[applause] so good evening, everyone. Welcome to New York Historical society. I name is alex, Deputy Director at New York Historical and a half of our present ceo and Vice President of programs, it is a delight to welcome you to our auditorium. The Nights Program the second founding of the civil war and reconstruction we made the constitution is a part of our shorts distinguish speaker series, part of a Public Programs and is always would like to thank mr. Swartz for all of his support which has enabled us to have such a wide array of wonderful programs so why doto e give him a hand. [applause] and, of course, our board of trustees was been most active and really helpful in bringing this institution to the level it is today, we do have trusty whos us today in the audience and all of our chapmans Council Members with us for the great work and support. To kNights Program is going to last one hour and include q a session. It will be conducted with written questions on note cards and you should have received something from one of our volunteers in the audience who has notecardsds and pencils. I will be going through a sims and him with the introduction of mr. And i will collect cards as well and i will hand out to anyone who did not receive it on the way in. And also tonight, after the onstage talk the speakers will be signing books for us in our history store on the seven cents to each side of the building of the books will be there at them for purchase. So tonight wee are thrilled to welcome back to h our stage eric foner. He is Professor Emeritus of history at Columbia University and a serve as president of three major historical associations, the organization of american historians, the American Historical Association and the society of american historians. Hes also the author of numerous books on the history of Race Relations in america and has been awarded the pulitzer prize, the bancroft prize, and 2015 the American History book prize right here at New York Historical society for his book gateway tori freedom. His newest book which was released a couple of weeks ago is the second founding how the civil war and reconstruction remade the constitution. Our moderators this evening, its great pleasure to welcome back Manisha Sinha, draper chair in American History at the university of connecticut and the slush and your fellow at the ratcliffe institute at harvard university. She is author of numerous books on slavery and Abolitionist Movement including her most recent, the slaves caused, history of abolition which was long listed for the National Book award for nonfiction and winner of the Frederick Douglass prize. She is also written for numerous publications including the New York Times, huffington post, boston globe andg the washington post. Before it began as always i would like to say if you can silence any cell phones you might have to anything that makes a noise, and i also realize i forgot to mention the name of her wonderful trustees in the audits, pat, so again thank you to our trustee for all the wonderful work they do for us. Now please join me in welcoming our guests. [applause] thank you alex for that great, very nice introduction for both of us. Id like to welcome all of you to our Public Program on the second founding how the civil war and reconstruction remade the constitution. Of course our guest is a preeminent american historian and youve already heard all the accolades that he has one. But i thought i would also introduce him today with a contemporary description of the radical republican congressman stevens during reconstruction. I came across it so it strictness or inappropriate. And the observer said, at over 70 years of age he was not attended with any abatement of intellectual by vasily of fire of youth. [laughing] so i thought it was an appropriate introduction. This is, in fact, a historical quote. It can be verified. Let me begin with the question i think most authors get. You have written already what s commonly called the bible of reconstruction. This is his big book on reconstruction. So what motivated you to write thisok book on the reconstructin constitutional amendments . Well, before answering that i should say im very happy to be back here at the historical side and particularly to have Manisha Sinha as the interrogator today. She didnt quite mention it but i supervisor doctoral dissertation of columbia quite a few years ago now, and she did get her phd there. [laughing] and this is her chance to get back at me because [laughing] i was on her orals exam ganesh is a chance to ask me questions. Why did i write this book . Youre right, of course ive written a lot about reconstruction. Im not a law scholar. Im not a legal for storing. Im not a lawyer, although some of my best friends are. [laughing] i often write books because i get slightlyy annoyed about the way scholarship is developing, without going into earlier books, and in this case over the years i became convinced that our Supreme Court doesnt fully understand the 13th, 14th and 15thth amendments, and even and her own time in the late 19th century i they really eviscerated them, but even in our own time they have not use these amendments in the way they were intended to really try to combat Racial Injustice in this society. So you know, why not just tell the Supreme Court they are all wrong and maybe one or two of them will listen. So in that way its sort of a revisionist but also there is a debate among historians about it which i i felt was going in a somewhat interesting direction aboutin well, where these Court Decisions based on racism, federalism, on both . Theres a certain narrowness, without denigrating