>> teaching the -- chief justice rehnquist said it could be accepted by the culture. how many cases can we say about that? a sweeping decision, it isolated united states as one of only four nations across the globe that allowed abortions for any reason, and yet it has not settled the issue at all. >> tonight, it is wrote v wade, wade, talng roe v about the right to abortion, but states can restrict that based on the viability of the fetus. watch that tonight at 10 a clock. -- 10:00 eastern. colleger: wheaton history professor tracy mckenzie teaches a class on the evolving northern war aims are in the civil war between unionism and emancipation. he described how public support for a method patient correlated with union forces perceiving to

be winning the civil war. heels argues against reduction -- he also argues lincolns reelection was unlikely due to the state of the war in 1963. his classes about an hour. tracy mckenzie: now, this morning, we are going to be more or less looking at the .hronological order of the war the focus today is going to be on the period roughly from lincoln's announcement of the emancipation proclamation to the end of the war. that is chronologically our focus. i am trying to emphasize some of the things in a moment. i would like to touch base with what we think are the primary areas of concern for this part of the course. can i ask you guys to help us all review major themes having in mind right now? someone please, hannah? >> [indiscernible]

tracy mckenzie: one of the things you are going to come back to is the concept [indiscernible] us popular american heads into regards, in regard to slavery, racial inequality. all of these reminding ourselves the relationship between the two is very complicated, not in the areas cents -- not in any sense related. >> transformation of northern aims. tracy mckenzie: transformation of northern war aims is something we have visited. it begins as a war in which the early focus is preservation of the union. american president lincoln is talking about broader goals, but in a short period of time, it becomes different. what i'm talking about this morning is the way in which was unpopular opinion responded to the northern war aims.

northern popular opinion responded to the northern war aims. the two things most relevant this morning. keep those in mind as you interact, as you listen. i help the -- i think it will help us gleaning what is important here. let's touch base with where we ended last time, and that is to remember that by the summer of 1862, abraham lincoln, for a variety of reasons, said there is a opportunity to strike at slavery that you don't think of when the war began -- that he did not think of when the war began. the length and cost of the war is polarizing northern opinion, and is creating a kind of opportunity in terms of popular opinion to pursue a more aggressive war effort.

that is part of what is going on. there is also the constitutional window of opportunity, right, that lincoln believes the war is presented to him. the role of the slaves people themselves, eliminating any kind that the north might play with regard to slavery is a factor also. you mentioned to other things very quickly. lincoln is hesitant to's art the slavery in 1961, because he was concerned about war states. one of the things he has concluded by the summer of 1862, war states do not play the role they would have in 1861. part of that is what the war has done itself. it has drawn about 3000 pro confederates from the border states into the army. in an interesting way, they plate a political role at that point. -- they play a political role at that point.

they are not in the united states at all in that case. and the fear that border states may switch sides and support the confederacy is no longer pressing in lincoln's mind. they are also concerned about having a bipartisan support for emancipation policy if he ever went in that direction. knowing he could not have any bipartisan support for it. by the summer of 1862, lincoln has given up on the possibility of bipartisan support for the war generally. the democratic party in the north is opposing him, which is every kind of personal initiative. the idea of this war is that going to be one that divides the world politically. it is something lincoln more or less has abandoned. but we see is new factors making emancipation desirable, al qaeda obstacles falling by the wayside. -- all kinds of obstacles falling by the wayside. lincoln has decided but the time is right -- when the time is

right, he will announce a new aim for the war effort that will add to the union human freedom. comes in come, and it september 1862 with lincoln's announcement of what we remember as the preliminary emancipation automation, which effectively defines a passivation -- emancipation as a war aim. is not going to apply to the border states. is that going to apply to areas of the literacy under union -- confederacy under union occupation. virginia, louisiana excluded. even with those exceptions aside, no one denies that the war has been fundamentally [indiscernible] what we want to focus on this morning is the aftermath of that. james mcpherson's book shows you

