Antebellum congress. Well start with a review of the first and Second Party Systems. Im then going to introduce a concept, a new concept to you. Thats the idea of political culture. Ill compare that to something weve in counter before, Political Parties. Finally the bulk of the lecture is presenting evidence, new evidence, in fact, some drawn from my own research and from those of other scholars in the antebellum culture. I have three major areas to talk about today. One, Tobacco Culture. Two, political friendships. Three, affairs of honor. Well conclude there after getting through that evidence. All right. So like we obvious do in the class im going to start with an image on the screen and im going to ask you to tell me what you see. This is Lady Washingtons reception from 1861. Take is in. Who can point out something you see right away that strikes you . There we go. Yeah. Lady washington is on a platform. Yeah. Like how high do you think she is maybe off the ground . Like, i dont know, a foot. A good foot. Thats a good one. A good piece there. What else do you see . Another one down there. Everyone is dressed up super fancy. Like you are today, right . Everyone is just dressing up the same way. Exactly. Very fancy, ladies wearing gowns. Good. How about a third thing . What else do you see . Go ahead, jimmy. It looks like they are all fairly close together. I cant tell, me might be dancing but they are very close together. Exactly. Very good. Thats good. I should say about Lady Washingtons reception that lady washington herself is standing literally center stage in an elegant gown. What you might not have noticed, theres someone else we sometimes think of as important sort of receding into the background here. Thats good old george. George washington in the center in black formal republican gown sort of overshadowed by lady washington. The title was Lady Washingtons reception. The word used at the time was of a formal reception held and hosted by the first lady martha washington. Many of you noticed how she was standing on a platform. Thats right. You also noticed the opulent attire. Frankly this is a scene that could have taken place in a European Court as much as it could have taken place in america. The next image, however, i think youll find a little more familiar. This is county election from 1851. Now, what do you see here, and how does it differ from that last image . Got a hand down here. Pass it down. Thank you. Go ahead, zachariah. The drunk guy in the top left of the picture. Drunk people. Good. Actually more than one drunk guy. This guy here, weve got someone who had a little too much here. Good. Yeah. Stump speaking. Yeah. We talked about this. Good. You remember. Stump speaking. Yes, me, vote for me for president. Excellent. Good. Anything else you see . Theres a hand back there. Its primarily working class people, not the wealthy. Good. Thats all good. Youre seeing a diversity of people. Now, one thing youre also seeing, though, is the white male electorate. This is going to stand in for democracy in this period, the jacksonian period, the one we look at today to start. Even though it is white male electorate, its the whole town. Indeed, the africanamerican to the left of the picture. Of course, children as well. Although it would be the white male voter for many, many years who would be the voter. Nonetheless, political culture encompasses all people, men and women, whites and africanamericans alike. Its not so much a question of whether or not one can participate in the vote but whether one can participate more broadly in politics. When we think back to the First Party System, think back to the people who stood out. Two people come to mind. From the federalist party, alexander hamilton, mr. 10 bill. From the Opposition Party to the federalist, we have Thomas Jefferson. These two men could not have been more stark opposites politically. Recall that the federalist stood for a strong constitution, a strong federal government, a Strong Financial and manufacturing base. As we say, hamilton was their leader, versus democratic republicans or just republicans for short who were wary of centralized government, who were wary of encroachments on personal liberties, and who promoted farming and commerce among small villages and town instead of small cities. Jefferson, the in lightened figure of the democratic republicans was their leader. Now, thats the First Party System. Its socalled because of what follows. Indeed the First Party System was an earlier moment. During the First Party System one of the issues was the embargo. We see from the political cartoon that the embargo is spelled backwards as o grab me. Using license here using embargo as a large turtle biting at the british smuggler who would try to break the embargo. The embargo really was a Foreign Policy measure. It was designed to make it so britain would have a hard time trading with the United States. It ultimately was one of the policies that doomed them to a second war with Great Britain. Thats part of the history. Its about the ways which the federalists and republicans clashed, the ways in which hamilton and his legatees and successors came into office, came into power and eventually faded from the scene. Who they left the politics of the United States to were these guys, the men of the Second Party System, socalled because we have totally new names for the parties. Although some issues changed, these were the new leaders of american politics. On the left Andrew Jackson, a tennessee democrat, who we study at some length here, and on the right henry clay, a kentucky whig. Between clay and jackson, we get two very different views of what america should look like. I have two political cartoons to show how in the Second Party System new issues were emerging. For example, the question of the bank, this is the second bank of the United States. In this image we see Andrew Jackson on the left holding a cain, which he usually walked with, because of all of his Bullet Wounds with his duals trying to battle back the many headed hydra, which is a mythical creature, but it stands in for the banks. Each head is an individual representing the bank. The