legal scholarship at all, its very important but theres a vision where the evidence is always come speeches in congress or maybe editorials in the new york tribune or things like that, organizations. But theco sort of vast debate in reconstruction about rights, about citizenship, i called Elizabeth Cady stanton in the book saying that was a moment in her memoirs with all these issues were debated up and down the societyl in the courts, in the pulpits at every fireside, every fireside. You have to bring ordinary americans into this debate, particularly africanamericans whose voice is almost never heard in the Supreme Court rulings are a lot of the literature. I just felt there was a sort of gap out there that i would try to fill, i guess. In the book you talk about the reconstruction amendments as quote the Lasting Legacy of reconstruction. We note of course reconstruction was the time after the war when attempt was made to establish an interracial democracy in this country, and it was overthrown with accommodation racial tariffs, legal and political apathy and reaction. I was just wondering how you solve this, this concept that this was a Lasting Legacy when that period itself proved to be relatively shortlived . Yes. Well, we often say with certainly a good argument, reconstruction failed. And theres perfectly good evidence to say that. But if we start with that premise and then worked backward, what happens is historians work back, why did it fail . What was the problem maybe they should have been on land or messed up on this think if we dont see they didnt all fail, and the fact that these amendments were added too the cause of duchenne and remained in the constitution until today, they are still there even though President Trump has indicated he would like to get rid of at least the first sentence of the 14th amendment, is a sign that that impose your interracial democracy didnt totally fail. Many other things. Reconstruction is about many things other than constitutional issues, although most of those get discussed in constitutional terms at one point or another. Many other things, establishment of black educational institutions, they survive. They didnt all fail. We still have black colleges veday which were found in reconstruction. The black Church Becomes a really Major Institution in reconstruction at the center of thoseer communities. As wb the boys said years ago, the very idea w. E. B. Du bois, the very idea of an interracial democracy survive even though the limitation of it didnt to inspire subsequent struggles. Thats why the Civil Rights Era was sometimes called the second reconstruction, because the issues on the agenda right after the civil war kind of came back. I think the constitution amendments are important even though they were nullified inhe many ways around the turn of that century. The fact that they were there and usable was really determine the legal strategy of the civil rights revolution. I agree. I dont like that i i was likeo say reconstruction was overthrown because a there was a Real Campaign to overthrow it of course. Er so you also visualize this time as the second founding. Thats the title of the book. That has to do with these constitutional amendments and the ways in which black citizenship is actually azeto touchstone of this new founding moment. Im going to go back and look at those three specific amendments that you discussed in the book of course. I was wondering if you want to talk about something that has garnered a lot of attention recently, that is criminal exception in the 13th amendment. Right. Can you tell us a little bit about how this exception became part oftt the amendment and its tragic if unforeseen consequences . Let me just take out my constitution here. [laughing]g] and 13th amendment. Just what is she talking up a neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime shall exist in the United States. Involuntary servitude can continue for people convicted of a crime. Where did that come from . I wondered about that. The first thing thats interesting is theres a lot of literature on the 13th amendment. This. Has written about this book on the 13th amendment that dont even mention it in the slightest but thats not surprising. Wasnt mentioned in congress hardly. Charles sumner said one of two things, that was about it. The press debate about the 13th minute said virtually nothing about the dangers involved in allowing servitude for those with being convictedos of a crime. So where did it come from . The language as was widely declared came from the northwest ordinance written by Thomas Jefferson and have migrated therefrom jeffersons Land Ordinance of 1784 which was enacted that would have barred slavery and all u. S. Territories at that time. Where did jefferson, why did jefferson put it in . I called up a couple of my good friends who were jefferson scholars, peter you know the way to graduate school with me and alan taylor, and i said why did jefferson put that in . They both gave the same answer. I havent the slightest idea. [laughing] and we dont actually know, but the real point is it has become a kind of boilerplate language that people neverad mention is every Northern State that barred slavery included that phrase. They took it, so it was familiar language that will not proviso banning slavery in territories acquired from mexico in the mexican war, included that criminal exception. This has become, get a lot of attention because there was this documentary, 13th, a few years ago. That at a slightly conspiratorial edge that this was put in there and order to anticipate mass incarceration. There were no, hardly any prisons back