were in smoke-filled back rooms but rather the people who were you know, going to get a chance to vote in free and fair elections. >> sunday night. >> now, professors and authors talk about the opportunities and challenges for the african-american community in the south and west during reconstruction. they discuss topics such as the role of black lawyers, participation in local politics by men and women, and race relations in the western states. the university of south carolina's history center and historic columbia co-hosted this hour and 15-minute event. >> the an exciting day. finally, after four long years of the civil war, we can finally go on to the really important work and talk about reconstruction. [laughter]

i kid, of course. i love it. but it's true. i think as we learn from the key note last night, we live in the world that reconstruction made. and so the very important that we sort of grapple with and try to understand this period in our history. and we haven't really had that kind of reckoning yet. maybe this is our opportunity to do so. you can say what you want about the centennial of the civil war, but it happened. we didn't have a centennial of reconstruction. we weren't here in 1966 sort of talking about this. maybe it was too soon then. but hopefully not now. today i'm excited to introduce our panelists who are going to challenge us to think more broadly about the who, the where, the how of the processes that sort of constituted reconstruction. as a public historian or someone that sort of calls himself a public historian, i'm

particularly gratified also that we have the opportunity to engage with you, a broader public, in this discussion. one of the aft heard la meants among historians is how little of all of our scholarship or the scholarship on reconstruction has made it into the public consciousness. here is maybe our opportunity to do something about that. so let's get on to it. our first speaker today is lewis burke. he's a distinguished professor ameasure tulls at university of south carolina school of law. -- emeritus at university of south carolina school of law. he's edited four books, including at freedom's door, african-american founding fathers and lawyers, and reconstruction south carolina. currently he's completing a history of black lawyers in south carolina, which will be published by the university of georgia press. he'll share some of that research with us today. after that, we're going to hear from elsa barkley brown at the university of maryland.

college park. her articles have appeared in feminist studies, history workshop, public culture, the journal of urban history, the list it can go on and on. if you've ever had the opportunity to read any of dr. brown's writing, you will know and appreciate how deftly she integrates complex theory into tudies of day to day life. i look forward to hearing from her. and we'll hear from stacy smith, society profess ever of history. she specializes in the history of american west and the civil war and reconstruction eras and her scholarship strives to integrate these two periods. by examining the plecksexis -- complexities of slavery and the black struggle in the 19th century. she's writter of freedoms frontier, california, and the strug of of -- struggle of

reconstruction and currently she's working on a book on african-american abolitionists and civil rights activists in the pacific west entitled empire of freedom. we thought we'd structure it this morning, we're going to hear from each of our panelists, give a short discussion of sort of their vision of the field or their portion of it. and we'll have a discussion amongst ourselves about some of those points and we ultimately want to open it up to a discussion with you all also. that's where we'll go ultimately. lewis burke. mr. burke: good morning. as aaron said, my work is being drawn from a book that will be published hopefully next year by the university of georgia press. the title of the book is all for civil rights, african-american lawyers in south carolina, 1868 to 1968. in nd 168 black lawyers that century. 69 of those lawyers were admitted in that nine-year

period that was formal reconstruction in south carolina. almost 25% of the lawyers admitted by the south carolina supreme court during reconstruction were african-americans. imagine the states where it had been against the law for african-american slaves to learn to read and write, they could not testify in court against a white person, they could never testify under oath. it was here in this remarkable period, a quarter of the bar was african-american. these men came from the ranks of the union army, the american missionary association and the friedman's bureau agents, at least initially. jonathan jasper wright, who read law in pennsylvania, came first, as a missionary. then became a friedman's bureau agent. as an agenda, he was charged with resolving disputes and educating the freed people,

particularly in bureauford county. in his role as an agent, in 1867 alone, he heard 300 cases. most of these cases were between community folks fighting over debts, livestock, crops, family issues, but some were against white planters who were mistreating the workers d wright was vigilant in seeking compensation for those workers. the pro voice courts, when the friedman's bureau of courts closed in 17867, the military's provost courts became the venue for resolving disputes. it was here that ex-union soldier william j. whipper, a native of pennsylvania who had studied law in detroit, first practiced. his first recorded case was in the summer of 1866. on july 20, the charleston daily news reported that whipper was trying casing in -- cases in that court. the next month, whipper was