most prominent one in the center was nicholas biddle, who was the president of the bank and became an enemy to jackson in this process. So this is something of a satire in a sense, because jackson would socalled kill the blank or slay the bank issue by vetoing its renewal application. That story is some what wellknown. What we know after the bank war, the whig party coalesces. A lot of these cartoons take the whig perspective because it shows the whigs were actively trying to attack jackson. As i was doing my research for this lecture, i had a hard time finding pro jackson cartoons, yet me know he was a man of the people, a symbol of american democracy. What we have left are these antijackson cartoons coming out of the period of the whigs. In this one the issue under consideration is executive power. At the top of the image, we see the phrase born to command. Jackson here is figured as a regal figure holding a scepter. You may not be able to see the details. In his left hand he has a scroll that says the word veto. This is a reference to him using the veto more than any other american in history as a way of claiming executive power. Beneath him and under his feet, youll see the constitution of the United States as if hes trampling on it. Youll also see various other improvements, socalled internal improvements, things that the whig party stood for like roads, like canals, and eventually railroad. So jackson here is pictured as being against all those improvements. As a whig attack, this was very effective. If theres one thing that american politics feared, it was that of a king. Remember the American Revolution had been fought over this very issue fighting a monarch to replace it with the democratic system. And although jackson himself is thought to be a kind of leader of democratic reform, lets not forget that sometimes politics is personal. All right. So i want to ask a question and see if we can knock out a few of them. Lets name some of the characteristics of the Democratic Party versus the whig party. Lets think about a few things here. Yeah. Democrat or whig. Democrats. Against government, Government Spending and also against the tariff. Excellent. What was the tariff again . Some sort of tax, right . Yeah. Tax on . Goods. Goods, right, coming into the United States. Thats good. We have a few of them. Yeah, weak government. Got that one. Yeah. I put up they are against action. Lets not forget indian removal. That counts as an action. Its more complicated, more like action jackson opposed. Spending. That was jacksons mayesville road veto. That refers to the veto in the image youre seeing Jackson Holding it as a power. I think you mentioned antitariff so you got them all. Remember the tariff of abominations. That was a measure passed under the John Quincy Adams presidency, attacked by jackson and socalled tariff of abomination abominations. What we see, the democrats in a lot of ways, they are the legacy party of democratic republicans. They even have the same name, so theres really a continuation between jefferson and his policies and jackson and his policies. Flipping the coin, whigs. Let me know about whigs. Whigs are opposite democrats for strong government, for Government Action in general, for Government Spending and for the tariff, basically. Thats good, actually. This is an easy one to remember. The whigs are everything democrats are not. Strong government, especially federal government. They wanted certain economic and social goals. Whigs are pro bank, jackson is antibank. Whigs are pro spending we might say especially on transportation, particularly internal improvements like the canal and the roads and then the tariffs. From the whig point of view, no tariff of abominations, a reasonable tariff, the kind of Economic Policy that the United States should in act. Much like jackson, the democrats, are the legacy party of jefferson and democratic republicans, it can be argued that the whigs they much secede the federalist agenda of alexander hamilton. Although they are kind of remade and remixed, the jackson democrats, the henry clay whigs, they are the next generation of politics. Its this party system, the Second Party System i want to focus on. In order to move from party to political culture, i want to introduce you to the concept. Its a concept that will be useful for us to think about. Parties. Ive broken parties into two sets of components. Its people. Its the leaders, its the issues, its the organization, people and action. Were talking about campaigns, platforms, elections. Parties focus on these things. Really talking about Political Parties, a group of organized people taking action for a certain result. Thats the roll of the party. The partys role is to gain power through these things, elections, campaigns. Political culture is different. It can be said to be a more capacious group of politics. These are more abstract things like norms or values or attitudes. It includes elements of power, things like symbols, meanings and rituals. So between Political Parties and political culture, we have a brought view of politics. We can think about partisans are both members of Political Parties and part of a political culture which may transcend at times those parties and may be limited to those parties. Thats the idea and concept i want to introduce. Political parties, a growing field in history, allows us to get into some new concepts, allows us to go beyond the party mold and look at what i think are some really interesting stuff from the antebellum period. So i have a few questions to consider during the remainder of the lecture and they are as follows. First, how and why did political culture change from the days of the early republic to antebellum. In other words, from the days of hamilton and jefferson to the days of jackson and clay. We want to try to trace that chan change. Thats the first goal of the lecture today. The second one is what does this emerging political culture of Antebellum Congress reveal about broader american society. Im going to return to those questions at the end of the lecture but i want to present to you evidence that i hope will begin to present the question and