constitution or any other statute depends upon what was the understanding at the time, which is what as starns can tell us. i use historians more than most people and they like me more han most people. well, i'm happy to welcome all of you to this -- i guess it's the third in our series of ectures named after the former president of the supreme court historical society. and this lecture is as you have third in a he four-part series on the supreme court and the civil war revisited.

the historical society has an educational outreach mission that includes these lectures. it includes training programs for teachers,. it includes the publication of ch publications as court watchers, eyewitness accounts in sk history which came out a few years ago, which is a general interest history of the court ith firsthand anecdotes. my colleagues on the court and i -- eciate the societies society -- society's wide and varied and public understanding of the supreme court and our form of government. i could go on about other efforts that the supreme court has -- historical society has made in that regard, but you are here for a lecture on chief justice roger brook taney.

tonight's lecture is being delivered by professor timothy s. huber. he received his b.a. from the university of miami and his ph.d. in history from the university of florida. he is a chair of the department of history at rhodes college in grandson has my year, riculated this namesake actually. some of you may remember that rhodes college is known within these halls as the alma mater of the late justice ford is. professor huebner is the author and the taney

court, justices rulingings and legacy. he is co-editor with the late kermit hall of the second edition of major problems in american constitutional history. currently, he is completing a narrative history of the civil war and american constitutionalism to be published by university of kansas in early 2016. additionally, he serves and i'm happy to say as the associate editor of the supreme court historical society's journal of supreme court history. could continue as professor huebner's accomplishments and publications are many, but that would leave us less time of his words. i hope you will all join me in welcoming professor timothy s. huber. [applause]

-- huebner. . thank you, justice scalia thank you jim goldman and david pride and the society for the invitation. a special thanks to jennifer lobe for making all of this possible. t's an honor to be here. on october 12, 1864, 150 years ago this week, chief justice roger brook taney died in his . nted home in washington d.c. after 28 years as chief justice of the nation's highest court, the death of the 87--year-old maryland native prompted little grief or mourning on the part of the people of the nornle states. while some northern democratic

papers offered words of respect, taney's republican opponents who were much more numerous were quick to portray his death as a cause for celebration. as soon as word came to massachusetts senator charles sumner, he dashed off a letter to president abraham lincoln in which he noted, "providence has given us a victory in the death of chief justice taney. it is a victory for liberty and constitution." in the dates following, a philadelphia newspaper stated the nation can feel little office s his removal of has been -- later, the atlantic monthly concluded that taney was essentially a partisan judge and around that same time in early 1865 an anonymous 68-page pam

let was published called the unjust judge that basically made the same point. roger taney was and is the most infamous chief justice in the history of the supreme court. tonight i would like to talk about the life and the death of chief justice taney and what his ath meant in late 1864 and 1865 when the nation was concluding a long and bloody civil war. along the way, i'd like it make various observations about taney, particularly the rise and fall of his reputation. ultimately i want to show that the way in which taney's death was interpreted tells us a great deal about the meaning of emancipation in 1865 as well as about a transformation in the american understanding of

rights. now, taney's poor reputation at the time of his passing stands in stark contrast to his own reputation 10 years before. although taney had been a controversial nominee to the court dem 1836, viewed as someone likely to carry out the political agenda of his mentor and nominate president andrew jackson, he soon earned as a reputation as a moderate and fair chief justice. under his leadership, the court issued landmark rulings in the areas of contracts, admiralty and commerce laws. and in each of these decisions, taney sought to solve a legal and a social problem by putting forth a pragmatic solution. after nearly two decades on the peakedtaney's reputation

during the mid 1850's. , a book described taney in glowing terms. taney, according to van distant had "a reputation beyond reproach, a purity of life that no man can assail." regarding as a judicial statesman, taney earned bipartisan praise. even the most vocal opponent of 1836, ination in representative henry clay, later publicly apologized for his criticism of taney and called him "a worthy successor of chief justice john marshall." "had theorian puts it,

taney court rested on its morals in 1856, it would have surely gone down as one of the most popular and effective courts in ur history." n 1857, taney's reputation changed dramatically because of his decision in one case, of course, dred scott versus sandford. in that case dred scott sued for his freedom after he had been taken by his master in a free territory and having lived there before being brought back to missouri. the court ruled against scott holding that he was still a slave. -- an enormous about of ink ink has been spilled on this case and doy not intend to

