Youd like to congratulate all of you who voted for the virginia ham sandwich as the sandwich of the year. I had one of them, and mine was not the deciding vote, i want you to know. Our next speaker is robert c. Kenzer. Bob is the William Benford vest chair of history at the university richmond, where he has taught for almost 25 years. For most of those year he has been the ally for the lecture series which we do each year jointly with the university of richmond in september. Like will green, bob has a bill cooper connection. Bill studied under the late david donnel at john hopkins university. Bob was also a david donnel student, although a few years later at harvard university. He teaches a wide variety of classes for the university of richmond, including several on aspects of the civil war in film. His Research Interest for many years has been civil war widows. He is currently researching a biography of a britishborn civil war widow, Elizabeth Louisa knights harris. Please help me welcome bob kenzer to the podium. [ applause ] before i begin my talk, i have a question for everyone in the audience. I want to do a little poll. How many of you this is the fifth of the five talks youve been it toto. I know one gentleman. Maybe half of you have been to all five. Okay. How many have been to four . Including this one obviously . Four. Three . Two . And one . Okay. Well, it just shows that youve been here before of the youve gone through the cycle. I begin with that question, oh, by the way, i have to tell you as you can see, im the fourth person whos speaking today. Originally, i was supposed to be the third person, but we changed the order a little. I have to wonder about conspiracies. [ laughter ] the fourth person has never been successful. [ laughter ] the fourth person comes after lunch. When your blood sugar is, you know, a little different and whatever. So i, i haute i would do something a little different, at least at the beginning of my talk, to get your attention and that is instead of talking about my subject, im going to talk about you. So listen carefully. When i began thinking about what i would stress about the individual who im going to nominate today as person of the year for 1865 Abraham Lincoln, i started refreshing my thonl of lincoln in 1865. This really wasnt difficult for me, because i actually teach a course at the university of richmond solely devoted to lincoln. Though it was easy for me to come up with a number of issues to be convincing i hope, about lincolns worthiness as person of the year for 1865 as a historian, i thought i should do Historical Research on all of the previous four person of the year events. This involved my watching on cspan, the website, the 20 previous speakers presentations to see what worked. As most of you know since many of you have been here all four times, the majority, yes, ive seen andy y seen many of your faces on cspan. Some wide awake, some enthusiastic, any way, the winners have been 1861, Abraham Lincoln, 62, lee, 63 grant, 64 sherman. I have history on my side because all the previous winners were men. Indeed, men with beards. [ laughter ] and three of them were on the union side. Now you might think that having lincoln winning in 1861 is to my advantage today, but im not so sure. There might be a collective preference on your part to spread out the distinction and go with someone different each time. Further, although grant and lee won in 1862 and 1863 i should say lee and grant won in 1862 and 1863 respectively. Last year when Gary Gallagher nominated both of them, you rejected it. My point is that youve been a very discriminateing group who really seem to determine howly cast your vote based on the presentation. And i compliment you for that. Remember i complimented you. [ laughter ] further, you are not sympathetic for voting for someone just because theyve lost before, as robert crick found out when you voted down his nominee stone wall jackson for both 1862 and 1863. By the way of note im up here as bob kenzer, not robert kenzer, because i figured thats a bad streak to try to continue. [ laughter ] indeed. So your reaction about jackson in 63 and Patrick Claiborne in 64 gives me concern as it does not appear that youre sympathetic to anyone just because they died the year of their nomination as lincoln did in 65. You folks are so tough that two years ago when it was noted that the speaker had delayed his honeymoon just to come to richmond to nominate lord russell, you gave poor thomas virtually no sympathy for his sacrifice. One only wonders how that marriage has worked out. Given my pro pence its to count i was interested whether there was some correlation between the time they made their speech whether it influenced your vote. As you can see on the overhead theres an enormous range of minutes. I was counting today. Everybody stayed at about the mid30s. I only conclude, i only include the actual nomination speech, not the question and answer segment, the least time used as you can see was it25 minutes. And the most was 58 minutes. No one has ever won with a majority as lincoln knew only too well in 1860. As you can see, the four speakers who won the plurality of your support you do not seem to be persuaded by how long the case is made as much as what is basically pointed out in the discussion. I must say that all numbers that i have up here now are out the window, because we were told as of thursday, that we were not permitted to go over 40 minutes. So you do some stuff and it doesnt matter in the long run. Now, turning back to the case i make for lincoln. I want to stress that i would not want to alter the vote, even if it would convince you to vote for lincoln this year. I thought four years ago, when jack davis mom mated lincoln for 1861 he did a wonderful job. You may remember how he referred to the genealogy website was used, figures used most in newspapers. Lincolns name appeared more than 25,000 times in 1861 nationwide. Far more than Jefferson Davis 9900, George