help you understand how political culture operated in this period. As i mentioned the three areas i want to investigate today, Tobacco Culture, political friendships, and affairs of honor. They are interrelated. Its not to say that one couldnt affect the other. Some are more important as others, as well see. Broadly these are three important aspects of the political culture of the day. When we think about it in those terms, we see that these are ways for us to understand why and how politicians came into conflict with each other in the era before the civil war. So the first piece, Tobacco Culture, this draws a lot on my own research that ive done. So ive not yet published these findings. Ive presented with an eye towards seeing what you think. But there are some elements of the Tobacco Culture that i found really interesting, and i have a few kind of compelling images here on the screen. Its amazing what you can find out there. Some of the elements of Tobacco Culture i found include chewing tobac tobacco, snuff, and cigars. In the 19th century, i should say right now, they have not yet quite invented the cigarette by this period. If you were doing tobacco, you were doing it one of these three ways. It may sound a little silly, funny, but, indeed, tobacco was one of the key ways that politicians across parties could talk to each other. I found numerous instances where sharing a cigar, sharing a pinch of snuff or sharing a wad of chewing tobacco could bridge a gap that otherwise existed between a democrat and a whig. I want to share a story with you on that. To convince you tobacco wasnt just an everyday thing that didnt matter for politics, let me read to you this quote from an english observer who came to the United States, who came to the United States, who went to washington, and who checked out the scene. He said the habit of chewing tobacco is also prevalent in the states, nor is it as in Great Britain and ireland almost entirely confined to the poorer classes. Members of the house of representatives and of the senate, doctors, judges, barristers and attorneys chew tobacco almost as generally as the laboring classes in the old country. Even in a court of justice, more especially in the western states, it is no unusual thing to see judge, jury and the gentlemen of the bar all chewing and spitting as liberally as the crew of a homeward bound west india man. So, you have the house of representatives, you have the senate, you have judges, everyone is chewing and spitting. Its incredible to think about it, that if you were sitting in the congress in 1840 youd be hearing the spit toon, the cling as commonly as youd be hearing the sorries of politicians. But, actually, it was the other form of tobacco, that i found in the u. S. Senate, was more common, and this is really kind of incredible to think about because this is really kind of a nasty habit. Its called snuff, and this is from a book from 1840 that i found called a pinch of snuff. And heres what this author said. A mans character may often be judged by the manner in which he takes snuff, we detest the still think, miserly, ungraceful attitude in which some people feed their noses. A liberal, elegant hand may be known in this work at a distance too great for the fact it serves to be seen. And that rather unattractive person in the screen youre seeing, i assume a woman, its hard to tell, is actually reaching into a little box, much like the one on the left, shes taking a pinch of this very fine pulverized tobacco and shes putting it into her nose by way of a snort. When you took a pinch of snuff the first thing that would happen is you would sneeze violently as the particles were in your nostrils. The second thing is youd get the hit of tobacco in your system. What weve what i found was that the most inveterate, the most common user of tobacco, of the entire u. S. Senate, was henry clay. Now, this is the guy whos the leader of the wig party, who is mr. Antijackson and yet henry clay was more known for using tobacco than perhaps any politician in the antebellum senate. On the right we see William Rufus king who was a democrat and a jacksonian supporter and these two men it turns out in 1841 had a Major Incident that almost led to a duel. The confrontation came when senator king asserted that the character of Andrew Jackson, his president , and that of his editor, francis blare, would, quote, compare gloriously to that of mr. Clay. So this is king making an attack on clay, by comparing him and his character to a jacksonian supporter. Now it was then said that mr. Clay considered this remark as placing blair in equality with himself, and therefore pronounced it false and cowardly. Whenever you hear the word coward in 19th Century America get ready because a duel is about to happen. Its a bad word. King promptly issued a challenge to clay and both men went so far as to arrange for seconds. Now, in the process clay realized he was a little bit overboard. It should not have merited a duel. The two men come to reconciliation. But on a personal level they had not yet kind of apologized to each other. This is how clay does it. There were apparently no hard feelings after the formal sni. In the senate the next day clay approached kings desk, who was seated, and in a friendly manner said, king, give us a pinch of your snuff. And the gallery who heard it burst into applause because they knew that this was clays way of saying, im sorry. It says this incident demonstrates, and there are so many more like it, political actors could rely on a common cultural practice, in this case taking a pinch of snuff, to bind even the most partisan divisions. What do you think of this example . Had you heard of tobacco before . What do you think . I mean, i thought it was pretty incredible. Yeah, omar. Is there any remnants of the Tobacco Culture today . Its a good question because, we think maybe it was just henry clay who was snuffing. What i found out, i really cannot believe this, is that even when you walk into the congress today, in the senate gallery, there are boxes, just off to the side, that are filled with snuff. And any member can take it. Because, again, with todays antismoking