitionists like Frederick Douglass and others had been pushing lincoln and his administration to recruit black men from the beginning. They clearly saw this more as a war for freedom. But for a number of reasons that was not allowed. The vast majority of the lawyer white citizenry in the north was not fighting this war to make africanamericans equal. There were not necessarily fighting the war to end slavery. There were fighting to preserve the union. Lincoln knew that and didnt want to undercut that motivation here but by 1863 that begins to change as the demand for the increase manpower becomes much more important. So the confederacy, i mean, from the very beginning they had to make sure that they were mobilizing as much of their and slave population as possible. The reasons are obvious. Just the difference in population between north and south, the north could mobilize many more white men to carry a rifle. For the confederacy of course they are going to mobilize their enslaved population to free up as many white men to carry a rifle in the army itself. You would have that tens of thousands of enslaved men and pressed into confederate service. What i mean is their masters wouldve been paid by the confederal confederate government for three months and they would been utilized to do any number thanks to advance the work effort. For instance, africanamerican slaves with constructed earthworks in any key site about the confederacy. They would have built and repaired rail lines during the civil war. They wouldve worked in places like the ironworks in Richmond Manufacturing munitions and other things necessary for the confederacy to fight this war. You may tens of thousands of enslaved men throughout the confederacy doing these jobs, playing these roles, these crucial roles. Then within the army itself he also had thousands of enslaved men that were present that about the Confederate Army to do what it needed to do. Of course you have men who are responsible as teamsters driving wagons, working in hospitals, foraging, working as blacksmiths. The army itself, to give example of the numbers were talking about, Robert E Lees army in the sum of 1863 may have may have number as many as roughly 75,000 men culminating in the key battle at gettysburg but within the army he may have had as many as 10,000 enslavement. That would also included what we call oddi servants of what they wouldve called body servant. If you are an officer usually from the slaveholding class, you wouldve brought in the army as slave from your plantation, yr home, and that enslaved individual would have functions as your personal slave, wouldve done anything that the officer needed to allow him to do his job. Between these body servant of what i call camp slaves in the book and these compressed slaves, you really get the sense of the important slavery was to the confederate war effort. Alexander stevenson, the Vice President the confederacy said slavery is a cornerstone of the confederacy. He was right and when you look at the army and acknowledge the presence of thousands of enslaved men you really get a sense of what he was talking about because confederate armies could not have done anything, they could not cant sufficiently, marched sufficient and even conducted battles sufficiently or as official as they were able to do it without the presence of enslaved men. Throughout much of the war the confederacy is mobilized in slave labor. That changes by mid1864 as more people in the confederacy can see the writing on the wall. They understand their chances of victory are diminishing and some people, many people i should y throughout the confederacy began to talk about the possibility of recruiting slaves as soldiers. This debate continues even in the early agency five. People take all kinds of different positions. Whats so interesting as a historian to read is just the emotional attachment that people have to making sure this remained and white mans war. Many of them understood that if they recruited slaves as soldiers that wouldve undercut the very purpose of the confederacy. If we recruit easement as soldiers, is the confederacy still worth fighting for . What does the confederacy even mean if we are now going to recruit black men and soldiers, and in a sense make them equal as white men. The Confederate Congress in mid march 1865 barely is able to vote to begin the recruitment of these men. Within a few weeks the war ends and theyre so evidence the few men who were recruited ever saw the battlefield. The war ends for the confederacy as as a started, as a white mans war. What that means is throughout the American Civil War, even decades after the war during the postwar period, former confederates and white southerners were under no illusion as to the role that africanamericans played in the confederate war effort. They were entirely in slave labor. It may be surprising to learn that the first shift from talking about loyal slaves, as they call them for so long, from the shift to black soldiers doesnt take place until relatively recently, late 1970s, as the countries overall collective memory of the war is beginning to shift. Confederate heritage advocates will argue that the confederacy mobilized africanamericans and sometimes they will admit they were organized in some cases as in slave labor but they always sent to find a way to include that the were significant numbers of black men fighting as legitimate soldiers, frontlinee soldiers, listed men, and immigrated regiments. They will point this out to say that in contrast to the United States army, which recruited black man after 1863 in segregated units with white officers commanding, that the confederacy went further. They can claim that the confederacy was almost functioning as some kind of experiment in civil rights. Even in the 1860s they will argue that the confederacy was mobilizing in integrated units. That is of course a wild claim, given that no one at the time of the war would have recognized such a statement. The black confederate narrative fits right in the center of this broader debate were having a special over the last few years about confederate memory, about whether or not confederate statues and memorials should remain in public spaces and even private spaces across the former confederacy and even beyond. The debate itself is truly reay about how we remember the confederate war and the civil war more broadly. When youre talking about people on both sides of whether or not these monuments, memorials should