that union has the potential to unify own opinions, emancipation always divides. always a divisive issue in northern opinion, and we see that in the years after the announcement of the policy. i want to begin with just some images that give us a sense of the way northern opinion is, to some degree, polarized. let us start with this particular image. this is a painting that is done in 1964. -- 1864. it is aimed at, or imaginatively re-creating the context of lincoln, fashioning of the emancipation policy. sure, aretails, i'm too small for us to pick up on, but i think there are some things to call your attention to. this is supposed to be link is a study in the executive -- executivestudy in the

mansion. all paraphernalia around him. there is a map of the united states. the artist has put a sword hanging down across the map, figuratively showing how the war has divided the country. some of the pieces of paper to our right, lincoln's left, or various petitions from anti-slavery organizations that are imploring the president to bondage.ainst human behind lincoln is a copy of his presidential oath. why lincoln would have a copy of his oath hanging up is hard for us to imagine, but the artist puts it there for a reason. on the shelf opposite lincoln is in fact a bust of andrew jackson, who in the context of the 1860's is the embodiment of the kind of staunch preservation of the union, willing to use

whatever means necessary to maintain national supremacy. on his left, the copy of the bible. the artist is telling us, this is the context in which the emancipation automation is ultimately emerging. can you think out loud with me a little bit about the message here? what is the artist wanting to convey by the proclamation, about how americans should think about it? any thoughts at all? question, you have a thought? >> well, the bible is like an , ideal wayn of moral comes to emancipation, but his oath is like, what he is sworn to do. and with andrew jackson, keeping the union. his goal is to preserve the union, but at the same time, he has moral obligations to free the slaves. tracy mckenzie: does that resonate with the rest of you?

the artist is try to show the complex at the of the motives in which lincoln, in this very difficult way, is balancing these competing obligations, these competing loyalties. the bible, sort of the embodiment of moral obligation, the oath on the wall, the embodiment of constitutionality, right? the artist is saying what lincoln is doing is trying to resolve the incident between moral obligation and his constitutional response ability, and we are supposed to see the emancipation policy as successfully doing that? with the flag over the window and the book of -- bust of andrew jackson, we have commitments to the union. this is the message, the very sympathetic message, really the way lincoln would want northern opinion to think of his policy. we talked about lincoln as being a constitutional anti-slavery politician, always willing to present views as consistent with the constitution, but also want to have some kind of moral

omission on top of america as possible. compare that image with this one. this is a kind of pencils that -- sketch, not colorful at the other one. this comes from an immigrant in the united states, the united states before the civil war, from one of the german states. he lives in baltimore. he is a northern democrat who is very critical of the policy. pale on can see the this image to pick up on the image. can you see any details well enough? what do you see their? >> he is standing on the bible, stomping on it. tracy mckenzie: rather than cherishing it, he is standing on it. >> it appears to be a demon on the table. tracy mckenzie: i think that is fair enough. yeah, ok.

>> there is like a saintly representation of john brown. tracy mckenzie: you can see the -- framedture of picture, it is supposed to be john brown, with the raid on harpers ferry in 1859. it was built specifically to arm slaves after the rated harpers ferry was planned. there is a halo, st. john. what message is that, perhaps, sending? the fact that brown is being shown favorably? what is the significance of that? any thoughts? samantha, a thought? >> a.b. brown was sort of reckless, overly -- maybe brown was sort of reckless, and they are considering other options. tracy mckenzie: brown is the embodiment of violent fanaticism.

compared to the other picture where lincoln is weighing the cost tuition very carefully versus -- constitution very carefully, brown does not do that. brown thinks the constitution is part of the problem, and violence is the answer. anything else you see their? >> it looks like he was massive. but he was really laboring over the document, where here he is slashed in his seat. this insinuates it is a fabrication of his own thinking. tracy mckenzie: there is not those influences, the constitution, the petition. he is doing it either alone, or let's say, in consideration -- in consultation with the devil. and finally, what is this little devil offering lincoln? it is almost certainly meant to be alcohol. there is a decanter on the far side of the table. the double -- devil is offering him a drink for inspiration.