laws you cant smoke inside a public building but you can take snuff. Jimmy. Its funny, i actually i was watching an old some Television Performance of one of my favorite musicians and in 1970, this was in 1970, it wasnt offensive for him to tell the story about this snuff commercial from when he was a little kid. Singing it on the air. 45 years ago. Goes to show you. Times have changed. Yeah, snuffing. Yeah. Okay, well, were going to snuff that conversation. And move to political friendships. All right, maybe this will be a little more friendly of an audience now. All right, well, look tobacco shows that, you know, we can get we can all just get along a little bit and it also shows that if henry clay, who is the most jackson hater that there is, can reconcile with the jackson supporter over tobacco, maybe theres hope for america. And, indeed, political friendships were a big part of the Antebellum Congress. Now here im drawing on both my research and a growing research filled with other historians, including Rachel Sheldon who talks about a washington brotherhood and for sheldon and my own research i find there are key elements that define this brotherhood. Boardi boarding houses is a big part of it, that the politicians lived together. Fraternal organizations, think here like the free masons. If youre a mason and youre a democrat, and youre a mason, and youre a wig, youre still a mason together. Taverns. As we saw, politicians like to drink. So, you know, going to a tavern to talk over issues was a way in which they bonded. Social clubs. More formal clubs where men could gather and as you can see in the picture, smoke their cigars and have brandy. This was a thing of the antebellum period. And lavish parties. Washington was nothing if not a place to party, and it typically was the case that there would be balls and receptions and that the president would have balls and this also is the case where a first lady could help to arrange those parties. Smoking cigars comes up. Its one of the ways men bonded with each other and became friends. And more. So what we have here is a washington, d. C. By the time of the civil war period that is, indeed, quite advanced along this lines. That was not exactly the case when Thomas Jefferson became president. In 1800 washington, d. C. Was just getting started. This image shows the white house as it was just built in 1800. John adams was the first president to occupy it for a few short months. Jefferson was the first president to occupy the white house during his entire presidency. The washington of 1800 was a kind of undeveloped place. There were swamps and muddy roads all over. And in the capital there was very little to do. Not so by 1850. One of the big differences between 1800 and 1850, when it comes to the city of washington, is that its actually a city now. This is a kind of a familiar outline to us. Theres a few things that the modern washington, d. C. Has that they didnt have yet in 1850. But i want to zoom in on this part of the map that shows us kind of the important government center. And this is zooming in on the map of washington in 1850. Youll note there are a few elements here that maybe are familiar to us. In the circle there you see the president s house, thats the white house. And on the other one you see capitol hill. Thats where the capitol was, yes, indeed, the national mall, the Smithsonian Institute and at that time the in finished washington monument. The rest of the swamp has been filled in nor the tidal basin created. In 1850, there was a lot going on in washington, besides the president s house, the capitol, look at the other buildings that have filled in. What i want to argue is that political friendships took place in the in between spaces, in the other buildings and particularly in the boarding houses, in places that you wouldnt expect on the map, like right here. Notice where that arrow is pointing. Its a small building. And its next to a larger one. Now, this is today by gallery place in washington, d. C. And its at a place now called the old patton office, part of the national art museum. What i was able to find as part of my research was a photo that shows this exact scene from the 1840s. And here it is. Its what was then the patton office, wasnt yet the old patton office, in the background, the columns and then those buildings in front. In this photo which was titled the old patton office, the point of the person looking at it might be to say, you know, whats important here is that big columnated building, thats whats important. What im going to argue is actually its that building. Its the building that you dont really see because thats the washington boarding house. Thats the place where the politicians lived. And thats the place where deals got done. Just going to mention one example of an important boarding house pattern and group that changed the course of American History. And, in fact, they lived in a boarding house on the same street, on f street, and its for that reason that theyre called the f street mess. And here they are. So take them in. There are five of them. They are called a mess because the boarding house was sometimes often referred to a mess because people ate their meals there, like a mess hall, right. So f street mess, so called because their boarding house was on. If street. Youve got james mason, youve got robert hunter, youve got david acheson, william good and Andrew Butler. What do these men have in common . What do you see . Yeah, omar. Theyre all democrats. Thats right, a lot of ds there, what else do they have in common. Sarah . Theyre all southerners. Yeah, southerners because virginia, thats the south. Because missouri, well its still the south. And because South Carolina, thats definitely the south. Right . Southern democrats. The party of Andrew Jackson. But whats ominously missing here from the party of Andrew Jackson are northerners. Where are the northerners . Why would a group of five southern democrats choose to go into the same boarding house together . Well, theres a lot of answers to that question. A lot of reasons. But one result is undeniable. It was this group, the f street mess, that was more responsible than any other group of politicians for the most important piece of legislation in the Antebellum Congress. And that was the kansasnebraska act. It was this group who on a cold, snowy night in january of 1854 marched over to then president Franklin Pierces house, the white house, and demanded that pierce support their plan to organize the New Territory of nebraska, to permit slavery. And there it is. Southern democrats have one thing in common that northern democrats dont. And thats an interest to expand slavery. This is ominous. Because this shows that the politics of the party, through this political culture, were becoming increasingly sectional. Now, what year was the kansasnebraska act . Do you remember . 