here is gillum ferguson. would like to thank our sponsors who make the success. her booktv.

if there's time at the end for a q&a with the author, if you could please use the microphone located in the center of the room with the home viewing audience can your questions, though it be great. it would like to watch coverage of chaise programfrom adobe reader tonight at midnight central time on c-span 2's booktv. if you're interested, books can be purchased in the arboretum and don't have the opportunity to have your book signed by the author if you would like. at this time, turn off all electronic devices on cell phones. thank you very much. it gives me great pleasure to introduce the moderator for this conversation, president of the chicago history museum. thank you are a match. [applause] >> thank you very much. it's a pleasure not to introduce today's author, gillum ferguson is a lawyer by trade, but the kind of lawyer who became a

historian. he's an infinite scholar. desperate in his first book, it has been taken by storm. it is "illinois in the war of 1812", a book of the illinois state historical society. it's about a theater of the word 1812 that has long been a quick date by historians and i'm proud to ask gillum ferguson to leadoff with his own opening dies. >> well, my interest in the morbidly turns out in 1812 the illinois territory turns out in and wisconsin have about 12,000 people in it. i mean, it was scattered in a narrow, narrow french among the state of illinois. six years later they were able to knock with confidence on the door of the union, asking to be admitted to the state.

after that, we never looked back. the population of illinois tripled every 10 years for the next several decades. what interbreed was a war of 1812 that no one had ever given a detailed look at what happened in illinois during the war. >> welcome a few fundamentals about illinois history. when it comes as a surprise to people as we think of america being settled for an east to west, but illinois was more or less settled from south to north and maybe you could explain it. it was settled last by new englanders than a list by people from places like virginia and kentucky. the initial settlement came in from the ohio river and especially up in tennessee and from the carolinas. an early settlers of illinois, most of them appear that we're

talking about settled within 20 miles of the ohio and mississippi river. they were used in farming and heavily wooded area sent to them harming us in farming unless you had to cut down trees and pull up hundreds of stumps before you did it. the idea to going into the vast rothmans was something that made it hard to get their mind around. the other problem of course in finding southern illinois was they had no ability really if you had done this after you cut down a forest and half of stumps until planned at that point was impossible to get clear title ii the farm. these people are not tenants. they were squatters because the public lands had not been put on fulton work until 1814. so other than a few people who helped grants, most of these people were taking a risk in the wilderness at that point.

and what random is that they're firemen at some point be bought out from under them by saying that in many speculator from east. what enabled the public lands to be surveyed by reducing the indian threat was of course the word 1812. so when we're talking about the illinois territory and most of the people who where they are coming to settlers in the southern part of this state come in the native americans can indian scattered around illinois, and this is part of what it can do larger northwest territory and maybe we should set that context as well. the northwest territories have a fit into american history. well, northwest territory with the wind northwest of the ohio river and then claimed by virginia by right of conquest or the revolution of course a key figure thayer. at the end of the revolution and the date that lose me, succeeded

that territory in 1786 to the united states and succeeded off the land northwest of the ohio river to the united states. then include with no ohio, indiana. michigan and part of minnesota. it's why, for instance, the kentucky and ohio river from reporters on the north bank because by virginia with the land northwest of the river. so congress organized this in 1787 as initially a territory in the northwest territories and the rules made for the development of society in that vast area. some of them out, some them not. but it was initially federal territory and provide it for the eventual creation of state in

the territory in illinois was ultimately one of them. so in 1812, when the word began, let's see, ohio was the state. indiana was a territory. illinois, as you described it was not only a territory, but went straight up through wisconsin and part of what we call the upper peninsula in michigan and even a little tiny corridor of minnesota appears so illinois with big territory. now why don't you tell us, who was here? what languages were they speaking in illinois? by here, i mean illinois in 1812 in the word began. >> the oldest inhabitants of the territory with a caskey indians who were the once proud a

lionize often known, which at one time was all the land between the ohio river and the wisconsin river. they had been reduced starting the 1670s but a series of shockingly savage attacks rather than the tribes commercially pursue from the northeast had been become socially demoralized the population had began falling. the current diseases from the incoming alignment had no existence to them by 1812 the reduced to really a bandmate of that tribe of the 200 people and it may be a generous estimate. the most senior were the french. the french had come with a series of communities mainly on the southern part of mississippi between st. louis and let us know carol, territorial capital and their primary towns. there's also french settlement in what is now.

