American progressionism and the coming of the new deal. He argues thattal al smith lost the 1928 election, his ideals and policies paved the way for president roosevelt. Good evening, everyone. Im really delighted to be able to see all of you here tonight and welcome all of you here for our talk for this evening. Im evan dolley, and on blehalf of the program here, welcome to our history talk. At the outset for being able to hold this talk, thank you to the funding of the history fund which is supporting this event, and let me jump straight to introducing our speaker for the evening. So our speaker for this evening is dr. Robert childs. He is a graduate of tascun university. He began a phd in history which he completed at the university of maryland in 2012, and the talk hes going to be giving this evening is the result of that phd dissertation, i do believe, yes. He has, during the course of this particular research, or the research for this project, he has received a couple prestigious state honors. The new York State Library cunning ham residency and the state Archives Partnership trust hack residency, both to conduct research on governor alfred e. Smith. And as part of his next project, which is on the statesman of new jersey and an aggregate for the fair labor standards act. He has also received a grant from the new Jersey Historical commission to carry that research out. He is familiar to many people in this room, i would imagine, because he is a frequent lecturer in recent history at gaucho. He is also a visiting professor at Loyola University maryland. He is talking to you tonight about his first book which was published in early 2018 by Cornell University press. And the title of the book and the talk up there on the screen, the revolution of 28, al smith, american progressionism and the new deal. Thank you very much. Welcome, dr. Childs. Thank you, everybody, for being here this evening. Thank you to the Humanities Center and to the History Program here, and especially dr. Dawley for coordinating all of this, and i dont think he knew he was going to get thrown into the midst of a media circus here, but we appreciate you working with me, and im grateful that the cspan folks were able to be here today. I also look around at the audience and im really grateful to see so many students, past and present, and family, friends, and so it means a lot to me to have such support, so thank you. I have the privilege to speak with you today about my first book, the revolution of 28, al smith, american progressionism and the new deal. My plan today is to start at some ways at the climax of this story with al smiths triumphal tour of 1928. I want to use that as a launching point to explore my major interventions in this book and then jump back to try and explain why american new stock working class voters became so enthusiastic about al smith, and more importantly than that, became committed democrats for several ensuing generations. So first to boston. It was a crisp new england autumn morning as the Democratic Victory special steamed eastward into massachusetts from upstate new york. On october 24, 1928, the temperature in boston had dropped from an unseasonable 75 degrees the previous afternoon into the mid50s. By 3 30 p. M. , when the locomotive arrived at south station, the city had settled into one of bostons cloudy fall days, considerably cooler than the day before. The anticipatory chill resulting from this atmospheric dynamism pressured with a sort of meteorological poetry, the wave of energy and upheaval that would sweep from the berkshires down to massachusetts in the wake of the albanybound train. On board was the governor of new york, the noted progressive champion of the urban working class, unashamed catholic and proponent of tolerance, liberal and economic reform, alfred e. Smith. The train slowed first at pittsfield in the west, greeted by 10,000 supporters, followed by about 30,000 in springfield where a band hailed their visitor with his familiar theme, the sidewalks of new york. There massachusetts senator David Ignatius walsh, an Irish Catholic democrat from pittsburgh extended greetings on smith who was saving his voice for the evening. On toward worcester, where another crowd of 30,000 filled Washington Square before that citys station, and less concerned over its own vocal endurance, yelled itself hoarse. Finally to boston. On boston common, smith was greeted by 150,000 people. At boston arena, only 15,000 people were able to enter out of the nearly 50,000 who sought admittance were enthralled by an army of radios, all this as two other auditoriums, Mechanics Hall and symphony hall, remained packed to the brim with ardent listeners after the overflow events. All told, police estimated that 750,000 people flooded the streets of boston to greet the governor of new york, a gathering 2,000 souls greater than that citys population at the time of the previous census. Why had they come . What did they hear . And how did they respond . In microcosm, these are the essential questions of my book. Al Smiths National prominence as a gubernatorial champion of social welfare of the laboring masses and his ambition to implement and expand that particular progressionism at the federal level, this blended with his biographical appeal to the growing cohort of newer voters as a representative of the urban ethnic growing classes who was a spokesman for a symbol of religious tolerance and opposition to prohibition and harsh immigration restrictions. These things combined the economic and cultural appeal in order to inspire these boisterous receptions in many of the nations heterogenious cities. He affirmed his later controversial, smith had a talent for popularizing very obtuse questions so the average fellow could understand him. And he was fulfilling his own pledge to maintain, in his words, direct contact with the American People throughout this campaign. Meanwhile there was the response which produced the revolutionary early stages of a National Political shuffling that would help spur the onset of modern american liberalism. And so the candidates utterances mattered profoundly. American politics like American Life moved briskly by the 1920s. Three decades of maturation by increasingly organized and wellfunded National Parties begot a precedent while Wire Services allowed propaganda to move swiftly through a zealously competitive and often fiercely partisan local press. While the radio and much more recent innovation transferred minor and Major Campaign personalities into the living rooms of millions of prospective voters every night. Within the frenzied mallieu of the 1920s required programmatic candor. The stakes for the boston address were especially high. You see, no serious contender for the presidency could allow the toxic charge of socialism to be associated with their national ambitions. Such was al smiths challenge beginning two days before his arrival in boston when his opponent, former now, commerce secretary herbert hoover, alerted a crowd at new Yorks Madison Square garden that their governor had abandoned the te t tenets of his own party in favor of state socialism. Herbert hoover, the much heralded commerce secretary and republican standard bearer was seeking the white house based on his very strong credentials as the engineer of the political economy