before that court suing the local charleston merchant for violation of the federal civil rights laws. for refusing service to a black soldier. now, whipper was unsuccessful in that lawsuit, but it was probably the first public accommodation suit -- lawsuit in south carolina history. and maybe one of the first in the united states. in 1868 the state constitutional convention adopted the state's first modern constitution, the majority of the delegates there were black. among these were three lawyers. wright, whipper and robert brown eliott. and six other men who would ultimately become lawyers. the new constitution, as we know, is a revolutionary document. establishing the first public schools, granting civil rights, granting the vote of all citizens to all males over the age of 21 years of age. william j. whipper, however, made a motion that the word male be stricken and substitute

every citizen. the record of the convention simply notes that whipper's motion was decided in the negative, as we would all guess. [laughter] elected to the legislature in 1868 and to other public offices, whipper, wright and eliott, they were leaders of the legislation. whipper was in fact the first chair of the judiciary committee under the new constitution and pushed for civil rights legislation. in that first session, they wrote and enacted the state's first civil rights statute. that session also ratified the 15th amendment, abolished capital punishment, accept in cases of -- except in cases of willful murder. he also -- later the legislature also elected jonathan j. wright to the south carolina supreme court, becoming the first african-american south carolina justice in american history. they also elected two black lawyers to serve on a special

court in charleston called the criminal court, which heard all noncapital felony cases in charleston. these lawyers also played a significant role in educating the community. probably the most common newspaper article that i would find during reconstruction, where one of these lawyers was mentioned, was when they were the key note speaker at an emancipation day celebration, a fourth of july celebration or a republican party event or a campaign event. where they almost unbearably addressed civil rights issues. robert brown eliott and francis lewis cardoza were leaders of the union league. they held meetings in which they read the constitution and the amendments in the civil rights statutes to the community. so they can be educated about those rights. now, i am a lawyer, i'm not a historian, so the focus, one of the main focuses of my research and of this book that i've done, is i've been trying to

look at the law practice of these lawyers. county and state records are fairly in-- are hit and miss. they're incomplete, absent in some counties, but from those records we know that black lawyers practiced in at least 16 counties in the state during reconstruction. nine counties with pretty good records, those are ones that i'll briefly talk about. the earliest cases in the state courts were in georgetown county in 1869, interestingly enough, william j. whipper was the lawyer found there. he tried four cases in 18 -- criminal cases in georgetown in 1869. he got three not guilty verdicts and one client was convicted. he had no civil trials, no other black lawyer had any civil cases in georgetown county. whipper tried cases in bufford, as well as five other counties

and robert brown eliott also rode circuit around the state trying cases. in fact, with two exceptions, most black lawyers appeared almost exclusively in criminal cases. charleston county had eight practicing black lawyers, charleston records are in some cases good, others very incomplete. but i've only found three civil cases tried by black lawyers during the entire reconstruction period. but these lawyers had 63 criminal cases on the trial dockets in charleston. whipper had 23, winning a majority of those cases. lewis tail heir 22 case -- taylor had 22 cases, but he lost 14 times. four other lawyers tried about 20 cases and won about half of those. or they did win more than half of those. in bufford, the records, there really are no public records. it's from newspapers that you have to ferret out what

happened in the courts. during reconstruction i found only two civil cases mentioned that were tried by black lawyers in bufford county. william whipper and thomas wheel were were cow -- wheeler were cow counsel in those cases and won both. on the other hand, whipper had six criminal cases, all were found not guilty, including the three charged with murder. thomas wheeler won eight out of the nine criminal trials he tried. in total, the black bar and bufford had 29 not guilty verdicts, one hung jury and six guilty verdicts during reconstruction. marl bro county had two black lawyers, john green lost his only two trials, but county senator henry j. maxwell tried 28 criminal cases, although 16 of his clients were found guilty. in newberry, will thomas and joseph boston appeared in over 20 criminal trials and had only one client found guilty.

in williamsburg county, the state senator had only one civil case. he won seven and lost seven of his criminal trials. the only exception of lawyers who had any significant number of civil cases is in akin county. samuel j. lee and clyde had 60 cases on the civil trial calendars. lee only won two of those civil trials and lost five. the others were settled or continued. however, lee and clyde and the association with robert brown eliott had 60 criminal cases on the calendar in akin county. out of all these cases, they obtained not guilty verdicts or dismissals in 24 cases. they had five -- i mean, 12 clients found guilty. now, i've spouted a lot of numbers at you and thrown this, but the remarkable thing to me, when i look back at my research of s the amazing number

black lawyers there were during reconstruction. 49. nearly 25% of the state's bar. now, that even surprised me, after having spent all this time doing this research. however, what has really become the theme of my book, in many cases, it's been that these lawyers have been primarily criminal defense lawyers. why? well, they're black clients -- their black clients simply did not have the money, nor the type of dispute that would require the use of the state's civil courts. there are no surviving recordses of our small claims courts, what we know as a magistrate's court today or it was called a justice courts -- it was called justice courts in reconstruction. those are not courts of record so they're not expected to have records and i've not found any.

