and you can see her right here on the screen. unfortunately another panelists kerry lane merritt had a family emergency a while ago and and let us know that she would not be to participate today. so just in terms of this panel, i would like to just put forward a few framing remarks on the 1862 moment and then let the speakers go for around 10 minutes each. i deliver their remarks maybe talk amongst each other raise some questions for each other. i'll be happy to facilitate that and then really open it up for q&a with the audience and another reminder do come up to the mic if you have a question. so in most conventional histories of the civil war the year 1863 is often taken as the turning point of the war the euro significant union military victories at gettysburg and vicksburg and most importantly the year president abraham lincoln issued the historic emancipation proclamation. but from the vantage point of indian country in the west 1862 emerges as a crucial market during the war. a precursor to the brutal subjugation of planes indians and the conquest of the west that would follow the civil war. i think this is the reason that the oh this year has convened this two-part roundtable on 1862. as my colleague at yukon nancy shoemaker likes to tell you. you cannot do american history without native american history. now 1862 is the year of the us dakota war when over 300 warriors were condemned to death by the military. lincoln took the time to review the sentences. carefully and commuted most of them. condemning 39 of the 303 dakota warriors to death in the end 38 were hanged and that still constitutes. the largest mass is execution in us history as should we sweet just pointed out in the previous round table. 1862 is also the year of the moral land grant act the pacific union railway railway acts the internal revenue act. the homestead act. all these apps were predicated on the dispossession of native american nations, and it heralded the development of the american state. it is also the year that president lincoln issued his preliminary proclamation giving advanced notice of his intention to issue the emancipation proclamation in 1863. now, of course the process of indian dispossession can be traced back to the settlement of north america by european colonists accelerated mightily by the indian removals and the mexican war in the 19th century. and while there has been much historical scholarship recently some done by our panelists on viewing the civil war reconstruction from the west. we still need to elaborate on how we made develop new historical narratives of the war that would combine both older and relatively new approaches to the war and 1862 in particular. today our speakers will address these issues from varying perspectives the histories of black emancipation and freed people struggles in the west the history of the state and political ideologies in western history and place link in himself squarely within that history. now i would also like to point out that there was a typo in the original description of the 1862 roundtable because they were initially conceived more broadly to cover the entire civil war rather than just the year 1862. i asked for your forbearance on behalf of the organizers and the staff that put the program together in the midst of a pandemic rest assured. we all know that the sand creek massacre of the arapaho and cheyenne peoples took place in 1864 and not in 1862. i would also like to have hank really in barnes who conceived of this of these two roundtables and the 1862 idea as was mentioned earlier. she could not be here, but she is the one who commanded all of us in this panel and the earlier one to address this issue. so without further ado, let me introduce our panelists in the order in which they will. beak each panelist will speak as i said earlier for around 10 minutes, and then we'll open up the discussion here first amongst themselves and then to the audience. and i'll introduce all of them at one go so that they can continue we can continue with the with the order of the program. hillary and green is an associate professor in the department of gender and race studies at the university of alabama. she is the author of educational reconstruction african-american schools in the urban south 1865 to 1890, which was published by fordham university, press in 2016. she's also the author of articles book chapters and other scholarly publications. she is currently at work on a second book manuscript tentatively titled unforgettable sacrifice. this book examines how every day african-americans remembered and commemorated the civil war war from 1863 to the present. mike o'connor who is joining us on zoom right here on the screen is a postdoctoral scholar at the richard civil war era center at penn state university. she received her phd in history at harvard in 2021 her masters in history at harvard in 2014, and her bachelor's in history at columbia university in the city of new york in 2011. the working title of her book manuscript is quote on this bear ground the ordeal of freed people's camps and the making of emancipation the civil war west her work has been supported by the charles warren center for american history at harvard university and the melon sawyer seminar on the politics of kinship at tufts university. and she as i said earlier will be joining us virtually. heather cox richardson is professor of history at boston college and an expert on american political and economic history? she is the author of six books on american politics including most recently how the south won the civil war oligarchy democracy and the continuing fight for the soul of america, which i had the pleasure to review in the nation. she is a leading to a historian explaining the historical background of martin political issues through twitter threads the co-editor of we are history a web magazine of popular history and the author of letters robin american a chronicle of american politics. and she's too modest to add that. she's the woman of the year named by usa today. michael green is an associate professor of history in the university of nevada lost last vegas department of history. he earned his ba and ma at unlv and his phd at columbia university. he's the author of several books of the civil war era most recently lincoln and native americans for the southern illinois university. press series the concise lincoln library. he has also written several books on nevada history. most notably in the textbook nevada a history of the silver state. he is writing a history of organized crime in america for roman and littlefield