of the 1920s of coolidge prosperity. It was really hoover prosperity, and hoover promised to go forward with the policies of the last eight years, and so he and his supporters saw smiths Progressive Agenda as a threat to their new era. 48 hours later, smith responded to herbert hoovers indictment. The socialism charge was an attack at which he had been grappling his entire career, so these charges invited the governor to review his progressive credentials. And so he did. Take the workmans compensation act, he implored his boston listeners. What was the purpose of that . Because it was a state operation, it was referred to as socialism. Take all the factory code, take the night work law for women, the law prohibiting manufacturing in the tentenemen the law prohibiting children working in the tanneries of the state. That was designed to protect the health, welfare of women and children referred to as socialistic. Herbert hoover agreed that each candidates proposal should be taken seriously and that the contradiction, in hoovers words, signalled in the American People a question of fundamental principle. So smith not only cataloged the past, he also applied that record to current conditions. Descending from popular ak la accolades for the coolidge academy, smith talked about new englands textile economy and contrasted that widespread and profound regional suffering with her better hoovers sanguine remarks of neglect in laboring classes of america. Smiths alternative approach was revealed in his record of progressive, social and welfare reforms in new york. So socialism was portrayed by smith in his words for social groups to derail, again, in his words, social construction betterment for the human element. Al smith was running against the hardingcoolidgehoover status quo, and his admirers were quite receptive to the message. Understanding al smiths message within the context of his progressive tenure as governor, an irishman from new yorks Lower East Side wrote a letter promoting the progressive senator George Norris to Cross Party Lines and support the democrat, which eventually he did. The new yorker boasted that, quote, the new york wonder man had bottmbasted things so that life wasnt worth living. In the local newspaper he cited statistics and arguments that had been propagated by the Smith Campaign. A factory worker from hartford writing under the pseudonym worker with prosperity had just never shown up in his community. A polish worker from western massachusetts excoriated the Republican Party for having, quote, further protected and fostered the special interests of a certain few against the common interests of the many. An Italian American rhode islander required the coolidges interests in justifying italian Rhode Islands support for the democrat smith. It is well known that al smith was a favorite of the recent immigrant working classes who were attracted to his candidacy because he opposed prohibition, and because he was a catholic, and because he spoke with a bowery brogue and defended immigrants. Which is profoundly true and profoundly important. It is the beginning of the story of smiths politics and the aspirations of his many supporters. Al smiths admirers, it turns out, embraced both the cultural symbolism of his candidacy and the progressive initiatives of the candidate expounded. Smiths catholicism, his working class roots, his disdain for prohibition and for the ku klux klan, these attributes all had a clear influence on voters in 1928, and they benefited smith greatly among urban workers just as they would prove unpalatable among voters in other parts of the nation. But leaving the story at that is superficial and perhaps even condescending. I have proceeded from the hypothesis that like any other human actors, the real people who became smith democrats in 1928, the ones who did the working and the praying and the suffering and the voting that historians have so long tried to decipher, these were complex human beings with complicated motivations and complicated lives. And so the idea of culture or economics, its not an either or proposition. It turns out that most smith voters were, indeed, sophisticated enough to understand the democratic candidate as representing both cultural pluralism and social and economic reform. This combination of cultural empowerment with social welfare appeals had been the formula of his progressive leadership in new york and it was the prospect of which he sought the presidency in 1928. In 1928, smith nationalized his particular brand of progressionism. Although he dwoiwent down in a bitter defeat that year, the ideas were not easily extinguished. His supporters would go on and hope he would make a comeback. In 1932, they hoped he would go on again, but that proved to not be the case. They went on to become the heart of the new Deal Coalition and of the roosevelt coalition, and their priorities would shape the democratic parties agenda for at least the next generation, really the next two, at least. My story, then, is both a local and a national tale. It starts as a new york story, the story of a young man, a product of the fourth ward on manhattans Lower East Side, a grandson of east irish immigrants, from a family who selfidentified as catholic and working class. We learned later on his father was not irish at all, he was catholic and german, but they selfidentified as irish. Young al lost his father in the eighth grade and was compelled to leave school and go to work fulltime to support his family. For several years, this kid worked 12hour days starting at 4 00 a. M. As a checker at the fulton fish market. Later on he would joke that his only Academic Degree was an ffm, standing for the fulton fish market. Along with the church and hard work and grim poverty, the other universal element on al smiths Lower East Side was the taminy hall political machine. As a young man, smith became acquainted with saloon keeper and local taminy hall wheeler and dealer tom foley. Under foleys tutelage, smith rose through the ranks of the infamous machine, and by 1903, thanks to his faithfulness, foley sent young smith to albany as a state legislator. During his first legislative session, smith could best be described as a political hack. He didnt give a single speech, he voted the party line. He was ignored, he was overwhelmed, but he grew into the job. So much so that by 1911 when his party took control of the state legislature, new York State Legislature was dominated by republicans for most of this period, partly because of old political alliances and partly because of gerrymandering. But after a scare in 1910, democrats took over the legislature, and in 1911, Charles Murphy pictured here in st. Louis a few years later with al smith, Charles Murphy sponsored young al smith for a Senate Majority leader, and smiths best friend, german immigrant robert f. Wagner, for majority leader of state senate. The tragedy that happened next is well known. In the midst of these two young legislators first session with real power, on march 25th, 1911 came the horrors of the triangle shirtwaist factory fire, a terrible inferno that engulfed a sweat shop on the Lower East Side and killed 148 workers, most of them young, jewish, immigrant girls and young women from the Lower East Side, many of whom had protested against unfair Labor Conditions just a