>> >> she was into that a revival and to also look clergymen but she is to take henry and his siblings and on the way home the story goes that she would basically quiz him what was said and how it was said and

such so samuel davies was a tremendous influence on henry's oratorical skills but be other secrets -- a secret was that he was a good listener and by all accounts from the men that grew up with him in to talk about in social conversation that they could find out things about somebody and getting people to talk to one another clearly he was excellent and empathetic reader of those sentiments or that legislative body or

a group of citizens gathered at the courthouse for the polling place and such sometimes i like to compare that to colombo because you know, how he would be bubbling and henry speeches typically started off with she washy and an effective and wouldn't say mumbling but seemingly without direction and tell he had figured out that interacting with his listeners what was the best way to persuade them? so what that point he would become more articulate so late in life hendry stands began to recognize the point going from just

speaking to those flights of oratory and i usually have been when sometimes he would have very small hand written notes but at some point in his presentations the glasses with up and the oratory began and his friends or fans would call that the war chant. henry was born just to give you a? idea born in 1736 died 7099 washington was born 32 also died 1799 jefferson is nine years younger board in 43

and then well into the 19th century so the question is sometimes asked as lit was posed that we remember henry for that liberty of death speech and cannot think what else he may have done so i'd like many kids contemporaries he does not have a place in this national pantheon so in part that is because he never held a national office attending the first and second continental congress as a permanent participant in those defense but is 76 he was back when congress

was busy declaring independence writing the declaration of independence henry was back in virginia and without political soul mate. and those that i will mention again at the close of the talk. so any thing so far there remains puzzling? so hendry cave into prominence in was an immigrant and a steady for years at the university of aberdeen. and did not have a degree

from the university because apparently as this is an contrast with some elements in today's world so faced with the fact to get the sheepskin you have to pay extra so what the hell? we already have the extra so now we can see on television with no questions asked if this is an education to go with it so his father came to virginia in the 17 twenties it is namesake teefourteen the reverend patrick henry came to virginia as a clergyman they settled that is north of

richmond and eventually henry's father very well in that day used bin to the wealthy widow and he studied mostly with his father and did not go to school which is why that patrick henry college in virginia for those who have been home schooled with that homeschooling movement with

regarding henry as a particular founding father so he does a couple movies he tries as a merchant his father tries to set him and his brother up with a store but they lack the credit that is necessary in the economy because they lack of those deep pockets of their competitors that the scottish factors had and it doesn't last for very long but ultimately henry begins to read law there is the question how long he read that some people say four weeks. [laughter] some people say six months

but jefferson doesn't think he read it at all. [laughter] but he passes the bar eggs a.m. at the hands of george to becomes a law professor and the attorney general. so of bottom of one page or the top of the next with the record books of 1760 that when he is south of hanover and the james river i'm sorry it is west of richmond and this is when he began

practicing law some of the other counties in that part of the world saw their records destroyed in the civil war so this is the earliest record that we have to sign up and show his credentials so one thing that is notable about the document if you look carefully it says they signed that authorization for henry to become an attorney if you look in the jefferson memoirs you will see him recollecting that he never signed it because he never would have done such a thing one of the thing to have to contend with writing about 18th-century virginia is that basically that they

were friends through 1781 that after that point the friendship collapsed along with the invasion of virginia by the british and administer charlton but henry made his reputation with complex legal theories that had to do with the question of though legislative authority that legislature authority it affected the way the parsons were paid as a group of clergymen and the bishop of london who controlled the anglican church protested to the board of trade in the

day got the of odd declared null and void. as a result it set up the dispute with that legislative authority with that commonwealth that they had that authority to make these good laws for the citizens or that could be vetoed by parliament but what makes that parson's cause phenomenally important is its timing so is in hanover county and as a result of of popularity of the arguments from the very first opportunity and to go

to that legislature so suddenly in the house of the colonial assembly. but henry was there when the stamp act was the live in williamsburg. so those arguments that he used and that others had developed with the of parson's cause with the disputes of governance so suddenly they were relevant to the stamp act. and with that coincidence of timing to play henry into a position to be phenomenally important and it is that element of timing of what

becomes a concerted well-organized opposition and with that unified opposition so what is important about the stamp act this is what all of those colonial and revolutionary historians will agree upon there are two or three of those most will agree in the of process over parliamentary authority that the american states horror colonies with that

constitutional principles that subsequently in 1776 at the core of the dispute to of great britain leading to independence so with the stamp act he writes a series of resolutions that are affirming that colonial legislatures supports them with one of their famous speeches where he points out caesar had his first and cromwell and then crying treason treason and then

that they may profit by their example so that henry's resolutions and the governor basically is capable to keep them from being published that all seven of those revolutions that those are circulated to other colonies and throughout in day basically lay out the backbone of the resistance to the stamp act. so he had that kind of prominence early on now just barely 30 years old.