and a history of the great basin for the university of arizona press. he serves as executive director of the pacific coast branch of the american historical association. so the floor is all yours now hillary. so i want to thank people for coming out today and also. really to explore and act that most people talk about for land grab universities and that's the moral act of 1862 and thinking about the recent attention brought by land grab universities a digital humanities project created through investigative reporting and research and it's this very public and very interactive digital tool which if you haven't looked at it, it's great for not just scholarship and to ask questions but for teaching and getting students to really think about education and institutions a real ways, it has renewed attention to the moral act of 1862 and it's funding of national land grant institutions and other schools. publishing march of 2020 in high country news under its education section. this project has gotten much. raise awards, but also scholarly contemplation indeed native american and indigenous studies a leading journal devoted its spring 2021 issued to critical reflections on the project including its methodology research and future questions. that might be drawn and implications for also why i find telling in what is now critical university studies institutional repair. it is fitting down. we are talking about this at this round table and the act itself passed on july 2nd 1862. if facilitated these creation of the state public colleges and universities through the development and/or sale of federal lands. yes this legislation that we talked about for the dispossession of indigenous lands for the benefit of predominantly african. sorry white americans. and yet this dispossession occurred through treaties agreements and seizure. we notice we know that the federal government prove to be bad actors in negotiate treaty. so are they really treaties and the violence both real and rhetorical was that the court he's federal policies, but it's the beauty of the land grab university project that shows the real consequences of land loss and us imperialism when the moral act of 1862 committed the federal government to grant each state 3000 acres of public land in the issue. of land script certificates for each of its representatives and senators in congress. what is less understood though is how the moral act of 1862 also affected southern black education? and here's where scholars including myself i get into this laziness in doing this work too and non-academics. we talked about the second moral act of 1890 which requires the creation of separate land grant institutions for black students or demonstrate that mission was not restricted by race, but the first act actually leads is used by kentucky state alcorn claflin and virginia state, virginia state university class. lists are alcorn is the first 1871. it starts to receive money. claflin and virginia state although other call by other names receive money in 1860 1872 in kentucky state receives its first funds in 1897. and it's under the first act not the second act because it's going to be reported that way so when we look at black education. and these schools we can also see what is biracial reconstruction era constitutions and the negotiation once public schools are created for black children how states use this federal legislation that's still on the books. to find black education rather than to raise other money. and that i think is what it really understands this legislation and more of its implications of land grant university because it shows the limits of reconstructive state's abilities to find black education and how they maximize all federal policies and funding initiatives to do so at the expense of not providing any more money. it's like the state lottery today for education. they raise money, but then the supplement the money earns for education. so you lead to defunding. and so when we look at these states where the first moral act applied to this early hbcus, we see that correlation between the diversity of those reconstruction act conventions the creation of black schools, but also the dispossession of native americans that made it possible. and so i think one of the things that we have to not only use look at that act but more importantly white supremacist governments that overthrow those reconstruction constitutions. they still use these acts so you see first moral acne and use into the 20th century too for these hbcus. so we really see that governments gave the bare minimum for black higher education, but also to systematically underfunding but what does it mean that they're also dispossessing native americans too. so it's black education emancipation, but also so the colonialism going hand in hand. so this is where i think that land grab university project leads to future scholarship and i want to raise an additional directions for understanding the scope of the moral act and the land grab university on its impact on marginalized communities of color writ large in the united states. which community indigenous community specifically funded these initial hbcus? do those hbc use acknowledge this funding and the impact on indigenous communities through either their curriculum or mission policies or later institutional repair done. and are these as these schools were created for emancipated and discriminated individuals a predominantly sudden black population? do these schools like claflin acorn alcorn and others have responsibility and same institutional burden essay, ohio state in other large land grant pwis. and i would argue they don't. but what does instant what is their institutional responsibility at repair look like then? and if white southern legislatures chose federal money to pay for black education instead of using state appropriations. what are the state's responsibilities for both tribal communities who they receive funding from and even the underfunded hbcus that they use the money for in their own institution and states. and i think as we think about this anniversary, i think the field can attend more to the findings of land grant the university project for understanding cellular colonialism emancipation expansion of federal power and the overlap in legacies of american institutions of higher ed for all people of color united states. thank you. like could you unmute yourself and go ahead. thank you so much. i really think the organizers and panelists for their flexibility and for this chance to participate in such an important conversation today. while trying to excuse me