It is me, your professor. Thomas balcerski. Im excited to offer you a lecture of the antebellum congress. The outline, we start with a review of the first and second party systems. I will introduce a concept to you, a new concept, political culture, and compare that to something we have encountered before, Political Parties. Finally, the bulk of the lecture is going to be presenting new evidence on the antebellum political culture. As you will see, i have three major areas of evidence to talk about today. One, Tobacco Culture. Number two, political friendships, and number three, affairs of honor. I will conclude their after getting through that evidence. Like we often do in the class, i will start with an image on the screen. Im going to ask you to tell me what you see. This is Lady Washingtons reception from 1861. Take it in. Who can point out something you see right away that strikes you . Lady washington is on a platform. Prof. Balcerski how high do you think she is . Off the ground . Like a foot. Prof. Balcerski thats a good there. What else do you see . Everyone is dressed up fancy. Prof. Balcerski like you are today. No, exactly. Very fancy. Good. How about a third thing . Go ahead. It looks like they are fairly close together. They may be dancing. I dont know, but they are all close together. Prof. Balcerski very good. I should say about Lady Washingtons reception, she is Standing Center stage in an elegant gown. What you might not have noticed is there is someone else we sometimes think of as important in the background. That is George Washington here in the center. In black formal republican of overshadowed by lady washington. The title of Lady Washingtons reception, a formal reception that was held and hosted by the first lady, martha washington. Many of you noticed how she was standing on a platform. That is right, and you also noticed the opulent attire. Frankly, this is a scene that could have taken place in a European Court as much as it could take place in america. The next image i think you will find may be more familiar. This is county election from 1851. What do you see here . How does it differ from the last image . Go ahead, zachariah. Drunk guy at the top left. Prof. Balcerski theres actually more than one drunk person. Good. Someone who had a little too much here. Stump speaking. Prof. Balcerski stump speaking. Good, you remember, the whole vote for me for president. Excellent. Anything else . It is primarily workingclass people. Not the wealthy. Prof. Balcerski that is all good. You are seeing a diversity of people. One thing you are also seeing though is the white male electorate. This is going to stand in for democracy in this jacksonian period. This is a diverse scene, the whole town. Note the africanamerican to the left of the picture and children as well. Although it would be the white male voter, the constitution political culture encompasses men and women, whites and africanamericans alike. It is not a question about whether one can participate or if one can participate more broadly in politics. When he think back to the First Party System, the people who stood in as politicians, two people come to mind. From the Federalist Party , alexander hamilton. Mr. 10 bill. From the democratic republican, the Opposition Party to the federalists, we have Thomas Jefferson. They could not be more stark opposites. Recall that the federalists stood for a strong constitution, astrong federal government, Strong Financial and manufacturing base, and as we say hamilton was their leader. , versus the democratic republicans were just republicans for sure for short who were wary of centralized government, who were wary of encroachment on personal liberties, who promoted farming and commerce among small villages instead of large cities and manufacturing. Jefferson, the enlightened figure of the republicans, was their leader. That is the First Party System. It is socalled because of what follows. The First Party System was an earlier moment. One of the key issues was the embargo. We see from this cartoon that the embargo is spelled backwards as oh, grab me. This is a turtle biting at the british smuggler. The embargo was a Foreign Policy measure designed to make it so that britain would have a hard time trading with the United States. It was one of the policies that doomed the United States to a second war with Great Britain. Thats part of the First Party System history. It is about the way the federalists and the republicans clashed, where hamilton and his legacies, and jefferson and his successors came into power and eventually faded from the scene. Who they left the politics of the United States to were these guys. The men of the second party system. We have totally new names for the parties. Although some issues changed, these are the new leaders of american politics. Andrew jackson, a tennessee democrat. On the right, henry clay. Whig. A kentucky between clay and jackson we get two very different views of what america should look like to show how the new issues were emerging. Theexample, the question of bank. This is the second bank of the United States. We see Andrew Jackson holding a cane which he walked with because of all of his old wounds from his tools trying to battle back the many headed hydra, the mythical creature from great mythology. Here it stands for the bank. On the heads of the hydra is an individual representing the bank. The most prominent was nicholas bill, the president of the bank and who became an enemy to jackson in this process. This is something of a satire because jackson would kill the etoing the by v renewal application. That whole political story is somewhat wellknown at this point. What we know, after