but even if these civil disputes were taken by the african-american community and those, it's unlikely they would have had a lawyer because paying a lawyer to resolve those small disputes would have been unusual. but i think black lawyers were criminal defense lawyers by necessity. we all know that the newly freed people in south carolina were under assault by the white minority. the whites controlled the jobs, they had the klan and other means of assaulting freedom. and freedom was constantly under assault. we hear today about black lives matter and the new jim crow and all these things. that's an -- it's an old, old story. black people were prosecuted and persecuted for racial and political reasons. black lawyers tried criminal cases because it was a type of

work needed by their client community. now, i find it also really amazing how successful these lawyers were. i think they were clearly highly competent. there are no surviving jury arguments, there are no transcripts that you can read to discover just how eloquent and -- they are. in some cases you'll see a newspaper article about how whipper brought a jury to tears and you'll find an -- a story about a white mob beating up thomas miller after he got his client off. they had an impact. and i think their impact was because they were highly competent. by today's standards, imagine a criminal defense lawyer who got more than 50% of his murdered clients off. that would be the richest lawyer in america.

[laughter] but that was whipper's record. during reconstruction. in three counties, 71% of the rials tried by black lawyers ended in not guilty verdicts and all of the other counties i looked at, when you count hung juries and dismissals, the rate is about 58% of the clients got off. so that's a pretty amazing record. these lawyers, i think, of course were quite competent and that is one of the main reasons they were so successful. but you also have to look at the community. who was the community? an african-american community in most of these counties. this was a majority black state. who were the jurors? they were majority black juries. in some cases all black juries. when clients need lawyers, they want lawyers they can trust, they want lawyers who look like

them and sound like them and feel like them. and so the not surprising that clients would hire black lawyers. it's not surprising that they would want a lawyer that looked like the jury that's going to be tried before them. and in fact, there are at least two murder defendants, white murder defendants, who hired william whipper to represent them and he succeeded in not guilty and getting both of hose defendants off. these numbers, you know, they're kind of dry, but to me message that a these lawyers were civil rights lawyers. they were the first civil rights lawyers. doing criminal defense work meant asserting freedom. meant protecting freedom. and i think they were

successful and competent lawyers by preserving their clients' freedom during this period. thank you. ms. brown: the work i have done is to work to explore what scholars call an ethos of mutuality and i'll talk about that. it's shaped african-americans in the immediate postcivil war, their interactions and understandings, particularly in relationship to politics and to political participation. so by ethos of mutuality, i mean an idea of interdependence , of thinking of one's self, one's life, one's goals as having to work interdependently with other people. and thinking about the ways in which that often contradicted what the larger societies' ideas were and lectures to

freed people were about needing to develop themselves as citizens by thinking about themselves, particularly african-american men, think being themselves as independent and self-made men. so i want to sort of think about the ways in which african-americans approached politics in the immediate povet civil war period, and i'm going to do so -- post-civil war period and i'm going to do so by principally looking at virginia, which what i study, but with some reference to south carolina as well. and i want to recap some of what i've written about this participation and think about this, as i said, in relationship to politics but perhaps in the conversation we can also think about how this ethos of mutuality shaped particular ideas about relationships between african-american men, women and

children. in other arenas, economic and family arenas, not just in politics. so my goal is to think about how approaches to politics and notions of gender in relationship to politics developed in the povet civil war and reconstruction -- post-civil war and reconstruction era. 'm going to begin in 1867. southern states were required, in order for full restitution to the union, that they have a constitutional convention and rewrite their constitutions. and i want to begin with those constitutional conventions and in this instance begin with the constitutional convention. the republican convention prior to the state constitutional convention, and the constitutional convention in virginia.