Mcclelland, a thousand. Beauregard, and jackson. Even in just southern newspapers, lincolns name appeared twice as many times as all the other prominent names combined. As jack stressed then, when people were speaking and thinking about events in 1861 Abraham Lincoln was on their mind more than any other person, whether they liked him or not he was who they thought about. Jack made that case and very effectively. And again, while im happy that jack made his case for lincoln no in 1861 in hindsight i hoped that one of the speakers would have taken an approach more similar to James Robertson as he did inf 61. He nominated the virginia volunteer. I think the better would be the johnny reb collectively. It they decided how the war would take place, how they would participate in it and how it would eventually end. My task today is somewhat easier. We can turn this off now by the way, so its not a distraction. My task is somewhat easier than that of the other four speakers, because while im covering the same period of time as them, i have to touch on Steven Spielbergs film lincoln. As you surely know what made 1865 such an important year for lincoln was first of all that he had been relengthed in november of 186 had4 and his share of the vote was significant. Further, between 75 and 80 of the soldiers voted for lincoln rather than George Mcclelland it appears those on a daily basis who were making the greatest sacrifice felt strongly about having lincoln as their commander in chief as he and they tried to bring the war to a conclusion as rapidly as possible. Lincolns election in november placed him in a much stronger position entering 1865. After all, if he had lost whatever. Not only did it allow him to reshape his cabinet as he wanted, but it gave him the opportunity to request that the house of republicantives reconsider passing the amendment ending slavery. While on april 8, the senate by a vote of 386 had amassed the necessary twothirds vote for passage of the amendment which would be since to the states for ratification, the house of representatives, 9865, through their 9865 vote taken on june 15, 1864 failed by 13 votes to meet the twothirds requirement. With some justification lincoln believed that since the passage of the 13th amendment had been presented as part of his campaign that his large victory justified the house of representatives returning to this topic. In his message to the congress on december 6 oh, i should emphasize, the president at this time did not go before congress and give speeches for the state of the union. They sent it up to congress and the clerk of the house would read the speech. So lincoln doesnt actually appear. I dont know if that was true for Jefferson Davis or not with the confederacy. Inasmuch as the Congress Lincoln urged congress, there is only a question of time as to when the proposed amendment will go to the states for their action. And as it is to so go at all events may we not agree the sooner the better. What lincoln was conveying here is that the newly elected congress, the one that had been elected in november when he was elected, the newly elected congress, the republicans would hold far more than twothirds majority in each house. When they sat in december, beginning, would begin to sit in december and they would pass legislation anyway. So he was appealing to democrat whose had voted against the amendment, many of whom had been defeated in november that they should now change their votes. In the film it almost appears that his trying to get the amendment passed was a secret. Mary todd was shocked. Sally field had not read her husbands address to congress. Now as most of you know, lincoln faced a crisis from the right side of his party led by the blair familys Francis Preston blair senior or hal holbrook if you like, as well as his son montgomery who had served as lincolns postmaster general until he was dumped in 1864. The blairs influence over conservative republicans was critical to lincoln and the house, because lincoln could not afford to lose a single republican as he tried to change the votes of democrats. Hence, when the 73yearold senior blair told lincoln that if he wanted to get passage of the amendment lincoln would have to allow blair to go to richmond and see if there was a possibility of ending the war through negotiation. Lincoln, who of course had been rejecting calls for negotiated peace for years, knew that such negotiations would never go anywhere, because first, richmond would not just reject the emancipation proclamation but surely a new constitutional amendment and second and more important, lincoln was convinced that richmond would not agree on even the more essential requirement that the confederacy would have to accept that as returning to the federal fold. What the spielberg movie most effectively deals with is not just how lincoln and William Seward were able to shift enough votes of democrats, but how they had to keep secret the result of the blair mission to richmond. That the confederates had now dispatched commissioners Vice President alexander stephens, Robert Hunter and john a. Campbell. Initially to city point virginia to communicate with grant. He was to communicate whether they were truly interested in negotiating. Again, as the film makes clear, just as it appeared that lincoln and seward had gained the necessary democrat votes in the house, word leaked out and was exploited by the democrats that confederate commissioners were making their way to richmond excuse me, to washington. The result was even that some moderate and conservative republicans would not proceed to vote on the amendment as they felt doing so would be detrimental if the confederal commissioners were about to arrive in washington. This, of course led to the famous rush up pennsylvania avenue by sewards attendant and lincolns young secretary with james ashleys question whether the rumors of the commissioners arriving in the capitol were true. As you now, lincoln responded in his very carefully crafted