18 50 4. Okay, so 1854, gave you that one. What year does the civil war start . 1865. Thats when it ends. Excuse me, 18 i dont know when it started. 1861 . All right, so some basic dates weve got to remember. The kansasnebraska act is 1854, the civil war starts 1861. Thats only seven years away. Thats my point here. Not to quiz you on dates is to say, look, this change really forbodes the coming of the civil war. So what do you think . Is a boarding house as powerful, then, as the capitol or as the white house . What do you think of this example . Curious to hear your thoughts. Yeah, go ahead, josh. I think its more powerful because theres no opposing views inside the boarding house compared to like in congress. Northerners and southern all in one place, battling for their views and stuff. But if the southerners all live in one house they all have the same views. Thats how they got their job done. Thats really well said. The power of the domestic sphere, we might say, in politics, yeah. Other thoughts on that . Well, remember these guys because the f street mess made quite a mess. In fact, what comes out of the f street mess, what comes out of this period is really my third category. Affairs of honor. Here again this is not to say that affairs of honor did not take place in the earlier period because they did. Famously the most important affair of honor of all from the First Party System, the duel between aaron burr and alexander hamilton, a few images of which you see here. This book, elements of affairs of honor, i look at the affairs of honor in the later period, ill end with that last example as youll see but broadly speaking affairs of honor across time had a few things in common. They were part of a culture of honor. And, again, this transcends both north and south, but it becomes more of a Southern Institution in time. Indeed the culture of honor is more associated with the south and especially by the start of the civil war, honor is very important to those southern politicians, like the f street mess. Its associated with reputation. And reputation can further be categorized by different elements but broadly speaking its what you were thought of. And at this time your reputation was all you had. In some ways i think of it today like our identity, which when we talk about identity theft, we talk about the problems that happened when our identity is stolen, right think of that, think about that as an attack on reputation, as when your reputation has been besmirched, or sullied, or attacked. Its about gossip. Its about spreading lies and rumors. Potentially of a personal nature, potentially of a political nature. Its about posting, which not too long ago this might not have been a word you didnt know because this book im thinking of was written in 2001 but now i think we all know what to post means, to post on any social media site is to put information out there. Back then all they had were newspapers, when they posted, when they published pieces in newspapers, they could precipitate an affair of honor if those postings were attacking reputation. And, indeed, it often went in this way, it often went gossip, then posting, and then finally duelling. Duelling. Duelling is the last stage in the cycle, or in the process of the affair of honor. Dueling was a last pressure. There were lots of threats of duels, we saw one earlier with henry clay and william king but indeed dueling was a last measure. Its not to say it didnt happen. It did, county beurre and hamilton one suggests. Dueling was the end of the process, not the beginning. So im going to present to you three examples of affairs of honor, one from this early period of federalists and republicans, and then the later two from the period of the Second Party System of democrats and wigs. And i wanted to start with this one because we get to bring in our own connecticut senator Roger Griswold, in this case from the house of representatives, okay, so lyme, connecticut, one of our own here, Roger Griswold was born in lion, connecticut, he was a federalist as many connecticut politicians were, right, and he goes to the congress to be a congressman and hes there from 1795 to 1805. So matthew lion Roger Griswold was a long serving federalist congressman from connecticut. Matthew lyon on the other hand was from vermont and he was a supporter of Thomas Jefferson, and so he became a republican. Well, republicans and federalists, as you see, as weve seen, could get along sometimes, but they also could get into big fights with each other and what im going to describe is known as the lyongriswold brawl, with our own griswold having a club in his hand and the vermonter lyon with a pair of fire tongs. How in the world did they get this way . It all came about an argument over politics. It was during an impeachment hearing of a particular democratic republic officer, William Blount of tennessee, that griswold, mr. Club, was trying to attack the attention of lyon, mr. Tongs, in order to have a dialogue on the issue, in order to engage in the political process. But lyon was ignoring him on purpose since they belonged to opposing Political Parties and indeed this is where the line starts to get crossed. Griswold finally lost his temper, and insulted lyon by calling him a scoundrel. Thats another word, like coward, which when you say it, everyone gets quiet. Eyes pop out. What will you do . Its like the dirtiest word in the affair of honor. You are saying, you, sir, are