organize my thoughts for today. i read the description of part one and i thought i might begin with a line from it that i've been thinking about i wasn't able to see the first panel because i'm here so, i don't know if the panelists in part one discuss this already. but if so, please take my thoughts as an invitation perhaps to carry the subject into our discussion. the the description refers to this significant year as transforming black life while devastating native america. and this way of putting it kind of reminded me of a line from a recent history of the war that the us waged against the dakota people in 1862 and on lincoln it says quote ironically. he was also working on the emancipation proclamation issued january 1st 1863, which granted freedom to slaves in areas under confederate control at the same time that he was forced to deal with those dakota who had lost their own freedom in quote. i should say that this gives the proclamation perhaps too much credit, you know, the words themselves freed. no one but enslaved people had to go out and fight for that their freedom and that gets lost here and we can maybe talk about, you know, congress responding to their actions before lincoln did with the series of legislation. they pass in 1862, but for now, i i want to just focus on how might look at. gaining freedom versus losing freedom or transformation versus devastation and a different way. and i wonder if this framework actually keeps us from understanding both the devastation and the violence of fighting and escaping the confederate project or slaveholding unionists. well at the same time and lighting the history survival work and futurity of the dakota people during and after the wars. i work on the camps and other assemblies of self emancipated people or freed people or refugees in the western and transmission, mississippi theaters the civil war and i i write about free people who weren't devastated not by freedom, but by the violence of the confederate project by slaveholders by khan men by union soldiers or employees by migrants. i wonder then if we can think of overlapping histories then of missionary surveillance of forced marches a family separations of the killings of children. aspects of the atrocities at fort selling at bedote where the union army forced thousands of dakota people and families into a camp surrounded by walls, and we're the military dakota families to violence and neglect. it reminded me of what i studied from the same time atrocities on other banks of the mississippi river and rivers that connect to the mississippi river. it reminded me of the people escaping bondage on the sam gaddy steamer attacked by confederate gorillas and executed by gorillas on the banks, missouri river. it reminded me of the successive expulsions of freed people from places like camp nelson and those deaths. i think of the hundreds of people who died building fort neglia national, tennessee who's remains. i think we're still being found in 2018 i wonder rather than thn terms of devastation for one in transformation for the other or loss and gain i i wonder could the camp or the violent practice of him that represent a possible intersection of these histories. specific typically, can we view encampment or camps? as sites of violence as battlefields in their own right and as sites of being justice of the us government because the camp help us to see both the intersections and the diversions of these history. of these histories and that they needn't be at i because if you look through the or army volumes are you know, the official records of the war of the rebellion like series one volume 13, you'll find calculations made against the dakota people in the same pages as calculations against people escaping slavery. like there'll be a tally of union forces following the attacks on the dakota people on the same page as samuel curtis instructing a brigadier general the -- of loyal men should be encouraged to stay at home and mind their business. so i think if we can change the framework from of one group receiving freedom and another group losing it or one grouping transformed another devastated we could form new questions about the us army and confinement. we could see perhaps removalist aspects of the union's management of the free people in the midwest in the mississippi valley whether that be the effort to clear southern, illinois of escaping free people less the republicans be accused of africanizing, illinois, whether that's the series of relocations of free people on to islands and the mississippi river like island number 10 or presence island, which i'm trying to understand in my work. um even looking east, you know, perhaps bernard cox exploitation of lincoln sort of early approached the free people macau island disaster where you know -- took people from fort monroe and to an island off of coast of hay where they were robbed and pain. maybe there's a repertoire and removalism that can cut through these histories. um on lincoln another thing that 1862 to mind for me. you know if i could save the union without bringing any slaves i would do it and if i could save the union by freeing all the slaves i would do it and if i could save it by frank some and leaving others alone. i would do that. these remarks by linking to horace greeley and august 1862 are commonplace in histories of the civil war and biographies of the president. they're direct in varying repercussions for people and bondage though are perhaps less commonplace. nor do analysis of those repercussions automatically accompany another prominent remark from lincoln about slavery his prediction in july 1862 that slavery in the border states would meet its end by the mere friction and abrasion of war. and as we know lincoln was urging the patriots and statesman of the border states, that would be within their interests to loosen their grip on slavery by accepting a plan for gradual conference stated emancipation. but when lincoln proposed this and when he responded to greeley a month later. he outlined a tremendous life-threatening political compromise from the perspective of the people trying to escape bondage the quiet acceptance of the jeopardization of enslaved people in states like kentucky the largest and last stronghold of slavery in the union in the state of lincoln's birth. his terms friction and abrasion and implied violence pain and injury, but he did not say exactly who would be rubbed raw and ground down and for how long or who would be sacrificed and i think of friction and abrasion is happening at places like nicholasville in kentucky in 1864 to isabel mille