the bank war, formally the whig party coalesces. It shows the whigs were actively trying to attack jackson. As i was doing my research i had a hard time finding projects and jackson, yet pro cartoons, yet we know he was a man of the people. He was a symbol of american democracy. What we have left are these iffy jackson cartoons coming out of the period of the whig. We see this phrase born to , command. He is a regal figure holding a scepter. You may not be able to see all the details. In his left hand he has a scroll which says veto. This is a reference to him using the veto more than any other president in American History. And underneath him, you will see the constitution of the United States as if he is trampling on it. You will see various improvements, socalled internal improvements. Things that the whig party stood for like roads and canals. Eventually the railroad. Jackson is pictured as being against all those improvements. As a whig attack, this is effective. If there is one thing american politics feared, it was that of a king. Remember, the American Revolution had been fought over this issue, fighting a monarch to replace it with the democratic system. Although jackson himself is thought to be a leader of democratic reform, lets not forget sometimes politics is personal. I want to ask a question and see if we can knock out a few of them. Lets name the characteristics of the Democratic Party versus the whig party. Think about a few things. What do you have . Democrat or whig. Democrats were for weak governments and against Government Spending and also against tariffs. A tax on goods. Prof. Balcerski coming into the United States. Good. Thats good, we got a few of them. Weak government. Got that one. I put up they were against, lets not forget the indian removal. Lets not forget that. Spending, i think we heard that. That refers to the image that you are seeing Jackson Holding as a power. Remember the tariff of abominations, a measure passed under the John Quincy Adams presidency. What we see are the democrats are in a lot of ways, they are the legacy party of the democratic republicans. They even have the same name. There is a continuation through jefferson and his policies and jackson and his policies. Now, flipping the coin the whigs. The opposite of democrats. They are for strong government. They are for Government Action in general. Government spending and tariffs. Prof. Balcerski thats good. They are everything the democrats are not. Strong government. Especially federal government. They wanted certain economic and social goals. The whigs are probank, jackson is antibank, prospending on transportation, particularly the socalled internal improvements like the canals and roads. And then the tariffs. From the whig point of view, it it was no tariff of abominations. It was a reasonable one. It was something the United States should enact. It can be argued the whigs very much secede the federalist agenda of alexander hamilton. Although they are kind of remade , the jackson democrats and the henry clay whigs, they are the next generation of politics. It is this party system that i want to focus on. In order to move us from parties to political culture i want to introduce you to this concept. It is a concept i think will be useful for us to think about. Parties. Ive broken it into two sets of components. It is the people, the leaders, the issues, the organization. People. And it is action. We are talking about campaigns, platforms, elections. Parties are focused on these things. Really it is a way of talking about Political Parties, they are a group of organized people taking action for a certain result. Thats the role of the party. The role is to gain power through all of these things. Elections, campaigns. Political culture is a little different. It can be said to be a more capacious view of politics. It includes beliefs, more abstract things like norms or values or attitudes. And it includes elements of power, things like symbols and meanings and rituals. Between Political Parties and political culture, we have a broad view of politics. We can think about how Different Actors and politicians are both partisans or members of Political Parties and part of a political culture which may transcend at times those parties or may be limited to those parties. That is the idea and concept i want to introduce. I want to suggest the study of political culture allows us to concepts,ome new beyond the party mold and look at interesting things from the antebellum period. I have a few questions to consider during the remainder of the lecture. First, how and why did American Political Culture change from the days of the early republic to the antebellum . In other words, from the days of hamilton and jefferson to the days of jackson and clay . We want to trace that change. Thats the first goal of the lecture today. The second one, what does this emerging political culture reveal about wider American Society . Im going to return to those questions at the end. I want to present some evidence that i hope will begin to answer that question and that will help you understand how political culture operated in this period. The three areas i want to investigate today, the Tobacco Culture, political friendships, and affairs of honor. They are interrelated. Not to say that one couldnt affect the other. Some are more important than others. Broadly, these are important aspects of the political culture of the day. And when we think about it in those terms we see these are ways for us to understand why and how politicians came into conflict with each other before the civil war. The first piece, Tobacco Culture. This draws on my research ive done. I have not