couple of years earlier. Well, smith and wagner pictured here in a photograph taken years later formed an investigative commission, and they brought in nonpartisan reformers to be expert witnesses. We have to make this right. There was a particular place in this process for the only groups that had really taken these issues seriously in the past, largely women reformers from progressive organizations, people like mary dryer of the womens trade union league who was named a commissioner. People like henry street, settlement founder and Public Health champion, lillian wald pictured here who would be a great supporter later on of governor smith and a great champion when he ran for president. And especially involved and there are a lot of notables but especially was Francis Perkins of the National Consumers league. She took smith and wagner and other politicals on field trips to see the horrible Labor Conditions in factories all around the empire state. And she would later on become a great adviser to smith on industrial issues as governor, and eventually, as you probably know, would be the first female cabinet secretary when she became fdrs labor secretary. Well, this interaction between largely female progression reformers is sort of counter counteruntuitive and into a broad range of labor and social welfare crises facing the labor state. Such issues would dominate smith and wagner, so that in 1918 when smith was running for governor of new york, he was proposing a broad array of social welfare and labor reforms. Here you can see him being sworn in after his First Successful run for governor. Predictably, once al smith was elected in 1918 in a very close election that republicans blamed on voting being depressed because of fears of the flu pandemic that year thats probably not the case, but in any event, his agenda would reflect the agenda of the social welfare progressives with whom he had interacted. As governor, he pursued labor reforms, including something that was a major transformation at the time, a 48hour maximum work week for women in factories, or pushing against child labor or pushing for an improved workmens compensation program. He also pursued what i would call a sort of broadly defined social welfare regime in the new york state, help for a local housing improvements, charitable hospitals, clinics and Educational Programs for maternal health. People always forget much of new york is incredibly rural and isolated and has there are whole counties with no access to health care at the beginning of this administration, and so that is a major investment as well. And investment in recreation and in conservation initiatives in the adirondacks and catskills, and dozens of new state parks were created, including nearly all the great state beaches on long island that many of us still enjoy and public education. In smiths first year as governor, new york spent 9 million on education. By 1927, that figure was a much more robust 82. 5 million. In the meantime, he modernized State Government both through specific reforms and through constitutional amendments to streamline the bureaucracy to make it function more efficiently and more economically so you could get these things down without being accused of bloated bureaucracy and incompetent big government. By 1928, he would be lauded by Francis Perkins, a great champion of his in that election as, and im quoting here, the first politician who has built his political career on the practical expression and legislation and in government of this passion for social justice. In large part, and this matters for the National Campaign moving forward, al smith was successful because he kept taking his ideas directly to the people. Indeed, al smiths political style matters here as well. He was able to succeed broadly because not only was he personally popular, but he also was able to communicate a very robust, sophisticated, complicated Progressive Agenda in popular terms to the mass of voters in a charming and relatable way. And thats how you actually succeed in a democracy. Its all well and good to have neat ideas, but rather than being theoretical and even elitist as many progressive reformers tended to be, often selfconsciously, the Reform Program proffered by al smith was transformed by its sponsor into a peoples initiative. We should note, of course, that one other element matters to this record in new york and especially pas a national candidate. Al smith promoted a pluralistic view of American Life. This pluralism, this acceptance of the increasingly diverse reality of the American People was intertwined with the economic and welfare elements that i have discussed. At least from the perspective of the urban working classes, most of whom were recent immigrants, new stock voters, marginalized groups. Justice for such people meant both industrial democracy and social respect. This meant that al smith opposed prohibition, not just because prohibition isnt any fun but also as a way of standing up for the legitimacy of his followers folk ways. Similarly it meant opposing harsh immigration restrictions, literacy tests, discriminatory National Origins quotas that were established in the 1924 immigration restrictions, and other immigration policies that were generally grounded in an anglosaxon vision of what became the fad in the 1920s 100 americanism. Smith and his admirers took this agenda in 1924 to the Democratic National convention. There they hoped to have al smith run for the nomination to try and fort William Smith mcadoo who was the son of woodrow wilson, and at that convention it was mcadoo against smith, it was the rural west and south Democratic Party versus the big city north and midwestern Democratic Party, it was the northeastern cities against the klan. The klan had 600 members nationally in 1924. It was a battle against this idea of 100 americanism. They had a big debate on whether or not to have a plank of the Democratic Party platform in 1924 denouncing the ku klux klan by name. And the debate raged and people were booing and yelling at each other. There were fist fights on the floor of the convention. By the way, smith and his allies had Home Court Advantage because it was being held at Madison Square garden in the heart of manhattan, and so taminy hall packed the arena with all their pals from the Lower East Side and everywhere else, east side, west side, all ornd taround the. So they were heckling the southern speakers who were defending the klan, then a young georgia delegate gave a speech in which he said, if youre a true southerner, we need to move on and we need to stand up against the klan. And the northerners were cheering them, and they tried to press into the georgia delegation to shake his hand. The other southerners wouldnt even cheer for their fellow georgian. And as the rhode island delegation was pressing into the georgia delegation, this large band started playing the famous and popular tribute to general sherman marching through georgia. This did not go over very well with the southern delegates. There were over 100 ballots in the sweltering july heat in m y Madison Square garden. They ended up with a candidate john w. Davis. In the midst of the chaos, threetime president ial loser William Jennings bryan, a year away from his grave, had taken to the podium, reprimanding the rowdy taminyites, saying