remain, when they are talked about this in the context of a specific memorial monument, they are talked about the broader issue. They are talking about how our history should be remembered and commemorated. And i think to some people that are not just yet ready to acknowledge the connection between the history of the racial divide, White Supremacy, the lingering legacy of slavery and our own current problems when it comes to trying to bridge that racial divide. So were standing on the campus of the universe of North Carolina at chapel hill, and right behind roughly is the spot where the confederate soldiers statute once stood. Silent sam was dedicated in 1913 on the campus and the dedication comes at a time when white southerners, former confederates are really sort of digging in to commemorating their lost cause. They are at the height of monument and memorial dedication and is also a time when a new generation of white southerners are now coming onto the scene. They never experienced the war itself and so their parents and grandparents want to make sure that they understand what that sacrifice was all about. This is a perfect spot to understand or come to terms with that because one of the dedication addresses that was delivered was delivered by an man named julian carr, a student at the beginning of the war here at unc. He would all to fight the war briefly as a private, successful philanthropist after the war, industrialist, and he gave a very powerful dedication address in 1913. The dedication address really highlighted the connection between the imports the white southerners placed on maintaining White Supremacy in the early 20th century with the cost they had fought for. During this address julian carr talked about coming home to chapel hill, coming to the campus and he says at one point during the address he said just a few feet away in the spring of 1855 when he arrived home, he talks about andy openly sort of admits to witnessing what he called a negro lynch for talking back against a white woman. And he talks about sort of in vivid detail what it was like to sort of striker and even shed blood. And i think when you understand what he was doing was connecting 1913 with 1865, eight highlights just importance of White Supremacy as part of the civil war itself, the confederate cause, and especially this point decades later where white southerners are working hard to maintain White Supremacy through jim crow legislation. April 20 understand whats going on in the present, at least have to come to some kind of understanding and if possible agreement about what got us here. The story of the black confederate, the myth of the black confederate and the story of the role of it in slave labor helps fill in a small part but an important part of that story. While in chapel hill we visited the campus of unc to interview africanAmerican History professor claude clegg to interview him on his book the price of liberty. Over the course of the 19th century, especially in the 1850s right before the American Civil War you see a spike in migrations of people that only North Carolina but around the parts of the country to liberia. A large part is related to the town, the political tone of the 1850s. The conflict over slavery, whether the countries going to be slave or free and a number of things that happened in this time, another fugitive slave law passed in 1850. Theres the dred scott decision in 1857 so you have a spike during the 1850s. North carolina is part of the spike of people who are leaving the state, and willing as they were trying to get people to get on the ships to liberia. The question was not only about slavery. The question was also about race. It wasnt enough just to free slaves and deported. You had to also get rid of free blacks who were a small minority of the black population but they had increased in size since the american revolution. You have to do both of those things in regard to the American Colonization Society and its advocates in order to address the thorny issue of slavery and the thorny issue of race. Now, the Colonization Society had the sort of the good sense or the Political Savvy to bring in their friends in the federal government and give them given the size of this project, by 1830 there are over 2 million in this country and thats a lot of people. If you are ideally going to move all those folks and then the free black population, Big Government is not the only institution thats going to be able to put together that kind of migration, even for the government, it was still a near impossible undertaking. The american causation society was multipronged. One was it was appealing to africanamericans in saying that she was dont belong here. The writing is very much on the wall. These fugitive slave laws, although youre not slave you could be caught up and sent to slavery. The dred scott decision of 1857 says that blacks come free blacks are separate class of people not protected by the constitution and thats not citizens. If that wasnt clear, there were individual states telling including North Carolina were saying that of the late 1850s free blacks need to get ready to select to their masters will be. That is, they they were going to be enslaved. To get to choosing now, choose a good one, choose one thats not going to work you too awfully hard but your freedom is expendable as this section of the divide between the north and the south exacerbates. Free blacks were caught in the middle of that and again they were forced to choose which side theyre going to be on, either leave, get out of here, or get ready for enslavement if you have never been enslaved in the first place. So that was the tenor of what was going on in the state and more broadly in the country. Africanamericans who leave this country, black americans to lead this country and go to liberia immediately when they get there every conscious of the fact they are not african. The climate is different. There are just to make seasons, the rainy and the wet seasons. The vast, vast majority of black americans who wind up in liberia were born in america. They were not born in africa. So what they heard about is they are second or third hand, something that the American Colonization Society said to them or the read about in their literature. Its something that your great aunt or greatgreatgrandmother said about africa that you might know, but other than that these people who were born to africa in the 1800s are not born there. They have no firsthand experience in