a liar. Well, it did not go too well from there. Lyon declared himself willing to fight for the interest of the common man, to take on griswold. Griswold, knowing a little bit about lyons past asked if he would be using his wooden sword, which we think is a reference to the fact that lyon had been dismissed from the Continental Army back during the revolution and thus does not have an actual sword anymore. This is when lyon spat on griswolds face. So now we have spit in the face. Okay, thats where it stopped there. They broke the two men up. Lyon made an apology to the house, but again formal apology, claiming he did not know it was insession, it was an impeachment hearing, but he meant no breach for decorum or disrespect to the house as a whole. Two weeks later not satisfied with the apology, griswold retaliated by bringing in the club, by attacking lyon with his club here and beating him about the head and shoulders in view of the house and this scene shows how all the congressmen were just watching on. Lyon, who wasnt seriously injured, then went to a fire pit and grabbed the tongs. And that is seen here in the picture. Now, they were broken up once again and it led to a house investigation. Nothing happened. Because the lyongriswold brawl was okay, basically. Even though it took place in the house of representatives this is all part of a code of honor. This is all part of an acceptable conduct for gentlemen. And of course apologies had to be made but the fact is, it could happen and it did. The fact that it didnt go on to become a duel is the thing that perhaps is most surprising about this, that it sort of stopped at the level of a brawl. We move ahead to 1850. We get to another one of these affairs of honor, this one, though, is getting a little bit more of a loaded gun. This ones the footbenton dispute where we have the mississippi senator, henry foot here, who well now see is holding a gun, and on the right here we have the missouri senator Thomas Hart Benton who has his chest pulled out saying let me at him, i have nothing to hide and thats the scene here. This one, too, comes from words being exchanged that nearly lead to blows. Foot calls benton a colluminator, this caused the missourian to approach foot down the hall in a menacing manner. Benton is a big guy, foot not so big, foot prepared for such a response pulled out the pistol. And, again, the word itself may not seem all that bad but its, again, one of these words that is saying, you, sir, are a liar and these are fighting words in antebellum america. When the gun was taken out by foot you can see he was immediately called back and eventually the two men were wrestled away. This is sort of a false alarm, you might say, and indeed both men were democrats so this doesnt quite fit into the sectional pattern we might expect in this period when you have two democrats, from kind of wings of the party, fighting it out and there are details there to think about but its really the final example, the one thats most famous, perhaps the most famous affair of honor of all, that reveals what i think the breakdown of american politics. And thats the brookssumner affair. In this cartoon from 1856 titled southern chivalry, argument versus clubs, we see an unknown assailant holding a cane, with his face blocked, the artist didnt know who the heck it was, attacking a man who seems to be holding a ben and perhaps a bill in his hand, the bill says kansas and that man was Charles Sumner, the assailant was briston brooks, a democrat from sok. Sumner at this point considered himself a republican from massachusetts. And prior to that hed been a wig. It all began when Charles Sumner made a speech in the u. S. Senate in which he attacked the results of the kansasnebraska act of 1854. Which he then went one step further. That was violence in kansas and sumner knew this and he wanted to point out there should be blame for the passage of the act on a few men in particular. He called out Steven Douglas of illinois who was a northern democrat and he also called out Andrew Butler of South Carolina. Butler, remember, was a member of the f street mess. He was one of those powerful southern democrats who had forced Franklin Pierce at that time to support the kansasnebraska act, two years later sumner makes a speech in which he says, and i quote, that Steven Douglas was, quote, a nameless animal, not a proper model for an american senator. And then in his next breath he insulted senator butler. He said of butler that he was as having taken, quote, a mistress who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him. Though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight. I mean, the harlot, slavery. Oh, boy. So Charles Sumner has just issued two major insults against two u. S. Senators, two men of the opposite party. Now, what this scene that actually took place shows us is that the violence in the u. S. Senate was starting to escalate. The footbenton dispute was broken up but it was two days later on the afternoon of may 22nd th 22 22nd preston brooks, a congressman, not a senator, not mentioned in the speech, but was a cousin, in fact a second cousin of Andrew Butler from the same town, hometown, edgefield, South Carolina. He along with two of his come padres, lawrence kett, also South Carolina, also a democrat, and Henry Edmondson of virginia, a democrat. The three of them. They caballed. They conspired. They made a plan. And brooks had a prepared speech. He probably had a piece of paper in front of him. He may have memorized it. Heres what he said, he said, but you tell me if he actually said this. He walked up to sumner who was sitting at his desk in the senate, the senate was out of session, sumner was busily writing and he was said to have said, and i quote, mr. Sumner i have read your speech twice over carefully. It is a libel in South Carolina of mr. Butler who is a relative of mine. As the story goes sumner starts to get up. Brooks loses control and begins whacking him with his cane. The cane was made of gut apercha so it began to crack upon impact on sumners skull. So you see blood on his forehead in the image. Sumner who was trapped, he was a large