in. There were hardly any prisoners. This is not supposed to be the basis of a giant system, but it did create this unfortunate loophole which later after the end of reconstruction, Southen States created this giant convict labor system as you know where people come mostly black, not all but mostly black were convicted of stealing a chicken and they are sentenced to eight years in the penitentiary and then they are leased out to work on a plantation or a railroad or a mine, o and he became a horrifying system. One of the books about this is called worse than slavery, because the conditions were so horrible. The court always said this isus allowable because the 13th amendment asset criminal exception. One of the points where think about is original meaning,in original intent, conservative view of how to interpret the constitution. But here you have an unintended consequence. Nobody anticipated whatte would happen that has really undermined some of the purpose is really of the 13th amendment. Really important and valuable contributions of this book to look at this as something that was customary that no one thought about and there was no conspiracy to undermine black freedom but the southern politicians saw that pole and worked it. He wanted to get back to the history we live in a time where conspiracy theories are right. Its probably good to have facts straight on that. So if you of course argue in this book i have argued earlier to that the 14th amendment is the most consequential. I would like you to talk more about that. Especially given the fact that you mentioned earlier some others want to revoke its provision of national birthrights. At one point i want to make to start with is that professor cinda in her book a great book on the Abolitionist Movement to quote you what she says abolitionist hitch their star to black citizenship all that was a crucial question, not the civil war. Slaves were not citizens, what about free africanamericans. The white people born in the country were deemed to be citizens of the civil war. It was little question about that. What their rights of citizens were unclear. What about free african and African Americans and citizens of the state. Many states they said citizenship is for what will, no black person can be a citizen of the United States. It was a law of the land when the civil war took place. With the freeing of 4 million slaves to Service Black soldiers in the civil war that question is on the agenda in the first sentence of the 14th amendment says anybody born in the United States is a citizen. And with no racial qualification whatsoever. No qualification to any religion or race or background and relevant today it has nothing to do with the status of your parents. An undocumented immigrant woman who gives birth to a child in the United States with the status of that show is clearly a boy the fact that their mother may have committed a crime is irrelevant. The mother could be a bank robber. That would mean the child can be a citizen. The 14th moment goes beyond that its the longest amendment added to the constitution. It has all sorts of convoluted provisions. Some of it has no particular relevance today like the confederate debt cant be repaid. We talk about reparations they put in the 14th amendment is never to be any payment to the owners. No ones going to get paid for the loss of their properties. In other provisions but the first section is the key which first creates this birthright citizenship. And then the states came out cannot deprive any citizen of the privileges or immunities of citizens whatever those are it doesnt tell you. And then that no person, more than a citizen, thats anybody, not just citizens, noncitizens have to be afforded equal protection of the law. That is the pivot of the 14th amendment. Equal protection. The notion of equality is so deeply ingrained in the United States at least in our ideology that women we may not realize theres no such thing as in the civil war. The word equal is not in the original constitution except for talking about what happens if two candidates get an equal number of electoral votes. This notion of equal protection and its not racial and this applies to everybody. And the fact that the language is nonracial has allowed in the 20th century the expansion of equality to all sorts of groups and most recently famously gay marriage. Thats 1 14 amendment decision. Equal protection. That is why i called the second founding. You have a new constitution after these three amendments. Another reason i wrote this book is even those are so important. Most people dont know much about them. If you ask your man or woman in the street one of the key documents of American History, they will say the bill of rights or the emancipation proclamation. They will not mention the 13th 13th, 14th and 15th amendments. The people who wrote them, john bingham is hardly a household name, right . , there was no recognition. He was more responsible than almost anyone for rewriting the constitution of the United States. Absolutely. He has a one that gave bill of rights. We should know this guy. You are right. I think this legacy and the ways in which it has been used is for a lot of people. This is kind of a Sleeping Giant in the constitution. The irony is, it has enormously expanded the right of every american. When it comes to racially quality, since nixon began with conservatives and adopting the strategy, the court has whittled away at the use of the 14th amendment. They are more attuned to what they call reverse discrimination white people somehow protection. A vast expansion. Narrowing at the same time when it comes to what was on