published these findings. Im presenting them to you today with an eye towards seeing what arethink, but there elements of the Tobacco Culture i found very interesting. I have a few compelling images on the screen. Its amazing what you can find out there. Some of the elements of the Tobacco Culture i found include chewing tobacco, snuff, and cigars. In the 19th century i should say right now they had not invented the cigarette. If you were doing tobacco you were doing it one of these three ways. It may seem silly. Tobacco was one of the key ways politicians across parties could talk to each other. I found numerous incidents where sharing a cigar or a pinch of snuff or a wad of chewing tobacco could bridge a gap that otherwise existed between a democrat and a whig. I want to share a story with you about that. But to convince you that tobacco wasnt just an everyday thing that didnt matter for politics, let me read you this quote from an english observer who came to the United States, who went to washington, who checked out the scene. He said, the habit of chewing tobacco is prevalent in the states. Nor is it as in Great Britain and ireland almost confined to the poorer classes. Members of the house of representatives and the senate, doctors, attorneys chewed tobacco almost as generally as the laboring classes did in the old country. Even in the court of justice, more especially in the western states, it is no unusual thing to see judge, jury and the gentlemen of the bar all chewing and spitting as liberally as the crew of a homeward bound west india man. So you have the house of representatives, the senate, judges, everyone is chewing and spitting. It is incredible to think about. If you were sitting in the congress in 1840, you would be hearing the spittoon as clearly as you would hear the politicians. It was the other form of tobacco that i found in the senate was more common. This is really incredible to think about. This is a nasty habit. It is called snuff. This is from a book from 1840 that i found called a pinch of snuff. Author at the author says, a mans character may often be judged by the manner in which he takes snuff. We did test the stealthy, miserly, and ungrateful attitude which some people feed their noses, a liberal elegant hand may be known in this work at a distance too great for the fact it serves to be seen. That rather unattractive person you see on the screen i assume a woman, it is hard to tell is reaching into a box and she is taking a pinch of this fine tobacco and she is putting it in to her nose by way of a snort. When you took a pinch of snuff, the first thing that would happen is that you would sneeze as the particles were in your nostrils, and the second thing is you would get the hit of tobacco in your system. What i found was the most common user of tobacco of the entire u. S. Senate was henry clay. This is the guy who is the leader of the whig party. Who is mr. Antijackson. And yet, henry clay was more known for using tobacco than any politician in the antebellum senate. And on the right we see William Rufus king. He was a demonstrate democrat and a jacksonian supporter, and these two men, it turned out, had a Major Incident that almost led to a duel. The confrontation came when senator king asserted that the character of Andrew Jackson, the president , that of his editor Francis Blair would compare gloriously to that of mr. Clay. This is king making an attack on comparing him and his character to a jacksonian reporter. It was said mr. Clay consider it is said that mr. Clay considered this as placing blair himself, and with called it cowardly. When you hear that, get ready. It is a bad word. King promptly issued a challenge to clay and both men and went so far as to arrange seconds. In the process clay realized he was a little overboard. The two men come to reconciliation. On a personal level they had not apologized to each other. This is how clay does it. There are no hard feelings after the formal apology. Because in the senate the next day, clay approached the desk of king and said give us a pinch of your snuff. And they burst into applause. They knew this was clays way of saying im sorry. This incident demonstrates political actors could rely on a common Cultural Practice to bind most partisan divisions. What do you think of this example . Had you heard of tobacco before . I thought it was pretty incredible. Is there any remnants of the Tobacco Culture today . Prof. Balcerski a good question. We think maybe it is just henry clay. What i found out i cannot believe it. Even when you walk into the Congress Today in the gallery there are boxes that are filled with snuff. Any member could take it because with todays antismoking laws, you cant smoke inside a public building, but you can take snuff. I actually was watching an old film of one of my favorite musicians. It was 1970. It was not offensive for him to tell the story of a snuff commercial from when he was a little kid. This was like 45 years ago. At have changed. Times have changed. Prof. Balcerski we are going to snuff that conversation and move to political friendships. Maybe this will be more friendly of an audience now. Tobacco shows we can all get along. It also shows if henry clay, the the most jackson hater that there is, can reconcile over tobacco, maybe there is hope for america. Political friendships were a big part of the antebellum congress. Here i am drawing on my research and others including Rachel Shelden who talked about a washington brotherhood. For sheldon and my own research i find there are key elements that define this brotherhood. Boarding houses is a big part of it. The politicians lived together. Fraternal organizations, like the