and never since the founding of the country had so much hinged on the judgment and the cunning, the timing, and the sheer endurance of just one man. abraham lincoln. as bob was nice enough to say, i would tell that story in a book that will be published this year, "1862 the making -- abram had a lincoln and making of america" and i hope you will all read and enjoy that. and thanks for letting me slip in that plug. today i want to talk about an overlooked branch of the government during that extraordinary year 150 years ago. the 37th congress of the united states was arguably the most productive, the most creative, the most farseeing and the most consequenceal in american history.

don't take my word for it. here's john nicolai, the grouchy gatekeeper of lincoln's presidential office. the secretary whose job it was to say no on behalf of the busiest man in the world and, boy, was he ever good at it. people called him irascible. that was the only one of the names that i can repeat in -- on c-span. when congress adjourned in mid july after about 7 1/2 months in session, having wrenched american history from the dead end of slavery toward the hard, slow course of freedom, having created our modern monetary and fiscal machinery, having established the united states as a world class military and naval power, having opened the

frontier to homesteading settle lers and supported their toil through a bureau -- federal bureau of agriculture. having authorized a rail length from the atlantic to the pacific across the same daunting mountain pass that doomed the donner party, and perhaps most visionary of all, having provided for the world's greatest system of widely available higher education. nioclai pronounced himself delighted to see the members of congress leaving town, quote, i am heartily glad that congress is at last gone. he wrote to his fiance back home in illinois. and i am sure i shall enjoy the relief from the constant strain of petty cares and troubles which their presence imposes.

and yet, even nicolai felt bound to add this. it has done well. and much more than could reasonably have been expected of it. certainly much more than any former congress has done. so how is one congress in 7 1/2 months able to accomplish so much? it's a natural question for us to ask today living as we do in a time of frequent gridlock on capitol hill. i'd offer several explanations for your consideration, but first i would say that it was not because politicians in those days were less partisan or more cooperative than they are today. if we think politics is a nasty business now, consider the fact the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee in 1862, charles sumner, of massachusetts, arrived for that session still bearing the scars of his savaged beating he had receive order the floor of the

senate in 1856 when preston brooks of south carolina attacked him with a brass tipped walking stick. hammered his head until the stick broke and then received hundreds of replacement sticks in the mail from all across the south. or that the speaker of the house of representatives in 1862, groh of pennsylvania, had been a central figure in a brawl that broke out in the house chamber late one in in 1857. the occasion was the bitter debate over whether to admit kansas to the union as a slave state. and while -- i will let groh tell his own story, towards 3:00 in the morning, he said, i crossed to the democratic side to consult with john hickman. douglas democrat, also from pennsylvania. one southern democrat shouted --

return to your own side of the house! you have no business over here anyway. this is a free hall. i responded. and everybody has a right to go where he pleases. attempting to seize me by the throat, the representatives said you are a damned black republican puppy. never mind what i am, i retortded, knocking up his hand. no negro driver shall crack his whip over me. i struck you on from the shoulder which i assume means something like that. he fell to the floor and in an instant a number of others standing in the area, in front of the speaker's desk, came rushing up the aisle striking right and left, one member of congress called by groh a gray-haired quaker from ohio seen in the melee, his hand bleeding. another from pennsylvania

grabbed a heavy stone spatoon next to his desk and marched down the broad isle in front of the speaker questioned later as to his purpose he said he thought that someone might draw a weapon and if so, he intended to tag him. and marched down the broad aisle in front of the question questioned later as to his as one republican rushed in to rescue groh at the center of this, he -- his rescuer managed to punch representative william barksdale of tennessee. barksdale swung around and grabbed the nearest republican he could find who happened to be washburn of the scrappy washburn brothers in congress at which point another of the brothers countered by landing a punch that knocked barksdale's wig off. the sight of the hair piece

flying across the chamber caused everyone except barksdale to burst out laughing and thus what passed for decorum in the 1850s was restored to the chamber. as for civility, consider senator ben wade of ohio, bluff ben as he was known. by 1862 everyone in washington had heard wade's opinion, his theory that aip ham lincoln's actions could be explained by the simple fact he was quote, white trash. wade set the tone of debate for 1862 when on new year's eve he led a delegation from congress to the white house and began his presentation by saying mr. president, you are murdering your country by inches. and he was from lincoln's own republican party.

i would venture it is also a mistake to imagine that congress in those days attracted a higher caliber of human fire power than today. it is true there were remarkable men in that congress. unfortunately, ever course, no women. starting with the great abolitionists and diplomat charles sumner and including justin morrell of vermont and william fessendon of maine. lincoln himself averred that these leaders were nothing special compared to the, quote, great men of america's past, washington, jefferson, madison, or even more recently clay and john quincy adams and daniel webster. the nation was growing in strength, lincoln theorized. but its leaders seem to be shrinking.