if the Democratic Party failed in its Historic Mission against privilege, quote, some other party will grow up to carry on those issues and take our place. B but, he added, that new party will never find the leaders of a noble cause in the gallery. It surely would be carried on but not by these big city hooligans. And this is the key. Which direction was the Democratic Party poised to turn . To the past, to bryan, to the klan, or to some unknown future . We take for granted today that the democrats were going to become the party of fdr and of liberalism and eventually of pluralism. None of this was clear in the 1920s when the plank rejecting the klan got rejected. They couldnt even reject the klan by name in 1924. The previous election, their nominee, governor cox of ohio, denounced hyphenated americanism, so there is no guarantee the democrats will become this party of pluralism. But al smith and his growing cohort of admirers had a vision. Despite smiths loss at the convention, 1925 turned out to be a good year for al smith. He was reelected governor of the state with a landslide, including new york which Calvin Coolidge won hands down. From 1925 forward, smith was a National Figure and a serious contender for the next president ial nomination. Of course, what is better known about this whole process is the religious question and understandably so. By 1927 it became increasingly clear that despite al smiths intent to focus on his policy agen agenda, and he made this clear time and again, his religion remained fundamental to his national reputation. Anticipating an al smith president ial bid, alabama senator thomas hefflin pictured here, a fellow democrat and a noted anticatholic assailed the governor of new york on the floor of the senate in 1927. He later got into an argument on the floor with daniel steck of iowa on how to pronounce stecks home state. Now hefflin was sent to a National Speaking tour partly funded by the klan in 1928. This would become par for the course for senator hefflin. But the following month an essay was published in the atlantic by Charles Marshall questioning whether an american president could uphold the constitution and respect religious freedom. Smith saw this as an opportunity. He composed a rejoinder. He hoped he had put the issue to rest that he was a patriot also as well as a faithful catholic. And he continued to ground his president ial ambitions in his Progressive Agenda and in his gubernatorial resume. In fact, i go a step further. I argue that the heart of smiths president ial aspirations was this specialized Progressive Agenda growing out of his years as governor of the empire state. His campaign, in other words, represented a nationalization of the peculiar version of progressivism that al had in new york. On the other hand, the culture of al smith as a cultural symbol is indeed warranted. He was the First Major Party of anticatholic nomination, he bludgeoned the ku klux klan and challenged religious quotas. His trademark brown derby along with his perpetual cigar became staples with political iconography. Clearly cultural battles over alcohol and urbanism and particularly over smiths catholic faith were of great significance in 1928, and im guessing many of you, most of you, probably already knew that. These things were important. They clearly mattered to voters, as you can see in this cartoon. The klan really did burn crosses in opposition to smith when his train arrived in some states. And the democrats really did use these cultural wedges to try and attract new stock voters into their party. Not just catholics, either, but jewish voters, africanamerican voters as well, making the 1928 campaign an unprecedentedly pluralistic one. The tomb of the unknown soldier, which was dedicated 97 years ago yesterday, was a powerful and potent symbol of this pluralism. For example, one of smiths many proteges in new york, the mayor of new york city, jimmy walker, proclaimed of the tomb of the unknown soldier that, quote, no one knew what color he was and no one knew where he went to church. Similarly, bostons once and future mayor James Michael curley displayed an image of the monument at his headquarters with the sardonic caption, what a tragedy if we should learn he was a jew, catholic or negro. It is essential to recognize, however, that far from monopolizing the debate, such questions provided an opening wedge for al smith and his allies to pursue more indepth discussion of other issues that in the context of their time represented important idealogical divisions between the parties, especially between the parties nominees. This is where historians, generally speaking, have gotten it wrong. Theyve dismissed al smiths policy ideas either as unimportant or unserious or not significantly different from those of herbert hoover, and thats, if you dig into the history and his governorship and what hes saying on the campaign trail and how people are responding, thats simply not correct. As i show in depth in chapter 3, al smith went into great detaildetail enunciating his ideas on policy, tariff issues, administrative reform, something he had engaged in in new york and hoped to take to the federal level. On all of these questions and others he challenged the status quo. And he presented in the form of his progressive governorship the blueprints, sometimes vague, sometimes very specific, but always the blueprints in his governor his gubernatorial resume of an alternative approach to national administration. Indeed, as i show in chapters 3, 4 and 5, the new democrats of 1928, the urban ethnic workers who were voting as a bloc for alfred e. Smith were fully aware of his progressive approach to economic issues. And these voters supported al smith based not only on their biographical similarity and their mutual disdain for prohibition, but also those things matter but also what mattered was an emerging political idealogy that was shape the new perspective of American Workers and eventually transform them into new deal democrats. This is important to recognize because since urban ethnic workers were voting for al smith based not exclusively on cultural issues but also on economic and welfare and labor concerns, and since, as i demonstrate in the book with all sorts of statistics i wont bore you with here, those voters eventually went on to become the heart of the fdr coalition. What all this means is that the 1928 election should be viewed as one in which a new coalition began to materialize around principles that would inform the new deal and provide the basis of democratic policy for decades. In the midst of the very real and very meaningful cultural struggles of 1928, the Smith Campaign would, as francis perki perkins prophesied at the time set the ideas around the country. So you could have pluralism and economic reform in the same candidate. As i pointed out, and this was important, it wasnt just smiths fellow Irish Catholics who were paying attention, and that mattered as well. For a long time, the irish had dominated big city machines, especially in the northeast, and they had done so with a sort of klannish insolarity, and a lot of ethnics had aligned with the republicans and the irish and canadians in new england became staunch republicans in rhode island, for example, partly because of rivalries with the irish both within the