The title is taken from a quote from ulysses s. Grant. He looked back on his career, and mountain memoirs, he writes frankly about the experiences he had, the good and the bad making for good reading. What he talk about late in life was his role in the u. S. Mexico war in 1846, and grant said, you know, at the time, i do not think there was ever a more wicked war than that waged on the United States by mexico so i thought at the time as a youngster only i had not moral courage enough to resign. Grant, of course, in the war was a young lieutenant, and i found this is really moving quote, and thats why its the title. The fact of the matter is grant was not alone in thinking that the u. S. Invasion of mexico was somehow wicked. One thing that i talked about in the book and ill talk about tonight is the evolution of the American Public in the course of the u. S. Mexico war, not a long war by any means from being really enthuse yays tix and in favor of invading mexico to largely turning in the war, and i see the u. S. Mexico war as the moment of americas First Antiwar Movement actually coming into being so there was antiwar sentiments during the revolution and certainly in the war of 1812, but that sentiment was limited. What you see happening in 1847 is a consensus, really, across the board. People from different regions of the country, soldiers in the field, officers, politicians, all deciding that a war that was being more or less successfully waged in another country was wrong and actually protesting that war so i think this is a really interesting moment in american history, and it takes place in a war that people really dont know much about. The u. S. Mexico war, people dont write about it a lot. Theres not a big place for it in the big historical imagination of americans. Theres a number of reasons for that. Its confused with the Texas Revolution that happened eight years before or ignored all together. When historians talk about the u. S. Mexico war, they tend to think about the war in relationship to the civil war, and they narrate the u. S. Mexico war as sort of the first stop on the road to secession arguing that the land that came from mexico apt the close of the war is what really caused sectionalism to heat up, and, n. , thats all true. You can look at the war as the moment that the civil war was inevitable, if you want to look at it that way, or on its own terms which is what i tried to do in this book. What i was interested in doing when i wrote this book was to show the impact of the war on individuals and on families. The u. S. Mexico war had the highest mortality rate of any american war. 15 of soldiers serving in mexico for the United States died. 78,000 troops served in mexico, and it was a war that had a big impact on people at home. I reallimented to write a narrative that explored how people were impacted and their families and people talked both in the war are abraham lincoln, making his first Major Political speech, one i found, actually, quite widely documented and discussed in newspapers. His first major vote in congress was condemning the war. Lincolns First Political stance on the National Stage is against the u. S. Mexico war. Thats one person i talk about. Another person is john jay harden. Some of you may be familiar with. Hes part of a very, very important family in jacksonville, and for a period of time he was the leading wig politician in illinois, not abraham lincoln, and its only hair dins death in the war that some argue makes lincolns path forward and road to the presidency possible because he was under the shadow of john before that happened. Hardins family is fascinating and deeply, deeply affected by the u. S. Mexico war war. Like most people, you probably dont know a lot about it. The north American Invasion as it was known in mexico began when president polk sent troops into a disputed areas between the rio grand rivers with the intention of starting a war. Polk wanted more. He was set on declaring war if the mexican army didnt rise. The day before he found out that mexicans crossed the river and killed 14 soldiers in the disputed area, polk said, you know, we have to declare war against mexico. The cabinet said we cant because they have not done anything. We sent 4,000 american troops down into land that mexico thinks is theirs, and were waiting for something to happen. It has not happened. Cant declare war yet. Polk finds out an incident happened two weeks before. News traveled slowly then, and when polk got this incident that he needed, he went to congress on may 11th, 1846 stating, mexico passed the boundary of the United States, invaded our territory, and shed american blood on american soil. This was a lie. Everybody knew it was a lie. The wig party, the opposition party, abraham lincolns party, everybody in the wig party knew, in fact, the land where the soldiers were sent was considered mexican rather than texas land. They write privately to each other after polk makes the statement that, well, the idea this is american soil that blood was shed on is pretty dubious, but the fact of the matter is everybody lines up, and they vote in favor of pokes declaration of war. Its not a declaration of war because polk is not asking congress to declare war, but that a war is going on, sent send support to the troops. The wigs are afraid of looking unpatriotic, suffering under the label of not being patriotic, and all 14 members of Congress Vote in declaring war in mexico, and thats how the war starts. Its short, 20 months total, and 16 months of those are actual fighting. As youll hear today, it was not short enough for the American People. It was marked by a number of stunning military successes by the United States like the battle of buena vista where 5,000 american soldiers defeated an army between 15 and 20,000 soldiers. The numbers, the ratios in the battle is obviously quite astounding, but the fact of the matter is almost every battle