freemasons. If you are a mason and a democrat or a mason and a whig, you are still a mason together. Taverns, as we saw, politicians like to drink. Going to a tavern and talk about was a way in which they bonded. Social clubs, formal clubs where men could gather and smoke cigars and have brandy. As you can see in the pictures, this was a thing of the antebellum. And lavish parties. Washington was nothing if not a place to party. It typically was the case there would be balls and receptions and the president would have balls. This is the case where the first lady could help to arrange those parties. Smoking cigars, it was one of the ways that men bonded with friendser and became and more. So what we have here is a washington, d. C. , by the time of the civil war that is quite advanced along this line. That was not exactly the case when Thomas Jefferson became president. In 1800, washington, d. C. Was just getting started. This image shows the white house as it was just built in 1800. John adams was the first to occupy it for a few short months. Jefferson was the first to occupy the white house during his entire presidency. The washington of 1800 was an undeveloped place. There were swamps and muddy roads all over. In the capital there was little to do. Not so by 1850. One of the big differences when it comes to the city of washington is it is actually a city now. This is a familiar outline to us. There are a few things that the modern washington, d. C. Has that they did not have in 1850. I want to zoom in on this part of the map that shows the important government centers. This is zooming in on the map of washington in 1850. There are a few elements that are may be familiar to us. In the circle you see the president s house, the white house. On the other one you see capitol hill, which means yes, indeed the national mall, the Smithsonian Institute and the, at that time, unfinished washington monument. The rest of the swamp has not been filled nor has the title basin been created. But even by 1850, there was a lots going on in washington. Look at these other buildings that had filled in. Political friendships took place in the in between spaces, in the other buildings. Particularly in the boarding houses where you wouldnt expect here,n the map like right notice where the arrow is pointing. It is a small building next to a larger one. This is today by gallery place in washington. Its at a place called the old patent office, part of the art museum. I was able to find this scene from the 1840s. Here it is. In the background, those bold buildings in front, and in this photo which was titled the old patent office, the point of the person looking at it might be to say whats important here is that the colonnaded building. What im going to argue is that building, the building you dont really see. Thats the washington boarding house. Thats the place where politicians lived. That is the place where deals got done. Lets mention one example of an important boarding house pattern and group that changed the course of American History. They lived in a boarding house on the same street. F street. Its for that reason they are called the f street men. There are five of them. They are called a mess because people eat their meals there. Like a mess hall. Their boarding house was on f street. You have james mason, robert hunter, david atchison, Andrew Butler and william good. What do they have in common . What do you see . They are all democrats. Prof. Balcerski yes. What else . They are all southerners. Prof. Balcerski because virginia, thats the south. Missouri, it is still the south. And South Carolina is definitely the south. Southern democrats. The party of Andrew Jackson. What is ominously missing here from the party of Andrew Jackson, northerners. Where are they . Why would a group of five southern democrats choose to go to the same boarding house . Theres a lot of answers to that question. One result is undeniable. It was this group, the f street mess, that was more responsible than any other group of politicians for the most important piece of legislation in the antebellum congress. That was the kansas nebraska act. It was this group who on a cold and snowy night in january of 1854 marched over to Franklin Pierces house and demanded that pierce support their plan to organize the New Territory of nebraska to permit slavery. There it is. Southern democrats have one thing in common northern democrats dont. And that is an interest to expand slavery. This is ominous. Because this shows the politics of the party through this political culture were becoming increasingly sectional. What year was the kansas nebraska act . 1854. Prof. Balcerski what year is the civil war . 1865. Prof. Balcerski that is when it ends. 1861. Prof. Balcerski the kansas nebraska act is 1854. The civil war starts in 1861. Thats only seven years away. That is my point here. Not to quiz you on dates. Look, this becomes the civil war. What do you think is a boarding house as powerful as the capital or the white house . What do you think of this example . Im curious to hear your thoughts. Go ahead. I think its more politics. I think it is more powerful because there are no opposing views. If the southerners all live in one house, that is how they got their job done. Prof. Balcerski well said. The power of the domestic sphere in politics. Other thoughts on that . Remember these guys. The f street mess made quite a mess. And in fact, what comes out of the f street mess is my third category affairs of honor. This is not to say that affairs of honor did not take place in the earlier time. Because they did. Famously, the most important of all, from the First Party System, the duel between aaron burr