Catholic Church and within politics and other groups, the italians to a lesser extent, and in other parts of the country as well, not just new england. But now these groups were starting to make common cause. In an africanamerican newspaper, they said the klan opposed jewish and negroes. Let them rise up and take down such a doctrine. They reminded their mostly catholic readers that republicans were against foreigners, catholics and negroes, one of smiths most prominent supporters was one of the bestknown rabbis at the time, rabbi stephen s. Wise, who said going after smith as a catholic, his opponents were going after the americanism of diverse different groups, including jewish americans. And theres Something Else to point out, and that is that these groups understood that the campaign was about these cultural issues as well as about economic issues. So this is a pretty typical cartoon, actually. This is from the baltimore american, and you can see what they think of herbert hoover. He is nesting with the klan and racial prejudices and bigotries. But look who else, industrial democracy. There is an understanding that there are numerous issues at stake here. And, indeed, the Baltimore Afroamerican pointed this out several times on their pages. They always had a working class audience and a working class editorial disposition. And so they recognized that the people being excluded culturally were also often the same people who were being left behind by the 20s economy, those for whom the 20s werent roaring for them as much as other people. So the boston noted, quote, the chevrolets, used cars, et cetera, are for al smith. The studebakers, packards, lincolns, et cetera, are for hoover. Or for one writing overseas but was deported, which is a different story, as garvey put it, smith is a man who was sprung from the common people. He knows their wants and their heartbeats and their pulse. Hoover has been pampered by the monopolist class. He himself is a millionaire. He can only see power from the capitalist point of view. The 20s didnt roar for everybody. Poverty and even being just on the rungs of the working class tended to intersect with cultural religion by ethnicity, by race. So smiths campaign, which dealt with both economics and culture, was a holistic one. And that is the key to understanding why people responded to him the way they did. Grassroots passion translated into enthusiastic receptions for smith at Campaign Stops around the country. Welcomes for the democrat were compared favorably to the only similarly triumphal display of unbridled diffusion in recent memory, welcome parades for aviator charles lindberg. They described the riot for smith in chicago where a huge crowd gathered at the train station to thunder their approval of the new yorker. In decreasingly republican philadelphia, which once had been a rockribbed republican city, but that was start to go break down in 1928, hundreds of thousands jammed the sidewalks and cheered like a tidal wave as smith made his way to deliver what was described as a striking speech before a wildly enthusiastic crowd. No democrat even bothered to campaign in philadelphia in 20 years, no democratic president ial nominee, i should say. New yorkers, of course, arent going to be outdone, and they responded to these developments with a clamorous reception of their own. A crowd of 45,000 approached delirium during smiths brooklyn speech while 20,000 yelling voices granted smith described by new york papers as an exhibition of his campaign at Madison Square garden. Outside the halls, 2 million new yorkers greeted their governor as he paraded triumphantly down the streets of his hometown to conclude his theyre cop contrary to the ideals of independence, which he held dear. But he was also running on his gubernatorial record. I love this cartoon because it makes my whole argument for me. And the point is that al smith was effective at communicating that record to a broader National Audience in 1928. I gave you an example, ill give you two more. Joseph f. Nolan of westfield, new jersey, an irish american, first time voter, explained to the newark evening news that smiths gubernatorial resume was, and im quoting, ample proof of visibility. If that record is indicative of what is to be expected of him in the event of his election, the United States is destined for one of the most distinguished administrations in its history. This recognition that smith wanted to take his show on the road was bipartisan politicians mocked smiths liberal administration of new york. His nickname has been had been the happy warrior, a name gaven to him by franklin roosevelt. They mocked him as the happy spender. Some working class writers in those same states scolded their republican governors for their miserly administration, citing the many benefits of smiths more prodigal approach. Indeed, despite the dismissiveness of some scholars who dont take these ideas seriously and see it all u about cultural issues, despite that, working class americans understood what smith and hoover stood for. Theres a wonderful speech that i stumbled upon in these boxes and folders within the boxes of letters to al smith and one was from a High School Girl from springfield, massachusetts. Polish american girl. Catherine coughski, who sent al smith a copy of the smith he had made at her High School Debate on who should be the next president of the United States. This is not some politico. This is not some member of the party. Some democratic hack. Some editorialist. People understand whats going on. Heres what she said. On the enactment of a legislative program, he has been able to protect the man, woman and child engaged in industry. He has improved the Public Health, attained the finest standard of public service. This could only be attained with his leadership. The governor has provided during his eight years as governor of new york, his desire and power to make the people as interest nd the government as the people himself. Hes been through hardships himself. Between him and the people is that bond which makes them trust him with their loyalty and their love. Now of course you know how it ends. Al smith lost in a landslide. However, what i have found and what i hope i demonstrate in chapters four and five of this book, sorry, i had a visual. What i hope that ive shown you here tonight is that not only were millions of new working class recent immigrant voters becoming immigrants in 1928 and not only would they remain so for several generations, but also most al smith voters understood the democratic candidate as representing both cultural and social and economic reform and most of those voters were clambering for both by 1928. This combination of empowerment with social welfare appeals, had been the formula of the governorship and it was the platform from which he sought presidency. In 1928, al smith nationalized his particular brand offing progressiveness. And while he went down to a bitter defeat that year, as you can see, the ideas he promoted were taken up by his enthusiastic supporters and through their efforts and the efforts of their political representatives. Especially sort of in the in the middle ranks of congress, up and coming new cohort politicians. Through their efforts, his ideas infused the reforms of the new deal with those earlier progressive