a. they had been there longer, other than any of the indian tribes, the next senior residents were the indian tribes of the north and then the white settlers would commend him away and back settlers from the south primarily from tennessee and kentucky. it's interesting to note that if you were to draw a line across the present state of illinois, say running through the present springfield and decatur, they were virtually no indian to other and residents. north of that line had come in from the north and force their way into kaskaskia but they began to disintegrate a force their way in by violence and take land away from the illinois indians. none of them had been there more than one or two generations. they're really only in the

1760s at the earliest so they attacked to the state on many occasions before. coming in from the south, where the settlers from tennessee and kentucky primarily. also some from the northeast, but very few of those commanders said an indian or from kentucky. and his name moves north. they met the indians who were forcing their way in from the north and the southward direction and where they resulted from the coalition of those two cultures as the war of 1812. now to put it again in a bigger framework, this time a global framework, the word 1812 of course is a chapter in a 20 year struggle between the british and the french. now the word 1812 actually was

declared by the united states late in the 20 year struggle and maybe you ought to give us a moment or two and remind ourselves about how that came about. >> what exists on paper doesn't always fully exist in the united states became dependent by way of the treaty of paris. it was fully recognized by european powers and as time went on, it became clear and clear the united states is not regarded as a full sovereignty. until the late 1790s, 1776 and sports find the british flag on american territory, which clearly in northern ohio, michigan, wisconsin and for a short time in indiana until eventually removed by jay's treaty was a clearly illegal occupation, but the united states couldn't do anything

about it despite the fact this is a violation of the terms of the treaty. after that, the british continued to interfere with the indian trade and monopolize valuable for a treat of the northwest territory with a great deal of success and to cultivate to their great father the king in london, which still random parts of the united states, even after the war. i'm when the situation is even worse. as kerry noted, britain and france for nhs struggle for 20 years with very few interruptions. they thought in every part of the world in everything they could undermine opponents, went to interfere with the trade. united states as a military pygmy, already emerging as significant commercial power and american ships were applying the seven seas or how many seas there are, carrying goods around

the world. both britain and france, particularly britain felt able to see flagships on high seas. even close to a part in u.s. territorial waters, see chicago, sees the ships and enemy port. the british particularly plot u.s. sailors off of u.s. ships. not only commercial ships, merchant ships and impress them into slave like existing in the royal navy fighting the king's enemies. so while this was a challenge to the united states. the united states under the passive frustration of jefferson and madison for 10 years responded with diplomatic protest and even the self-defeating management of an embargo on her own trade, which really did not bring the europeans to their knees, but strayed much of on shipping.

but finally, when he reached the point for over 900 u.s. flagships by britain and france voted beyond the madison administration declared war on britain and really at that point serve notice on the entire world that there were some insults of this country would not swallow in some line by which it could not be pushed. i think was a real entry in the united states under the world stage as a nation which had to be respected by other nations in which the defendant's rights. >> so you may remember some of that from your reading of history, from the schoolbooks. most of those events occurred on the east coast, not in the former northwest territory. so now the word comes that the united states is at war. what that means in the last of those responsible for places like the illinois territory? >> welcome to the person responsible for the illinois territory with dominion adverts

was a critical appointee. he was not -- he was not a soldier and a demonstrator. he was called to the court of appeals and he had a three-year appointment. his glass with the secretary of war and he was responsible for looking out for the protection of the united states interests and illinois territory. at that time, there only to u.s. garrisons. 54 acura born, now on michigan avenue and 36 soldiers on the ohio river. those 90 soldiers were given the task of guarding the two states of illinois and then as war broke out. so a lot of the responsibility for self defense fell on the settlers themselves. every free white male between 18 and i believe it was 46 was by

law to a member of the state militia appeared typically this meant that the semester four times a year. everyday they would go by the drinking and march around up. when war broke out, this became a very, very significant sacrifice by the militia men who have to leave farms can especially in the spring and fall which remained campaigning seasons to go and serve for extended periods of several weeks or even months. so they answer to governor edwards and edwards in the militia, the primary responsibility war broke out. >> if i remember correctly, governor edwards not only oversaw the militia, he often had to reach into his own pocket to help subsidize what was going on because the supplies and so