the republican state convention ened on august 1, 1867, in richmond. sis ere constituents across the state were to have elected delegates to the republican state convention and african-american communities had elected their delegates to the republican state convention . this convention was being held in the first african baptist church in richmond, virginia. and when the convention opened, where the republican delegates were to come, on the opening morning, not just those african-americans who had been elected to come as delegates showed up, but rather thousands of african-american men, women and children showed up at the convention and they didn't show up just to watch what was going on, they showed up to participate, so i want us to

think about what it means that they assumed that they had a right to come participate. i've elected my delegate, because that's what the procedure was, but i also have a right to come talk myself. so i want us to think about, like, what that meant, what they were saying. his pattern of large scale showing up and participating persisted whenever a major issue came before either the city or state republican conventions or later the state constitutional convention, which would convene in richmond later that year. a "new york times" reporter estimated, talking about an october 1867 convention meeting, a "new york times" the ter estimated that entire colored population attended the convention. and to show that this was

unusual, noted that, as is usual on such occasions, families, this means white families, which employ servants were forced to cook their own dinners. [laughter] or contents themselves with a cold lumple. because not only had sambo gone to the convention, but dina was there also. [laughter] as i said, they were not just showing up to be onlookers at the proceedings, but also to be active participants. they assumed that they in fact had an equal right to be present and participating as the delegates themselves. and they made this abundantly clear. in august, 1867, they began to arrive four hours before the opening session, so by the time -- by the point at which it's time for the session to open, the delegates actually can't get in.

because it's packed. and so the republicans decide that they'll move the meeting and have it on the state house grounds, which was fine because there were thousands more people who wanted to been pate, who hadn't able to get in either. so they were able to be present there. and i want to point out that what is being pointed to by "the new york times" is not just their presence, not just how crowded they were, but the fact that they were not silent in the process. and though they had had community meetings to talk about many of the things that were going to get discussed, throughout the conventions, african-americans who were seated in the gallery or standing outside would start to engage in the debate that was on the floor. and start to talk back to the delegates on the floor and put their points in. and that became a regular part

of those meetings. not without white republicans trying to prevent that from happening, but that became a regular part of the meetings. i also want to emphasize not just those meetings, the formal meetings of the republican convention and the state constitutional convention, but i want to emphasize that what was going on throughout this entire time period were mass meetings in the evenings of african-american constituencies in churches and mutual benefit societies and elsewhere where they were talking about what was going to be on the convention floor, what were the issues that were going to be debated on the convention floor. and in these mass meetings they were voting on what these issues were and how they wanted their delegate to speak, even though they were going to show

up and speak for themselves, but how they wanted their delegate to speak and to vote. and one of the things that most intrigued me when i was looking at these mass meetings was both who participated and who voted in those mass meetings. and in these mass meetings in 1867, the people who voted were the men, the women and the children. so i want us to think about what that means about who we understand as political participates, who we understand as having political knowledge, who we understand as being deeply affected by the decisions that are going to be made. and that idea of african-american presence, not just presence, but that idea of frican-american presence and widespread participation and especially voting of women and children was one that was

constantly being challenged, part of what many white republicans, many white missionary teachers, etc., saw as their obligation, was to teach african-americans how to engage in politics. and part of that teaching was the assumption that they didn't understand how the political process was supposed to work. they didn't understand that only men were competent to participate in that. and they didn't understand that other people should be staying at home and going about their business. and so this is often talked -- talked about in the newspapers of the time as sort of very frivolous behavior, of people being lazy and not at work when they should have been at work in richmond, tobacco factories would have to close on these

days because the black tobacco workers didn't show up for work, they went to the conventions at that time. so even though eventually in virginia, as elsewhere, the state constitutional conventions and the republican conventions as well voted against the enfranchisement of women. one of the important points i want to make is that even in gh that vote happens those official sites, within the mass meetings men, women and children still continued to participate and vote in those mass meetings. and eventually what happens is the participation of women and children in those meetings comes to be used in a way to sort of try to demonstrate the incompetence of the

african-american community politically, the inability to understand politics, as i said. what i want to it shapes political behavior, ,hapes understanding of gender shapes understandings of citizenship and it shaped how people participated in the voting process itself. on election days, it was quite common that even though only men were granted the vote and would be able to cast a ballot, it was quite common that men, women, and children went to the poll. we can think about the variety of the reasons men, women, and children are showing up at the polls, taking off of work and

going to the polls, and making these festive occasions. contemporary what commentators focus on. they think it is a party. they do not understand the seriousness of this. i want us to think about the way the understanding of men may be the only people who had been granted the vote, but it is a collective vote. i want us to understand the way this idea of collectivity is also reinforced by what is actually happening on the ground. i want us to understand how dangerous it was for men to show up and vote and the ways in which showing up to vote collectively is a form of