now i would say the first reason that the congress of 1862 was so productive was -- i will quote what rick edwards said to me in the lunch line in a different context. you can do certain things in a crisis you can't do under normal conditions. the opposition democratic party had simply shattered over the issue of secession. and their strongest element, the solidly democratic south, had removed themselves from the federal government. the burst of legislative energy that marked the first half of 1862 had, in fact, been building through many years of epic gridlock. gridlock over the future of the united states. it was as if two teams of brawny athletes had been engaged in a

mighty tug of war and one team abruptly dropped its end of the rope. but the achievements of 1862 cannot be explained only by the fact that the republicans suddenly had large majorities in both houses of congress and the president. two other factors were also crucial to the equation. the first was extreme necessity. the united states was facing the greatest threat in its history. looking backward, knowing how it all came out, it is easy to forget the extent of that crisis moment. we can hardly imagine as the fortunate heirs to that sacrificial generation of americans just how close our national experiment came to dying in 1862. the breakaway confederate states

of america, a would-be nation founded not on ideals of human equality but in the famous words of the confederate vice president alexander stevens, founded upon, quote the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man, that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition, confederate states, the first government in the history of the world based upon this great physical, philosophical and moral truth. this enormous threat to the american future covered in expansive land larger than thor entire european territory conquered by napoleon. almost as large as the asia

conquered by kahn. this was in the process of mobilizing a greater percentage of its population as soldiers than any european power had ever achieved. those troops were led by some of the most experienced military men on the north american continent starting with confederate president jefferson davis. a west point graduate, decorated combat veteran, and former u.s. secretary of war. the confederacy also wielded a powerful economic weapon near total control of the world's cotton supply at a time when textiles were driving the industrial revolution and cotton was perhaps the most important commodity on earth. the idea that so vast and strong a country could be tamed and forced back into the union by an army of raw volunteers, led by

an unschooled frontier lawyer as commander in chief, struck most neutral observers as highly far-fetched if not preposterous. it is in the highest degree likely that the north will not be able to subdue the south british prime minister lord palmerston counselled his own foreign ministry. what's more, the government in washington at the beginning of 1862 appeared completely overwhelmed. the president was increasingly seen as feckless and insufficient. congress was in the hands of a political party that had never governed before. the treasury department was broke. federal spending multiplying as never before. $6 would be spent in 1862 for every dollar spent by the government in 1861. northern banks fearing a panic

by demoralized investors had closed their exchange windows in late december of 1861 and were refusing to honor paper money by redeeming it with gold or silver. if the chances of restoring the union seemed slim, even more remote was the notion that a freely elected government of the people would be strong enough to endure this crisis. from the days of the roman republic, to revolutionary france, no republic had ever survived such a calamity as this. both experienced and history taught the people of 1862 that was so much at risk and such strong enemies, only a dictatorship was sufficient. in the smoke-choked barrooms of washington's finest hotels and

at the dinner tables of senior union army officers, in the drawing rooms of washington's leading politicians, the idea of a military dictator was endlessly discussed. george mcclellan, union commander, toyed with the idea quote, i almost think that were i to win some success now, i could become dictator. he wrote to his wife and he did nothing to discourage the press from signing him the nickname the young napoleon. he even posed for official photographs with his hand tucked into his tunic. congress moved -- that congress moved with such unprecedented speed to create a modern currency, raised the vast sums needed to fight the war because people in 1862 understood what

later generations of americans have, i would argue, largely forgotten. that if secession managed a first success there would be no logical end to it. we see the civil war so much as a north versus south issue that we imagine other possible results, always revolving around two side-by-side nations. that's not what they were looking at. there was nothing inherently stable about two independent nations, north and south neatly dividing the space and the resources they had once shared. if the south was section successful, more faultlines were likely to open. the bonds that held the old north-west of ohio, indiana, illinois, iowa, michigan,

wisconsin, minnesota, the connection between that part of the country to new england was extremely tenuous. and if the union shattered into pieces to the east of the mississippi, there would be little or nothing to connect any of those pieces to the great treasure lands of the west. secession was a tiger that might bite in many directions, quote if there's -- one division of the states, will there not be more than one? a leading southern unionist asked. wouldn't north america ultimately end up as fragmented and war-prone as europe? but just as they understood the urgent need to preserve what the founders had begun, the members of the 37th congress also shared an idea of a future that they wanted to build.

