The bulk of the lecture is going to be presenting new evidence drawn from my research and others on the antebellum political culture. I have three major areas as evidence to talk about today. Tobacco culture, political friendships, and affairs of honor. Like we often do in the class, we are going to start with the 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 piece there. What else . Everyone is dressed up fancy. Prof. Balcerski like you are today. Exactly. Very fancy. The ladies are wearing gowns. How about a third thing . Go ahead, jimmy. It looks like they are fairly close together. They may be dancing. 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. 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 gowns. Sort of overshadowed by lady washington. The title was Lady Washingtons reception, a formal reception that was held and hosted by the first lady, martha washington. Many of you noticed she was standing on a platform. And you notice the opulent attire. This could have taken place in the European Court as much as it could have taken place in america. The next image i think you will find may be more familiar. This is county elections from 1851. What do you see here . How does it for from that last image . Because it. Thank you. Passed it down. Thank you. You see a guy at the top left. Prof. Balcerski theres actually more than one drunk person. Good. Stump speaking. Prof. Balcerski stump speaking. Vote for me for president. Excellent. Anything else you see . There is a hand up there. It is primarily workingclass people. Not the wealthy. Prof. Balcerski that is all good. You are seeing a diversity of people. Youre also seeing the white male electorate. This is going to stand in for democracy. Jacksonianiod, the period. It is a diverse thing. The whole town. Children as well. Although it would be the white male voter, for many years, particular culture encompasses many 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 we think back to the First Party System, when we think back to 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, Thomas Jefferson. They could not be more stark opposites. The federalists stood for a constitution, a strong federal government. A Strong Financial and manufacturing base. And hamilton was their leader. Versus the democratic republicans who were wary of centralized government, who were wary of encroachments upon personal liberties, who promoted farming and commerce among small villages instead of large cities and manufacturing. Jefferson, the enlightened figure was their leader. That is the First Party System. It is socalled because of what follows. Indeed, 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. The artist here is representing the embargo as a large turtle turtle biting at the british smuggler who would try to break the embargo. It was a Foreign Policy measure designed to make it so that britain would have a hard time trading with the United States. It ultimately was one of the policies that doomed them to a second war with great britain. Thats part of the First Party System history. The way the federalists and the republicans clashed, where hamilton and his legacies, and jefferson and his successors came into office, came into power and faded from the scene. Who they left the politics of the United States to were these guys. The men of the Second Party System. Socalled because we have totally new names for the parties. Although some issues changed, once again these are the new , leaders of american politics. On the left, Andrew Jackson, a tennessee democrat. On the right, henry clay. The kentucky whig. Between clay and jackson we get two very different views of what america should look like to show how in the Second Party System new issues were emerging. , the question of the banks. This is the second bank of the United States. We see Andrew Jackson holding a cane which he walked with. ,because of all of the bullet holes from his wounds. He is trying to battle back the many headed hydra, the mythical creature from greek 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 bank issue by vetoing its renewal application. That whole political story is somewhat wellknown at this point. What we know from it is that after the bank war, formally the whig party coalesces. Indeed it shows the whigs were actively trying to attack jackson. I had a hard time finding projackson cartoons. And yet, he was a man of the people. He was a symbol of american democracy. What we have left our these antijackson cartoons. Of the image, we see the 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 that says vito. This is a reference to him using the veto more than any other president in American History. And underneath him and under his feet you will see the constitution of the United States as if he is trampling on it. You will also see various other improvements called internal improvements. Party stoodthe whig for like roads, canals, and railroads. Beingkson is pictured as against all of those improvements. As a whig, 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, running a monarch and replacing it with a republican 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 here. What do you have . Democrats. Weak governments. Against tariffs. A tax on goods. Prof. Balcerski coming into the United States. Good. We have a few of them here. Lets see what i had. Weak government. Got that one. And i put up they are against action. Lets not forget the indian removal, that is part of it. Spending. That refers to the veto and in the image that he is holding as our, he mentioned antiterror. Ofember the tariff abominations, that was 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 really a continuation between jefferson and his policies and jackson and his policies. Flipping the coin. What do we know about the whigs. They are opposite. They are for strong government. They are for Government Action in general. Government spending. 