forth from the east were not always fair. in fact, even news of what was happening was not as forthcoming. >> it took weeks for a letter to reach illinois territory from washington. and again come after us was responsible to the secretary of war. it's interesting that edwards who would write repeatedly to the secretary of war, not only with what was happening in this territory, but asking for instructions are for approval with the animals never heard back from the secretary or knew what existed from 1812. his appointment expired in the madison administration and that they forgot to reappoint him for any governor from illinois at that point to such an unimportant decisions and tangential part of the territory. they basically forgot. and edwards to his credit continue to act even though the war was breaking out and someone had to do it. when he called the militia in the service can be pledged own

asset as paid for the militia if the government should do so i would eat them later. minyan edwards has a bad reputation of historians asserted the prototype of the illinois political act. and i have to say that was the attitude for which i approach an essay began to research this book. but i will say that the two years from june of 1811 to june of 1813 when he was superseded in command of the two best years of his life whatever shortcomings in other areas, he made a great devotion to duty and great moral and physical kurds and took his responsibilities very seriously. in fact, i think the rest of his life had followed the pattern that he said in this two years coming up with a better historical reputation. i consider my book something of a rehabilitation. >> well, one of the best aspects

of the book is the chapter where gillum ferguson focuses on the lives of two individuals who tried to shape events in this very lately settled area, very difficult to control. two individuals with foresight and robert dixon. if you could share their stories with us as a way to help us understand what was happening on the ground and what was happening of the few individuals trying to shape what was happening on the ground. >> well, thomas forsythe and robert dixon were in a sense opposite numbers. dixon was a scotsman who have been -- had come to in the northern united states as a young man and had caged and is married to a sioux woman and it was unlike a lot of the not named mary h.

they live together faithfully and told that they had four children. and dixon was perhaps the dominant fur trader at the upper mississippi river before the war. the tall redheaded fellow, i guess it's quite beloved at the indians, not only because of his personal charisma, but because it is obviously genuine concern for them. his opposite number, as i see an ipo,, was thomas forsythe. forsyth was also a man of ambiguous nationality, which he used to allow them to travel in the indian territory in difficult times. yet been born born in detroit but is still subject to king george. many of the american traders regarded him as an englishman, so for that matter to the indians. the forsythe had no love for the english at all. and he eventually was appointed american indians in peoria and i

think that is pure heaven in indian agent. that was steeped in indian country. and forsythe operated to a certain extent does the eyes and ears of the united states in indian country. his correspondence come were surprised in a number of places and the chicago history museum in wisconsin historical society and notable clutch in the missouri history museum is one of our best sources for what was going on in indian country at the time. both of those men had the responsibility for these neutralizing the indian in the past bringing them into the staircase of their respect decides. dixon was perhaps the most successful initially because he raised in illinois territory and including wisconsin and illinois and the upper mississippi. he raised basically indian armies, which he led according to his instructions come in late

easter type for the british and ontario and harass him. ironically this to some extent spared illinois territory some of the ravages of the antiwar because dixon pursuant to this order is that most of the fighting indian warriors and the mississippi valley to the eesti theaters that were far from their own interests. there is a story that black, the famous indians, the black hawk war and a prominent figure in this word and for my book and for my book it will attack book it will attack st. louis and kaskaskia. dixon didn't do as he would not be of great men to kill women and children and he would leave them with your shoulders to fight it if they defeated american soldiers at the mississippi valley would fall into their laps. babcock said he considered this

in the nether indians to politics into the lives used in retrospect probably decision was not in the best interest of the indians. forsyth's responsibility was primarily one of trying to keep the indians neutral. he spoke chippewa pottawattamie as well as french and has very strong personal ties to some of the indians among the pottawattamie, especially chief, was senior chief of the other voip river valley and has responsibility unsuccessful at first was to keep indians the least natural if he did not fight for the united states. after the collapse of the british position in ontario, the pottawattamie did make peace. after that, forsythe was able to keep them in line even after