discuss the constitutional and legal details, but a basic understanding of what taney did and wrote in this case is essential for understanding the rapid decline in his reputation. taney's opinion and -- in dred scott contained two significant points of law. first, taney held that african americans, whether slaves or free, had not been included in the political community at the time of the founding. therefore he reasoned, neither they nor their defendants were citizens in the state within the meaning of the constitution. now this ruling in and of itself at the time was not the most controversial part of the decision. as one scholar has noted, many state courts in the south and the north had already held the same thing, that african americans were neither citizens of their state nor of the united

states. but taney seemeding to further than just denying blacks citizenship. in reviewing the history of the writing of the declaration of independence and the constitution, taney held that the founders had not acknowledged or included african americans in the people of the united states. taney reasoned that the fact that so many of the founders held slaves proved that they had no intention of applying the all men are created equal language of the declaration to african americans. it was too glaring of a contradiction. in making this point, taney wrote these memorable words. "it is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in relation to that unfortunate race which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened

portions of the world at the time of the declaration of independence. they had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of of an infear yure -- infeweror order and all together -- so far infeweror that they they had ts -- in-- no rights which the white man was bound to respect and that the negro might be justly and lawfully reduced to slavery for his benefit." now i will come back to these words. the second point of law decided by taney, and more significant in the context of the political debates of the time, was that congress had no power to prohibit slavery in federal territories. taney put it this way, the right

of property and slave is distinctly and expressly ffirmed in the constitution. congress had no power -- this was at the time the most controversial part of the opinion. does -- the big question of the 1850's was whether slavery would be allowed to spread into new territories and his answer to that question was a resounding yes, slave owners had a right to take slaves into new territory and congress could not interfere with those rights. in other words, the more pressing rights issue was not whether african american slave or free possessed the rights of citizenship under the constitution, rather rights in

the context of the heated debates of the 1850's meant the rights of slave holders. that a manthe rights from south carolina had ampionshipped in that -- championed were beginning to rally behind in the late 1850's and these were the rights that taney had protected. strikingly absent from the mainstream national debate over slavery in fact, was a discussion of the rights of black people. abolitionists seemed perfectly in-- content to debate the topic and republicans emed focus on -- few abolitionists or republicans

championed racial equality under the law. abraham lincoln stayed away from this issue as much as he could in his debates with steven douglas. and referred only to the basic rights which he believed was in the declaration of independence that one person could not be owned by another person. in their criticism of the dred scott decision, northern white republicans focused relentlessly on the slivery part of the decision -- slavery part of the decision rather than the black citizenship or rights aspect of it. african americans, however, had a different reading of this case . rather than focusing on the question slave holders rights, they zeroed in on the issue of black rights, their rights.

taney's bold claim that blacks had no rights, that the white man was found to respect became somewhat of a rallying point for the growing group of northern black activists who sought not only to end slavery, but also to advance the aspirations of black people throughout the united states. it may well have been the most offensive phrase and the one that had the most galvanizing effect on a segment of the population in the history of the supreme court. in 1858, a year after the issuing of taney's opinion that the suffer ath convention of the colored citizens of new york, african american leaders made clear exactly what they thought taney's opinion, playing off taney's language, they held that , "the dred scott decision is

afoul and ainfamous lie which neither black men nor right men are bound to respect." the delegates expressed particular outrage of taney's interpretation of the declaration of independence. the idea that blacks had not been included in the political community at the time of the founding and that therefore the government of the united states was a white man's government. the delegates announced, "we therefore call upon all who subscribe to the theory of human rights set forth in the declaration of american dependence to trample in self-defense, the dicta of judge tain yip beneath their feet as of no binding authority." the emphasis that african

americans placed on the citizenship part rather than the slavery part stands out because it taught against the political grain during the late 1850's's. the other striking element of the african american critique of the decision was the way this hich they personalized their criticism, training their -- they aimed specifically on chief justice taney. now, taney was one of seven justices in the majority in this case and each justice wrote an opinion, but it was taney's opinion with his infamous words "they have no rights" that most ffended african americans. 1862 ents of 1861 and contributed even further to this close identification of chief justice taney with the court's

dred scott decision. lincoln was elected president in 1860, and when white southerners feared the rights to hold slaves would not be protected under the incoming president they succeeded from the federal union and the civil war began. the northern war effort began as an attempt simply to restore the union as an attempt put down the southern rebellion. but by 1862, union policy changed. largely because of pressure exerted by african americans, but also because of the republican belief that liberating slaves helped the union cause, emancipation started to become the policy of the union government in washington.

