Catholics. Just to put this in the context of what weve been looking at the past couple of weeks, what weve been looking at is this struggle for American Catholics to kind of find their place in american culture. Despite persistent and clear expressions of loyalty and patriotism and despite the real and human sacrifice of life in the civil war, after the civil war catholics remained a people viewed by most americans with suspicion and fear. A people apart, a people to be feared. A variety of reasons for this. They were members of what was perceived to be a Foreign Church based in rome. They were, as weve seen, participants in a separate School System. Even just by the virtue of their status as members of the working class at a time when the working classes are coming to be seen as the dangerous classes, catholics appearedded as a people apart, a people dangerously apart. Catholic efforts to participate in mainstream american institutions only seemed to make things worse, and this is perhaps most clear in the area that we will look at today, politics. From the founding, even really before the founding of the united states, many protestantamericans believed that the hierarchical authority, structures of the Catholic Church instilled submission and civility in catholics. You can recall that reading from john adams in the canon of feudal law where he described the Catholic Church as the root of all evil, certainly the root of history. Adams was not an outlier, that was a common component of angloamerican political culture. And it was this submission to the authority that rendered catholics bad citizens in the new republic, bad citizens unfit to participate in american republican, small r republican Political Institutions. Hutch to the horror of native protestants, however, catholics and especially the host hated catholics, Irish Catholic ares turned out to be enthusiastic participants in the order. Catholics embraced american Political Institutions and american participation in those institutions. Still, this did not prove that catholics could be good americans. If anything, native protestants responded by arguing that this participation itself was undermining the american political system because the catholics did not understand the true nature of politics. What is the true nature of politics . I think thats something were still debating today. But it is clear in the late 19th Century America that protestants and catholics had different understandings of politics. And these different understandings, i think, are best understood not in different political theories, but as different political cultures. The contrast between the two cultures, i think, was best expressed in the work of a mid 20th Century American historian richard hostetter. I do have this written down for you, the pulitzer prizewinning book the age of reform written in 1955. Its about the late 19th century into the early 20th century after the new deal. And hostetter introduces this period with this illuminating contrast between two different political cultures. Ing one of those cultures described as founded upon indigenous that means anglo, indigenous, middle class yankee protestant political traditions. This tradition assumed and demanded a constant disinterested activity of the citizen in public affairs. Disinterested is the key. Politics is not supposed to be about interest. It is disinterested activity. This tradition argued that that political life ought to be run in accordance with general principles and abstract law apart from personal if needs. We dont get into politics for our personal needs. In addition, political culture carried the assumption that government should be in a good part an effort to moralize the lives of individuals. Weve seen a bit of this already with the moral reform traditions. It started in the 1830s. These were directly political in terms of being part of a political party, things like the Temperance Movement are the best example of that. Applied to politics, it means that politics should be used to raise the moral level of citizens. Thats one political culture. According to hostetter, there was another political culture founded upon the european backgrounds of immigrants. Got sort of native, yankee protestant the immigrants. These immigrant cultures were generally unfamiliar with independent political action. These people did not come from republics. They werent voting citizens in any way most of them were, however, very familiar with hierarchy and authority. Not just catholics, but any immigrants coming from a kind of traditional peasant culture. Immigrants come to america. Theyre not in search of political theory, her desperately in need of basic material sustenance. And they took for granted that political life would flow out of those needs, that politics was very much about interests. Interest for them, largely interest in survival. Basic material survival. They understood politics not as disinterested, impersonal activity, but politics mainly in terms of personal obligations and strong personal loyalty. And rather than allegiant, abstract laws or mores. So this is personal politics in a kind of immigrant 19th century way, personal connections, personal loyalties. These two ideal types, if you will, of political culture can be somewhat abstract. I want to begin just by giveing you a very specific example, a real life example. This example comes from a book by historian jack beatty. The book is called the rascal king. Its a biography of James Michael curly, an Irish Catholic boston politician who, lets say, is a representative