man, he was trapped under his senate desk. As he tried to get out of it he ripped the bolts from the floor. By the way, this senate desk is preserved by the Massachusetts Historical Society today. Ive seen it. Its incredible. And brooks continued to bash sumner until he was on the floor bleeding and unconscious. Sumner was out for the count. Brooks composed himself, walked out, took a deep breath and went off into history. It should be noted, too, though, that ketts role, one of brooks co compatriots was to keep other senators away, you see him here wielding the cane. That was supposedly ketts role, the desk, the ink that had spilled. People who would try to come to sumners aid as much as you see people laughing. People thought that Charles Sumners attack on senator butler went too far. Concerned as well as humored. When you have someone being beaten senseless on the floor of the Senate Something was fatally wrong. Now, my question to you is, youve heard the story now, to what extent was the brookssumner affair about politics and to what extent was it about personal issues, do you think . Do you make this as a political thing or personal . More personal. Go ahead, jimmy, yeah. I would say anytime that it gets this heated its more personal than political. But its probably a combination of both. But i would say more personal. What other things . One down here. I thought it was a little political because one is democrat and one is a republican. Theyre on two opposite sides. So and it looks like he takes the political cycle like a little strong. Thats a good lesson for our times. Takes it a little strongly, excellent, yeah. Other thoughts . Well, either way, it certainly hurt. This is one of the major episodes in the buildup to the civil war. The brookssumner affair is credited with giving the political strength, the republicans run on two platforms, bleeding kansas, which is to say the violence in kansas, they think was caused by terrible decisions by the democrats, opening it to slavery, that is, and bleeding sumner, that this personal attack galvanized a political party. And so i want to offer a few conclusions for you that i think try to sum up all this and suggest how Tobacco Culture, boarding houses and affairs of honor makes sense as part of the story of political culture and why theyre important and i also want to return to those questions to help you understand what has changed since the days of hamilton and jefferson. One conclusion is this, that there had been a breakdown of congressional friendships and that breakdown is revealed in sectional divisions in national politics, that it used to be okay, so to speak, to cross those party lines, to be friends, to have those parties, to have those social clubs, to have all of those different cultural elements in common, and to Smoke Tobacco together. Or snuff. Those friendships broke in the heated climate over sectional divisions and of course the most and greatest division was over the issue of slavery. Not to be ignored in this moment. And i find, this is part of my research, that the boarding houses actually became more sectional and more partisan in nature, that the f street mess, although the most powerful and the most prominent example of a sectional southern democrat boarding house was not alone, that politicians were beginning to sense, and especially after the brookssumner affair, that they needed to band together, that for their own safety, indeed, in washington, they knew it was best to stick with their own. This breaks down trust. This breaks down the personal bonds that the men had once shared, that the political establishment that had promoted it and this gets to the last piece. The burrhamilton duel was so infamous because, well, it was one of the few times where american politicians fought and actually killed one another in a duel. The lyongriswold brawl was also unusual because although it maybe seems comical, it suggested that things had gotten too far. When henry foot draws a pistol and points it at thomashart benton, no ones surprised. There was a quote it was the only way to defend yourself against a pistol is to bring two pistols. When prestonbrooks beats sumner to the ground in 1856 people laughed, said he got what he deserved. In the south you get one story, in the north you get another. And finally, to conclude, the political culture of the Antebellum Congress had come apart at the seams. Thank you. Okay, im going to stop here and take questions and see what you think. So i want to hear from you guys. Go ahead, josh. Okay, so i never heard of boarding houses, besides boarding schools. Do they still exist in washington, d. C. . Thats a good question. Boarding houses. I mean, who had not heard of it before . Raise your hands. Im not surprised, really, its not a term we use very much today. Its not really in our culture. But, in fact, there are some boarding houses today. I actually had a bonus slide on this. Lets see if i can find it. I thought someone might ask that. Here. Yeah, it was this one. I found this article in the new yorker from 2010 about the socalled frat house for jesus. It was incredible to me. It really changed my whole view on what the heck was happening in washington today. There was actually a group of congressmen in 2010 who were living together in basically a boarding house. And as you can see in the image, what they all shared in common was a christian belief. These some of these men are still in the congress. Some have because of scandal, had to step down. But the article was talking about the so called fellowship on c street and it got me thinking a lot about the f street mess. These guys are from different parties, turns out, democrats and republicans, the thing that unites them is more the religious view so its not as comparable to, you know, the boarding houses of the 1850s. But, you know, this stuffs still happening and maybe with rising rents in washington, d. C. Well see more of this. As time goes on. Its a good question. Other questions . Yeah, katie. What happened to brooks and sumner after like the caning . Oh, he didnt just go home happily ever after, ill tell you that, brooks and sumner . Yeah, both. Brooks, lets