some rather violent provocations from american soldiers. but he was never able to succeed in bringing them to war against the british promo amongst the indians was much too slippery a politician to the people into another war indefinitely was one his favorite piece. >> city of robert dixon is trying to organize affairs on behalf of the british. you have forsythe who is trying to neutralize on behalf of the americans, the indians in illinois. the third individual you might say who has the bigger picture in mind, who has a vision in mind is to come for and his brother. >> comes the really looms large in my book by casting a shadow

appeared the fiscal contacts is what is now the state of illinois or illinois territory for them in it. he made a number of recruiting or missionary trips here. but their spirit really dominates the indian portions of my book is quite influential in the war. in 1812 in this area was in crisis because the large game animals on which they were largely dependent for protein had become -- have become rare and effect are headed to distinction of buffalo almost gone. the outrage became a rapid deterioration bears in the light often dying out on the way to extinction. or for the first time we read stories of starving indians. now partly this was a result of their increased ability to kill them with modern weapons as well

as with the demand for trade post on them. also as a result of the fact we're about 10 years of the very severe drought at the beginning of the 19th century. 1810 especially according to interesting about vietnam personal fingerprint crude analysis is one of the worst dress ever to strike the midwest. so the indians began -- began to realize something had to happen. two comes out with a shawnee indian, not shawnee chief wonder what influence, but his brother who was a prophet use the name to cower. white feathers at the time called it a prophet with a handy term to use because as i say he changed his name periodically. really developed a program of

spiritual, commercial, political and military revival for the tribes in the mid-west as a way of not only reducing the encroachments were versed in them, but also in terms of morale among the teachings of the prophet were of course the alcohol was strictly forbidden and they identified that as a serious problem among the indian tribes is something that was demoralizing them and destroy the social structure. interestingly enough, the profits is to be the use of firearms and hunt team and that could only be done under his teaching with the bows, arrows, traditional weapons of the indians is that they could use to buy advanced weapons to fight in war against the americans they could not. i think somewhat wavy limit your harvest -- as some sent today to

the fact there hunting that these weapons is in fact forcing them into an economic collapse. so cocoons the offered a way forward to brother had little success in ohio where they come from a stick up for their west outside the area. the chiefs might have been corrected by just two americans while the tribes were intimidated, especially in illinois, pottawattamie and the winnebago, they had many come in many adherents and at the famous battle of tippecanoe and 81011 and indiana, perhaps the indian warriors for indians from illinois who belong to those sioux tribes. >> so, let's talk about some of the big early events in the war of 1812 and the northwest territories area. mackinac, fort mackinac in 1812,

nature for controlling the whole upper great lakes area. detroit fell to the british, again cutting off another major site and the great lakes area. and then on august 15, 1812 came the fall of fort dearborn in chicago. and that is the one event from this theater that people may have some knowledge of. it is an event that is much discussed. there are many mysteries. but i did tell us stories best you know it of what happened on that day and a place that became chicago. >> well, fort dearborn was an isolated post and not as it turned out if they found a very happy pose that there's a lot of dissension among the officers, but it was many, many miles from the nearest american post.

it has got mail bimonthly career from fort wayne. was very isolated your doctor was so isolated the governor of the military wasn't even his territory. so is quite vulnerable. it was a small civilian settlement that grown up around the ford. most of them discharged soldiers to messianic age treaty with the indians for a small farming. in the garrison before ford which numbered between 50 and 60 men at different times. about 54th time that the events were talking about. it was seen as indefensible. it is very powerful work could be supplied. william holcomb and commander in detroit, nature commander was a commander who had authority over fort dearborn, which was commanded by captain nathan hale's. in early august received an

order ordering them to evacuate fort dearborn to complete his command to fort wayne or detroit. nokia has been criticized a lot for that, but i think probably unfairly. after the eventual order emerged in the old legend that this is left at the heels discretion seems not to be true. they commanded him to do this. and he the captain, united states army captain was given a direct order by a major general and they certainly not going to say no unless their circumstances that could have been aware of. we prepared over the course the week to meet his command of the small civilian community out on the march to fort wayne. over the course of the next week he tried to purchase passage by distributing on the united states property or most of the united states property in both the fact tree, which was a

government trading house here in chicago owned by the government as well as the nonmilitary supplies at the post of the surrounding indians. as he did this, it attracted a larger and larger crowd and came from further and further away from bases as far away as milwaukee, southwestern michigan and the leg. one criticism that could be made if he didn't simply leave immediately the next day before a large crowd of indian had congregated. but he would've been on the road for some weeks and probably vulnerable during that time and hope to purchase a passage from the indians. other injuries may not have had any great love for americans in general, they had come to know those in chicago communities as individuals and as has the clout of lurcher indians who had no contact with chicago flock to the area situation requiring more dangerous. finally healed but his command.

