Union in a sense was so important during the 19thcentury is gone. There were contending understandings of the meaning of union. Almost always tied to ideas about liberty and opportunity and frequently enmeshed with beliefs about the place of the institution of slavery in the american republic. All of the individuals who have been the subjects of lectures in this series talked about union from madison and other framers of the constitution who drafted what they thought would lead to a more perfect union, to Andrew Jackson who very famously referred to union in making a toast while he looked right at john c. Calhoun during the nullification crisis on jeffersons birthday in 1832. He said our federal union must be preserved, to which, as many of you know, calhoun replied the union next to our liberty most dear. During the election of 1860 when four candidates ran for the presidency under four party standards, all of them talked about union. All of them wanted to be right with union. For lincoln and most republicans, the union was a sort of mystical, perpetual, indivisible, eternal thing. Stephen douglas, who was the regular democratic candidate that year stated over and over that whatever else happens the union had to be preserved. After the election of 1860, john c. Breckenridge says the constitution and equality of the states are symbols of everlasting union. And the fourth candidate, old john bell, who ran as candidate of the Constitutional Union party, didnt talk about anything else. They didnt even have a platform. Their platform was in their title. It was union. And the constitution. Union comes up so often during this century, which is not peters perfect century, but it is his second favorite century after the late 18th century. Lincolns vision of union rested on free labor and a voice in selfgovernment for common citizens and the potential to rise economically. Not the guarantee but the potential. Jefferson davis also believed in the union as safeguarding selfgovernment and Economic Opportunity, but of course he also saw it as guaranteeing slavery in its expansion. Both men celebrated the declaration of independence. That is lincolns great founding document. In his view. Both invoked jefferson repeatedly and throughout their years. Jeffersons ideas regarding union were complex and immensely important. We are almost to you peter. They resonated throughout the 19th century on both sides of the Potomac River or the ohio, if you prefer. The United States put Thomas Jefferson on its 5cent stamp in 1856. Only two people preceded jefferson on stamps in the United States. Jorge, of course, always would have to be one of them. The other one was benjamin franklin. The confederacy put him on their 10cent stamp in 1861. The only person who landed on a confederate stamp before jefferson was Jefferson Davis, interestingly enough. This afternoon peter and i are going to have our conversation about jeffersons thinking about union and how his ideas were available for use or misuse by many different people in the decades between 1800 and 1880, peter. So why dont you talk for a few minutes about jefferson and union . Prof. Onuf just a few minutes . Prof. Gallagher take as long as you want. It is rainy outside. No ones going to play tennis. Prof. Onuf well, im a radio star so i want you all to close your eyes and suspend disbelief. Prof. Gallagher peter has are not only a jefferson side, but two jefferson pins. Prof. Onuf well, gary, id like to start with a quotation from jefferson and its an interesting one. Its when hes talking about the declaration of independence as hes designing a reading list at the university of virginia. Goering are used to do this together. We used to teach a course, the famous 701. That reading list included the declaration, of course. Oh, i didnt write it. The American People wrote it. Im just channeled it. Im just chilling it. He channeled the American People. Anyway, he said, what is the declaration . We want jeffersons simple definition of what the declaration is all about. He says it is the fundamental act of union of these states. He says the declaration gave us union. Now, as gary said just before, we dont that word Means Nothing to us now. What could he possibly have meant, why did he say it. Why didnt he talk instead about all those wonderful things in the second paragraph. Oh, all men are created equal. Youve heard that one. Government by consent. The american creed, as its frequently been described. Yet for jefferson, there is something creedal about union. What i want to do is try to put union and his vision of republican government together because i think we and many critics in the 19th century dissociated the two. Now you say it is only referring maybe vestiges only fastidiously vestigiously to what used to be called the Labor Movement in the 18th century, in jeffersons time, and into the 19th century as people criticized the union, they looked at its flaws. People like William Lloyd garrison said this is a covenant with death, with hell, this constitution. The union is associated with the constitution, not with the declaration, and the constitution is the beginning of american politics. When we still had political life in this country, americans celebrated the constitution as this great reform caucus inaction, as one author called it, where sensible, realistic statesmen got together and they crafted the only possible miraculously, the only possible constitution that could embrace so many different states, different labor systems, so much diversity. It was a compromise, in other words. As garrison suggested, to have union, you had to compromise. Any good historian will tell you thats exactly the point of the union right now. Thats not what jefferson meant by union, though. For him, it was the coming together of selfgoverning republics, which in and of itself, the fact that the states had their own constitutions, were governing themselves, what a tremendous breakthrough for mankind, this idea of selfgovernment. And then showing their genius for union in the creation of new state governments, the first peoples in the modern world