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. Prospending on transportation, particularly the internal improvements like the canals and roads. And then the tariffs. From the whig point of view, it was no tariff of abominations. It was the kind of policy that the United States should enact. It can be argued the whigs secede the federalist agenda of alexander hamilton. Although they are remade and remixed, the jackson democrats, 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 to you to this concept. Parties. I have broken them into two separate components. Its people, its the leaders. It is the organization. People. And it is action. Youre talking about campaigns, class wars. Platforms, elections. Parties are focused on these things. It is a group of organized people taking action for a certain result. Thats the role of the party. 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. These are abstract things like norms or values or attitude. And it includes elements of symbols,ings like meanings, and rituals. Parties andtical political culture, then, we have a broad view of politics. Howwe can think about Different Actors or politicians or members ofsans part of aparties, and political culture, which may transcend at times those parties or may be limited to those parties. So that is the idea and concept i want to introduce. The study of political culture, which is a growing field, allows us to get into new concepts. It allows us to go beyond the party mold and look at what i think are some interesting stuff from the antebellum period. I went to the end somehow. Questions to consider during the remainder of the lecture. They are as follows. First, how and why did American Political Culture change from the days of the earlier republic to the antebellum. In other words, from the days of hamilton and jefferson to the days of jackson and clay. Change. To trace that that is the first goal of the lecture today. And the second one is, what does revealerging culture about our American Society . I will return to those questions at the end of the lecture, but i want to present some evidence that i hope will begin to answer that question and how political culture operated in this. In this period. What i want to investigate today , Tobacco Culture, political friendships, and affairs of honor. They are interrelated. Not to say that one could not affect the other. Some are more important than others, as we will see. These are three important aspects of the political culture of the day and when we think about it in those terms, we see that these are ways for us to understand why and how politicians came into conflict with each other in the era before the civil war. So the first piece, Tobacco Culture. This draws on my research that i have done. I have not yet published these findings. You think. Ee what but, there are elements of the Tobacco Culture that i found really interesting. I have a few interesting, compelling images here. Is amazing what you can find out there. Some of the elements of the Tobacco Culture i found include snuff, andacco, cigars. In the 19th century i should say right now, they had not quite invented the cigarette by this period. If you were doing tobacco, you are doing it one of these three ways. It may seem silly, it sounds funny. Indeed, tobacco was one of the key ways that politicians across parties talk to each other. I found numerous instances where sharing a cigar, sharing a pinch of snuff, or sharing chewing tobacco could bridge the gap that otherwise existed between a democrat and awake. A whigeen a democrat and. Quote read to you this from an observer who went to washington and checked out the scene. He said, the habit of chewing tobacco is prevalent in the state. Entirely almost confined to the poorer classes. Members of the house of representatives and the senate, doctors, and attorneys to tobacco almost as generally as the laboring classes data in the old country. So you have the senate, you have 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. But actually, it was the other form of tobacco in the u. S. Senate that was more common. This is really incredible to think about. A nasty habit. It is called snuff. This is from a book from 1840 that i found called a pinch of snuff. Here is what this author said. A mans character may often be judged by the manner in which he takes snuff. Miserly, the stealthy, ungrateful attitude in which some people be their noses. Feed their noses. And that rather unattractive person on the screen that you tell,eing, it is hard to is actually reaching into a little box, much like the one on the left. She is taking a pinch of this and she isobacco putting it into her nose i way of a snort. When you took a pinch of snuff, the first thing you would do is sneeze violently as