of that second culture. But this is what beatty has to say almost as if he were directly following hostetter. He writes an arktypal archtypal boston story illustrates the resulting clash of cultures. A beacon hill lady kind of an elite within boston, standing for the first culture, yankee, protestant culture. A beacon hill lady once went ringing doorbells on behalf of a highminded candidate for the School Committee many. At one house, an irish house lady listened politely and then asked doesnt he have a sister that works for the school or has something to do with the School System . The beacon hill lady was shocked at what she took to be suggestion of patronage. I assure you, madam, she replied, he is not the kind of man who would ever use his option to advance his sister. To which the south boston the housewife responded, well, if the s. O. B. Wont even help his own sister, why should i vote for him . [laughter] and so that captures that contrast more than anything else. Politics is about helping each other out in material ways, and, you know, for the south boston irish woman, its not about making a million dollars, its maybe getting a job for his sister or relative, Something Like that. His economic interests, sure, material interests, sure. Very, very basic as the level of survival, not enrichment. Now, hostetter writing in 1955 wrote, he described this contrast as one of anglo versus ethic, native versus immigrant. And thats certainly true, but thats fairly broad. Ethnic and immigrant, hes using those terms to include a wide variety of groups. Certainly, not all immigrants were catholics by any means. Many could be jews, protestants, orthodox, the greeks. But in terms of how this conflict played out in mainstream american culture, it was centrally a battle between protestants and catholics. Certainly at the time understood in those terms. And this religious aspect of this conflict is most clear in that First Political cartoon i sent you called the tamany priest. A political cartoon by thomas nast who was appropriately named thomas nast, his ctoon thes very nasty particularly catholics and the irish. But in this cartoon, nast makes very clear theigious dimension of this conflict. Cartoon you have this apelike irishman. So that certainly covers the ethnic and the class elements of is political divide. But on the right, you have a priest. D in the middle youav a goose with the label on the Democratic Party, and the apelike irishman and the priest who we can assume is also irish are carving up the Democratic Party, carving up the spoils, if you will, of local politics. And theyre doing it can figures like hostetter and even more recent historians tend to want to downplay the class on American Catholic history. I want to stress that it is imonly to view these conflicts impossible to view these conflicts apart from religion. The religious divide is as sharp or sharper as any kind of class or racial or ethnic divide. So you have this image from thomas nast who is definitely speaking for the first culture as a yankee protestant the culture of an unholy alliance in urban america. An unholy alliance between Irish Catholic immigrants and an irish Catholic Church. This unholy alliance is generally associated with the urban Democratic Party, but went by the more specific name of tammany hall. Thats the lecture title. Tammany was not the Democratic Party itself, it was a Political Club within the Democratic Party. So think of, i dont know, theres Christendom College here, and theyre the ones who control everything. And thats kind of how tammany hall functionedded. And ask it does give some specificity as well to the northern Democratic Party. We havent had too much time to look at it in this class. Democratic party, again, the oldest party in the american national. Its extremely divided, the southern Democratic Party the party of slave holding, not a whole lot this common with the northern party. Not slave holding anymore, but still very, very distinct from the northern Democratic Party. The southern Democratic Party is very anglo. Not yankee, but certainly anglo, native. They can claim to be true the americans. But the northern Democratic Party, the urban Democratic Party is heavily immigrant and so tends to be referred to more by the term tammany hall, a Political Club within the Democratic Party and in the Democratic Party per se. But this Political Club in new york controls new york City Politics for much of the late 19th century and into with about the middle of the 20th century. And the image that you have here which is very much an image of tamny if hall certainly during suggests tammany hall suggests evil and corruption, again, from the perspective of that political culture. That is what tammany is, little call corruption. The reading that you have for today, however, gives a different, more os if view of more positive view within the culture itself. So first were going to the next part of the class were going to go over some of the history, the most relevant history of tammany hall in the middle of the 20th century. And then, after that, we will look at some collections from to give you what you could say is maybe the response from within that second political culture. First political culture, looking from the outside, this is all corrupt, this is destroying american politics and american virtue. From within that culture, no, its not destroying hearn politics or destroying virtue, its just a different kind of virtue, a virtue very much rooted in community, as we shall see. Nast, again, writing from that First