who govern themselves. Then, theyve built on that to create yet a more allembracing union. Union was part of the unfolding of the republican vision. There would be future unions. The union would expand. The union was dynamic. The union was processed. The union was a Movement Toward a better world because what it demonstrated weve talked about equality. We know how important that is. Were all equal. But what is the point of equality . It enables you to consent. You cant consent if youre not equal. And what do you consent to . You consent to that which enhances the welfare of mankind. Because suddenly the people are governing themselves. Theyre not under the heel of despots and pirates. Tyrants. Now selfgovernment. And i want to tell you this, my fellow americans [laughter] prof. Onuf im getting worked up now. You can tell. Prof. Gallagher have a sip of water. Prof. Onuf i better. [laughter] prof. Onuf americans, youre just going to have to wait a minute. Democratic government. Hold on to your seats. Is an engine for moral progress. I am channeling jefferson. I am channeling the enlightenment, the democratic enlightenment. Once the people rule themselves, government will improve. We will no longer have coercive despotic governments. We will be governing ourselves. Where do we take our prof. Gallagher you cant have a real union if theres in any coercion at all. Prof. Onuf that is absolutely writes. This is a point we will go back to. Prof. Gallagher maybe sooner than you think. Prof. Onuf really . Prof. Gallagher we may not be linear here this afternoon. It may be sort of stream of consciousness but go ahead for now. [laughter] prof. Onuf i will just make a quick prof. Gallagher its a process. Prof. Onuf yes its a process. , dont think of union as a fixed thing. Its not perfect. You heard what madison said. What they said about the constitution. More perfect. Suggesting its not most perfect. Its not perfect. Its getting better. Because we dont understand yet, what natures god enjoins but were figuring it out. I dont know if anybody out there is into natural religion and acknowledges natures god, unless you are a unitarian. But they dont talk about natures god in unitarian churches. I know, im lapsed unitarian. Prof. Gallagher can you be a lapsed unitarian . [laughter] prof. Onuf check it out. This is what you get. Prof. Gallagher from what youre saying, let me push you on Something Else right here. If this is a process and its things are going toward, with any luck, something thats even better, did jefferson think this could only be i mean the union became very much an exceptionalist concept by the mid19th century. Is it that way in jeffersons mind . Could this happen somewhere else . Prof. Onuf there is an exceptional dimension. You know, the city on the hill idea that weve heard from Ronald Reagan as he was channeling john winthrop, that idea that United States is an exemplary nation. The example suggests that others can follow. But follow is the key word. They will become more enlightened in the fullness of time. Whats remarkable about the American People is these are the people who made the revolution is that they they are all literate mostly, except in places like virginia just joking. I come from new england. I cant help it. They are largely literate. Prof. Gallagher new england used to be important. Didnt it . [laughter] prof. Onuf ok, lets reenact. [laughter] prof. Onuf colorado boy colorado did not exist, ok . All right. Moving on. Prof. Gallagher it actually did exist. New england just hadnt named it yet so they didnt think it existed. [laughter] [applause] prof. Onuf you know now why the union failed. All right. So where was i going with this . Prof. Gallagher i had asked you whether jeffersons notion was an exceptionalist notion of what was happening in the colonies at that point, because it became very much that. Prof. Onuf right. And jefferson does think that the americans have a unique opportunity to govern themselves because they are literate in the broadest sense of the word. Theyre civically competent. Theres been a high degree of local autonomy and selfgovernment in the colonies and the revolution itself is testimony to the fact that americans are conscious of their rights and willing to fight for them. Because this was a peoples war. I dont believe all this, but i am just channeling jefferson. Prof. Gallagher lincoln called the civil war a peoples contest. Prof. Onuf and thats the important thing. Because that is the principle of republican government. We now have abandoned notions that we have little gods on earth, kings, who give rule to us, who are our political fathers without whom we could not exist. We have abandoned the great chain of being that suggests that some are born to rule and others are born to be ruled. What a magnificent idea. But what a scary idea in the 18th century when the people are basically considered and im now quoting Abigail Adams rubbish. I just happened to be reading her recently. But it is a common way of referring to ordinary people the scum prof. Gallagher lincoln and many other unionists in the mid 19th century would have said nothing had really changed, that the rest of the world still didnt think that ordinary people were capable of selfgoverning. Prof. Onuf i think thats a key point when we compare lincoln and jefferson on union. Lincoln sees that this is the last best hope of mankind. You might say that jefferson sees it as the first best hope for mankind. That he has this enlightenment idea that it will spread. Light will spread. Its almost a metaphor thats natural, that suggests as the day dawns and as the light spreads across the land, people can see clearly. That notion of seeing clearly is very important. And the people are capable of seeing what they need to see. What they need to see to govern themselves. You dont have to be, as we say now, a nuclear physicist. You just have to be a democrat no, just joking. [laughter] prof. Gallagher what about the notion of the union being perpetual, that was so important by the mid century to people who saw all of these qualities in union that made the