in a span of several months, congress inenacted legislation forbidding -- slavery. congress also passed an act which made possible the emancipation of slaves by confederates. declared all slaves in areasu combine -- union free. everyone of these policies instituted by lincoln and republicans constituted a gradual, methodical assault on the dred scott decision. particularly on the slavery part

of that decision. by 1863, slavery was slowly losing its grip on the southern states in the midst of war. meantime, tony it looked in the background. the chief justice held a unique position as the only southerner on the court to be part of the dred scott majority who sympathized with the confederacy. five of the seven justices in the majority had been seven or's. virginia died of in 1860. alabama,bell of another justice in the majority address got, because of his

loyalty to his home state and secessionist course that it took , resigned his seat on the high court in early 1861 and went back home to the south. he ended up serving as the assistant secretary of war for the confederacy. tennesseehn k china became famous for his support of the federal union. in 1861, upon attempting to hold circuit court in his home state, he encountered a group of confederates outside of nashville who informed him that if he entered the city to hold court, they could not guarantee his safety. he left. when federal forces occupied nashville in early 1862, he came back as somewhat of a conquering hero to unionist in the city,

and he did all the u.s. circuit sessions in the summer of 1862. georgia --ne of justice wayne of georgia earned the scorn of his fellow georgians for his faithful devotion to the union. dad -- dead, and others thoroughly but devoted to the union, that left one. bitter -- from his position as chief justice, he did all he could to support twart -- he --

voted against the constitutionality of lincoln's blockade of southern points. he drafted a hypothetical opinion challenging the constitutionality of the federal draft law should it come before the court. it didn't. he seeds over lincoln's emancipation proclamation. opposed to lincoln's policies, and so sure that the administration hated him for it, he wondered aloud after the decision in the habeas corpus case whether the president might order his arrest. 1863 and 1864, as union army may greater inroads into the confederacy, his opinions and he himself seemed more and more the relics of a

bygone era. it came more and more under criticism. only six years between the issuing of the dred scott decision and the announcement of the emancipation proclamation, america was undergoing a radical transformation. the unionlincoln, and military were enacting and implementing policies making freedom possible. while african-americans were taking matters into their own hands by walking off southern plantations and toward federal military lines, many of those who moved out of slavery, the men anyway, were moving into the union army. 200,000 black men were serving as union soldiers or sailors. warblack's during the civil , military service offered a way to overcome the stamp of inferiority inherent the

opinion. i wait to assert they were men and a way to claim equal rights and an equal share of the american heritage. , a black man from new jersey who had become a leading lawyer and activist insisted that the war presented just such an opportunity. listen to his words from a speech in january of 1862 in boston and mocking paraphrase. freeman capable of bearing arms and three quarters of a million slaves wild with the enthusiasm caused by the dawn of the glorious opportunity of being able to strike a blow for freedom will be a power that white men will be bound to this act."

with the nation swept up in revolutionary change, he spent his last few years holed up in his home on indiana avenue in washington. sick, mostly homebound, in the care of his daughter's and , and disgusted by the policies of president lincoln and official washington, he seized to carry at his duties. he spent much of his time in that reading newspapers and smoking cigars. he held the title of chief justice of the united states, his sympathies clearly laid with the confederate government in richmond. , husband of his daughter maria, served in the confederate army.

pictures of both of them hung on the wall in his house. home,im confined to his the chief justice is ill health and impressive longevity became a subject of some conversation and speculation in washington. senator the republican "i prayed with, earnestness for his life to be prolonged throughout the canyons of ministration, and by god, i'm afraid i have overdone it. " [laughter] come.me did eventually , he wasfore his death presented with the opportunity to take an oath of allegiance to

the united states government, an oath proposed by president lincoln and provided for maryland's newsday constitution. the chief justice stubbornly refused. died on the evening of october 12, and the very next day, voters in his home state approved an amendment to the state constitution abolishing slavery. occur a fitting event to the day after the death of the proslavery chief justice. later, a group of family members, friends, dignitaries, and onlookers gathered to pay their last respects. president lincoln and three cabinet members were there. afterward, a train took his body familymall group of

members to frederick, maryland where the funeral service took place. months, innext three late 8064 and early 1865, lincoln won reelection as president. the union forces under the command of we mt sherman in georgia continued their march to see, and eventually northward into south carolina. congress debated and passed a 13th amendment to the constitution. it ended slavery and overturned the slavery portion of the dred scott decision. meanwhile, the public debate over his legacy and the meaning of emancipation had begun. , the emphasis that african-americans had always aspecton the no rights became an important part of the