and alexander hamilton. This material draws upon a book by joann freeman. Affairs of honor. I look at the affairs of honor in the later period broadly speaking they had a few things in common. They were a part of a culture of honor. This transcends both north and south. But, it becomes more of a Southern Institution in time. Indeed, the culture of honor is more associated with the south. Especially by this hard why the start of the civil war, honor is very important to those southern politicians like the f street mess. Its associated with reputation. Reputation can further be categorized by different elements. Broadly speaking, it is what you were thought of. At this time europe a tatian was and sometimes it is like our identity. Identity theft, the problems that happen when our identity is stolen. Think about that as an attack on reputation. As when your reputation has been this marched besmirched or sullied. Its about gossip. Its about spreading lies and rumors. Potentially of a personal nature or potentially of a political nature. Its about posting. Now i think we all know what to post means. To post on social media site is to put information out there. Of course, back then, all they had were newspapers. When they published pieces in newspapers, they could precipitate an affair of honor if those postings were attacking reputation. Indeed it often went in this way. It often went gossip and then posting and then finally dueling. Dueling is the last stage in the cycle or in the process of the affair of honor. Dueling was a last measure. There were lots of threats of duels. We saw one earlier. With henry clay and king. Dueling was a last measure. Not to say it didnt happen. It did. As the aaron burrhamilton situation suggests. 200300 in total in this time between politicians. I want to present to you three examples 31 from this early. I want to present to you three examples of affairs of honor. Of federalists and republicans. I wanted to start with this one because we get to bring in our own connecticut senator roger griswold. In this case from the house of representatives. So we have one of our own here. Roger griswold was born in lyme, connecticut. He was a federalist as many connecticut politicians were. He goes to the congress to be a congressman. Hes there until 1805. He was a long serving federalist congressman. Matthew lyon was from vermont. He was a supporter of Thomas Jefferson. He became a republican. They could get along sometimes. They also can get into big fights. What im described is the line griswold brawl. Griswold had a club in his hand. How did they get this way . It came about an argument over politics. It was during an impeachment hearing of the democratic republican officer that griswold, mr. Club was trying to attract the attention of lyon, mr. Tongs, in order to engage in the political process. But lyon was ignoring him since they belong to opposing political processes. Griswold lost his temper and insulted lyon by calling him a scoundrel. That is another word like coward that when you say it, everyone gets quiet. Eyes pop out. It is the dirtiest word in an affair of honor. It is like saying you, sir, are a liar. Well, it did not go to well for him. Lyon declared himself willing to fight, to take on griswold. Griswold asked if he would be using his wooden sword, which is a reference to the fact he had been dismissed from the Continental Army and thus did not have an actual sword. This is when lyon spat on his face. That is a stop there. They broke the two men up. Lyon made an apology to the house he made a formal apology claiming he had not known it was in session. But he meant no breach of decorum or disrespect to the house as a whole. Two weeks later, griswold retaliated by bringing in the club. By attacking lyon with his club and beating him about the head and shoulders in view of the house. All the congressmen were just watching on. Lyon grabbed the tongs. And that is the scene here. They were broken up once again and it led to a house investigation. Nothing happened. Because the brawl was ok basically. This is all part of the code of honor. This is part of an acceptable conduct for gentlemen. Apologies had to be made but the fact is it could happen and it did. The that they didnt go on to become a dual is most surprising. It stopped at the level of a brawl. We move ahead to 1860. We move ahead to 1850. We get to another affair of honor. This is more of a loaded gun. This is the footbenton dispute. We have the mississippi senator who is holding a gun. And on the right we have the missouri senator who has his chest pulled back saying let me add him i have nothing to hide. Let me at him i have nothing to hide. This one comes from words being exchanged that nearly lead to blows. He calls him a columinator. Benton is a big guy. Foot was prepared to respond. He pulled out a pistol. Again, the word may not seem that bad but it is one of these words that say you are a liar. These are fighting words in antibellamah america. When the gun was taken out by foot you can see he was called back. Eventually the men were wrestled away. This is a false alarm you might say. Both men were democrats. It doesnt fit into a sectional pattern we might expect when we have two democrats fighting it out. But it is the final example, the most famous affair of honor of all that revealed the breakdown of american politics. That is the brooks sumner affair. In this cartoon from 1856 entitled southern chivalry, argument versus club, co you see an assailant holding a cane with his face blocked. Attacking a man who seems to be holding a 10 and perhaps a bill in his hand. That man was Charles Sumner. The assailant was preston brooks, a democrat from South Carolina. Sumner considered him a republican from massachusetts. Prior to that he had been a wig. It all began when Charles Sumner made a speech in the u. S. Senate in which he attacked the results of the kansas the brassica act the kansas nebraska one step further. There was violence. Sumner knew this. He wanted to point out there should be blame placed for the passage of the act on a few men in particular. He called out Stephen Douglas of illinois and he also called out Andrew Butler of South Carolina. Butler was a member of the f street mess. One of those powerful southern democrats who had forced Franklin Pierce to support the cancer brassica act. Sumner makes his speech in which he says and i quote, Stephen Douglas was a noisome, squat, and nameless animal. Not a proper model for an american senator. Then he insulted senator butler. He said of butler, he was having taken a mistress who is always lovely to him, so polluted in the side of the world, the harlot slavery. Charles sumner has issued major insults against two men of the opposite party. This scene that took place shows us that the violence in the u. S. Senate was starting to escalate. The footbenton was broken up. Two days later, preston brooks, a congressman from South Carolina who was not actually mentioned in the speech but was a cousin of Andrew Butler from the same town, edgefield, South Carolina, he and his compadres and Henry Edmondson of virginia, the three of them cobalt. They conspired. They made a plan. Brooks had a prepared speech. He probably had a piece of paper in front of him. Here is what he said he said. You tell me if he said this. He walked up to sumner at his desk. Sumner was writing. He said to have said, mr. Sumner, ive read your speech twice over carefully. It is a libel in South Carolina over butler. Sumner starts to get up. Brooks loses control and begins way whacking him with his cane. It began to crack upon impact on his skull. We see blood on his four head. Sumner was trapped under his desk. As he tried to get out of it, he ripped the bolt from the floor. This desk is preserved by the Massachusetts Historical Society today. Brooks continued to bash sumner until he was on the floor bleeding and unconscious. Sumner was out for the count. Bricks brooks walked off into history. One of his compatriots was to keep other senators away. You see him wielding the cane. You see the ink that had spilled. People who are trying to come to his aid as much as you see people laughing. Some people thought the attack went too far. Concerned as well as humored. When you have someone being beaten senseless on the floor of the senate, something was fatally wrong. My question is, youve heard the story now. What extent was it about politics and what extent was it about personal issues . Do you make this as a political thing or a personal thing . Go ahead. I would say any time it gets this heated it is more personal and political. Its probably a combination of both. Prof. Balcerski ok. Anything else . I thought it was political. One is a democrat and one is a republican. They are on opposite sides. It looks like he takes the political side strong. Prof. Balcerski excellent. Other thoughts . Either way it certainly hurt. This is one of the major episodes in the build up to the civil war. The sumner affair is credited for giving the Republican Party strength in the election of 1856. They run on two platforms. Bleeding kansas, the violence in kansas was caused by terrible decisions by the democrats. And bleeding sumner. That this personal attack galvanized a political party. I want to offer a few conclusions that sum up all this and suggest how Tobacco Culture, boarding houses and of honor makes sense as part of the story of political culture and why they are important. And to return to those and i also and i also want to return to those questions, what has changed since the days of hamilton and jefferson . One conclusion is this. There had been a breakdown of congressional friendship. It is revealed with sectional divisions in national politics. That it used to be ok to cross those party lines, to be friends. To have those parties. To have those social clubs and different cultural elements and Smoke Tobacco together. Or snuff. Those friendships broke in the climate over sectional division. The most and greatest division was over the issue of slavery. Not to be ignored in this moment. I find this is part of my research that the boarding houses became more sectional and partisan in nature. The f street mess, the most powerful and prominent example of a sectional southern democrat boarding house, it was not alone. Politicians are beginning to sense they needed to band together. For their own safety, in washington they knew it was best to stick with their own. This breaks down trust, the personal bond they had once shared. This gets to the last piece. The burr hamilton duel was so infamous. It was one of the few times where american politicians killed one another and a duel. The liongriswold paul the lyongriswold brawl was unusual because although it was comical, it suggested things had gone too far. When henry for draws a pistol no one is surprised. There was a quote that it was the only way to defend yourself against a pistol was to bring to pistols. When brooks beat sumner to the ground people laughed. People said he got what he deserved. In the south to get one story. In the north you get another. Finally to conclude, the political culture had come apart at the seams. Qr. Thank you. Ok. I want to stop here and take questions and see what you think. I want to hear from you guys. Ive never heard of boarding houses. Do they still exist in washington . Prof. Balcerski boarding houses. Who had not heard of them . Not surprised. Its not a term we use much today. It is not in our culture. In fact there are some boarding houses today. I had a bonus slide on this. It was this one. I found this article in the new yorker from 2010 about the frat house for jesus. It was incredible to me. It changed my views on what was happening in washington. There was a group of congressman in 2010 living together in basically a boarding house. You can see what they shared in common was a christian belief. Some are still in congress. Some have had to step down. The article was talking about the fellowship on c street. It got me thinking about the f street mess. These guys are from different parties. The thing that unites them is more the religious view. It is perhaps not as comparable to the boarding houses of the 1850s but this is still happening. Maybe with rising rents we will see more of this. Good question. Other questions . What happened to brooks and sumner after the caning . Prof. Balcerski he didnt go home happily ever after. Which one . Both . Brooks. He died. He had a villains ending. He died pretty early. He died in january the next year. He did not live very long. Sumner actually lived a long life. Charles sumner recovered. He went through some serious 1850s medical treatment where he had burns put on his back as electroshock treatment. He was probably suffering from what we would call posttraumatic stress disorder. At the time, they did not know what to do with that. He was a big man who lived with these wounds his whole life. He lived until 1874. He was a senator during the civil war, he was from massachusetts. He ended up writing the best civil rights legislation. He was down but not for the count. He got back up. From 1859 through 1874, he served in the senate until his death. Other questions . You said they still allowed smoking in congress . Prof. Balcerski they allow snuffing which sounds disgusting. Im not sure if anyone snuffs today. But yeah. What was i going to say about that . Im not going to ask there are smokers out there. What i will say in doing my research, henry clay really doesnt go away Tobacco Culture. I have a slide here. This guy is all over Product Placement throughout American History. Theres a cuban cigar called the henry clay. We see this box is probably im not sure of his chewing tobacco or a snuff box. I found Franklin Pierce gets shafted here. He gets made into a pipe head. There is a campaign to put his head on a pipe and smoke it. Kind of a misunderstood figure. Other questions . I assume you all figure we dont duel anymore. Or do we . I just had one other thing. I had a few slides ready for you. It is this. You are on yourself on doing the paces on the duel. Hold on, i have already lost track of my place. I was shocked. 2004, throughk in the joys of you too, i have been able to find this clip. At the time, i did not believe what was said. Georgiar senator from and an msnbc commentator, listen to the clip . They will get heated very quickly. Get out of my face. Be sure to check out i wish we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a dual. He almost couldnt keep a straight face. America was a violent, nasty place. Next week, abolitionist, reform, so check out the reading, bring documents. Any questions, let me know over email. Thank you for your attention. We will see you tuesday. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] listen to lectures in history podcasts by streaming anywhere, anytime. You are watching American History tv only on cspan3. The memorial was dedicated with world war ii leadership here is a preview. Is dday. We go. s go, so here greetings to our guests here tonight and for those of you watching, we wish we could all be together in person to celebrate the completion of the magnificent memorial. However, the legacy of dwight d. Eisenhower the freedoms we live every day in america. If the pandemic has taught us anything, it is that you dont have to be in the same place together. Your team is watching. The brilliance of this memorial will reverberate around the world and the legacy of Dwight D Eisenhower will be lifted. Tonight, as we dedicate this memorial, we stand on the shoulders of some giants. They made it possible. My favorite, the senator who kept his full effort alive. At any rate, we could not have done this without you, lisette. Sir michael allowed us to conduct our business supporting a bipartisan way in the image of a man tonight. I want to thank one commissioner in particular who has already been thanked and deservedly so, bob dole. Efly wondered, he fought gravely wounded, he fought his way. Applied the same tenacity and spirit of fundraising on behalf of this memorial. Because of this tireless effort, the remaining heroes of the greatest generation can now come here and finally salute their commanding officers. Watch the full program this sunday at 8 00 p. M. Used to eastern. American history tv is on social media. Follow us on cs been ive cspan history. A lot announcer the coeditor of environmental history of world war i talks about the diverse ecological impact the First World War had across the globe, and explains the changes, including ships and agricultural reduction and displacement of wildlife and humans. The National World war i museum and memorial hosted the event and provided the video. And, as a speaker, he is a certified instructor. His research focuses on the environmental, particularly in times of crisis and conflict. He received fellowship from the American Council the mystery of science and research, and the National Endowment for the humanities, to only name a few
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.