way, so far as i know there are no peace commissioners in the city, nor are there likely to be. Of course at that moment, those commissioners were detained in it private, by general grant at city point. The result of lincolns denial of their arrival was that on january 31, the house passed the 13th amendment by a vote of 119a 11956, as well as every republican and 16 democrats supported it. Lincolns response to the vote was the famous phrase that the amendment is a kings cure for all the evils. In the movie although the statement is not made by lincoln after the passage of the amendment he used the term cure, twice when he met with Ashley Seward and blair. The movie focuses on Thaddeus Stevens who takes the original copy of the bill and embraces it as he reads it in bed with his housekeeper mistress lydia smith. I believe lincolns calling the amendments passage a kings cure has to meanings. One, it was cure for what had been a nearlethal disease for the nation. Two, the amendment was something of a cure for lincoln as its passage freed him as he now could claim that emancipation was no longer in his hands. That congress had passed the amendment and the states were ratifying it. In other words, he could no longer be criticized for refusing to nudge on the issue of emancipation to gain peace if he met confederate commissioners, because it was out of his hands. Less than a week later lincoln along with seward met with the three commissioners on the river queen at Hampton Roads. Clearly house passage of the 13th amendment placed lincoln in a much stronger position. He knew that the confederate leadership would never agree on emancipation. They used the occasion to fragment the confederate state. His strategy was to undermine the confederate o government and fragment the confederate state. This is where the film and history part company. In the film, it is Alexander Stevens who raises the issue of the passage of amendment at the outset of the meeting. In reality they learned about it when seward surprised them by stating that just a few days before it had been passed. Indeed, the movie ignores the fact that lincoln then told steve ps, quote ill tell you what i would do if i were in your place. I would go home and get the governor of the state of georgia, stevens state to call the legislature together and tell them to recall all the state troops from the war, elect members of congress and ratify this constitutional amendment prospectively to take effect in say, five years, such a position would be valid in my opinion. While the commissioners rejected this idea it does raise the question whether lincoln given all his efforts to gain passage of the 13th amendment weeks before was actually really backtracking. The movie ignores this fact because the implications would have been hard to explain fully, given the brief amount of time devoted to the Hampton Roads conference. Its about 2 of the film. Again, the biography of lincoln speculates as folse, lincolns remarks about the course that lincoln should follow. The realization that slavery was already dead. The principle concern was that the war might drag on for another year. The purpose was to undermine the Jefferson Davis administration by appealing to those followers mentioned in his annual message to congress in december 64. He wanted to raise their hopes, if necessary through a campaign of misinformation. Clearly, the three confederate commissioners would have an easier task in persuading other southerners to lay down their arms if they promised that at least the remnants of slavery could still be saved. And i should add for some period longer. Donald points out that stevens and hunter recall that lincoln also followed this up at Hampton Roads by pledging he meaning the nation o, would be willing to tax for their slaves. Both the north and south shared culpability for slaverys existence. Given the far weaker state of the Confederate Military in 1865 this pledge now had far greater significance. Lincolns rationale was that whatever the nation paid as compensation for slavery to end the war as rapidly as possible, the amount would be less in dollars than what additional months of fighting would cost. It was kwosting about 3 million a day. As evidence that he was sincere about this idea when he returned to washington to inform the cabinet of the events at Hampton Roads he asked to endorse the idea to appropriate 400 million to be distributed to the Southern States in proportion to their slave population, half of which would be paid on april 1st if all resistance to the National Authority ceased and the remaining half by july 1st provided that the 13th amendment was rat pieifyiedratified. Every member rejected it arguing that congress to ending its session to deal with the idea. While the film omits the compensation offer, i believe the offer itself ties in closely with what lincoln expressed in his second inaugural address nearly a month later on march 4 1865, in which he surely had to be thinking about during the Hampton Roads conference. I will not narrate his second inaugural address but stress that his words, let us not judge that we not be judged in reference to slavery suggests that a month before he was proposing, he would not be looking to place blame on the confederacy confederacy. Lincoln may have favored this blamefree atmosphere because of events two weeks earlier when congress failed to pass a reconstruction bill. For 15 months, since december of 1863 lincoln had made his soft reconstruction plans public. He insisted that louisiana have fulfilled these terms a position radical republicans rejected. The same member who led lincolns floor efforts to gain passage of the 13th amendment tried to come up with a compromise that would please radicals as 2012well as moderates and conservatives. As the plan for all of the other states, this formula really was not only more severe by setting what most felt was an impossible 50 threshold, but its inclusion of an ironclad oath now required finding