see, well, he died. He kind of had a villains ending. He died pretty early. The caning was in may. He died in january of the next year of a cough, a croup. He did not live very long. Sumner actually lived a long life. Charles sumner recovered. He went through some serious like 1850s medical treatments where he had burns put on his back as a kind of electroshock treatment. He was probably suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder. At the time they didnt know what to do with that. He was a big man. He lived with these wounds his whole life. He lived until 1874. A senator during the civil war, during reconstruction, he was from massachusetts and he ended up writing some of the best civil rights legislation of reconstruction. So Charles Sumner was down, but not for the count. He got back up. And from 1859 through 1874, until his death, he served in the senate. Yeah. Other questions . Zachariah, yeah. Well, i was a little confused. You said they still allow smoking in congress . They allow snuffing, which sounds kind of disgusting. Im not really sure if anyone snuffs today but, i mean, thats not thats, yeah. What was i going to say about that . Oh, yeah, the other thing is, im not going to ask if there are any smokers out there. Please dont answer that question. But i will say in doing my research for this, henry clay, you got me thinking about something. Henry clay really doesnt go away in Tobacco Culture. I have a slide here. Yeah. This guy, henry clay, is all over Product Placement throughout American History. Theres a cuban cigar called the henry clay. And we see, too, that this box here is probably im not sure if its a chewing tobacco box or a snuff box. Probably chewing tobacco with the henry clay face on it and the other thing i found was Franklin Pierce gets kind of literally shafted here, he gets made into a pipe head. So during the campaign of 1852 everyone thought it would be a great idea to put Franklin Pierces head on a pipe and smoke it. What can i say . He kind of a misunderstood figure, Franklin Pierce. Other questions . I assume you all figured at this point we dont duel anymore. Yeah . Or do we . Well i just had one other thing then because i had a few slides ready for you. Heres one. Its this. Youre on your cell phone doing the paces on the duel. So hold on. Ive already lost track of my place, sorry, its kind of funny. Although duelling has ended, guys, the rhetoric of duelling has not and i was shocked. I remember actually watching this back in 2004 and thanks to youtube, the joys of youtube, i have been able to find this clip. And at the time i didnt believe that it was actually said. So this is a senator from georgia, okay like american politician, popular senator, zell miller, and chris matthews, an msnbc commentator. Listen to this clip here. Which i have cued up here. Look at this. Matthews is going to confront miller and its going to get heated really quickly. Ask the question. Its a tough question. It takes a few words. Get out of my faus. If youre going to ask me a question, step back and let me ask it. Senator, please. You know, i wish i wish we i wish we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a duel. That would be pretty good. He almost couldnt keep a straight face because in the days when you could challenge a person to a duel, america was a pretty violent, nasty place. If theres no other questions were going to end there. Next week we have our turn to abolitionists and to reform. So make sure to check out that reading. Bring the documents with you for our discussion. Im trying to think, if theres any other questions about the chapter quizzes, let me know over email. Otherwise, thank you for your attention. Well see you on tuesday. Weeknights this month on American History tv, were featuring the contenders, our series that looks at 14 president ial candidates who lost the election, but had a lasting effect on u. S. Politics. Tonight we feature former speaker of the house james g. Blaine who observed as secretary of state for three american president s and enjoy American History tv. This week and every weekend on cspan 3. Every saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on American History tv on cspan 3, 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 patience 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 just mention, madison originally called it freedom of the use of the press and it is indeed freedom to print things and publish things. It is not a freedom for what we now refer to, institutionally as the press. Lectures in history, on American History tv on cspan 3, every saturday, at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. Lectures in history is also available as a podcast. Find it where you listen to podcasts. The competition is on. Be a part of this years cspan student cam video competition. Middle and High School Students be the start of a National Conversation by making a five to six minute documentary exploring the issue you want the president and congress to address in 2021. Be bold with your documentary. Show supporting and opposing points of view, and include cspan video. Be a winner. Theres 100,000 in total cash prizes, including a grand prize of 5,000. The deadline to submit videos is january 20th, 2021. Be informed. Youll find competition rules, tips and more information on how to get started at our website. Studentcam. Org. And now the contenders. Our series on key political figures who ran for president and lost, but who nevertheless changed political history. Tonight we feature former House Speaker henry clay of kentucky, known as the great compromiser. The program was recorded at clays ashland estate in lexington, kentucky, its about 90 minutes. This is an encore presentation of cspans original 14week series which first aired in 2011. This is a portrait of kentuckys henry clay, known to us in our history books as the great compromiser. During his 49year political career clay served as secretary of state, speaker of the house and as a u. S. Senator and he was a contender, making five president ial bids, including the election of 1824,
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.