priorities and helped transform american politics and eventually, American Life. Thank you. Very much for being here and ill take a few questions. Thank you very much for that really fascinating and incredibly rich discussion of things that i knew little about. But thats also not my area of the world. So we now have plenty of time for question and answer. And so i will now invite the audience to pepper dr. Childs with questions to expand upon our understanding. Relative to the last slide, how do you explain the fact that with his anticlimate position, he won all of the Southern States or most. Actually, if we can go back to that, this is a very important story. So, hes the first democrat since reconstruction who didnt carry not tennessee, harding carried tennessee, but north carolina, virginia, florida. Hes the first democrat in history who didnt carry texas. The only reason was because of his running mate. He barely carried alabama. In south carolina, its pretty sure they cheated. In the deep south, they vote democratic, theres a whole, actually, its not my next project, but the one after this, is this campaign in the south because ive already written it. And what happens is there are, theyre a different set of complex factors in the deep south. Its whos the Greater Party for white supremacy. The republicans are still the party of lincoln. Of reconstruction. Those and so democratic politicos in the deep south can campaign on if you, we understand we dont like this guy. He makes us uncomfortable. But if you let them take over the federal government and keep it by sundering the solid south, then all is lost. On the other hand, the republicans are flirting with a lily white policy, purging black delegates from their ranks. So its basically both parties in the south. Its a sort of, the south is always a sort of real life counterfactual in these years and at this time, its the opposite of everything i described. Whats interesting, ill talk about this tonight, but there is something about this in the book. Farmers, just like textile workers and certain other sectors including mining, farmers had a terrible 1920s. There was no roaring 20s for farmers. These states were a lot closer than they should have been, but they stayed democratic. These stayed republican. Smith did very well in the wheat belt and corn belt, but also among struggling cotton farmers. How much of this is race, economics . Prohibition . Thats a balance and thats when you have to get into the weeds, but thats really the answer. Its not a short answer, but its a medium length answer to your question. That is a very good question. Always important to address the south. They made me cut the chapter on the south. I guess i shouldnt say that. Any way. If youre interested, it will be out, eventually. Yes. I have no idea. Only time will tell. It couldnt hurt. But i stick with the past because i have trouble predicting the future. Other questions . Yes, sir. What were the republicans doing so well that just had a huge landslide . Well, in most of the country, the economy was rather robust. Its not as universal as a textbook might paint it, but a lot of part of the economy were quite strong and so hoover is seen as the genius behind the Harding Coolidge prosperity and it was his system. He and melon, the treasury secretary, are both widely lauded and rightly so. In the moment, it was working well. You probably know how it turns out. It seemed to be going very well at the time. Also, herbert hoover, among some progressives, was seen as a progressive. So some of those social work women actually said well, its basically a tie and the tie goes to hoover because hes against prohibition. A lot of the social work women were in favor of prohibition. So some noted social workers, most famously, jane adams, were in favor of hoover. So its not like everybody of the progressive inclination gravitates to smith. Then part of it was the ethno cultural issues. We dont want a catholic in the white house. We dont want to end prohibition. By this stage, most people arent obeying prohibition, but the saying was that they live wet and they vote dry. Right. And so its that sort of cognitive dissonance thats part of politics often. But the economy for many people was doing quite well outside of certain sector, but there were warning signs if people were paying attention, which they werent. Most people werent. Other questions or thoughts. So this is based on a rather dim recollection of u. S. History. My understanding is that the explanation for the switch from this landslide for hoover to roosevelts dramatic victory, thats general ly put down to te depression, but are you offering a different that smith built in 28 was moving the country in that direction . Well, you need ed the depression in order to make the roosevelt landslide happen. Pu what im arguing is that this was going to shape the course that things took once events changed. Does that make sense . So, smith couldnt win this way. Thats enough. But if you look, this is why i spend a lot of time in new england. Because in new england, the depressions already going on. They interviewed textile workers 50 years later. One time during the depression, they dont need the stock market to crash to they will them theyre suffering. The same thing with farmers and other sectors. And so in new england, its sort of a nice case study on you have the right political and economic atmospherics, what are the potentialties of what smith is doing in 28 . By 32, his ideas were out there. He had won over the majority of voters, not the majority of these districts, but the majority of voters in the 11 biggest cities in america, all of which harding had won. He had won over, you saw massachusetts and rhode island had switched. People often remark he didnt even win new york. New york was a very republican state in president ial voting at this time. Smith was an aberration and new york was a lot closer than it normally was. So its moving in a certain direction, but once the depression hits, first of all, fdr is not like what would al smith have done, ill do this now. F drdr needs to deal with the depression, right . Thats his job. Thats what the 100 days are about. Well lets look and see what ems smith has done. As the new deal goes on, his coalition in congress, his supporters are the hard of his Political Base is the people who rose to prominence within the Smith Coalition and theyll shape the direction that things move as time goes on. So its a little more, there are those who say sort of bluntly, smith makes the new deal and thats, no. Thats going, thats being too enthusiastic. But this sort of helps shape the political dynamic moving forward, which is just as important and robust an argument. Just has nuance to it. Yes, maam. Why did you, how did you get interested in this topic . Oh, mercy. You really should. Well, some of you know, including you, that i, i fell in love with a young lady from long island and i would go visit her dads house and hes here. And a bunch of things on long island named after robert moses. Who the heck is robert moses. So i read the power broker, a beautiful book, pretty harsh, but well done. And 2,000 pages later, i knew who robert moses was, but he had a good analysis of al smith and he introduces some of the themes i delved into about smith and administrative reform. So