this encapsulates the kind of polarization that the emancipation policy creates in the north. to come back to david pearson, union unit sized -- union unit sized, if the patient divided. -- emancipation divided. it is not the only thing in the middle of the civil war that is extra contentious. we will not have time to develop this, but we can list other factors that are at play. probably the most important link to emancipation is the recruitment of black soldiers into the united states armed forces. the united states congress has authorized the president of the united states to employ men of color for military purposes as early as the summer of 1862. lincoln and the summer of 1862 is not prepared to take this stance, is far too controversial. he authorizes some experiments

with the investment of black soldiers as early as the summer of 1862, but he keeps it under the radar. on areas close to south carolina, kansas, the far remote frontier, they will begin to be the enlistment of black soldiers. in areas of contingent, that does not happen. until the policy is announced. when it is announced, lincoln authorizes a very aggressive way to recruitment of black soldiers. you begin to see posters like this one. in 1863.n philadelphia comment join us, brothers. brothers.d join us, these appeals lead to the enlistment while some are -- of somewhere along the way, 180,000 men into the forces, always

segregated, called the color troops. maybe as many as a quarter of a million other african-american males served in nonmilitary ways in labor details and other capacities with united states forces. a very large edition to the armed forces of the united states. i would argue that the sort of government on enlisting black soldiers, if anything is more controversial in the north then emancipation. i made that claim, and i ask you why that might be. any thoughts? why is this kind of image more troubling? >> it implies a sort of quality -- equality between the two races that emancipation does not do on its own. tracy mckenzie: there is the implementation of the quality here. emancipation does not necessarily provide.

taylor? >> they are putting weapons in people's hands that they enslaved, and so they worry that like, now they have weapons, they might turn against the white men with arms. tracy mckenzie: taelor raises the concern that in reality, it is often linked to the policy in southern perspectives that in putting weapons in the former enslaved people, it may even be inviting if not encouraging retribution, some sort of violent response against white civilians. i think that is a factor as well. i think, one of the things we tried to identify already is that if you are an american in the northern states in the middle of the 19th century, you could oppose slavery for many reasons, separate from racial equality areas that may be your motive, but need not be. when we recruit black shoulders

-- soldiers, they cannot separate that from a policy pointing toward racial equality. and so, and certain way, i think this policy is more controversial, even more divisive than emancipation itself. we can add to the list of controversial issues, i will not go into as much detail, but i will mention that in the summer of 1862, the north begins to move to conscription policy, meaning forces of soldiers, they do that calling for volunteers in the summer of 1862 or nine months signees. the move to an all-encompassing draft law, anyone between ages of [indiscernible] is subject to the draft. it has a very significant impact on popular opinion.

one of the things you guys have been reading his a short excerpt of the diary of this new york republican named george templeton strong. isrge templeton strong writing in the summer of 1862, he goes downtown, new york city. there is a major battle raging in virginia at the time, and strong disguise what he sees in new york city as you would never know war is going on. describes -- describes what he sees in new york cy as you would never know war is going on. he is a technology that men are fighting and dying -- acknowledging that men are fighting and dying. it is possible if you live remote on the theater of war, it was a total abstraction. construction -- conscription makes every adult male viable for military service, so you can imagine how that adds a kind of level of significace to

political debates about war is about and if the war is going well. conscription is a factor, and the final factor i want to mention very quickly is lincoln and menstruation record on civil -- lincoln's administration record on civil liberties. we dug about political oppositions of the lincoln administration. civil liberties may be as important as emancipation in some areas as promoting opposition to republican leadership. lincoln. early on in his presidency timesines the will be when he will need to take it short and very steps to crack down on voices that might weaken the war effort. under the constitution article 169, the congress is given the authority to withdraw at least temporarily something called the privilege of habeas corpus. have you heard of habeas corpus?

the phrase habeas corpus come from latin, literally, to have the body. but the privilege of habeas corpus is preventing the government from arbitrarily imprisoning civilians and not giving them due process. not giving them their right to a trial before the body of their peers. under the constitution, if some government official or to throw you in prison without trial, someone to go through court on your behalf, request that a judge issue an order releasing this political prisoner, a writ order for heaviest corpus, and order to have the body. the constitution says this privilege may be withdrawn or repealed temporarily in terms of invasion. so lincoln, at different times during the war, as early as april 1861, sort of embroiling the policy into the late months

of 1862, will authorize the arrest of civilians without trial. one historian who systematically reviewed that policy estimates that somewhere along the lines of about 15,000 civilians are arrested at some point during the war. if our population today, it -- like like to 250,000. all of them released, but it is going on. factor thatnother is a source of considerable political opposition. opposition tove emancipation, the enlistment of black soldiers, conscription in some circles. concerns about civil liberties as well.

behind theses particular concerns our anxieties about the way the war is going. supportinforms popular or opposition to the war more than the momentum on the battlefield. it is going to sound like a gross oversimplification, but it is more or less something that has been verified by systematic analysis, the signal most important factor that determines popular attitude toward war and the particular context is that it does appear the war is being one. wars whereing won, victory seems tangible and at hand are popular wars. won,that are not being wars in which victory seems remote if at all likely seem to be on popular wars. this brings us back to the emancipation policy.

because lincoln had resented emancipation -- presented with the patient as a military act. .s a military act as a military act which would bring victory and shorten the war. we see one other image. this is one of my favorite images from the civil war. this is one of the ways in which we see that emancipation embodied. here we have a print that is done, i do not know the exact date. it is either 1862 or 1863. it is presented by currier and ives, a very popular house that made inexpensive artwork for private homes, places, and this particular drawing, you have the justification of emancipation as a military act. the symbolism to define fairly

quickly. you have difference davis, president of the confederacy on the far left. -- you have jefferson davis, president of the confederacy, on the far left. he called to the passing visitors of the carnival, step right up, give me to bits and try your and at such and such. he is tried to get people to break the background of the -- backbone of the rebellion. he is an enormous vicious looking dog with the word rebellion written on the back. a variety of northern figures that most readers would immediately recognize or know of. these northern figures had a various -- in various ways try to rake -- break the backbone, bring union victory. in the back, with his head in his hands, is a man named john crittenden.

john crittenden was a congressman who in 1861 tried to come up with a compromise that would avoid war. crittenden had a tiny little hammer labeled compromise. it is woefully inadequate. and then you have a variety of other northern figures, a general with a larger hammer enabled -- labeled steel. and another labeled strategy. other union generals. and next is the secretary of war, edwin stanton. stanton is talking to president abraham lincoln. stanton tells lincoln that these generals and try their skill, they may try their strategy, but i think my hammer is the one that is going to break the backbone of the rebellion. labeled draft. this will put us over the top and bring military success. lincoln always with the

stereotype of the rail splitter, his acts over his shoulder, talks to stanton, you can try him with that. of i believe that this ax mine is the only thing that will touch him. it is the only thing that will do the trick. the ax is labeled emancipation reclamation. it is all about bringing victory , emancipation is justified. the military, as my authority in commander-in-chief. here we see the relationship between success in the battlefield and popular support for emancipation. if we grasp support for emancipation in north, would correlate pretty closely with popular perceptions of whether the war was being won, weather progress was being made or not. if you are abraham lincoln or any republican advocate of

emancipation, and the adamant -- in the aftermath of the proclamation, the union more effort takes a news dive. -- nosedive. it is announced in late september of 1862. there is not a significant union military victory for the next nine months. roughlyhat period, until july 1863, popular support for emancipation, popular support for republican administration goes down, down, down. now, we don't have a lot of time this class. it goes so quickly in the overview of the war to talk about specifics militarily. -- lenny remind you of a broad overarching pattern. we have a map, you have seen this before. you have some sense of what is conveying. we've talked about that.

the grand strategy the lincoln ministration began with his on three components. , thrustederate states the confederate capital which has been moved to richmond, and the campaign to quit -- take control of the mississippi river. i will make it broad generalization. in the first year of the war, in the eastern parts of the theater of war, particularly the round of virginia, the confederacy was doing very well. went,e farther west you the west feeder of war, union success was more and more striking. they had this pattern of union victory in the west, confederate victory or at least union stalemate in the east. what happens in the nine months after the emancipation proclamation is that that pattern falls apart, and

republicans cannot point to it is bogged down in a costly siege in vicksburg. there is a very expensive, bloody battle in central tennessee that accomplishes nothing. there are major confederate victories in the eastern theater in virginia in 1862. one string of successive confederate victories with staggering human costs. ,his is interrupted temporarily july of 1863. isthe span of 24 hours there major union victory at gettysburg.

gettysburg was at the top of the map. the next day vicksburg, the last stronghold on the mississippi river and the confederacy surrenders to union forces. by the end of that year, tennessee has been completely rid of confederate forces. georgia,ies are now in threatening within 30 miles or so. toward ag is pointing regain of union momentum and a likelihood the war will end by the following spring. one of the things that adds to , victory is now likely, lincoln has identified a new general.

timeln has a difficult identifying a successful commander in the eastern theater of the war. man, ulyssess this grant from the western theater to the east. successful very fighting in mississippi. command allt to union armies in all theaters of war. lot.ln and grant talk a lincoln is convinced grant has the plan to end the war as soon as the weather improves enough to resume campaigning in the of that year. the story of 1864 in terms of the civil war is the story of the way in which that expectation ultimately com crashing down. isthe spring of 1864 there

significant fighting into areas. i don't care that you remember the specific details but i want you to put yourself in the perspective, northern civilians are already in the war that is vastly longer, more expensive than anyone had anticipated when the war broke out. ask yourself how they would inform your participation in the future. two areas of fighting primarily. virginia between .ashington dc and richmond there is fighting starting in betweenring, 1864 ulysses grant and robert e. lee north of richmond. , they will maneuvers move east and south, east and

south, always trying to get andnd the confederate army strike directly at the capital confederateen the fi capital in the confederate army. it leads to is a series of very costly battles. the result is that from early june, 1864, early there are a series of battles with casualty levels that for anything recognize before this. the pattern of military history in the civil war in the first half is a pattern in which two large armies would come together -- reeking untold casualties.

in the armies would separate and take weeks, often months to recover and requip themselves to resume the fighting. what changes is one battle gives way almost seamlessly to the next. the armies in northern virginia are constantly in contact with one another inflicting casualties on one another that are astounding. let me give you an example of grants army. the first dayouth of may with 1600 thousand soldiers. that army will sustain 64,000 casualties. we will add to those 64,000 casualties, the terms of service

of many soldiers are expiring. to those 64,000 who are taken out of action, 18,000 go home. their term has expired. mayarmy grant began with in , 150,000 men, has now only less than one third of that original army left. ultimately this campaign blogs down. siege.s instead to a defended city's of richmond called petersburg. it is pretty much in place by mid-june.

grant's hope for a quick campaign that would capture the confederate capital has been frustrating in the human cost has been staggering. the same time there is fighting going on, there is fighting in northern georgia. the union army struck south around chattanooga on the border and was trying to move on that land. it is one of the important transportation crossroads at this time. on in northerng , constantthis armie conflict. let me add up for you what

happens in these two campaigns. casualties,mber of if you combine casualties in northern georgia and northern virginia, 89,000. it in an thousand and less than three months. i don't know if that sounds like a lot to you are not. i hope that it sounds like a lot to you. the population of the free million if we take those figures and try to translate them today, the united states forced us to experience the same proportional laws. today would require casualties of 1.5 million. the united states is involved in a war taking one-one half-million soldiers.

that is killed, wounded and missing. out of action. what would be the popular response? think out loud with me. what do you think? >> overwhelmingly negative. prof. mckenzie: chris says overwhelmingly negative. this is hypothetical. >> people would want it to be over. they probably wouldn't care about what they were fighting over. prof. mckenzie: some people are .oing to say i'm sick of this the cost is too great. nothing can justify this sacrifice. think such a high human cost requires staying the course and justifying the sacrifice.

prof. mckenzie: does that make sense to you? he is saying rather than the high human cost being an argument for disengagement, it becomes an argument for persistence. it is going to be if we back out now all those who have made this sacrifice will have done so in vain. which is the language abraham lincoln uses in his gettysburg address. died iny have not vain. others may need to die. than one kind of response. we have bifurcated response. greater polarization. more people say this is too high , and more say we must do whatever it takes to vindicate the sacrifices that have been made.

imagine the united states is involved in a war in the last three months, 1.5 million casualties have been sustained. the president goes before the american people in a press conference and reading from the teleprompter tells the country he is calling for more volunteers. the number of volunteers he needs he specifies clearly. he says i need 8 million more. volunteers" tatian marks why? because there is a draft law in place. if volunteers are not forthcoming will be another way to ensure the manpower they need is met. i'm putting the and our numbers today. in thencoln asked for

aftermath of all those casualties is 500,000 more volunteers. a half million. final detail. imagine you are currently involved in the war. 1.5 million casualties in the last three months. a president says i need 8 million more. finally that president is running for reelection on his war record. let's add that to the max. at the same time abraham lincoln is asking for half a million more volunteers, he's asking for the american people to support him for a second term. it's impossible to feel the weight of contingency in the summer of 1864.

unless we see how unlikely the reelection was. certainly, lincoln at various times believes his reelection is unlikely. what i would like us to do is to to the 1864 visit presidential election. keep those big things in mind. the war is a window into attitudes. a little bit of context. is seeking a omination for a second term, he's doing something that we take for granted. presidentsncumbent

will be candidates for second terms. we assume they will get the nomination. we may not assume they will be reelected but we know statistically incumbents have good chances. that is not the case in the 19th century. to best president reelected to a second term was andrew jackson. that was 1832. 32 years have transpired since the last time a president was reelected. the last time an incumbent was even nominated had been 1840. one is automatically assuming in the republican party lincoln 's free nomination is inevitable or even desirable.

a lot of individuals with like to replace lincoln. someone to replace them because they have aspirations of their own. ,incoln's cabinet members someone who would like to be president. there are others with presidential aspirations. other members of the republican party don't think lincoln's re-electable. for that reason, with a concern for the war effort, they believe replacing lincoln is probably the wiser course to follow. ultimately lincoln is going to be reelected. what with muted in these he has othersiasm, there were aspirations for the nomination, no one person was able to create

a broad enough base of support to unseat lincoln. lincoln is going to be nominated in june 1864. the way he is nominated and the strategy followed by the party is key. look at some images that will get us thinking about the strategy of the party. tell me what you see. make some inferences about what this tells us in that election. let's begin with this poster that would have been widely circulated in the state of new york. it showing nominations at various levels starting with president and going down a variety. and tell me poster what you do or don't see. what jumps out?

>> it doesn't say republican nomination. it says union nomination. prof. mckenzie: let's start there. opponents of the republican are going to be using the label republican. republicans don't use the label very much at all in 1864. they are going to use the label national union. here.al union nominations let's start there. he moved to anything else can't talk to me about that. talk to me about that strategy and what it seems to be suggesting. ? samantha. >> is interesting.

focusonstrated a shift in . emancipation of slaves, they are returning to their initial focus, more popular. keeping the union together. prof. mckenzie: what we see here is a kind of -- what might look as a backtracking in the announcement of the emancipation policy, a clear redefinition of republican war aims. this seems to be returning to the earlier focus. anyone else have thoughts about that? they are trying to attract northern democrats who are probably on the fence about whether they want to support the party. they support the union. it's an obvious effort at bipartisan support to say regardless of party, if you

stand for what we stand for you need to be with us. what do they stand for? according to their label, the union. i think they would try to argue emphasizing national union, we are not backtracking. we're perpetuating the embracement of emancipation, preserving the union. anything else that you see here? may not be able to read it enough. i have in mind the vice presidential nomination. you, and i want, who lincoln's vice president was, in his first term, you might not immediately know to answer hannibal hamlin.

ofthe convention in june 1864 the republicans calling themselves national unionist kick out there vice presidential person on the ticket. hannibal hamlin had been an anti-slavery politician from new england. 1860 republicans and wanted to balance the ticket putting a prominent new englander with a prominent midwesterner. hamlin had done his job. his reputation was too strongly anti-slavery. 1864, as they deflect criticism of emancipation, they drop their vice president. they replace them with andrew johnson. we would talk about more if we were moving into reconstruction. he will figure centrally.

what do we know about him? he had been born and raised in the south. he had owned slaves himself. he was a democrat. the only other thing we my ad is he was a staunch unionist. , thewe think about that ticket in 1864 was the northern, anti-slavery republican lincoln -- notwith the southern proslavery but now opposed to slavery on moral grounds. what do they have in common? almost nothing. but one thing.

>> preservation of the union. prof. mckenzie: they are unionists. the pairing of these two, driving home the point. aimeds a union coalition at preserving the union. it can accommodate lots of issues of slavery. we see this in a variety of ways. a few more images. they label again, grand national union banner. the slogan says liberty, union and victory. broad, vague terms. the platform of the national party, 11-12 points. it's going to say this is paramount. of everyst duty

american citizen to maintain against all their enemies, the integrity of the union and the constitution and laws of the united states. if you go through this particular plank in the platform , we talk about quelling the rebellion, bringing traders to justice. it is all about preserving the union. phrase, the resolution says laying aside all differences of political opinion we pledge ourselves. lane.a fiction large the strategy is to say this is party. old republican it is a new bipartisan coalition that has its own cementing glue.

they will endorse emancipation. endorses the constitutional amendment that would end slavery and all of the united states. look at how it phrases that. the third plank in the platform. cause, andwas the now constitutes the strength of hostileellion, as it is of principles of their public and -- republic. we are in favor. it says the constitutional amendment to end the slavery everywhere. , as partposing slavery of our commitment to preserve the union. this was the cause of the rebellion.

it must be ended if we are to end the rebellion. this is going to be the approach of the republican party in 1864. 1864 is basically resigned to the inevitability of his defeat. the casualties have been so high , war weariness is mounting. he does not expect to win. strikinge most episodes and his presidency, the 23rd of august he has a memo in which he says it is exceedingly probable i will not be reelected. he has concluded that. the he writes that memo democratic party is preparing to meet in its convention in chicago, very near us.

that convention will ultimately nominate as its standardbearers these individuals. mcclellan, the commander of the army of the potomac early in the war. mcclellan represented a faction known as war democrats. war democrats were members of northern democratic party that favor the prosecution of war aggressively. they wanted to continue the war to preserve the union but always opposed emancipation. his running mate is george pendleton. a congressman from ohio. he represents a faction of the party called east democrats.

the nickname was copperheads. they basically arrived at the conclusion the war is a failure and continuing the war was a tragic mistake. theseatic party will put two men together on the same ticket. , even earlier in the war he staked out his position with regard to abraham lincoln. warays i do not favor a with the subjugation of the people, the confiscation of forcefulperty or the interference with slavery. the democratic party is closely enough divided that there are a lot of democrats that are not

happy mcclellan was the nominee. he's a war democrat. feelings, their party let them write the platform, which is bizarre. they are going to have a war democrat lead the party and let the peace democrats write the platform. this is what they come up with. one of the major planks in their platform. after four years of failure to restore the union by the experiment of war we demand immediate efforts be made forces station of hostilities -- for secession of hostilities. peace may be for stored on the basis of the federal union. but the platform is saying, immediate cease-fire, negotiation with the south, the only issue is the union.

emancipation is completely off the table. this is the two sides. they are drawn. very significant thing happens before the general election. the momentum on the field of battle turns. if there's a single critical of atlanta,is the fall of the object of union attention since the spring. this is immediately greeted with jubilation across the north. many individuals believe it may have been more than any single thing what turned the tide of northern opinion. you see two very clear strategists. a democrat, it will emphasize raise.

ist they are going to do constantly remind northern voters this is an unnecessary war fought to establish racial equality. i will pass over one image here and move to another one quickly. in 1864.ars it is picking up on a theme that emerges at the end of 1863. journalistc anonymously offered a pamphlet in which she said the republican party has as its agenda for the future of the united states what this author called miscegenation. it's not much used anymore, that term. it is invented in 1863. ix, the mixing of

the races. this author is saying the republican party wants not only total racial equality. it aspires to the intermixing of the races. democrats pick on it and run with it. drawing of the miscegenation la ball. of will have this kind gathering. what jumps out at you? can you see it well enough to pick up on the message of the artist? lots of white people dancing with african-americans. prof. mckenzie: every single

couple is interracial. we are moving towards. this is what the republican party wants. if you don't believe in that you have no business supporting anyone other than george mcclellan. in 1864re a republican you will do everything to deflect the emphasis on race. you cannot win the election defined in terms of racial equality. if you're going to win it at all, he must find the issue in terms of the union. they are going to link the democratic party with the south, and the size their support for a cease-fire according to its platform. you have other emphasis. particular

republican cartoon that shows the democratic party. we have studied 1832. they should resonate to some degree. the nullification crisis. according to this artist, you have andrew jackson promising the staunch advocate of the union, forcing the south ultimately to submit to federal authority. in 1864 what to they look like? thunderingeral not that the you must be preserved but cowering before the president of the confederacy. this is how far they have declined. it is quivering in its boots against the threat of the confederacy. a couple of more images.

.his is a campaign drawing davis, theferson president of the confederacy clasping hands with a union veteran. they are clasping hands over a grave and the tombstone says in the memory of union heroes fallen in a useless war. implication is if you favor the democrats, you are saying every sacrifice made to this point has been wasted. we have a veteran who has given a great sacrifice. we have columbia, the embodiment of the united states weeping by the grave. a vote for george mcclellan is a class hands with the southern traitors.

,his is my final image lampooning this ludicrous combination of commitments in the democratic party. you have mcclellan, the war democrat riding a warhorse leaving a sword while smoking a peace pipe and wearing a bonnet, which is supposed to be saying something about his masculinity. he is accompanied by the peace democrat riding a donkey. this is to say this is a ludicrous combination. in the end nothing matters more than the fall of atlanta. nothing matters more than the one andhe war as being the result in the end was abraham lincoln's comfortable electoral victory. he takes 91% of the electoral votes. the one thing i want to stress

is his opponents takes 45% of the popular vote. 45% of the northerners cast a ballot who declare the war a failure and have unanimously repudiated emancipation. it's important to us. reunifiedink about a united states, what conclusion conclusion -- what must we draw? a large amount of the population was not enthusiastic about emancipation. ,o come back to a final thing in a democratic society where a large majority hold a particular value inconsistent with the interest of the minority, there is not much reason to be optimistic for the rights of that minority.

if the majority of the united are by common interest the rights of the minority will be insecure. that is a foreshadowing of the history of reconstruction for the rest of the 19th and 20th centuries. very fast whirlwind overview. , you zero in on abraham lincoln. we will enter into a conversation with him. we are going to try to think historically about what he had to say. i look forward to that. you guys, a great couple of days. we look forward to being together again next time, zeroing in on this document. take care. >> join us every saturday

evening at midnight eastern as we join students to hear lectures on topics ranging from the american revolution to 9/11. they are also available as podcasts. >> this weekend on the presidency, tyler perry talks about the 12 american presidents who owned slaves. here is a preview. like slavery permeated all of the 13 colonies. they solve the region dominate the oppression of african peoples and expand the institution of slavery by the mid-1700s. most slaves toiled on small farms, shipyards. southern slaves cultivated the

cash crops that made a few white men rich. investment in slaves determined social status and once claimed to an elite whiteness rested on their ownership of people. it comes as no surprise 12 presidents owned slaves, eight while in the office. it dominates the landscape and symbols throughout america. we find slaveowners on currency. their statues on universities. and celebrate individuals who were literally involved in human trafficking. terminology matters in this context. , for some reason it seems easier for most people to digest when thinking of the past. ory excuse the institution perhaps overlook it as a black

on on american -- black eye american history. calling it human trafficking places thomas jefferson and george washington into an uncomfortable human memory. next, from a recent abraham lincoln symposium on his life, career and legacy, the author of lincoln and emancipation. the talk took place at ford's theater in washington dc. it is about 50 minutes. >> i am here for an important function. i have the honor of introducing edna green medford. medford is the author of lincoln and emancipation.