so one of the beings this involvement with the stamp act so 10 years ago i was working on a book in the of revolution and that distinctive thing about patrick kerry is us a character in that story and to live long enough to be present all the way through the constitution and in the first american party system so 10 years ago to write this book about the revolutiorevolutio n and in virginia and the national

star was significant. and specifically i thought there is no reason to do a biography of henry because there is probably nothing new to say. five years into this project i suddenly realized there was news staff because they kept stumbling upon new stuff and also because when you looked at one character the interaction with other people you see the dimensions right europe those guys that were nonsexist toward gender neutral that's you would not see to write a biography so

i think the of book reflects the different points with that new information from those sources but also insights into henry's interactions with a prominent contemporaries and james madison was another working closely with the george mason and george marshall so 10 years ago i would not have written this book five years ago i started and here it is. so let me turn to henry's involvement with slavery. >> can i ask a question

about the stamp act?. >> fighting about he was a stamp collector? he did not know what to do. and wanted to wait for discussion until the next session. and to understand a the principles because he alone identified with the 67 resolutions -- six or seven resolutions of taxation and

pushes through. in to get to the crux of the of matter. >> it goes to those circumstances around the stamp act. that is a complex and fascinating subject worthy of its old book that i started working on a couple of months ago. [laughter] but what you are referring to is the fact the way george introduced a the stamp act and parliament was to do to announce that when parliament reconvenes we will propose the stamp act. windows that were some embarrassing characters and

those that were notable among them in did nazi the problem but it would be a nice lucrative job. but then what happens is they take a full year to actually pass the stamp act so the announcement does one of virginians to start talking but as you indicated but in march of 1765 and

that older more conservative in those were prepared not to take any action and they thought that was sufficient and those that stood up to say that is not enough. so long his preparation for a his resolution of the stamp act it is pretty clear he has been in williamsburg and other business earlier and that took him to the capital and i suspect that initial correspondence of the agents earlier on.

beyond those leaders and with the established leadership with the upstart nobody in to steal that. thanks for the question so line of the things that i am proud of in this book is the documents henri's involvement with slavery more than it was laid out before with that topic of

america in history. i was listening to john mecham the other night and it might have spent c-span the disposition of the indians and the existence of slavery were the two original sins of american in history and there is much to that perspective. so i tried to simply report and to document henry's involvement in the system of slavery. and i am very grateful to my editor because henry's first surviving comment about

slavery was not made until the end of the 1760s by which time he is well into his thirties. in in the early draft of this book that is where i took it up and my editor said you cannot do that. he grew up in a slave society you need to talk about that. he was absolutely right. in the bit of a quandary if he didn't say anything about slavery and tell he was in his 30's so looking at the nature of slavery with those

laid communities there are studies of hanover where he was growing up in the 30's and 40's and then it was helpful the position taken by samuel davies that we know that henry heard and his survival in those positions that his uncle referenda patrick henry would have expressed so with those attitudes toward slavery that henry grew up with they were fairly simple in the 17 thirties and forties. soties virginians felt that slavery was sanctioned by the bible and the

responsibility was to treat his slaves well to teach them to read so that is where henry started in the 1740's. by 1773, we go because we have many letters of that quaker abolitionist and this happens to be the most famous that henry wrote a letter that says slavery is evil you cannot justify that by religion of the enlightenment and yet here it is.

so who would suppose in this modern age that i am the owner of slaves and slaves of my own purchase? one of the things that i do respect about him in this passage is is cantor and honesty. and those who say our families had slaves what are we supposed to do? explicitly admitting his complicity in the institution witted is wrong. and to rubio engage in those discussions so basically to find more documentation and

headed for college with that quaker americana and such so for example, then governor of virginia 1776 through 1779 they decided they would start to free some of his slaves and give plant to have the opportunity to be independent small farmers so five years before this was legal it passed a statute

and prior to that that was a rare happenstance. as it turns out and documented in which they talk about the difficulties because the neighbors don't like it and they are threatening to use those arcane laws that was in effect from the colonial period in one of the slaves and henry clay is involved in that correspondence reflects the fact he was supporting him to give legal

device and we try a touche change the laws and in 1782 virginia us pass legislation allowing slaveholders for whatever reason that is something they wished to do so the highwater point with that resolution of slavery. >> if someone were to monument the slaves to assure that those slaves

with the rest of society. >> there were conditions haven't one of the most was the notion that after one year the freed slave need to leave, mob because virginia law with that multiracial society there were also protections. there was an age limit on how old the slave could be to be freed. because the legislators did not want to have them work the people into their old age then suddenly fail to take care of them to free them at a point that they

were destitute. >> what about the slave owner to read the scriptures? so with that legislation?. >> so this is the 18th century so what you are referring to it is in fact, getting into the antebellum period and typically those laws are trying to prevent with those southern slaveholders are teaching other people slaves so in that 18th century not only