Political culture, anticatholic and antiirish. With all that being said, the charges of corruption, these were not unfounded. In fact, thomas nast first made a National Name for himself by covering the exposure of such corruption in tammany hall politics through a scandal known as the tweed ring. And your next image that i sent to you is this image of tweed alone. This is the harpers weekly interesting, harpers weekly journal of civilization. But on the cover theres this fat, fat guy, and and that is William Maher tweed, the tweed of the tweed ring. To this day, certainly for historians, hes a kind of a symbol of corrupt urban politics. Lliam maher tweed was popularly known as boss tweed. Boss meaning that he was the bos of politics boss of pits in new york. He was the one who called the shots due to his position in tammany hall. Interestingly here, even though some people might associate tweed, tweediness with some irish clothing, tweed was not himself irish he was neither irish nor catholic. He was an immigrant, however. He was the son of immigrants, but immigrants of a scot presbyterian background. I dont know how much history you all know, but back in the old in ireland, there is no sharper conflict between Irish Catholic ares and scot everybody presbyterians. Scottish. They were sworn enemies in the world world. And its old world. And its not like those battle lines completely disappeared in the new world. 18703, 1871, there were actually riots in new york city. They were called the orange riots. They werent about oranges. [laughter] they were about orange, orange men were scottish presbyterians who centuries earlier had supported william of orange in his fight against the catholic king, james ii. Of course, youll remember from your core classes. Every year in july orangemen back in ireland would have, would raid. Theyd kind of march through catholic areas of Northern Ireland celebrating this victory of rot instants over catholics protestants over catholics. Its not just an old world thing. Its caroled to over into the new world and carried over violently where in new york city new york city, orangemen would march through Irish Catholic sections of the city kind of rubbing their face in it, and riots ensued. Thats an example of how old world resentments carried over, but tweed is representative of the possibilities of american life. Most of his followers in politics were, in fact, eye Irish Catholics. Tweed realized that he was in this cosmopolitan city, many different ethnic groups. Ethnic groups also could vote, and you dont get votes by alienating people or dragging up old battles. So he was, tweed though by native anglo perspective was a little more american by virtue of being presbyterian nonetheless, kind of opened up to the catholic community, especially the Irish Catholic community. And we see this in his inner circle, the socalled tweed ring that is associated, again, with this, with this corruption. The next image i have sent out to you is of that of the tweed ring. You see a ring of people all accusing the other person of corruption. But there are four figures that are highlighted in this image. You can see the carryover from the harpers cover that the fat guy on the left there is tweed himself. But going from the right, the little guy there is okie hall, often called elegant okie. He was the mayor of new york but a mayor who was hand picked by the real power of new york, boss tweed, the head of tammany hall. Okie was an anglo, native anglo stock, and at this point it was important to have somebody like that out this front. Even if theyre only a figurehead, it would help to kind of soften the blow of this immigrant political power. They were trying to get critics give critics the illusion, if you will, that angloamericans were still in power. So that kind of public figure, public face of the Democratic Party at least at the level of mayor around the time of tweed was okie hall. So youve got tweed, scotch rest by teen presbyterian, okieal, angloamerican. But the other two figures right in the center of this picture here are Irish Catholics. Richard slippery Dick Connolly who served as comptroller in the City Government, and Peter Sweeney who served as commissioner of parks. Now, neither of these positions suggests great political power the mayor is the person who one runs things. Been who runs things. But, no, no, no, not at this time. These minor, kind of unelected bureaucratic positions like comptroller and commissioner of parks, these were much more important because these were options that dealt with finances and jobs. So half of the tweed ring is Irish Catholic. But more importantly, tammanys rank and file was overwhelmingly irish and catholic, and tweed was seen as their champion. By tweeds critics. Again, the sense of the onlies of the new world put aside old world resentments. They didnt say, oh, were not going to vote, were not going to support the scotch presbyterian. No, they supported him was he supported them. But there was undoubtedly and truly corruption, financial corruption at the heart. In 1871 the New York Times charged tweed with having looted the new york city treasury to the tune of 45 million. Now, that may be chump change these days, but at the time it amounted to a sum greater than the entire annual u. S. Federal budget before the civil war. So this is a lot of money, a lot of money. At the time of the indictment, tweed served as the citys commissioner of public works. Again, it seems like kind of a minor bureaucratic job, position, nothing that would carry with it great powe