i think that this is the second crucial point to understand about their productivity. this was a vision that had been hammered out during the tumultuous decades following the explorations of lewis and clark on the missouri river just up the road from here. one legacy of the louisiana purchase was a long and bitter, but ultimately, quite fruitful argument over how to make use of the vast, rich lands seized by the europeans and added to the young american republic. in a very real sense, the fight over these western lands set the fuse on the civil war itself as the competing systems, the slave economy versus free labor, hatched irreconcilable schemes

and plans for exploiting this great bounty. so when the south tried to break away, when the southern members of congress removed themselves from the picture, remaining members of the body had a plan of action, ready to put into ready to put into effect. an agenda they had built over the 1850s that looked to the long future of a nation if only it could survive the next few months. and they pushed it through congress even as the war raged around them. what was the nature of that future? first, that it would be free. the 37th congress passed the law that ended slavery in the district of columbia. ratified a treaty with great to

eradicate the slave trade. and ordered the confiscation of all the slaves held in rebel territory. these were huge steps toward the eventual triumph of the 13th amendment. the future that they envisioned would belong to a middle class of farmers and entrepreneurs. an ideal reflected in the homestead act and also even more importantly in justin moral's act creating america's remarkable system of land grant, colleges and universities of which this fine institution is just one example. perhaps nothing that congress did better symbolized that forward-looking visionary nature of that agenda than the realization that the american

future would depend on the innovative power and social mobility unleashed by the widespread availability of higher education and advanced research, applied research. having given them all it that credit, i really can't close without reporting that the 37th congress was also distinguished by some of the most rampant corruption in american history. the overnight expansion of the federal government into it a colossal spending machine drew every variety of profiteer and lobbyist and opportunists in the country, really in the world, to the overcrowded capital on the potomac. and no enterprise was more sullied than the much dreamed of transcontinental railroad. it that project enticed among

many, many other scoundrels a young man named thomas ewing jr. he was on leave from his job as the first chief justice of the kansas supreme court. ewing went to washington in february 1862 on behalf of a company that wanted to build the transcontinental railroad. ewing and his partners had never built a single foot of a railroad. and they also did not own any land, but they didn't let either of these impediments stop them. relying on his sterling connections, ewing's father was a former senator and cabinet secretary, his foster brother was william t. sherman, one of his cousins was the future speaker of the house, james g. blaine.

ewing arrived in washington and began spreading around some $4 million in bribes. and that number is not adjusted for inflation. and he promised at least 100,000 acres of land to friendly lawmakers who would help his project. in this way, the ewing operation called the leavenworth pawnee and western railroad, first managed to push through a treaty ratified by the senate that would seize lands belonging to the delaware and potawatomi indian tribes and give them to the railroad to then sell to finance their construction. after that, they moved to

prevail on the house of representatives to set the route for the great transcontinental railroad from st. louis to denver. straight through ewing's hometown of leavenworth. after denver, hair plans sort of got a little fuzzy because there was something just to the west of denver that they had not quite figured out how to deal with. by one historian's calculation, at least 12 members of congress received shares in the lp&w totaling more than $1.5 million, while secretary of the interior, caleb smith, assistant secretary john usher, and the commissioner of indian affairs, william p. dole, collected promises of more than $1 million combined. but ultimately thomas ewing was partially thwarted, withheld from abraham lincoln, the railroad lawyer, who had long

since been persuaded that the natural route for the transcontinental railroad would run just north of this place. up from omaha right up the platt river valley. if you've ever driven along i-80, you notice it's very flat. in fact as i have driving up here today, i remembered the opening pages where she has her young hero looking across his new home and thinking of nebraska, there's a lot of it. when congress adjourned on july 17th, 1862, in their inner most thoughts, i'm sure many of its members must have wondered if all their worked had been in vein.

george mcclellan's campaign on the peninsula had fizzled tantalizingly close to richmond and soon confederate troops would invade the north in kentucky and maryland, the european powers were then on the verge of stepping into the dispute to force a mediation that would have recognized southern independence. the republican grip on congress was threatened and with it the fate of this huge and historic agenda. how the union was saved from that low point is another story told in my forthcoming book. it's an astounding chain of events, but we haven't time for that now. instead i'm going to give the final word to charles sumner. perhaps the greatest figure of

that tumultuous congress speaking of misunderstood individuals. our session has been busy, sumner wrote understatedly to a friend after congress adjourned. but then he added with justified pride, i doubt if any legislative body ever acted on so many important questions. thank you very much. [ applause ] >> thank you. we do have some time for questions. i would ask you to come up to this microphone if you have a

question you'd like to ask. anyone? others of you if you have questions, if you'll come up and be ready to ask your question. >> i was wondering, thomas crowell and several other authors wrote about the problem of counterfeiting operations during the civil war. and i was wondering if during the process where the united states government was drafting the moral act and the homestead act of 1862 if they ever thought about the possibility of counterfeit operations being established in the midwest and

northern great plains. and if so what were their plans in preventing such an event. >> i found no record of that being a concern for the treasury department, which particularly in 1862 was, if you read samson chase's, the secretary treasury's diary, it becomes clear that he was running an endless effort simply to fund the next day's operations. or arguably the past week's operations. day after day he comes in to his office to find million of dollars of unpaid bills on his desk and he'll complain about the fact that he has no idea how to pay them.