legal but people were encouraged to do this but as you indicate there is a notion that somehow or other they prevented anyone to teaching slaves to read it and there is indications in that is used not against the slaveholders but the reformers or liberals so depending on who is doing the accusation and. and for those to be meddling

with those institutions. >> he was very much against the constitution as those from virginia and that was reported in the late 19th century of 1788 and guy'' in my book in that particular line does not hear the published records of the

constitution. on the other hand there is to be too free with his language and asking henry to be more philosophical that basically calls on him with that euphemism. with this is where i go next. one of those interesting wrinkles having to do with the federal constitution. but one of the things that

henry recognized and he makes an argument relying on this caller from california and from that article 20 years ago that is a structural argument for slavery. so that constitution as devised in philadelphia in 1787 would give some delegated powers of taxation to the new federal government. and henry saw that is being dangerous. the reason in part had to do with slavery. slavery was evil and repugnant.

ian and therefore the northern legislators not familiar with the slavery had to suddenly confront it. because the legislators have to levy taxes and what everybody will try to do is make sure the tax is weighed easily on our constituents and more heavily than theirs. so hendry says if you give the power of taxes to the authority like congress isn't a matter of principle but politics they will come after southern slaves and try to tax slavery out of existence. and that argument only works

with the promise that slavery is immoral and evil and repugnant and those are the positions that henry voiced in 1773 as well. >> why would he object?. >> basically by that time of lots of virginians were scared out of their minds this would lead to social disruption. and of course, those views tragically were confirmed once the haitian revolution breaks out so at that point that henry is retiring from

politics and that is where his correspondence closes and at that point he still believes slavery is wrong and evil and repugnant but what do we do about it? he cannot figure out what to do about it. so he and the generation comes back to the position that tragically where they started out but only now slavery is wrong but we don't know what to do about it so therefore we should treat slaves well. so now the only thing that i think we could give henry and his contemporaries real credit is to declare that it

is wrong. and there is a sense in this tragic story of america's involvement hopper that we measure their failure of the standard day tried to uphold . it cannot be justified. does that make sense? not a bit. [laughter] but italy's has been the great american dilemma. another question?. >> what made it difficult for them to come to a resolution? if they thought

it was repugnant to they could not figure out what to do about it?. >> the answer to that would very. there were virginians that slavery was justified under property rights. if you go back there was an article in the quarterly that published a bunch of 1780 petitions from what we call the south side from the james river in north carolina and basically arguing slavery was justified in the bible which is an old position and that

it was a property right that virginians had defended against great britain or any attempt to take away the slaves would be an affront to the property rights. so from our perspective it is an ugly argument but that is part of the climate of opinion that anybody in politics to contend with making changes. so what they did that was successful they were able to end that slave trade and able to pass a law allowing the slaveholders for

whatever personal reason there are some celebrated cases robert carter of the carter family is one of them and inspired by the ideals of the revolution in did free the slaves to treats the effort that was on a larger scale to try to establish to free slaves so there is is of great deal of

fear unleashed by the haitian revolution indicated how do we free people that will be seeking revenge?. >> if i understand you correctly fear is one issue the other is money. >> absolutely. and bc a great deal of documentation of that aspect of slave holding for those that have documented the ways not only the southern economy but as whole to be vastly dependent on the forced labor.

i don't mean for one second to minimize the slave regime or to have that complicity but to explain what i could piece together that it is okay to treat them well in a position at the end of his life that it is not a k. it is evil but i don't know what to do. >> they said the loudest cries for liberty come from the gross. the have anything in mind?. >> i think he had a lot to in mind but it was that same

juxtaposition with the attachment to liberty. if people studied the rhetoric they will point to the fact that aside from the institution of the enslaved black people in america that political discourse had a distinct meaning that slavery was the complete absence of one's autonomy. the polar opposite of liberty there is of famous section in the classic study that talks about the contagion of liberty the way though language of politics

in the 18th century draws the institution of enslavement as a labor system and regime. . . the right to own slaves was a basic property right and there is no liberty to curtails our property rights. so this viewpoint strikes up, some people sincerely believing they might be slaughtered in their beds and any attempt to

abolish slavery was an abridgment of their liberty. >> we are all faced with the confrontation of a very ugly system, and human tragedies and their failure to live up to what we would have hoped they would have been able to do. >> what do you say about -- >> henry sponsored legislation encouraging intermarriage between virginia settlers on the frontiers and native americans. he was able at least to see that

dimension of multiracial society, thought it would bring peace to the frontier. how are we doing on time? ten minutes. a question up here. could you talk about the establishment of freedom of religion in virginia and the bill of rights? >> be happy to. the question is could i talk about henry and freedom of religion in the bill of rights. henry grew up in a household where religious toleration prevailed. to hear the presbyterian evangelist samuel davies, his