national discussion. amendment moved swiftly toward ratification by the states that year, the question of black citizenship and lack rights moved to the forefront. now that lacks were free, what rights with a have? in the midst of this, he and dred scott, now more closely connected than ever, became a symbol of the old proslavery order. the pre-civil war slave power. on february 23, 1865, when senator lyman trumbull of illinois introduced a bill providing for the placement of a marble bust in the supreme court chamber, where bust of the previous chief justices were senatordisplayed,

sumner rosen opposition. that," he said. sumner continued, >> the name is -- judgment is beginning now. emancipated country will fasten upon him the stigma which he b."rves others joined sumner in his criticism. they would pay $2000 to hang this man in effigy, rather than $1000 to commemorate his efforts. later that year in a speech on the floor of the house in which

he laid out his views on reconstruction policy, republican congressman thaddeus stevens of pennsylvania took an even stronger position against him. referring to his draft scott decision, stevens argued that the notion that america was a white man's government only was "as atrocious as the infamous sentiment that dammed the way chief justice to everlasting fame and accurately everlasting fire." a link the keys on his legacy published that year in the atlantic monthly, the author made clear that none of his other work on the court would matter. in comparison to his infamous decision in the case of dred scott. quote this i

>> it will be the theme of the world and the theme of all who precipitated him will him buzz remembrance held in . for he did more than any other individual to extend the slave power." he went on to discuss his motives in the decision. here he used similarly stark language. he noted that quote the worst of motorists is the disposition to serve the cause of evil." he argued that he knew exactly what he was doing. to snuffion attempted out all hope of rights and liberties to the nations free and enslaved african-americans. the chief justice as ignoring all of the precepts of the christian religion, the declaration of independence, and

the constitution. finally, going through a long list of english judges with reputations for unfairness and infamy, including george jefferies of england, the infamous persecutor of promises and's -- protestants, he concluded that tawny was the worst of all. point in his reputation came with the 1865 publication of an anonymous 68-page pamphlet , "the unjust judge." accused him of the worst abuses of the judicial power. it asserted that the dred scott opinion alone with shape his reputation. thatof the pamphlet argues

the framers had been and that the constitution and body the spirit of the declaration of independence, particularly its assertion that all men were created equal. the author of the unjust judge took the dinner satisfaction and showing how early in his career tawny viewed slavery incompatible. it is true that as a young lawyer in maryland, he had defended jacob gruber, an anti-slavery methodist minister accused of a disturbing the peace and inciting rebellion, and in the process, tawny had cited the declaration of independence in support of his antislavery views and had "a blot called slavery

on our national character." thisuthor made much of apparent change of heart, describing tawny as failing to live up to his early ideals as well as those of the nation's founders. analysis of the dred got case, the pamphlet attempted to demonstrate that african-americans, contrary to tawny's assertion, had been included in the political community at the time of the founding. more than an academic criticism in the dredeasoning scott opinion, the unjust judge constituted a record cold -- rhetorical assault on the character of the nations chief justice. it considered him a malevolent, all man, engaged in the most

nefarious of purposes, a man untrue to the principles of the christian religion as he was to the ideals of the constitution. in his perversion of the law and his misuse of his power, tawny equaled the infamous judge " in his worst days." moreover, the author contingent "he exceeded which character he will be most remembered, he was next to pontius pilate, the worst to ever occupy the seat of judgment among men." the evolution in the response from republicans was clear.

the page of history to condemn to help for the decision to be the worst judge in the history of the english speaking world to being next to everff pilate, the worst to occupy the seat of judgment among men. the rush of union victory in the triumph of emancipation made tawny appear by comparison to be on the wrong side of history, to be an abuser of power, and a force for evil. so, what does this interpretation of tawny's death mean? what does it tell us about chief justice tawny and america at the and early 1865?

i think it tells us three things. first, it tells us that by the time of his death tawny had come power, thehe slave entrenched pro-slavery interests that the union was attempting to defeat. no rights language of dred scott, the union adoption of a policy of emancipation, and they's attempts to throw at lincoln administration turn him into a highly visible public enemy. he1864, it was clear that stood for the rights of slaveholders, for no rights for black people, and he stood opposed to lincoln's efforts to prosecute the war.