United States exceptional . Prof. Onuf thats a great point. That point about perpetuity. The only thing that jefferson thought should be perpetual were the fundamental principles or ideas on which the union was based. And let me put it this way. Were going to get into this complicated development thats really important over time. I want to introduce the key to jeffersons thinking about union. And thats federalism. Jeffersonian federalism is not what we have today. You have to understand that his conception of Political Authority, legitimate Political Authority begins in the family. We talk about family values today, but for jefferson, the family was the foundational republic on which larger republics would be built. I think its important to get this down, because its going to explain, i think, a lot of things that happen over the 19th century. For jefferson, federalism culminating in the union and perhaps in an expanding union, perhaps even a union of unions that will cover the world, begins literally at home. And that Foundational Union of man and wife, the creation of a family which is the incubator of republican citizens in the next generation. Families combine together, for jefferson had new england envy. Gary obviously doesnt. He wished virginia had towns. What do we have in virginia. What did we have in virginia . Counties. In which local clerks selfappointed themselves, and gave rule through parish vestrys, through county courts. The only Representative Institution was the house of burgesses. And those elections, 90 of them werent contested. And the ones that were contested were drunken brawls, because thats the way you treated voters. Its a pretty sorry story. And jefferson was familiar with this. He said we need towns so the families, the fathers, can get together. And on top of the towns, the counties. And then we go to a higher level, to the states. And then to the union, the federal union. Heres the key idea. I am going to throw this back at you. Equality is crucial. We talked before about you cant have consent without equality. And every prof. Gallagher you cannot have coercion. Prof. Onuf no. Every level of union, whether it be on the town level, the union of families, or the county level, the union of towns, those unions exist to preserve and perpetuate the equality of their constituent units. Do you follow me . Thats pretty straightforward. In other words, the legitimacy the value of the union of the town is that all families will be treated equally and have an equal voice in their own government. And you move up the ladder, that imperative remains. And that is, union depends on preserving equality of constituent units, because otherwise, some are benefiting at the expense of other thats another way of saying that some are ruling the others. You know, the great problem with unions throughout our periods is the fear that its going to be captured by the bad guys. And one thing americans produce in great abundance is bad guys. Prof. Gallagher this problem, though, of equality within the union did you have another did i step on your punch line there . Prof. Onuf no, i was waiting for a big response. Prof. Gallagher oh, ok. Are you going to respond . I dont think theyre going to. One thing that for example john c. Calhoun wrestled with, how do you maintain what he would have called equality equal treatment in all the ways that matter, within a union where demographics were tilting power toward the nonslave holding states. Prof. Onuf thats, of course the great nightmare of the slave holders. And their need to control, in fact, to capture which is precisely what they did, because the federal government was dominated by slave holders throughout its existence up to the civil war. So much so that by the time lincoln comes along, and says, well, maybe we should agree not to let the area of the slave states expand. , then thats too much. Thats violating the basic idea of union. Heres the problem, i think its what we would try to reconcile as we talk about the problem of union, how can you have equality or liberty, you might put it autonomy, independence, and union . Is there a tension between them . Thats what i mean by prof. Gallagher whats the line between compromise and coercion, they would have argued about that too. You say you are compromising and i am saying no. Prof. Onuf what im going to suggest to you, im going to try to channel jefferson here, the way we resolve such quarrels is that Public Opinion becomes progressively more enlightened. And thats whats so hard for us to believe in an era in which Public Opinion doesnt become more enlightened. Prof. Gallagher thats the idea of an organic developing union too. Thats going to be part of it. Prof. Onuf right, it will expand. And the idea that expansion means balancing free and slave states, thats insane. Because jefferson honestly believes that slavery will eventually disappear. And why is it going to disappear . Not because of economic forces and market forces. Its going to disappear because people are going to see that its wrong. Remember, the revolution was against the spotted despotic authority. And jefferson does not have a great record on slavery. I can to you that right now. What he does believe the a sick principle of republican government is equality, it is not coercion. It is consent. Slavery, even surely that contradiction between a republic of slave holders is going to become too striking, too conspicuous, and americans will see its in their best interest. Prof. Gallagher would he have argued for each equality among the white citizenry or would he have included everybody . Prof. Onuf no, he wouldnt. The short answer on this as you know, is that for jefferson the idea of the way he thinks about slaves is as a captive nation, held unjustly, this is important. Slaves dont deserve to be slaves, theyre not naturally slaves, they are slaves because of what jefferson would like to blame george the third and his president s predecessors for sanctioning the slave trade because we have them. But it is an evil institution, its unjust. The solution is to end the state of war that is slavery. It