actually, long island beaches and Robert Carrow reminded me there had been this character, al smith, that was mentioned for a few minutes in my Excellent High School history class and not at all in College History classes so i thought i knew more about this guy and few years later, here we are. So thats the short version of that story. Later after this president ial campaign and fdr is president , al smith actually opposed some of the new deal policies that he seemed to sew the seeds for in his campaign. What happened . Thats right. Youve made an important point. The book has sort of a sad ending. And so, his ttorians debate thi. Some historians argue, for those who arent aware, after fdrs in power, smith, after by late 34 into 35, 36, turns against him. Campaigns for republican in 1936. First time in his life. And what in the world is going on . Some historians argued that smith always had an inherent conservatism. If you read anything about him as governor, that just doesnt make sense. Some historians argue and some of the people who knew him, argue there was an element of personal bitterness. Smith lost new york state in 1928. Fdr barely carried it to the elected governor and fdr, smith thought he was going to be the sort of gray imminence of new york and sort of run it behind the scenes and fdr was like im the governor now. I like you, but its my turn and smith sort of resented this. In 32, smith wanted to run for president again. Fdr bested him. And the other part is the voices around him were changing. His whole career, his whole job, was to help people from the Lower East Side as an assemblyman. Later on, to help the people of new york state. After he stopped being governor, he was broke and his friends including john rascome, who was a very conservative former republican who had become chair of the dnc because he add mired his fund raising capabcapabilit. He helped smith become the first president of the empire state building. And so now when the depression hits, his job is not to help people get through the depression. Its to sell real estate to struggling businessmen in an empty skyscraper and his view of depression becomes very different. So there are a lot of competing arguments. The cop out argument for me is well, this isnt technically a biography, so thats it. But the fact is whats important about it is youve hit on something and i argue this and not all historians agree, he did change. This is, what hes doing 34, 35, 36, is a break from his past and fdr was bemused and remarked to frances perkins, everything that he had done with what he would have done as president. Its a good question. Well never know the the other thing ill just point out. If you want a happier ending for the smith story, Robert Slayton writes a biography that goes to the end. He lived until 1944. Its a really good biography. I dont agree on everything, but its a really good, solid biography. He says look, as things were going badly in europe, smiths one of the ones who speaks out after crystal and he says weve got to support fdr on the war efforts. Even if hes not supporting him politically. So he does step up when some of the other people dont and the other thing is he didnt completely change parties. Hes always a tammany guy. Still best friends with robert wagner, although theyre constantly arguing with each other by the late 30s. In 1934, they had a Gubernatorial Election in new york and smith supported the very liberal democrat, herbert lehman, over the republican, his former protege, robert moses, who he could have easily supported. So its more of an fdr thing, i think, but i cant read it in mind, but that would be my speculation. Lots of hands. Yes, sir. Tammany is pretty wellknown for being corrupt. Yes. How is it that smith and wagner i guess avoided that and were successful . Its a great point. Essentially, there was a newer generation and they were the leaders of it. Smith and wagner, who basically said we could use power, not simply to plunder the municipal treasury, but to help people where we came from. And also a, charlie murphy, who you saw a picture of him, gave them a certain degree of idea lonl cal autonomy and independence. Not always. There were certain bills that he would get wagner to stop if it wasnt good for a business ally, but that was early in the teens. They did avoid a lot of that. There were some whispers, and this is not in the book, because theyre whispers. In the 1980s, that a business man who had been on hard times, was basically giving him this pension so he could live comfortably. The person who looked into this was Daniel Patrick moynihan because he read about it and was alarm and basically, theres never been any evidence that there was any quid proquo or anything. So youre right that le and wagner were not crook, as best we know. We could find something tomorrow, but hopefully, i would have found it. They did avoid that trap. I mentioned jimmy walker. He was from that generation, too. If you know new york city history, he went down in flames and got forced out over a corruption scandal. So they dont completely clean up their act. In some ways, these guys are special. Thats a good question. Yeah. They werent opposed to him or anything like that but it would have been very difficult to have like bishops and things. That would have really hurt things. Ive talked to people who have since passed, this is an eck doe tall, that in catholic school, al smith was put up, but in factories in new jersey and new england, they had posters of hoover that said your job is safe. So i guess well call it a tie. I dont know mufch, if there wa a robust role, im not aware of it. There were plenty of conspiracy theorys. You saw the one of him kizzining the cardinals ring and this makes him not an american and there were plenty of people who thought that was going on, but he wasnt running as a pawn of the churnch. There are still people on the internet who think that. It doesnt take long on google to find them. But its not true. Those who typically sided with hoover based on prohibition, but what was the role of women in als campaign . There was a woman, didnt even mention here because shes featured mom pr e ed prominentl book. Belle moscowits was the unofficial person run ining the whole campaign. Now, within the dnc, women and male delegates were 5050 representative. That does not mean bafor a seco. Once wips suffrage becomes constitution al, both of the parties freaked out. And they were afraid there was going to be a woman vote. If all the women vote for one side or the other, our side is in trouble. They scram bed to get as many women involved as possible. So in the 20s, theyre doing that. This is part of the continuation of that trend. By the late 20s, they realize theres not going to be a woman vote so they start to be more dismissive. In the meantime, some of the men would do things without consulting the women. For example, choosing john as the chair of the dnc. Its not like this is a wonderful moment of gender equality, but belle is his top adviser. Women like lillian wall and jane adams. They had basically an agreement, since we both agree to disagree, neither of us will campaign actively. Which is neither of them actually follow agreement because lillian writes letters to dozens of social workers and they send a mass letter that goes all over the