north, there may have been no greater symbol of the south and all that it stood for then chief justice tawny. that thesetells us really were revolutionary times. that in a nation that had so valued its institutions, its founders, it's constitution, and its court system for decades that one of its most distinguished and longest-serving justices might experience so rapid a fall in the minds of the notary public. in 1864 and 1865, many northerners really did see themselves as bringing about a profound revolutionary break with their past. a past symbolized by the aging proslavery tawny.

it is not easy for 21st century that it wouldknow take a civil rights movement to bring about further change to understand the swift and revolutionary pace of events during the civil war. it is often our tendency to, history backwards, rather than forwards, to say from our perspective that the war did not really change much. when we look closely at what s said, we can see the rapid downfall of the chief justice's reputation speaks to pths of the revolutionary aspirations of the day. slavery, a 250 year old institution on american soil, went down to defeat on the battlefields of the civil war. along with it, its most

prominent judicial defender. these were revolutionary times. finally, the story of tawny's rapidly declining reputation reveal something about black agency and activism, about the extent to which african-americans shaped the times. course, the fact of war was the driving force in bringing about emancipation. it was african-americans themselves who were fleeing to federal military lines. it was african-americans who always focused on the rights portion of the dred scott decision. who always drew their inspiration from the all men are created equal language of the declaration of independence. and who always pushed the debate forward to emancipation, yes,

but beyond to the rights of black people in the republic. radicalments of white, toublicans owed a great deal black's decades long attempts to push the declaration of independence to the forefront of american political discourse. was african-americans who helped to bring about a fundamental shift in american notion of rights, from the rights that tawny had to discuss and dred scott, the rights of slaveholders, to the rights of enslaved persons. relied on the fifth amendment of the constitution to emphasize the rights of property, but african-americans look to the declaration of independence to champion the rights of all human beings.

the passing of tawny, the revolutionary nature of the times, and the role of african-americans in bringing about that revolution was probably most evident in the truly historic event on february 1, 1865, less than four month after tony's death, a month before lincoln's second inauguration, and two and a half months before lee's surrender at appomattox. , john as law of became the first african-american to gain admission to the bar of the united states supreme court. when he was admitted to practice by the new chief justice, salmon

. chase the new orleans tribune, a black newspaper, took note with pride. that hepaper reported would be practicing were previously, and was and how they put it, "the infamous tawny sat enthroned between -- decreeing that i colored man has no rights." it was indeed a new era. thank you. [applause] >> the c-span cities tour takes

look tv in american history tv on the road, traveling to u.s. cities to learn about their history and literary life. next weekend with the visitor that is in wisconsin -- visited madison, wisconsin. >> the call, to every citizen. it is an unending struggle to keep government representative. >> he is probably the most important political figure in and one ofistory, the most important in the history of the 20th century in the united states. he was a reforming governor. he defined what progressivism is. he was one of the first to use the term. he was a united states senator who was recognized by his peers

in the 1950's as one of the five greatest senators in american history. he was an opponent of world war i. he stood his ground, advocating for free speech. above all, he was about the people. after the civil war, america changed radically from a nation of small farmers and producers and manufacturers, and by the late 1870's, 1880's, 1890's, we had concentrations of wealth. we had growing inequality. we had concern about the influence of money in government. ofspent the later part 1890's giving speeches all over wisconsin. if you wanted us be your for your club or group, he would give a speech. he went to county fairs. he went to every kind of event you can imagine.

he built a reputation for himself. by 1900, he was ready to run for governor, advocating on behalf of the people. he had two issues. one, the direct primary, no more selecting candidates and convention. two, stop the interests. specifically the railroads. >> next saturday, starting at new -- noon eastern. that's on c-span3. >> each week american history tv sits in on a lecture with one of the nation's college professors. you can watch the classes every saturday evening at 8:00 p.m. and midnight eastern. holy cross professor edward o'donnell talked about the prejudice many immigrants faced in the 19th century with regard to religion, customs, and social status. professor o'donnell says this often lead to fights over what

would be taught in public schools, westerns of loyalty of catholic politicians, and job s with things like "no irish need apply." an hour and 10 minutes. >> welcome. we will be talking about the anti-immigrant movement that explodes in the 19th century, pretty much impacting all immigrants, but especially the irish. they are the most identifiable group. they stand out and generate an enormous opposition. before we get into that, let's back up a little bit. we are not just going to be talking about the irish today, because the nativist response irish generates actually existed before the irish got here. you can find early versions of it