father went to hear everything he indicates was his boring uncle, his anglican sermons. henry was very active in his support to the american revolution, faced off against virginians notably edwin pendleton, and archibald blair, in caroline county, throwing them into prison, henry argued on behalf of the court cases on behalf of independent baptists

in the 1770s, and the colonial government so they constantly got themselves in the crossways. unlike the presbyterian evangelicals who were willing to go along with religious toleration and agreed to certain rules, the independent baptists, to go where they went without any control by the state. henry had a very strong reputation being interested in and supportive of the baptists. early baptists writing about the history of their denomination in virginia singled him out as being one of the heroes. on the basis of that, when he

was governor, a chapter in the book talks about him meeting with two baptist leaders and the deal was struck the baptists would encourage their young men to fight for independence if the legislature as they did would allow the baptists to send ministers along with the troops, that is the deal that was struck between henry and these baptist leaders at scott's town in the early years, surprised they have not done that earlier. henry was involved with writing the bill of rights which was passed in june 17, '76 before

adoption of the constitution, one participant in those debates argues henry was responsible for clauses 14 and 15, having to do with certain civic virtues to have to do with religious toleration, toleration supposes as virginia had an established church and supported by taxation but tolerates dissenting groups, this would be the language in religious discourse, henry, in the 1780s puts forward, he and washington and a number of other

virginians, leaders throughout history thought it was important to maintain virtue, this is something they counted on the churches and clergymen as educators to do, put forward a statute in 1784 that would have established state support for teachers of the christian religion. he couldn't figure out how to do it in much the same way. they are advocating this kind of thing in our own time. henry put this forward. basically, he realized not only was it unworkable it was

unpopular with all the religious groups he worked with before with the baptist, the presbyterians, the beginnings of the methodist organizations as well, he basically abandoned his legislation and went off to become governor which enabled, gave james madison the opportunity to rally, in support of the bill thomas jefferson was passed since 1785 and 86, the statute for religious freedom and the difference, and the declaration of rights and religious toleration, the statute for religious freedom

says the state should not have any involvement. it matters not -- what you believe whether there is one god or many god breaks my bones. >> one of the core premises of this talk. if patrick henry is so accomplished, you convinced me of that, how come we as a nation don't know him or celebrate him, and -- >> if someone wants to do that, i will work with them.

part of the real reason is he didn't hold national office. henry's reputation which is another story, henry's reputation in the 19th century was phenomenal and in fact as it happens, it was 200 years ago that the first biography of patrick henry was written, went through 24 additions before world war 2, it is still in print so there is a kind of a core -- and henry, one of the things about scholars, modern scholars, scholars are lazy. one of the funny ironies about henry's reputation is in the 19th century he was thought to

be important and in 1890 there was a 3 volume documentary addition of his correspondence and it was not as good as we like it to be today, but for a long time it was better than we had for a lot of other people, and all of a sudden in 1950. for scholarship was overturned in terms, today, scholars who were interested in various subjects would go back to their sources and the sources they go to are the papers of james madison, george washington, alexander hamilton, and henry, those three volumes of henry's stuff look old and outdated and hard to find, so he gets left out.

but i think the reason he wasn't elevated into the national pantheon is he never held national office in the way that most of the people we think of as our national american heroes from that period typically held office. because virginia was his country, he did get offers, if we had another half hour, he got offers from washington on many occasions to become an ambassador on the supreme court to do this, that or the other thing. henry and washington despite the fact they disagreed over the

constitution forged a working relationship during the american revolution and even title about in the book where washington always knew that henry had his back and he speaks about that in the last years of their lives. so basically, by that time henry was not in good health, retired from politics in 1781-92, his health goes downhill, 63 when he dies in 1799. we might squeeze one and if it is real quick. >> the great debate about those people who felt the national formation of the new united states had to be a confederation because they followed one

philosophy, the winning side by mason, joe washington and many others, confederation wasn't strong enough to work, sort of thing. it sounds like what you are saying, patrick henry might have been more in favor -- >> this again, more stories and we have time for. basically in 1784-5 henry recognized congress needed to have more financial resources in a coffeehouse in richmond, we write something up and i will

support it on the floor of the legislature. between that conversation and writing and ratification of the federal constitution, henry witnessed a bunch of chicanery in congress by some new england congressman whether or not they could swap the mississippi river trade deal with spain, henry felt betrayed and suddenly became aware of the way in which sectional interests could work against virginia. that is one of the core moments, turn to sentiments, a vigorous critic of the constitution during ratification debates.

my argument in the book is playing political hard all trying to achieve the kinds of them -- amendments making the national government less dangerous to virginia's interest. now i know she will pull me off the stage so i want to say thank you for the opportunity to talk about henry. >> you can go sign them. [inaudible conversations]