of the u. S. Mexico war, troops greatly outnumbered u. S. Troops, and, yet, the u. S. Won every single military engagement in the war with the exception of the battle in california which americans prefer to think of as a squirmish rather than a battle. That doesnt really count other than that americans win every single battle. Three theaters the war, and in the first stage of the war, Zachary Taylor secured northern mexico with key victories in 1846 in the first months of 1847. The second theater of war, general steven watts carney traveled west in kansas through new mexico conquering new mexico and all the way to california happening at about the same time. Unfortunately, neither of these tremendous victories bring what polkments which is peace, and the securing of california and texas into the american union. Mexico refuses to surrender despite the victory of taylor and carney and polk sends general Winfield Scott to invade central mexico, bombards vera cruz traveling through central mexico securing the capitol and the fall of 1847. In the eyes of the americans, it was a fore gone conclusion their side would win easy because most harbored racist beliefs on mexican men being that they were too lazy and cowardly to fight. Now, point of fact, mexican troops fought very hard as you see in the really rare print. Very, very few images of the war so its great when you find one to get a sense of how they envision whats happening. Mexico lost all of these battles, and ultimately lost the military side of the war because they had vastly inferior weapons, their leadership was terrible, mexicos government was in turmoil, they were broke, various battles where they are actually no money was even making it to the army to support itself, and because hostile native american trains in north of mexico had so ravaged northern mexico, little will to resist among the residents in the northern part of mexico. Now, on the mexican side, most of the army was made up of conscripts who didnt fight as hard at others, but object u. S. Side, most were vol volunteers. At the start of the war, it was so overwhelming, particularly in the midwest, that many, many more men volunteered to fight than could actually be taken in volunteer regimens so overwhelming enthusiasm for the war, and, in fact, the midwest provides the most troops fighting in mexico. People think its the south. It isnt. Missouri and illinois are the two states that provide the most troops that go to fight in mexico. Nonetheless, support for the war was not universal at the beginning. Here we have a Campaign Post r for henry clay, the wig nominee in 1844, and his opponent was james k. Polk running on the platform of annexing texas, and expansionism in general. Clay opposes annexing texas in 1844 because as you see from the poster, he believes its resulting in war with mexico. I love the poster when i discovered it. Its from a Campaign Appearance in indiana. Look at the lists why to support clay here in 1844, the first couple are really typical wig economic positions. The wigs generally are the party of Economic Development in the United States in the 1840s, but when you get down to the fourth reason, you can see are you for or against the annex asian of texas . Are you for or against the assumption of texas debts . Are you for or against an unjust and disgraceful war with mexico . Then my favorite, for or against natural disgrace . This is in 1844. This is what wigs say if you dont volt for clay, you Bring National disgrace on the country, and youll be in a war with mexico. Clearly, a lot of people could see the writing on the wall. In new england at the start of the war, antislavery sentiment was widespread and antiwar sentiments as well. Early on in the war, the massachusetts house of representatives states that the war is immoral and they are going to oppose it, and a lot of new england intellectuals provide really trenched critiques of the war. People speak out against the war in strong terms. Now, i think in opposition of the war was limited to new england, it would be interesting, but not that different from what happened in the war of 1812. What you see happen, though, is that over the course of the war, new england stops being the only place where people protest the war actively, and theres a national Antiwar Movement grow. There essentially four main grounds on which americans oppose the war. The first one, which you can see clearly in the poster, on the grounds of morality that this was an unjust war bringing national dishonor on the United States. Congressman Joshua Giddings of ohio warned the house of representatives repeatedly that in order to be patriotic, people had to, quote, dpis sent from the aggressive, unholy, unjust war, and upon the murder of mention mexicans on their soil or robbing them of their country, i can take no part for now or after. He was strong in his opinions, but that was the kind of critique that you see certainly by march of 1847 when the United States bombarded the town of vera carney leading to the death of lots of civilians. There was a critique based on morality. The second grounds upon which people critique the war were on the grounds of slavery, and getting i just told you about, an abolitionist, but it was not just abolitionists or people in new Central England ww issues of slavery being really important to the war. A lot of people felt like if the United States did, in fact, annex large portions of mexico, that would make slavery spread and make the slave power stronger. Begin, it was not just people in new england with the view. Consider for a moment this very popular print of the war. Maybe some of you have seen this. When you first look at it, its kind of a neat image of the power of newspapers in the 1840s. This is called war news from mexico by Richard Catten woodbill, a wellknown and republicked artist at the time. First it looks like an image of people being inthursday yays tick of