protection and how dangerous it was to leave people at home if all the men went off to vote. it is a matter of protection on either of those sides. it gave an which license to african-american women to participate in the political process, to participate in arguing for certain candidates, to wear buttons related to the election, to walk along to the polls, making the point that part of what they were therefore -- part of what they were there for was to make sure their family voted correctly. thinking of that as a collective vote. i am interested in the ways in which a particular idea of

ways inendence, the which a particular idea of interdependence with them out of threey, and what are the -- what are the conditions in reconstruction that reinforce the necessity of interdependence and the ways in which that idea of interdependence works against many of the ideas about appropriate constructions of gender and gender relations , school northern whites teachers, etc., are trying to teach to ex-slaves and the importance of our as developing their own ideas about politics that come out of their own particular experiences and the experiences, thinking

about the relationships of men, women, and children in ways that were very different from what the dominant society was proposing. thank you. [applause] >> i have a pretty daunting task today. we are standing, sitting here in columbia, south carolina, the ground zero of reconstruction in my task is trying to convince you that reconstruction is not a uniquely southern story. same stories over race, citizenship, legal equality,

also happening in the american west. putting the west into the history of reconstruction forces us to think some fundamental aspects of the era after the civil war. i will start by telling a story that comes from my own research. california in in 1860's. it is the story of an african-american man named george washington who was born in virginia but migrated to the california gold country, nevada county, he was accused of assaulting a chinese man and stealing $25 in gold dust from him. washington was arrested in the

case seemed open and shut. there were three chinese witnesses. washington had never been accused of a crime before, staunchly maintained his innocence, hired an attorney, a white attorney in california. the grand jury indicted him for the crime. the county judge throughout the indictment altogether -- threw out the indictment altogether. the california supreme court lower courts decision that his indictment should be thrown out. washington's attorney made a novel argument. his client was being denied the civil rights that congress extended to african-american citizens under the civil rights

act of 1866. this is happening before the ratification of the 14th amendment. it aimed at protecting newly freed african-americans in the granted them the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens. california anticipated this law during the civil war itself. the republican led legislature finally repealed 1850's law barring african-americans from giving testimony against whites in the state court. washington was still being denied one very crucial right enjoyed by the white citizens of california.

it revised the state criminal law to prevent chinese or american indians from testifying in court cases involving whites. the civil rights act of 1866 extended all the rights of white citizens to new african-american citizens and washington should be immune from chinese testimony against him. [laughter] didstate attorney general not agree. he fought the dismissal at every turn. jurists agreed with washington's attorney. this is a remarkable mind blowing case and i am starting with it because it is an entry point into getting us to think about some of the ways in which shifting our focus to the west

shatters our ideas about what reconstruction is about. notion the the postwar reconstruction era, the legislation was confined in its effects to the american south. federal legislation, because it was federal, was national in scope. it extended beyond the south to the north and to the west. of 1866 andghts act other legislation, reconstruction amendments, reached into entirely different unfamiliar regional and racial contexts. an african-american man could be protected from chinese testimony in california. the 13th amendment have major

consequences for territorial new mexico. federal officials launched a series of criminal prosecutions against the spanish-speaking former mexican citizens of new mexico who held indians captives in slavery. in oregon, state legislatures rejected the 15th amendment prohibiting the states from discriminating against voters on the basis of race, color, or previous servitude. legislators feared the new amendments would make voters of chinese alongside african-americans -- neither of those states would ratify the 14th them -- 14th and 15th amendments. recast theislation boundaries of freedom and

citizenship in the same time these policies were remaking the south. once it becomes clear that reconstruction legislation transforms the west alongside the south, similarities between the two regions emerged. one of the most important similarities, each of these regions became a testing ground of federal authority were resistant groups fought the federal government. the familiar narrative of reconstruction focuses on an increasingly powerful federal government attempting to assert control over resistant white extant ferrets determined -- white ex-confederates. as we can see from the case of the people versus washington, the contest between federal control and local control and

rebellions against the power of the federal government were national in scope. joe hamilton was california's attorney general. he was a proslavery democrat. he protested the decision in the washington case not because he was sympathetic to chinese immigrants. exactly the opposite. goal, his main thought was he believed the civil rights act of 1866 was an example of the federal government overreaching into the rights of the states. he argued was an implied power granted to the states by the constitution. violated the act constitution because it forced -- interfered with

the rights of the states. was to rebel against the federal government's rights to determine the rights of citizens. this is one of many much larger western rebellions against federal authority. some quick examples. acrossn indian peoples the west battled for territorial sovereignty over their homeland. fighting against the federal government who thought to remove them to federal reservations. church in the lgs utah-- lds church in