the particles were in your nostrils. The second thing is you would get the hit of tobacco in your system. Mosti found was that the inveterate, 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 wig party. Whi whig party. On the right, we see William Griffith king. A jacksonian supporter. Had a majorn incident. That almost led to a duel. The confrontation came when senator king asserted that the character of Andrew Jackson, is president , and that of his editor Francis Blair would compare gloriously to that of mr. Clay. This was king making an attack on clay by comparing him and his character to a jacksonian supporter. It was then said that mr. Clay considered this remark as an equalityr on with himself and therefore pronounced it false and cowardly. , getver you hear cowardly ready because a duel is about to happen. It is a bad word. Clay realized he was a little bit overboard. The two men came to reconciliation. On a personal level, they had not yet all ties to each other apologized to each other. There were apparently no hard feelings after the formal apology because the next day, clay approached him and in a friend in a friendly manner said king, give us a pinch of your stuff. And of gallery who heard it burst into applause. They knew that this was clays way of saying im sorry. This incident demonstrates political actors could rely on a common Cultural Practice to bind even the most partisan divisions. What do you think of this example . Had you heard of tobacco before . What do you think . 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 who is snuffing. Was snuffing. When you walk into the Congress Today in the gallery there are boxes that are filled with snuff. Any member could take it because you cant smoke inside a public building, but you can take snuff. I actually was watching an Old Television performance of one of my favorite musicians. It was 1970. He was singing on the air. Goes to show you, 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 that if henry clay, the most jackson hater th ere is, can reconcile over tobacco, maybe there is hope for america. Political friendships were a deep part of the antebellum congress. Here i am drawing on my research and others, who talked about a washington brotherhood. For sheldon and my own research i find there are key elements that defined this brotherhood. The politicians lived together. Fraternal organizations, like the freemasons. If you are a freemason and a democrat, a freemason and a whig , you are still a freemason together. Taverns. Politicians like to drink. Going to a tavern and talk about over things they bonded. Social clubs. Men could gather and have brandy. This was a thing of the antebellum period. And lavish parties. Washington was nothing if not a place to party. It typically was the case that there would be balls, that the president would have balls. This is the case where the first lady could help to arrange those parties. Smoking cigars comes up. It is one of the ways men bonded with each other and became friends and more. So what we have here is a washington dc by the time of the civil war period that is indeed quite advanced along this line. That was not exactly the case when Thomas Jefferson became president. Was justwashington dc 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 between 1800 and 1850 when it comes to the city of washington is that it is actually a city now. This is a familiar outline to us. There are a few things the modern washington dc has that they didnt have in 1850. I want to zoom in on this part of the map that shows the important government centers. Government center. On the map ofg in washington in 1850. There are a few elements that are familiar to us. In the circle you see the president s house, that is the white house. On the other one, you see capitol hill. Which means yes, indeed, the national mall, the smithsonian institute, and the unfinished washington monument. The swamp has not been filled in. Look at these other buildings that had filled in. What i want to argue is that political friendships took place in the inbetween spaces, in the other buildings. Particularly in the boarding houses, in places where you wouldnt expect them. Like right here. Notice where that arrow is pointing. It is a small building. It is next to a larger one. This is today by gallery place in washington dc. It is at a place now called the old patent office, part of the national art museum. Photoable to find a showed this exact scene from the 1840s. Here it is. It is what was then the patent office, in the background, and then those 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 when you know, what is important here is tall,ig tall big, native building. What i am going to argue is it is that building, the building you dont really see. Thats the washington boarding house. Thats the place where the politicians lived. That is the place where deals got done. Im just going to go ahead and mention one example of an important boarding house pattern and group that changed the course of American History. And in fact they lived in a , boarding house on the same street. On f street. Its for that reason they are called the f street mess. There are five of them. They are called a mess because the boardinghouse was oftentimes called ms because people would eat their meals there. Like a mess hall. F street mess socalled because there boardinghouse was on f boardinghouser was on f street. You have james mason, robert hunter, david atchison, Andrew Butler. 