the war enthusiastic of the war, got news of the war in the newspapers, and, in fact, this was the first war where journalists were embedded with troops. Basically, there were journalists traveling with the troops writing back story. Its the first war where people get immediate news about whats happening from a first hand accounts from journalists traveling with the troops. Look at the image more closely. First of all, woodbill was from baltimore, not new england. Notice how he places slaves up at the front and center of the image. I think whats bills asking readers to think about the implications of slavery by putting them in front of the image, and at the very edge, theres a guy tossing a match into a barrel. This was suggesting, well, you know, what is mexico really going to do other than set off a fire storm . This is an image from baltimore about the war. Another major critique of the war had to do with what people saw as the impact of service in mexico on the american character. People argued that the mexican war was making the american character worse, and, in fact, degrading american soldiers and turning them into the people that we really didnt want them to be. This critique became especially strong after reports of very bad behavior from american troops made it into u. S. Newspapers, and i see that happening about the middle of 1847. Particularly in northern mexico, the volunteers who i told you about behaved extremely badly. They murdered civilians in the streets. They raped mexican women. There were reports of entire villages burned down, and general zach ri taylor felt he couldnt control the volunteers who were under control of their own commanders from their own towns, and none of them abided by the kind of discipline that taylor expected and basically got from the regulars in the army. Heres one image of a massacre of 25 mexican civilians by arkansas volunteers known, by the way, as the racken sackers in northern mexico in february of 1847. This was painted by a soldier from illinois who actually claimed to see this massacre happen. He didnt have to see it. It was reported all over the United States. The racken sackers were taking revenge on the people of mexico for the murders of one of their own, and this was a really widely reported incident, but by no means exceptional, and, in fact, a couple weeks after this happened, another ms kier was similar perpetrated by texas. When the American People read about this behavior, it helped turn them against the war. The st. Louis republican was a newspaper that when it heard about the massacre, it initially claimed that it could not be true so they denied it. They said theres rumors its not true, but once the newspaper got verification of it, it actually wrote to all readers saying let us no longer complain about mexican bar bare disputed, poor and degraded as she is, no cruel perpetrated can excel the work of yesterday committed by our solders. Finally, the fourth reason, and, perhaps, the most important reason why the Antiwar Movement spreads sen and is a force in american is basically racism. A lot of americans felt like association with mexicans wouldnt just corrupt american manhood but had the potential of degrading the United States all together by watering down what americans believed to be their anglosaxon blood. South carolinas greatest orator and intellectual john c. Calhoun, a believer and the needs of slavery in society was an active opponent of the war with mexico because he thought that mexicans did not belong in the United States. He said, quote, i protest against the incorporation of such a people. Ours is the government of the white man. Calvin was hardly alone. A lot of americans felt mexican land is desirable, but taking mexican people with it posed a problem for the United States. Now, it was not just intellectuals, ministers, and middle class northern reformers making these critiques. One of the contributions that i think my book does, makes is showing that the world that soldiers and officers made playing in the evolution of the Antiwar Movement bringing me to colonel john hardin of illinois, a gentleman i introduced you to, and who i came to know well spending hours with his family papers in chicago. Now, hardin, again, from jacksonville, a congressman, part of the wealthy and prestigious kentucky family, related to henry clay, both through marriage and blood, tightly woven kentucky aristocracy. He was the first one to volunteer to fight for the war. He was volunteering before it started. He was repeatedly writing letters to Steven Douglas who although was a democrat, was a friend of his, and he had a lot of military experience fighting in the black hawk war, an officer in that, and he actually was in charge of kicking the mormons out of the state of illinois. Hardin was a big military guy, a political guy, and he really, really wanted to fight mexico. He wrote letters to newspapers saying this is our greatest possible opportunity to gain california for the United States, and if wars declared, ill be at the front of the movement, and, in fact, he was. Now, hardin is very, very excited about the possibility of taking a lot of mexican territory. Hes a proponent of manifest destiny. When he arrives 234 mexico, the views change dramatically. When hes there, he writes in sort of rapturous terms about potential silver mines he heard about saying the silver mines here are supposed to be the richest in mexico, and were only abandoned by, quote, the ignorance of the mexicans, saying, it requires a little skill to make these mines valuable. The longer he spends time in mexico, the less he liked it. In 1846, just a few months after arriving in mexico, he wrote the law partner, quote, theres not an acre in 500 here that a man in illinois would pay taxes on, and the people of mexico were far worse, quote, ive never seen a drunken mexican, thats the only good thing i can say, a miserable race, a few intelligent