fought the federal government. we have the case of new mexico i talked about earlier, contested federal authority to emancipate their american indian slaves. they obstructed all federal investigations into labor relations. the struggle between federal and local control over matters of citizenship, freedom, labor happened on multiple fronts. argument and where i will spend the rest of my brief time has to do with race itself. the case of the people versus washington shows that in breaking out of that north-south narrative, we automatically exploit the black-white

narrative as well. it is clear to me that we were -- we learn a lot about the black freedom struggles by placing it in a multiracial context. we know this about the 20th century civil rights movement more and more. california, the community of 5000 african-americans to which george washington belonged, always had to frame their rights in relation to other groups. one of the main groups of up that were white anti-chinese .rotesters african-americans were sympathetic to chinese immigrants as another group of people who were punished on the basis of race.

coast, appeals for universal manhood rights were not going to get them very far in california. african-american movements were failed if they were tied to advances in chinese rights. leaders inn-american california found themselves forced by circumstances to back away from claims of universal natural rights to finish up to embrace more limited claims. excluded chinese immigrant men from the process. it involved emphasizing that african-americans were of the nation. born in the united states, -- they were

christians and fully assimilated in the culture. the chinese might be able to improve themselves in the future, but in the meantime, they could be reasonably excluded from certain types of civil rights advances, including the right to vote because they were temporary sojourners. they were non-christians and were currently uninterested in becoming u.s. citizens. justified in 1867 african-american petition that would change the state suffrage law to allow black and white men to vote but exclude all other people of color. he said, the negro is a native american. loyal to the government and a lover of his country and her

institutions, a christian by education. in contrast, the chinese are foreigners on it did with our system of government -- system ofed with our government with an idolatrous faith. in 1870, the 15th amendment did away with barriers to voting based on race and color, but the strategy of adding black men to new legislation rather than eliminating all racial barriers to citizenship became a black and white republican tactic. 1870is most evident in when republican u.s. senators try to revise federal naturalization laws which had

allowed only white european immigrants to apply for u.s. citizenship. black and white republican activist wanted a race neutral law initially. in the face of anti-chinese opposition, they settled for a compromised measure that would allow people of african descent born outside of the u.s., but no other nonwhite people, to apply for u.s. citizenship. this 1870 naturalization act would hold slave for decades. just to wrap this up, we cannot understand the african-american struggle in the 19 century in a

black-whiteern context solely. arguments for race blind simply weretral law not effective in all the store context.- in postwar african-americans sometimes had to retreat away from notions of universal manhood rights to a more limited notion of citizenship that stopped with black men's equality. [applause] >> are our minds blown now?

this is fantastic. these try to draw some of threads together that we have hanging out. hopefully. ended, we where stacy have this sense of complicating the geography of reconstruction. i wonder about some of the implications of expanding our gaze westward, maybe northward, challenge arelso thinking about traditional temporal definitions of reconstruction. suggesting these black lawyers -- where do we end this? are we talking about a long

reconstruction or a long, long, long civil rights movement? what are the temporal boundaries? ms. smith: western historians who have thought about this question have been trying to insert the west into narratives said we need to start the whole process with the conquest of the mexican north in 1848. the u.s.-mexican war provokes all the questions about westward expansion of slavery and it brings thousands of native americans and former mexican citizens into the u.s. state and provokes a controversy over the status of indians and mexicans in the nation as well as african-americans.

the questions that would come up after the civil war about what is a citizenship -- what -- who , some western historians would argue really coming out with the conquest of the mexican north and did not end in the united states until -- well, they still go on. the 1920'sing about as a good stopping point for thinking about this era as new immigration laws which heavily restricted the ability of different groups of people to immigrate and naturalize. at the same time, native americans were only made u.s. citizens automatically by federal legislation in 1924. you are right, when we move

things west, we really start to play with the temporal boundaries. i do not have a good answer. it is complicated. [laughter] >> dates don't matter. unless they do. [laughter] >> long struggle. idea that i think ,merges from these talks picking up with what you talked brown, we see some of these same things going on in south carolina. talking about this collective

use of the ballot. one thing i wonder about, though , you suggested a white-black dichotomy. one thing you see in south carolina, within the african-american community, some uneasiness about this ease those of mutuality -- ethose of mutuality. think ity because i challenge the idea of african-american manhood and what it meant to be and how central that was to citizenship. isquestion ultimately african-americans , putting them at the center of