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. Because missouri, it is still the south. And because South Carolina is definitely the south. Right . Southern democrats. The party of Andrew Jackson. But, what is ominously missing here from the party of andrew and Andrew Jackson are northerners. Where are they . Why would a group of southern democrats choose to go on the in the same boardinghouse together . Theres a lot of answers to that question. A lot of reasons. One result is undeniable. Streetthis group, the f 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, snowy night marched over to Franklin Pierces house and demanded pierce support their plan to organize the New Territory of nebraska to permit slavery. And there it is. Southern democrats have one thing in common that northern democrats dont. And that is credo an interest to expand slavery. This is ominous. 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 1861. Thats only seven years away. That is my point here. Look, this change really for dests the coming of forbo the coming of the civil war. What do you think . What do you think of this example . Curious to hear your thoughts. Go ahead. I think its more politics. I think it is more powerful because you there are no opposing view more opposing views. You have northerners battling for their views. If they all live in one house, they all have the same views that is how they got their job , done. Prof. Balcerski well said. The power of the domestic sphere we might say, in politics. Other thoughts on that . Well, remember these guys. The f street mess made quite a mess. What comes out of the f street mess, what comes out of this period is my third category. Affairs of honor. This is not to say that affairs of honor did not take place in the earlier period. Because they did. 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. It is an excellent book. I look at the affairs of honor as a later period. Broadly speaking, affairs of honor across time have a few things in common. They were part of a culture of honor. This transcends both north and south. It becomes more of a Southern Institution in time. The culture of honor is more associated with the south. Especially by 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. But broadly speaking, it is what you were thought of. At this time, your reputation was all you had. Ways, it is like your identity. We talk about identity theft, the problems that happen when our identity is stolen. Think of that. Think about that as an attack on reputation. Beenyour reputation has besmirched. So lead. Or attack. Sullied. Or attacked. Its about gossip. Its about spreading lies and rumors. It is about political nature, a personal nature. Its about posting. Now i think we all know what to post means. To post on any social media site is to put information out there. Back that all they had were ne spapers. They could precipitate an affair of honor if those postings were attacking reputation. Indeed it often went in this way. Gossip and postings. And finally, dueling. Dueling is the last stage in the cycle, and the process of the affair of honor. It was a last measure. There were lots of threats of duels. Clayw one earlier with and king. Dueling was a last measure. Not to say it didnt happen. It did. Suggest,nd hamilton there were 200300 in total in this time between politicians. I want to present to you three examples. 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. We have one of our own here. He is born in lyme, connecticut. He is a connecticut politician from this period. Was a federalist, as many connecticut politicians were. He goes to congress to be a congressman. Hes there until 1805. He was a long serving federalist congressman from connecticut. Matthew lyon was from vermont. He was a supporter of Thomas Jefferson. He became a republican. Well, republicans and republicans republicans and federalists could get along sometimes, but they could also get into fights with each other. Griswold had a club in his hand. And lyon with a pair of fire tongs. 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, to engage in the clinical process. He was ignoring him on purpose since they belonged to opposing political processes. Griswold finally lost his temper and insulted lion by calling him a scoundrel. That is another word like coward. When you say it everyone gets quiet. Eyes pop out. What will you do . Its the dirtiest word. You were saying you are a liar. Well, it did not go too well from there. 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. They broke them up. He made a formal apology claiming he had not known it was in session. It was a weak excuse. But he meant no breach of decorum or disrespect to the house as a whole. Two weeks later, not satisfied with the apology, griswold retaliated by bringing in the club. He beat 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 seen here in the picture. 