africa. They dont know any languages from africa. They have european names, and that is starkly apparent to them once they get off these ships. What happens is they fall back on whats familiar to them. In essence they become americans, however the americans they thought they were i wanted to be once they get to liberia. Its there when they get there, they try to reinvent whats familiar. Their architecture, they keep wearing american styled clothing even though there in the tropics. Their foodways are very americanized. Its very interesting attempt to reinvent america in the tropics, an america that they themselves could not experience in america because they had been either enslaved or they been free in america but basically second or third class citizenship. The liberians or the africanamerican settlers and liberians are involved in a colonizing project. They are involved in a project of dispossession. They are involved in the exclusion of Indigenous People from the colony that becomes a state called liberia, and their conflict between Indigenous People and the settlers well into the 20th century. Some have had to do just with the fact of, and taking of the peoples land. Some of it had to do with the kind of cultural arrogance that the settlers taking to africa. So the code africa thinking that african civilizations there is no match for the western civilization after coming out of. And africa they insist upon speaking english. They consider themselves christians and their architecture, their foodways, their government structure to all these things they think are superior to everything they got in africa. Again, it underscores the fact that africa is a completely different, strange and unfamiliar place to them to the point that these settlers fall back on whats familiar, and thats their western experience, their experience in the United States and also cultural baggage and all the cultural arrogance that comes with that. The liberian government continues to exist. Its one of those situations that can exist forever. That is, you cant have a small minority of people governing a much more numerous majority of folks and excluding them, exploiting them, so forth. This cant go on forever. It usually has a bad ending. And ending for liberia comes in 1980 when a number of junior african Junior Officers of african origin to sit as opposed to black americans in the liberian military stage a coup against the government and wipe it out, wipe out the government of the former africanamerican or black american citizens and jeff civil war and library for the next 20 years and that is more or less how the sins of the father so to speak in liberia, the exclusion, the dispossession, the arrogance and so forth comes to its reckoning. The American Colonization Society probably, if we could set them down here, the leading officers and ask them here in the 21st century what to make of the project, i imagine that they would say they were doing the lords work. They did right or as right as they could given the circumstances by the black americans who migrated. And, of course, it is not the liberian project. It is civil war the inns slavery in the United States, and colonization of think for some people is just sort of an illusion that you could sort of deported your way out of the conflict between the north and the south. If you could convince enough masters to free enough slaves and to get on those ships to go to liberia, eventually this whole problem of slavery and race might be resolved, although over time it looked like an even more ridiculous proposal. Among the campus of unc chapel hill updates we visit the Wilson Library to take a look at their enriching voices exhibit. The enriching voices exhibit looks at the literary contributions of African Americans in North Carolina from the 19th century to present. 2019 marks the 400th anniversary hundredth anniversary of the arrival of africans to english north america, and since that time they have made significant contributions to our history and culture. We wanted to focus in on one of those contributions and being a collection of largely books, we decided to focus on writers from North Carolina. This case presents very important slave narratives from the antebellum period by people who were really the shapers of North Carolina literature in many ways, and they had a very much of an International Impact because of the wide reprinting of their work, either in their own time or in the 20th century. So moses roper, its very important to notice how he is dressed and how his author portrait looks. Hes dressed like a gentleman turkeys not dressed like a slave. Most people in the american north and in england had their notions of the slave being someone who is a common labor. They did you really think of slaves as having these kinds of personal qualities that would make them dignified and respectable. So when you dress moses roper liked like this and you include his signature, what youre saying is this is a literate man. This is a man of accomplishment. Why is he enslaved . So moses roper went to slavery and saw the worst of it. In order to make sure that readers understood from the very beginning just how shocking and horrific experience of slavery was, roper told the story of his birth which was, well, the main thing that happened when he was born was that the wife of his master came into the room where his mother was to see the baby, and when she saw this light lightskinned baby and who he looked like, she went back to her kitchen and got a knife and came back because she didnt want this child, the scent of her husband, to live. It was only because moses ropers grandmother interceded and stop this, that he survived at all. And so his story is very much about how to get away, its about multiple attempts to run away and thats what its called the narrative of the adventures in the escape of moses roper. He went on a lot of adventures tried to escape from slavery. Eventually he got away, got england, published his narrative in england with help of abolitionists. The narrative went through 20 additions. It was very popular. Harriet jacobs is a person who in her own time with her narrative was published in 1861, was not widely read. The civil war ensued almost as soon as her book came out and it was not widely known or appreciated. Now its been published into at least a dozen languages and is red all over the world. This is the most important book in 19th century africanamerican woman anywhere. Harriet jacobs, unlike moses roper, came from a relatively high echelon among the enslaved. She was a domestic worker. She had privileges. Her mistress taught her to read when she was a child, but the great disadvantage that she had was when she was 15 our master, her in slavery began a process of Sexual Harassment that was unrelenting. He wanted to turn her into his concubine, and he made no bones about it. He made it very clear that was what he wanted her to be, and she made just as clear that she did not want to do that. So its a story of not only the ways that africanamerican women were oppressed because of sex under slavery, but its also a story about how an africanamerican woman, even a teenage girl, couldnt resist. This is a photograph of anna julia cooper, a woman who came from raleigh, North Carolina, born into slavery in 1858. By the age of nine she was going to school at actually at the same time working as the teacher, because she was so bright and so dedicated to education. When she got to be college age, she left North Carolina and she went to oberland, i college with an africanamerican woman could actually be accepted. And when asked what did you want to take in her ladies curricula, she said no, i do want to be in the ladies curricula. I want to be in the regular mail curriculum. She eventually got an ma from oberland in mathematics and became a Public School principal at the industry to school in washington, d. C. , which was known for developing the most talented of the talented in the city of washington and the district of columbia. She also wrote essays, give lectures which were collected in the voice from the south. One of the main things of this book is the necessity for the Higher Education of africanamerican women. That was hard enough in 1892 to convince most white people that africanamerican men needed Higher Education, but cooper was adamant. A voice on the south he comes a pioneering feminist statement of belief, not only in the building of africanamerican women to be educated at the highest level, but also for their capacity to lead as a result of that education. Charles waddell chested was a person who could claim not only european heritage also indigenous heritage as well as african heritage. And he probably got the equivalent of a seventh or eighth grade education through friedman schools that were established in fayetteville, North Carolina, where he grew up after the civil war. But charles mainly educated himself. He wanted to become a writer. Thats the main thing that one was to become a fiction writer, and so what he did was to become the first africanamerican to publish fiction in the atlantic monthly. As soon as he could he started writing novels. The tradition the novel is an expose of what was known then as the wilmington race riot of 1898. Today its more accurate to permit the wilmington massacre of 1898. So chestnut was talking about something i was really frontpage news in in 1898, the fall of 1898. A novel he hoped would galvanize Public Opinion to make white people understand what the move to establish cradletograve segregation, what that was really all about, where did it come from . What was a of the tradition to talk about in terms of the deepseated racism that he knew growing up in the south. As well as anyone else of african descent who was living in the south at the time. The novel was not commercially successful. But today its widely read. There are multiple paperback editions of it. Its hot and appreciated far more now than it ever was in the past. I like visitors to come away learning more about the significant contributions that africanamerican biters have made the North Carolina and United States literature, and this includes a very strong group of writers in the 19th century who would put us on the literary map and made more contributions than probably white writers here in North Carolina at that time. Twice a month cspan cities tour takes booktv and American History tv on the road to explore literary life and history of the selected city. Working with our Cable Partners we visit various literate and Historic Sites as with your local historians, authors and civic leaders. You can watch any of our past interviews and tours online by going to booktv. Org in selecting cspan cities tour from the series content at the top of the page or by visiting cspan. Org citiestour. You could also follow the cspan cities tour on twitter for behind the scenes images and video our visits. The handle is cspancities. Booktv has covered several books about impeachment. However law professor and constitutional lawyer Alan Dershowitz who is not part of President Trumps Impeachment Defense Team discussed here 2018 book the case against impeaching trump. Heres a portion. Without it being a crime, because crime is going to do it i picked the present leads you need a crime. Hes the third branch of government produces are not going anywhere. You violate the constitution. You didnt appropriately impeach or remove me. What are you going to do . Sumi. They will not bring the army because the present controls the army. Congress doesnt control the army. What are they going to do . At this point the case go to the Supreme Court. There is no other alternative. And so what i argued is to avoid that kind of constitutional crisis, congress ought to narrowly read the impeachment criteria so as to not create a conflict with the executive branch. If it does, the legislative branch, the executive branch disagree, its going to be up to the Supreme Court under marlborough versus madison to decide his right to the right justices have already said if this kind of a conflict arises, congress acted improperly in the Supreme Court might very well intervene and decide the case. I lay all that out in the book as a possible scenario im not advising President Trump if you were to be impeached and removed not to leave. Im not advising that im just saying that is certainly a reasonable possible when you have three branches of government and two of them disagree about the interpretation of the constitution in the end that is to be decided by the Supreme Court. To access all of the cspan and booktv archives on impeachment visit our website cspan. Org impeachment. You are watching tv on cspan2 with top nonfiction books and authors every weekend. Booktv, television for serious readers. Heres a look at some books being published this week. Look for these titles and bookstores this coming week and watch for men at the authors in the near future on booktv on cspan2