reconstruction history, requires us to think about how african-american actions and decisions contributed to successes but also how a contributed to some of the failures of reconstruction and are we able to do that? is that still too dangerous? dr. brown: give me an example of the failures. >> the collapse of the political process. the collapse of the republican coalition. dr. brown: ok. , we have towill say be conscious of who holds power. imagine whoave to

had the power to make what kinds of changes. thinking back to both what i was talking about in terms of political participation and also abouttacey was talking in terms of thinking about the participation of other people of color and thinking beyond this black-white paradigm. in both of those instances, thinking about who is going to get to vote, male-female, who is etc., whatt to vote, we see is this initial push toward universality and then a

readwing of that, which i , whichgnizing a reality work, i triedn my to separate what is happening on the formal political arena and what is happening in african-american communities. in many of these meetings, african-americans took a vote about whether what the constitutional convention should include is universal, not universal manhood, but universal suffrage. in many of those meetings, the vote for universal suffrage is what passes. in the south carolina the support for a

woman's suffrage, but it is also number of significant african-american legislators in south carolina, six of the nine african-americans elected to the u.s. congress support women's suffrage. those localening in mass meetings and what they come to realize they can achieve in the larger constitution are really different things. a recognition of what is possible, i think, and it is also a recognition of what is possible that eventually comes to make a big difference within african-american communities as well as african-american men get

the vote, being denied -- as people are trying to disenfranchise them, start having to make arguments that demonstrate that they can operate in the political system as it is. one, we do not have some ground tier where we can say -- ground here, where we can say, with would what african-americans have done? we have to address these questions by thinking about how people negotiate in a situation in which they do not have power. yes, i think we can absolutely talk about the limitations to not allowing women to vote or what are the limitations to actually supporting a bill that

is going to leave the chinese and others outside of citizenship, but we are having that conversation recognizing that in none of those instances are african-americans the people who actually have the power to make the decision and politics is about your ideals and about negotiating within the context of what power restrictions you have. not know if i could say i could blame african-americans for the failures, but i would absolutely say we can't either ways in which particular -- we the ways in which particular ideas began to be shaped. >> may be a concluding thoughts

before we open it up to a larger discussion, the subtitle of our symposium is history and public memory and as we try to think about this idea of public memory, i wonder if we can go down the line and consider how directions, how that might contribute to or alter the public memory and commemoration of reconstruction. >> i think my research about black lawyers fits into the traditional mold of reconstruction history. -- they were a part -- serious political

influence for a time period. i am not sure that i am taking the conversation very far. dr. brown: i am going to think about public memory in the schools. one of the plants i was making about what is happening on the ground is about violence and the widespread nature of violence and the impact of that and it

seems to me that from toonstruction to the 1970's can only think about african-american history in terms of thinking about the tremendous amount of violence against african americans and to put what african-american people are doing and able to do within the context. one of the things i am always struck by an disappointed in is the hesitancy of public school teachers to teach about violence against african americans. i spend a lot of time talking with public school teachers and enjoy talking about how we will teach some of this history. the only time i have ever been able to get a set of high school

teachers to say, we can make violence against african unit that weentral are going to do, has been in a conversation with high school teachers in prince george's, maryland, a predominately black suburb of washington, d.c. , what canersations , whatpeople understand kind of feelings might that , but up among the children i think those conversations are about what we are comfortable talking about. they sort of assume many african-american young people today do not already live in the midst of violence and understand

violence and might need a way of thinking about that historically. i know there are some efforts now for people to begin to trails of violence, where have incidences of violence happened within local communities, and come together to create markers for those. i think that would be one of the places where i would start, how to have -- what are the things we want to remember? what are the things we want to mark? what are the things we want to try to be silent about and to think about that? with my focus on the american west, i think part of the struggle, and you will probably hear about this in the

second half of the day, reconstruction is insanely complicated. it happened differently in every ex-confederate state, so many different federal policies that changed so much over time. trying to shoehorn the west into that story is really difficult, especially at sites we would more typically associate with reconstruction in the american south. i do not know if i would advocate that we go to a site in south carolina and louisiana and say, also the west. west coulde american be interpreted in a way that gets us thinking about those events in a broader frame.