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. And of course apologies had to be made but the fact is it could happen and it did. The fact that it didnt go on to become a duel is most surprising. It stopped at the level of a brawl. We move ahead to 1850. We get to another affair of honor. This is more of a loaded gun. This is the benton 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 at him, i have nothing to hide. This one comes from words being exchanged that nearly lead to blows. Foote calls benton a columinator. A big guy. Foote not so big. Foote pulled out a pistol. Again, the word may not seem that bad but it is one of these words that is saying, you sir are a liar. These are fighting words in antebellum america. When the gun was taken up by see he wascan immediately called back. Eventually, the two then wrestled away. This is sort of a false alarm, you might say. Both men were democrats. This does not quite fit into the sectional pattern that we might expect during this period, when twoou have when you have democrats fighting it out. But it is the final example, the most famous affair of honor of all that revealed what i think the breakdown of american politics. Brookssumner affair. In this cartoon from 1856 titled southern chivalry, argument versus club, we see an unknown assailant holding a cane with his face blocked. That is purposeful. The artist did not know who it was. Attacking a man who seems to be holding a pen and perhaps a bill in his hand. That man was Charles Sumner. Brooksailant was preston , brooks was a democrat from South Carolina. Sumner at this point considered himself a republican from massachusetts. Prior to that, he had been a whig. It all began when Charles Sumner made a speech in the u. S. Senate the resultsattacked of the kansas nebraska act of 1854 and he went one step further. There was violence again. Sumner knew this. He wanted to point out that there should be blame placed for the passage of the act and a few men in particular. He called out Stephen Douglas of illinois, and northern democrat, and he also called out Andrew Butler of South Carolina. Butler, remember, was a member of the f street mass. He was one of those f street mess. He was one of those powerful southern democrats who had forced Franklin Pierce to support the kansas nebraska act. Sumner makes his speech in which he says and i quote, Stephen Douglas was a nameless animal, not the proper model for an american senator. In his next breath, he insulted senator butler. He said of butler, he was having taken a mistress who is always lovely to him, though polluted in the side of the world, the harlot slavery. Charles sumner has issued major insults against two u. S. Senators, 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 footebenton dispute 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 hislina he and two of three of themhe conspired. They made a plan. Brooks had a prepared speech. He probably had a piece of paper in front of him. He may have been raised it you may have memorized it. 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 was said to have said, mr. Sumner, ive read your speech twice over carefully. It is a libel in South Carolina over butler. As the story goes, sumner starts to get up. Brooks loses control and begins whacking him with his cane. The cane began to crack upon impact on his skull. Some blood on his forehead. Sumner was trapped under his senate desk. As he tried to get out of it, he ripped the bolt from the floor. This senate 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. Brooks composed himself and went off into history. One of his compatriots was to keep other senators away. You see him wielding the cane. That was supposedly his role. People who would try to come to sumners 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 . More personal. Prof. Balcerski go ahead. I would say any time it gets this heated it is more personal and political. Its probably a combination of both. But i would say it is more personal. Prof. Balcerski ok. Anything else . I thought it was political. One is a democrat and one is a republican. They are owned two they are on opposite sides. Two it looks like he takes the political side strong. Prof. Balcerski thats a good lesson for our times. Excellent. Other thoughts . Either way, it certainly hurt. This is one of the major episodes in the build up to the civil war. In fact, the brookssumner affair is credited for giving the Republican Party strength in the election of 1856. They run on two platforms. Bleeding kansas, which is the violence in kansas was caused by terrible decisions by the democrats. Opening into slavery, that is. 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 affairs of honor make sense as part of the story of political culture and why they are important. And to return to those questions, what has changed since the days of hamilton and jefferson . One conclusion is this. That there had been a breakdown of congressional friendship. But breakdown 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, those different cultural elements in common 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. And i find, this is part of my research, that the boarding houses became more sectional and partisan in nature. The f street mess, although the most powerful and prominent example of a sectional southern democrat boardinghouse, was not alone. Politicians are beginning to sense they needed to band together. That for their own safety, in washington, they knew it was best to stick with their own. This breaks down trust, the personal bonds they had once shared. This gets to the last piece. The burrhamilton duel was so infamous because it was one of the few times where american politicians fought and actually killed one another in a duel. The lyongriswold duel was unusual because although it was comical, it suggested things had gone too far. When henry foote 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 bring pistols. Two when brooks beat sumner to the ground, people laughed. People said he got what he deserved. In the south, you get one story. The north, you get another. Finally to conclude, the political culture had come apart at the seams. Ok. I want to stop here and take questions and see what you think. I want to hear from you guys. Go ahead, josh. Ive never heard of boarding houses. It sounds like boarding school. Do they still exist in washington dc . Prof. Balcerski boarding houses. Who had not heard of them . I am 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. Lets see if i can find it. I thought someone might ask that. 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 whole view on what was happening in washington. There was a group of congressman congressmen 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, because of scandal, had to step down. The article was talking about the socalled fellowship on c street. It got me thinking about the f street mess. These guys are from different parties, it turns out. Democrats and republicans. 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 in washington dc, 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. I will tell you that. 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, during reconstruction. He was from massachusetts. He ended up writing the best civil rights legislation. Charles sumner was down but not for the count. He got back up. From 18591874, he served in the senate. Other questions . You said they still allow smoking in congress . Prof. Balcerski they allow snuffing, which sounds disgusting. Im not sure if anyone snuffs today. What was i going to say about that . Im not going to ask there are ask if there are smokers out there. What i will say in doing my research, henry clay really doesnt go away in 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 too that this box is probably im not sure if this is chewing tobacco or a snuff box. I found Franklin Pierce gets shafted here. He gets made into a pipe head. There is a campaign in 1852 to put his head on a pipe and smoke it. Kind of a misunderstood figure. Franklin pierce. Other questions . I assume that you all figured at this point that 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 your cell phone on doing the paces on the duel. Although dooling has ended, the although dueling has ended, the rhetoric of dueling has not. I was shocked. Thanks to youtube ive been able to find this clip. At the time, i did not believe it was actually said. This was a senator from georgia. And chris matthews. Listen to this clip. Heated quickly. Get out of my face. Wish we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a dual. Couldnt keep a straight face. America was a violent, nasty place. Abolitionist, reform, so check out the reading, bring documents. , 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] you can watch lectures in history every weekend on American History tv. We take you inside college classrooms, topics from the American Revolution to 9 11, saturday 8 00 p. M. And midnight eastern on cspan three. Announcer this sunday on american artifacts, the new Frank Gehry Designed park and memorial to dwight david eisenhower, which occupies a location near the u. S. Capitol, and the national air and space museum. Here is a preview. He found that 101st airborne. He wanted to know if anybody was from kansas. Soldiers do not represent particular people, but some of the people that were there say he was talking about flyfishing. May be true, maybe not, but that is the story. You will notice that the paratroopers, the gear had to be strapped to their bodies, so you will see straps, some of them hold ammunition, some the things they would need to survive, because they were being dropped behind lines. There is eisenhower with the eisenhower jacket, cut off at the waist. The other thing i want you to look at is how young some of the soldiers are. The two on the outside of this grouping of four look young. It is a reminder of these soldiers going on the invasion the next day, a lot of them were just kids, so that is reflected here in this sculpture. Our history is told in many different ways in america, in one way is through memorials and monuments, particularly washington, d. C. , an Educational Program that will be hosted by the Eisenhower Foundation in abilene, kansas with teaching resources. You look over here and say, who are those guys, and what is that giant stainless steel thing over there . Maybe you are here as a student group, listen to your teacher, and you learn about a guy who came from abilene, kansas, a family not wellknown, not rich. Educationlege through west point and served his country until he retired from the presidency in 1960. It is a Great American story. Announcer watch the full program this sunday, here on American History tv. American history tv is on social media. Follow us at cspan history. Coeditor ofe 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. I museumnal world war and memorial hosted the event and provided the video