country. But they send letters all around the country on smiths behalf. Francis perkins speaks actively touring the country. As does molly, she comes out of the National Consumers league and becomes a prominent new dealer. My next project, mary teresa of nnlz, is a congresswoman and shes campaigning actively. So women play a role in the campaign. And it is recognized at the time, even though belle is behind scenes, newspapers comment on how she is his political brains. And thats another part of the answer to his switch. So you spoke a bit earlier about the idea of parties campaigning in states that would kind of been i guess mothered in the past. So, keeping in mind the current political climate, is there perhaps some forgotten knowledge that politicses today are like relearning . That we could take from this situation . There are a few things can be learn learned. To say these people are voting based on this issue and normal people dont vote based on this issue. Some people do, fanatics and bigots. But most people arent fanatics and bigots. I hope most people arent. I dont know. Some people are are rolling their eyes. People are complicated and their lives are messy. So thats the first thing, right . Class issues still matter. Cultural identity matters. Marichalized groups are still at the bottom of the Economic Pyramid or whatever metaphor you want to use and so look, i think we need savvy politicians could recognize that and perhaps do a lot of good. And forgotten areas, thats another key point. Either party in the last few cycles has done better when they reach out to areas where they tended to avoid. When the democrats took back congress in the george w. Bush years, they went to purple america and red states and when donald trump was elected president of the United States, he went into blue states. Expanding matters, but even more to your question is when youre talking to people, you have to really understand what theyre going, you have to try at least. And the thing about al smith was awe then tis thety. He didnt always translate to, like he could talk about the problems of a poor farmer, but a lot of them were like this guy doesnt really get it. You have to have a certain authenticity, too. I think thats something that contemporary politicians would do well to heed. So, hopefully ive navigated that mine field. Other questions. Sir. Was al smith married . Did he have a family . Yes, his wife was katy smith. She died a bit before him and fdr sent him a nice note after she died because they were coming back to the end. He had gosh, four children, i want to say. There was an al smith, he was al smith jr. But there was another al smith. He was a couple of daughters. He had children, a family and the family lived with him at the state house and they had a wedding. There were beautiful pictures of his daughters wedding at the cathedr cathedral. If youve ever been to albany, the albany cathedral is right next door to the governors mansion. He had a special pug in the front row. But there are these pictures, the whole cathedral is just inundated with flowers. So yes, he had a family. He and his wife, from all the evidence, were very much in love and devoted to one another. And he had a number of children and grandchildren and theres lovely pictures of him with his grand kids at the beach. The 30s arent really about al smith rallying against fdr. Theyre about al smith being an elder statesman of the smith family, right . Im actually glad you brought this up because theres a happy memory, too. Its him and his grand kids and he doesnt like the way things have turn theed and hes recentful probably of fdr, but thats not really the point. Hes a human being, just like the people im talking about. Im glad you gave an opportunity the address that. Thats a great point. Yes. Well get to both. Any of his children or grandchildren . I was not, however, afterward, i worked up the courage to send a copy of the book and a letter to al smith the fourth and his wife sent me a nice note back saying he was enjoying the book and if i ever speak in connecticut or new york to let them know. So ill have a further answer to you hopefully at some point in the future. Another . Sure. Giving all the influence women had on him, was his wife influential in his kcareer of politics . She was sort of, she wasnt like Eleanor Roosevelt. Yeah, no, shes not an Eleanor Roosevelt. But shes there on the campaign trail with him. As best we, as best i understood. She was in accord with both his religious and political views but Eleanor Roosevelt is Eleanor Roosevelt. Shes special. So. Yes. His success as governor, politically. In all ways, and his support of the common person how would you compare or see as his secret that you would give to present day governors . Well, i really do think its the question of mentioned befor. I think he really does care about this. Hes move d, hes not well educated in a formal sense. His first term as a state delegate didnt go well. He stayed in his hotel room and st studied new york law and learned to be this master of how it worked. So curiosity, being interested in how government works, using ill to help people. But also authenticity, from your own experience, whatever that means, but also then authentically caring about people. Perkins takes him to the factories to see these horrible conditions. And when he goes out even to rural new york, right, he cares about the conditions that he sees and reads about and even people who are from very different walks of life from smith, he gets letters from the new york, Northern New York Sportsmans Association because of his conversation initiatives and they say you really understand what were try iing do. Hes not one of these sort of outdoors men from the a adirondacks, but he could understand and care about these issues and so i think those would be the basics. Any other questions . Great questions. Thank you all very much. Thank you for all your questions. Id like to thank you all once again for coming here this evening. Thank you one last time for a wonderful talk. Thank you very much. If youd like to talk afterwards, hes here for a little while and there are some cookies out in the hall. Help yourself on the way. I do, if anybodys curious. Weeknights this month on American History tv, its the conte contenders. Our series who look at 14 president ial candidates who lost the election but had a lasting effect on u. S. Politics. Tonight, we feature wendell welke. After losing to franklin roosevelt, he then became the president and formal representative to britain, the middle east, soviet union and china. Watch tonight at 8 00 eastern and enjoy American History tv this week and every weekend on cspan3. Every saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on American History tv on cspan3, go inside a Different College classroom and hear about topics ranging from the american revolution, civil rights, and u. S. President s, to 9 11. Thanks for your patient and for logging into class. With most College Campuses closed, watch professors transfer teaching to a virtual setting to engage with their students. Gorbachev did most of the work to change the soviet union, but reagan met him halfway, reagan encouraged him. Reagan supported him. Freedom of the press, which well get to later, i should mention, madison called it freedom of the use of