it's a little uncertain but between 90 and 100 people escorted by captain william wells from fort wayne and 30 nominal lady from miami indian with the south than at the michigan avenue bridge over the chicago river headed south along with michigan avenue and the location is disputed a mile and a half of 18 temporary avenue where they were set upon by the wind in the thought were escorting them safely to fort wayne and there was a brief battle. he'll make the mistake of church and with the troops against the indians event scattered and cut the troops off from the wagons were the women, children were stationed. and that the wagons there was a real web..

12 children were killed in one whack in, all small children. two of the diet at all of the civilian males of chicago, except one, the famous traitor john kinsey were killed in a very short time as well as some soldiers had been detailed to guard the wagons. the troops on the regulators after a short battle for about half the number were killed agreed to surrender under the promise that their lies to be spared. this promise is kept only in part. some are actually murdered after the battle and they were were then led off into captivity. the forsberg picked the next day, august 6 team come 1812, and the cans were thrown into the river. >> so that was another important defeat for the united states along the great lakes, the site

of course being the important shortage by the great lakes basin of the mississippi river. so just to jump ahead, they tied a turn in the war in the sense that the battle that lake erie to plays, which restored naval control to the americans at another important battle with the battle of thames in october 13. and maybe you could give us a thumbnail description of that battle and what it on for those who were in illinois. >> the battle of the times deserves to be remembered perhaps better than it is. it was the final culmination. william henry harrison was canned into northern ohio. hairston was a careful and

cautious general that's been basically you're getting ready for his campaign to recapture detroit, which had been surrendered by the british in august of 1812. finally after the battle of lake erie to restored american control to the theory and gave america naval supremacy at least on the lower great lakes, not so much on the upper, harrison was able to make his move against detroit. the british evacuated detroit and retreated into ontario. harrison and his army set off after them. the british were led by a general name prop her, not a very good general, the fighting with him was the famous chief, who was one of the great men or women of american history. after that he caught up with the british and indians. they then like rabbits for the most part. tecumseh and his warriors stayed

on five and tecumseh died fighting, killed to an account by future vice president of the united states, richard nader johnson. they destroyed in ontario and really cut off from a severely interrupted communications between the british and the east and indians in the west. by this point, the effect in illinois was substantial. the pottawattamie had had enough. cheeselike aycock and cuomo had fought alongside the british. they been singularly unimpressed by what they've seen. they returned to illinois and even some of the most possible chiefs made peace. so at least your central illinois measure of peace had returned when pottawattamie did put down their weapons.

to a peace treaty. in 1814 of course the situation is much reverse. but by the end of 1814 of the battle at left is that the war was over in illinois. >> let's jump ahead to the formal and of the war of 1812, where the treaty is signed. at bringing peace to illinois territory, even in the context of the signature and a piece of paper in europe, it is not easy. and in fact, the whole process organized by commissioners took place as one tribe at a time. and i found not a fascinating chapter and would love to hear more about that. >> well, the treaty, which

nominally ended the war between the united states and britain, the british to take an initial position that the united states established indian buffer state is also in north of the ohio river. and this is one of the seaport and spread this is what they promise the indians they would fight for. but is it had come and gone about jump, but ultimately gave up on that and settled for a saving to basically the indians that existed to them in 1811 and abandoned the hope for an indian state in the northwest. the british made peace and peace was formalized by exchange ramifications of february, but the indians had represented and they were in fact, many of them

severely hostile to the terms of the agreement. in fact, interests that have interests that have come in many on the frontier were outraged by the terms. it might personal promises of personal honor face to face with indians that they would fight until they have established a state for the indians are these the sort of buffer state. i had begun counseling and the deal is off and they fought in vain for two and half years and it turned out really the third time they would be abandoned by their allied, great britain. the indian tribes that were not necessarily under the is willing to race to the counsel table. so the americans had to send out a mysterious to the tribes individually, some of them difficult to reach because they are hostile so they would send out traders who had done indian

tribes to bring them to peace treaty just north of st. louis that were william clark and minion adverts, the founder of st. louis all serve to make peace pier one after another with these tribes. some of them didn't come in until 1816 and some, such as winnebago never came and made peace, but the process did and in the instructions for the american commissioners were not to speak any more sessions of land. they worry about that later. simply to make peace in the indian tribes. of course once that amnesty was granted, peace was restored. the ability to united states was also open to. >> and before you know it, illinois was a state? >> in 1818. by 1840, the less indians were gone. >> in what became of the promise

of certain of the guarantees that the british said they were fighting for what prevailed even post-treaty in the area clerks >> well, the british myth that certainly indians that debris should be to guarantors of the rights of inmates afterward, but the united states had quite a different attitude towards that and thought that that could not be admissible. this is u.s. territory. united states had sought the sovereignty of its borders and after that they really curtailed any contact to the extent they could between the indians and the british. >> well, one name that you heard a number of time is chief como. and i think of all the names that are in this book, he's the individual i would like to meet the most because he is absolutely a fascinating person.

he's achieved, but rather native american chiefs were ceos. they had to sort of importune and lead. he was someone who was counted as a friend by both different points, the americans in the british. he was considered generally reliable. one of the goals i think you handled it admirably has been whenever possible to get authentic indian voices in the book. and you're actually able to quote a speech from como. not word for word, but on account of the speech. do you agree he is one of the most fascinating characters that appeared? >> definitely. gomo is one diplomat and for him the shortest difference between two points is never straight line. so there's a lot of twists and turns in the route he took, but is also among all the care is

not the one who seem to have the best understanding that eventually the killing is going to add rock would have to find a way to live together. >> so maybe i'm not notice it could place two and. i would just conclude by saying that those of you who heard this sweep through a series of very complicated development will have the same impression i had that there is so much we don't know about this period in american history, the bison tunnel of the war of the 1812 is the great reason to explore that history, but the fact is, this is the chapter where we are not so much fun doing what we thought we know. we are encountering things we never neo. and this book marvelously combined on the ground developments with the

30,000 feet approach, we do have an understanding of the big developments. so we came back very much for your authorship and participation today. >> thank you, gary. [applause] >> thank you, mr. ferguson. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible] >> will be back in a few minutes with more from chicago.

>> so my history of financial institutions is a history of learning about these things. so for example, in 1811, new york, the state of new york created a new security law, which did two things. i mean, appropriate law allowed anybody to sit on the appropriations minimalist actions. he used to have to go to the legislature and get special permission. in fact l.a., they created limited liability for investors. at what that meant if you invested in the comp and in the company was later accused of

wrongdoing, the complaints, the lawsuit could never go after your assets because you invested in the company. before that, people were afraid to invest in companies they didn't really know. so it made everything like a family business. you had with people you trust. the law changed everything and it was copied over all the world. so a friend of david basu discovered carefully, what i think it did is they created a sense of pleasure and investing. people used to invest in lotteries. campbell was another human trait, finding out whether your number came out. by creating limited liability, it became fun, the same way a lottery is fun. i mean, people have to enjoy life, right? there has to be something in the do you get out of bed in the morning gets you excited, so we designed things they give you that feeling.

the securities law has been the source of a lot of our innovation because now investors -- it looks like they're playing a game. ellipsoidal selfish, but it draws our economy. hallmark slick data it that it's gambling any thought we should shut it down. worse than not, worse than not. but perhaps after years of experiment that people think well come in the way have to let people indulge in these things. so, okay, so that name is -- we have another 10 or 15 minutes. i want to talk about the future and about some of the ideas that i talk about. i'm going to start from tomorrow and then move a little bit more and more into the wild future. what happens tomorrow is president obama has said that he will sign the jobs that.

that is all a bit misleading, maybe some political reason. it's not about jobs. it's called jumpstart business started. and what it is. it's controversial. i like it though. notably, as an experiment, and may or may not work well. but let me tell you it's the most interesting part of the job sites. the jobs act was created in response to requests from internet website providers who wanted to create a crowd funding website french printers. so if you're trying to start a business, you can put it up on their website and say i am looking for money and then thousands of investors or millions all over the world can send money and you can start a business. this is a lead accounting idea,

isn't it? that is endorsed by a lot of internet people. anything is just just about as wild as wikipedia sounded at the beginning. so if i came to you -- say, before wikipedia started inside, i'm going to open an online encyclopedia now going to let anybody in the world actually, my first reaction would've been, that is a idea, right? it's not going to be a good encyclopedia. but we've learned something about how people can work together through wikipedia. so i think this is a good experiment. now congress has done is they are worried that there's a lot of chiefs out there, unfortunately. and some is going to steal money from someone else this way. so one thing they've done in the legislation is that you have to document your income through the website. repeat with incomes up to $40,000, you can't invest more than 2% of your income, which is

what, $800, so small for each individual. and that protects people, but it can't go that bad. i think the maximum is $10,000 you can put in if you have a higher in town. so it's designed to protect people. you know, even people who can only invest $800 should get enough of them. you've got real capital. >> what are you reading this summer? booktv wants to know. >> i am wrapping up citizens of london, which actually came out a couple years ago. it's a marvelous history basically of london during the war and very, very prominent people. edward mara was reporting when the united states was strongly held views that we should get in the war on england side. people o'hare man who was sent over there under president roosevelt to to deal with the

foreign aid program for england. and the ambassador, a fellow named laymen who had replaced joseph kennedy, president kennedy's father. he was of course partial to the germans any suspect that the reason roosevelt brought him home. so it's a marvelous book about the three of them and their interaction with churchill and their advocacy. the advocacy of united states breaking out of this isolationist mode again it to war on england behalf. the author had previously written a wonderful book, which i highly recommend called troublesome young men about the members of parliament to rally behind winston churchill who was throughout the 30s and orchestrated his rise to the prime minister's job when chamberlain felt.

so these two books i'm particularly interesting in reading them back to back our great books that the early stages of world war ii and i highly recommend them. >> for more information on this and other summer reading books, visit booktv.org. >> here's the book list of books being published this week:

>> many of you may not have even been born in 1973 and four. put richard nixon and one of the

biggest landslides of the history of the united states, that most americans who voted in that election voted for him, yet when the facts came out that laws were violated, the american people, including the majority was supported richard nixon said, congress you have to investigating you have to have a the laws have to be enforced a matter what. and in the end, when the house judiciary committee passes on a bipartisan basis for the impeachment of richard nixon, the country overwhelmingly supported that first. and what did that tell us? the more important than any political party and more important than any president in the united states and more important than any single person in more important than any ideology was the bedrock principle of the will of the

preservation of our constitution. and americans united on that scene, regardless of having his otic cyst about a year and a for that. are not talking ancient history nutso. people put behind them their own partisan views inside what is good for the country and the rule of law and the dander du bois was critical. so i sat, that's a really important principle. and i believed in it, too. and then, we got the bush years. the accountability principles pretty much worked. i don't want to say they were perfect. hardly. government doesn't operate in a perfect world. but then we got to the shares and things changed. and so i am a co-author wrote a book about an each meant.

it's a very niche area of expertise in this country. we still have had the experience of dealing with the terms of the constitution and the impeachment proceedings that were, but we thought we would've book we saw, however, that there was no accountability through the impeachment process. so then we said well let's look at what else can be done. the framers of the constitution understood and it's clear in the debates that once the president completes the office he and maybe she can be prosecuted. there is nothing in the framers debate that had he been president? free. you get a forever free from jail card. nonsense. the framers did that the president could be very bad things. i mean, they were human. they created checks and balances because they also understood congress could do that thing

was. they were not idealistic about people. they're very practical and they're very pragmatic. so we said ok, let's do this book about what kind of accountability can exist. and to our surprise as we began to look at what the criminal statutes were, what we saw was not just the possibility of accountability, but that the bush team was excruciatingly sent today to the possibility of prosecution and had tried to arrest their ears and a variety of ways, including slicing and dicing and rewriting criminal laws to protect themselves from accountability and to protect

themselves specifically from criminal liability. >> watch this and other programs online at booktv.or. >> more from the 2012 printers grow that fast. here is gail collins. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]