it is the old cowboy and indians narrative. it is hard to break out of that image in the public mind. at certain sites, all of the --tles between the u.s. army they are trying to retreat over the canadian border in 1877. lots of sites associated with that that could be associated with the pulling out of troops in south carolina and the louisiana. moment.actly the same here is an example of federal power being deployed about native peoples in the west. where is that power going? it is going to suppress indigenous rebellions on the

great plains and the pacific northwest. just seeing those power struggles with native peoples as a broader narrative about the power of the federal government, how state power and state violence is being used, and how those american indians are going to be incorporated into the spaces those are good for thinking about putting the west back into that story. >> we have about 12 minutes left. if there are questions, we have a microphone on the side of the state. if you could come up and ask your questions and to the mic. -- into the mic. >> my name is gwyneth pearson

and i do not think i have a question. because of the comments that -- imade about the balance was thinking this morning as i was preparing to come to this, i listen to a lot of historic presentations about our history from great scholars and i appreciate what you have given us this morning. the experience of the cruelty that black people had throughout every era of this entirety has been overlooked. of a conservation commission and we fund projects. we did some oral histories not too long ago and some of the people -- and i will not mention their names -- some of the people we interviewed had been

the first in different categories. they would do these very generic sounding oral histories and afterwards, they would pull me to the side and tell me about all of the dirty stuff that was done to them during -- and yet we would hear these great stories, work hard, do the best you can kind of stuff. we never got to talk about the cruelties and the experience black people had in every era. i lived in the era of segregation and i know the hurt and pain of being a black person. on theciate the comments .iolence

it was a very important point to me. >> i have a question for lewis burke. first of all, i have an observation. someone alluded that columbia might be the birthplace of reconstruction. i might say that it is the death place of reconstruction in america. aboutr presentation jurisprudence that you have studied during that period, i'm interested in two things. what was the nature of the plaintiffs cases and who the plaintiffs were in those contests?

were they whites against blacks or were they blacks against whites? what were the races of the judges involved? how was it those attorneys were able to succeed during that malleable time? mr. burke: if you are talking about the parties in the civil cases, it is hard to know. >> criminal cases. mr. burke: most of the defendants were black. black, the victims were but there are no records without me going into census records to be able to figure that out. >> what was the nature of the criminal acts? mr. burke: everything from simple larceny all the way to murder. a lot of murder cases. >> were they committed primarily

by white plaintiffs? defendants thek black lawyers were representing. the victims of a crime? you cannot determine that from circuit court records. they simply list the defendant and what they are charged with and what the result of the cases. -- result of the case is. >> it would be a much more compelling story to know if black defendants were succeeding against white plaintiffs. and if those judges were also white or black, it would give a deeper context. mr. burke: i appreciate that, but i am not sure i can produce that. knowing who the judges were, all

the state circuit court judges were white. there were two black trial court judges. they created a special court in charleston. some of the statistics are from that court. all these other cases were white judges. >> we have a couple more questions. >> i want to address your question and the response that dr. brown gave you. the failure of reconstruction and the black community. an exhibit -- there was an exhibit on jubilation, celebration of african americans. emphasize what she said.

when people look at power, they think it has to be at the statehouse level. it really was not. involveden very much in the voter's registration effort and because of the african-american church being so years, itor so many is the political power. i go into african-american churches now to get people to vote, there is a law that says if you get politically involved, you lose your tax status. african-americans are not getting into the political system because of what they think they might lose. that whatemphasize dr. brown said is very powerful to me.

>> thank you for coming here today and talking to us and beginning a conversation that will continue this afternoon. talking about reconstruction. let's thank our panelists. [applause] we will see you back here this afternoon. >> american history tv on c-span 3. tonight at 10:00, on "reel america" -- to key west,f florida. why do they come? approximately

185,000 cuban refugees arrived in florida. hear interviews from these new arrivals to america and find out why they left. republican and democratic conventions. >> in the name of the hard-working americans who make up our forgotten middle class, i probably except your nomination -- accept your nomination for president of the united states. proud -- i am proud to receive and i'm honored to accept your nomination for president of the united states. >> barry lewis on the creation and evolution of new york city's greenwich village. >> it basically gave us what we

already understood. east of 6th avenue was washington square. nobody ever crossed that line. the people in washington square never went on the other side of six avenue. presidency -- the >> unanimously commander-in-chief, unanimously president of the united states, unanimously appointed as the lieutenant general of all the .rmies what a record. explores thatquez even though washington was officially retired, he continued to meet with political figures from the new capital and was also called upon to craft policy

. for the complete weekend schedule, go to c-span.org. >> in 1995, 2 decades after the fall of saigon, the united states normalized diplomatic relations with vietnam and president obama recently spent three days visiting the country. next, vietnamese ambassador to the united states pham quang the history oft diplomatic relations between the u.s. and vietnam and how the relationship has changed since the end of the war. this two minute program is part of a three-day conference at the lbj library in austin, texas. >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome