>> from a relatively obscure stice in 1912 into a liberal icon that homes leaves the court. host heast you say robert

valentine was one of the most important people to get you the material you needed? >> robert valentine has been lost to history and past commissioner of indian affairs. and in 1911, he was living in the house of truth which was on 19th street with his wife and infant daughter and his wife and daughter went home to new england to nurse the daughter ack to help. >> this is how the salon took shape. the reason why valentine is two-fold. he was the house's visionary. he sort of set the agenda of the house and secondly, as you

alluded his correspondence was incredibly important because valentine's writing on a daily basis about the comings and goings. and a remarkable woman who i thank in my acknowledgements was friend of valentine's daughter and granddaughter. and his papers were in a barn in rescueduntil this woman them, preserved them and donated them to the massachusetts historical society where they were unprocessed and unknown to historians and we got a grant process of valentine's process and it was a diary of the house. >> how did you find out about the valentine process? >> i googled robert valentine shows up this woman

and one of the things that showed up was robert valentine's papers and i put on my journalist hat and tracking her down and she was incredibly helpful throughout the entire process. she not only preserved the papers, but she knew two generations of the family and help me fill in facts which weren't always easy to fill in. host: you talk about the massachusetts historical society. we have gotten a lot of them from over the years. when they just showed up, were they in boxes? guest: they were in boxes and kind enough at the early stage to allow me to look at the collection which was on process nd not a lot of our inzutions.

i realized i had a book. host: for purposes of how long was this house of truth important? in writing the book? guest: six-year period to write the book. i thought the book would take me two to three years to write, but this was four character narrative that expand 20-some years and six years and two kids later, i finished. host heast you have four pictures on the cover and one of them is felix frankfurter, who was he? guest: he was a young i'd is particular lawyer and went to work past secretary of war, like the council -- counsel almost.

and worked for him in the southern district of new york where simpson was a u.s. attorney. frankfurter, if valentine is a visionary of the house, frankfurter is the one who had the talent for bringing different people into the house. he is incredibly excited about ideas and he carries on the house. valentine passes away quite suddenly, died of a heart attack with frankfurter's and others sitting around the table and frankfurter carries on the house and finds the new republic with the fourth person who is a very young walter whitman. host: who is a picture of him. guest: at the time that he joined with frankfurter and the new republic crowd was a harvard

college graduate and even a socialist. he became more of a traditional liberal. move. ssed how makes the host: how conservative was he at the end? >> he was pretty conservative. he was isolationist. before world war ii he wrote columns about the nazis that caused he and frankfurter not to speak for a long period of time. he opposed f.d.r. in 1932 for the presidency and re-election in 1936 and 1940. he did oppose the vietnam war. hat does the man who built

mount rushmore have anything to do with early 20th century iberals? he was convinced that needo roosevelt should return to the white house and was active in his campaign and that's what house.borglum into the he stayed friends with oliver holmes. and he is dog on the table cloth at the house of truth, precursor to mount rushmore and holmes who had been wounded three times during the civil war was astonished about the idea of carving historical figures into the side of a mountain. with rglum's friendship

frankfurter. the day after holmes dice in 1935, borglum is in the residence at 1730 i street making a death mask of oliver wendall holmes face. goes from 1912 to f.d.r. in 1932. if there was no f.d.r., there wouldn't be mount rushmore. host: where are you from? outside washington degree. nd i went to yale. host: where have you been teaching? > next year, george taun law school. host: what do you focus on?

>> constitutional law and supreme court history. those are my two main areas of expertise with a sideline of sports law. host: your books were named what? host: first one was called "beyond the shadow of the senators," an early baseball team. and the second book which is more legal called "the well ved slave" host: let's go back to this house here in washington, d.c.,. you have a picture in the book of frankfurter standing on the steps and it was a brownstone type and painted all white. have you been in that house? guest: i'm dying to get into the house. there were pictures from the

inside of the house that i felt since the house had been remoddled was aren't going to help me finish the book. i would love to see the house floor into the upper crow's nest. it would be fascinating for me to step foot in the house. host: during the six years, how many people lived in this house? guest: 1912-1919, once the runup to world war i starts, people start coming and going in the house. five to six people lived in that house. at the height of the house, rankfurter and valentine and dennison. embassy living there as well.

host: i want to show a picture from 1925 and 1911 lists all of the people that were in that house. the age of people in 1911 that we have just been talking about. lippmann and eing turn to the 1925 photo of the supreme court because sitting there on the court is oliver wendall holmes junior, second from the left. but on the far left is james mcreynolds and at top, far right is louis brandeis and william

howard taft. what's he doing there? >> he had the distinction of being a former president sitting on the supreme court as chief justice, a move that people speculated might be in obama's future, but people speculated that. taft really help remake that court into a much more conservative court. warren harding becomes president and liberals are kind of in the wilderness. harding, just a very short period of time, only spends three years in office but he apoints four members of the court including taft and after taftis appointed, he helps select conservative people and con hat court in a severetive -- conseff fashion.

and some people would say holmes was liberal but difficult to categorize. host: mcreynolds on the far left and brandeis from kentucky. tell us about that relationship. host guest: both of them are appointed by wilson. and had a liberal reputation as a truck buster before he joined the wilson the administration and while he was in the administration and he goes on to become one of the most conservative and racist and anti-semitic supreme court justices in history. but to tell you how diverse the people who were dining at the house of truth. robert valentine comes down from massachusetts and frankfurter arranges a dinner and they get

into a debate about civil service and whether or not people should be hired to work in the justice department based ronage and atriot frank furtherer says it should be merit. and mcreynolds said what about the senators approaching you getting their favorite political candidates hired? and frank furtherer said, attorney general, you are responsible to the american people not to the politicians who are knocking on your door or constituents to get in. host: it was said they wouldn't sit in the same room. what was the personal relationship? guest: there is a wonderful article in the journal of supreme court history that says there is no truth to the rumor

about -- the rumor was there was no photo in 1923 was he refused to have his photo taken next to brandeis. what is true, mcreynolds was dozea o brandeis and cor who was second jewish justice. and they think that was based on their religion. host: stone had just gotten on the court in 1925, what was unique about his confirmation process? guest: first supreme court justice to testify before the united states senate and testified about a discrete issue when he was attorney general. but he was the first person ever to testify. the first person to testify about any subject was felix frankfurter in 1939. after frankfurter testified in

1939, every supreme court nominee testified after frankfurter. he started the tradition but the first person to testify was stone. the person we haven't talked about and the shadow figure in the house is louis brandeis because his nomination by wilson. mcrenolts had become a huge conservative force on the court. ere were gasps on the senate floor that he could nominate him because he had a radical reputation. and most of the people that was outraged was william howard taft whose comments privately about the brandeis nomination were ugly and drifted into anti-semitic stereotypes.

i wasn't willing to say that in the book, but the comment if you read them in the abstract talking about brandeis' ctivities as his theoretical circumcision to get jewish-americans behind him in the court. host: brandeis has a university named after him up in the boston suburbs and harvard and they had a jewish quota. what was that about? guest: during the brandeis confirmation process which before merrick garland, brandeis waited longest for a senate judiciary committee hearing. but there was a huge petition by organization, the

president of harvard, asking the united states senate not to confirm brandeis they felt he was dishonest and trick steer and these stereo types and what the new republic did was showed all of the personal connections of all these people of this petition. and the new republic, it was written by frankfurter lieding the charge for brandeis confirmation showing this was in-group. a self-hating jew, but they showed that all these people who signed this petition against brandeis there was a shift in group loyalty. they tried to stay away from charges of anti-semitism and didn't want to make it into a jewish things. host: some of the jewish people

were anti-black or didn't care about civil rights. what's that about? n, : frankfurter, lp pman wasn't a salient issue for them. they cared about the rights of workers and took holmes' opinions and a case in 1923 which found for the first time that the mob-dominated trials of southern blacks violated the due process clause. first time it struck down a criminal conviction under the due process clause. that was a huge moment and linking the idea of fair criminal trials with race. host: frankfurter became a justice in 1939. did he take brandeis' seat? doza's seat.

and writing about this in my next book. my book is about justice frank furtherer and i'm writing a chapter of how and why he gets nominated. most people assumed it was a done deal because of his close relationship with roosevelt and that's not the case. host: when you hear that judge gorsuch sitting in his nomination hearing say that the court is not political, he's not political and you think back to felix frankfurter and louis brandeis and for that mat errol i haver wendall holmes, what's your reaction? guest: holmes was the least political. he wasn't a political animal at all. he didn't read newspapers. his only source of news was the new republic and the reason why, he admired herbert and walter

and felix frankfurter. other than that, he didn't care about news and didn't care much about politics but frankfurter and brandeis were political animals. i think i would separate politics from constitutional values. all justices have to come to their position with constitutional values. host: in the case of frankfurter how close was he to f.d.r.? frankfurter is and exercised extrajudicial ctivity. today would be considered a gross violation of the separation of powers. host: you mentioned the new republic. who started it and what year? >> herbert crowley started it in 1914 in conjunction with the people who lived in the house.

felix frankfurter was one of those. and hand was a founder man n. lip p host: that's the original 1914 cover. guest: they awe it as an outlet of what they guarded as roosevelt's ideas, a big federal government. they believed they could help people through the federal government. host: we'll go back to that. miltonian means for -- guest: protect people's libet and freedom through a robust federal government. i followed their idea and needor roosevelt embodied that idea. but after he lost the white house in 1912, he became a huge

critic of woodrow wilson. ost: he was elected in 1912? guest: wilson was elected and taft and roosevelt split the republican votes and wilson, the first democrat since grover cleveland to be in the white house. host: all of those folks in the house of truth, how many of them were for woodrow wilson? guest: brandeis was for wilson and people associated with the house were really upset that brandeis was for wilson and didn't like that brandeis was writing articles over pro-wilson ideas. they wanted an outlet for their ideas. and that's how you get the new republic. hat happens is they stop being ritical of t.r. and see t.r.

being hypocritical such as the german invasion of belgium. t.r. said one thing and t.r. was criticizing the wilson administration for not taking more forceful action and generally they felt before world war i. d t.r. gets angry at the criticism and calls the editor three international jews. and at that point, their relations are done. before the founding of the magazine. host: why did people want to separate jews from everyone else? guest: phobia. jewish people were occupying high places. there was anti-immigrant sentiment and i think it was part of it. st: i ought to ask you about

-- did you do a book on that? guest: it involves every single person associated with the house. vanzetti?was saco and vanzetti and is saco are without the moustache. they were convicted outside of boston of robbery and murder of a pay master. steal a company's payroll and kill the guard. the trial was in 19231. the appeals process goes on for six years. t causes all sorts of national and international attention. the communist party was deeply

involved in the case but wasn't until frankfurter decides to readthe record for what he some of the motions and felt that the prosecution wasn't on the up and up and writes an article about that case and turns it into a short book and turns the case in 1927. and the cause is that the two of them had been railroaded and not afforded a fair trial and what was on trial was italian and arcist believes. host: there is a lot of video. huge crowds and they march into the court. they are handcuffed and all that. why were the crowds so big in those days? what was the issue for people living in the boston area?

guest: it was a sensational case. one of the so-called trials of the century. that is amazing footage. that is on their way to being sentenced. they weren't sentenced to death until 1927. it was the publication and what me out was the trial judge made all these extrajudicial comments during the trial. just wait until i do to those and arcistic bastards. they were from italy. saco was trying to repatriot back to italy before they were arrested. host: why did they come to the united states? what did it mean to be an and arcist. guest: good and hard question.

in some ways it means the overthrow of the government. they were anti-u.s. government. they were anti-u.s. government's involvement in world war i. ost: were they and arcists /communists? guest: i think so. host: were they guilty? guest: hard to say. sacoistoryal consensus was not guilty.etti was a lot of witnesses who were pro-prosecution were badgered into testifying. the ballistic expert for the state gave testimony that the prosecutors used to mislead the jury about the bullets there was a lot of evidence that existed.

even just based on the transcript itself that the trial wasn't on the up and up and the judge's comments about the defendants while the trial was going on. any one of those things would have resulted in a new trial and that's what liberals wanted. and everyone in this liberal network that he creates at the house of truth. host: what was tealics frankfurter like? guest: complete ex trowvert. he was 5' 6," spoke with a slight german accent. he was from austria. prominent family and came to this country at age of 11 and didn't speak a word of english. but was number one in his class at harvard law school and by 30, he worked for three

presidential. he was a prosecutor under theodore roosevelt and worninged in the taft administration and works in the wilson administration all before he is 30. host: would you have liked him? guest: oh, yeah. anyone who knew him liked him. he had this magnetism. rehnquist when he clerked for robert jackson, rehnquist writes, he was attracted to frankfurter. the way he would people on the arm with a grip. he was intense. there is an exhibit at harvard law school and said there was a passionate intensity. host: what was louis brandeis like? guest: a cold fish and part of the reason why the house gravitated more to holmes than brandeis, brandeis had this real reserve and almost a studied

reserve. even his letters, if you read his letters, they are bullet points, it says one, period, two period, one line after another. there is no feeling in those letters. host: what was oliver wendall holmes like? guest: he liked people and liked to talk about philosophy and ideas. i think -- they were attracted to holmes, some of them political and some of them legal but his personality. holmes had this twinkle in his blue eyes and connected with the younger generation. st: i want to put up a stone mountain carving, what was it and what happened to this? carve orglum begins to

these confederate leaders including davis and jackson into the side of stone mountain georgia and he also joins the ku klux clan. and he had a falling out with them and gets fired. and he has to flee for destroying his model and runs for his life through the hills of georgia into north carolina. host: how far did he get on the side of the mountain? guest: he find issued two figures. host: what's the relationship with bordemrum. were they involved in mount rushmore? became a glum political animal. some would say his politics were

more instrumental, that he was interested in people funding his big projects. but i don't think that's only the case. borglum was from the west and interested in the plight of western farmers and workers and his politics in many ways were aligned with people like felix frankfurter. there was a popism. and there was politics in the roosevelt administration that helped him make mount rushmore. it was this project at the height of the depression and funded by coolidge and then hoover gave it a bit of a boost and coolidge gave him his initial federal funding which never would have happened after the depression. hoover carried on a little bit. t borglum campaigns hard for f.d.r. and --

st: we can hear and see what he sounded like? >> when do you think this work will be completed? >> i'm trying to finish it so the figures will be done by 1935 sufficiently to allow the president to unveil it. >> and the ingo subscription? >> they are planning to start this year. host: have you ever been out there? guest: i have. the national park service runs mount rushmore. they have quite a nice archives of mount rushmore's history and that was helpful to the project. that was a great clip that you just showed. .d.r. does unveil jefferson in 1936, which is a huge moment caught on the news real. i think there is a photo of it

in my book. t borglum actually never finished mount rushmore and he dice in 1941 and his son puts the finishing touches on the project. mount rushmore was nt finished in an elaborate way. mount rushmore is this imperfect symbol of american liberalism, it's belief in big government and regulatory state and funding great projects like this. but also has its flaws. some of the blind spots of liberals was race during this period and mount rushmore is carved on sacred indian lands. mount rushmore is celebrating our government, there is a negative side to it as well. host: go back to the new republic. can you put it in the context of today? how big a deal was a small

publication? how big was it by the way in pages? uest: it was big and thick and lippmann had amazing sources. when the u.s. finally enters the war was when the new republic was at its height in circulation. the exact figures, i can't give it to you. 20,000.000 to republican presidential capped, charles evans hughes and past and present supreme court just ises. there are a list of really a who's who of washington. if you wanted to find out what was going on in washington, you read "the new republic." host: anything like it today? guest: there is the internet and

washington was a much smaller place then. it was amazing about the house of truths how the people associated with it, whether it pmann howurter or lip corridor.ccess to host: did they mary and have children and any of the ancestors still around? never had any children. and his wife was the first woman to live in the house of truth. frankfurter met at the house of truths and never had children. oliver wendall holmes and his wife never had any children. brandeis had two daughters, elizabeth and susan and they did have children and some of brandeis' grandchildren is still living and one of them teaches at the university of wisconsin

law school. i met him. he was after my time. but met him at some events. there are some from the house of truths. had two um married and children and i know some of his offsprings. his great-granddaughter was incrediblebly helpful to me. ost: he named his son lincoln. guest: he admired lincoln and giving a straight carving that fits in the u.s. capitol rotunda today and lincoln's son said that was the best likeness of his father. host: i have to ask you about walter lip pmann's second marriage. guest: he was having an affair

with the wife of his best friend. it is what it is. his first wife and he were mismatched. his wife wasn't interested in politics and was more of a new york person. and lip pman n breeved and breathed politics. and his best friend was a pretty prominent foreign policy person and he was having a long-term affair with his wife and it wasn't until their love letters were discovered that they went public. learned lip pmann like and, severed his friendship. host: who was learned hand? >> guest: one of the great judges not to be on the supreme court of the united states. he was a really good writer and

a way with language in the same way that holmes did. holmes was a beautiful writer and hand also. hand one of the integral members of this ground. hand would come to the house of truth and he was friends with frankfurter and holmes. he was thick as thieves. hand was in favor of theodore roosevelt. host: crowley being one of the founder. guest: there were some others. host: did it cost a lot of money. guest: huge financial backing one was associated with jp morgan. and had a huge fortune. they had a husband and wife team. host: not unlike today when a lot of these magazines have

millionaire backers? guest: like jeff davis. host: and "the weekly standard" and all the web sites. guest: "the new republic" was never intended to be a profit-making enterprise. crowley knew the magazine was going to lose money. host: go back to robert valentine because it was so important to your book, when you started reading in the -- did you have to go up to massachusetts? >> great place to do research. beautiful building. host: what year did you go up there, do you remember the year? guest: 2010, 2011. host: did you have pull run of the boxes? guest: i had enough of the

correspondence. i had all this correspondence not only between valentine and his wife and frankfurter was writing valentine's wife. and one of the original members of the house were writing. and they were all writing letters and frankfurter was writing valentine when valentine wasn't in the house. i had correspondence of the jigsaw puzzle. host: what do you do with that information? how do you catalog it? guest: i take digital photos of the documents and organize the photos according to box and folder numbers as they are arranged so i can find them again. and just reviewing those documents on your computer and reading those letters takes time because most of them are written in long hand because it's like reading other people's mail or

diary. it's a fun -- what i got from and a lot of people have missed this, i think valentine was the most important friend that frankfurter had in the first half of his life. before 1939 before frankfurter got on the court, there was no more important influence. host: he died in what year? guest: 1916. host: his wife died in 1953? guest: yes. host: what did she do? guest: she was carrying a torch for him. and raising her daughter and good friends with frankfurter's wife and i got great corspornedens between her and marion frankfurter who described er as a shadowy, wispy moment.

some of if ia valentine comes and stays in washington and retraces the steps of all the places where she and her late husband had been. march joran frankfurter stayed friendly with the frankfurters. host: let's look at that house on 19th street. do you know who owns it now? guest: i don't know. i'm attempted to right a dear owner letter. host: do you know how many people lived in that house? guest: there's the sticker price. that's blue trim around the windows and door. it is a white and blue house now and it was red brick at the time. $1 funnyis worth to be 5 million? guest: i don't think it sold for that much money.

i knew i didn't have that much money. host: let's go back to the original list of how people were back then so we can -- i want to ask you a question and see the age ranges from 212 up to 70. if you -- 22 up to 70. if you put all of them in that house today, how varied do you think their politics would be and what side would they be on in today's politics? guest: their politics were different. as i said, brandeis backed woodrow wilson, who was suspicious, more suspicious of a large federal government. borglum. and value entire leaves the taft administration as the head of the commission of indian affairs, he is on page one

because he is the highest ranked in the administration and defected to work on roosevelt's campaign. host: what do you think about hat we went through last year? guest: it was tame. theodore roosevelt challenging his chosen successor, william howard taft. when he loses, he runs as a third party candidate. you have a socialist party candidate that we haven't even talked about. he gets 900,000 votes in that election and the former president of princeton, woodrow wilson, who as a result of the vote splitting becomes the first democrat in the white house ince grover cleveland. that's a much more chaotic election than the one we went

through with a lot of populism and cross cutting. host: who was responsible for naming it the house of truth and did they really think have truth? guest: it was self-mocking name for the house. the person who is attributed is holt who had the gift of language. i don't think holmes named it. the person who holmes thought named the house of truth was a dennison. host: i know you have 200 pages of notes. how hard was this book to write? guest: it was hard to write because i thought i was telling four books in one, frankfurter's ann. , lip pn

i don't know if i was successful but tried to make their stories . ow and not repeat myself go over ll wanted to time from 1912 to brian: what do you want this book to do? mr. snyder: i want to show people that liberalism did not sprout up with the election of franklin roosevelt in november -- brian: are you a liberal? mr. snyder: i guess so. liberals have rebranded themselves as progressives. i would certainly call myself a progressive. i think what happened in 1912 in the house of truth is liberals began to form these networks. networks of politicians and lawyers and journalists and artists.

even though they were not in political power all the way in the 1920's up until 1932, these networks were doing a lot of work for them. they were undertaking a lot of political change. that is the major contribution of this book, to show the early developments of american liberalism, a lot of which took place at this house. brian: is this going on today, where there is a house, salons in a town like washington? mr. snyder: this is a quintessentially washington story where young, idealistic or often ivey league or college graduates come and live in a house together and have dinner parties and network with various people. they might be working on the hill or might be working as counsel to a senator. i think this is in some ways a quintessential washington story but in terms of forming networks that are changing the world, i think the conservatives in recent years have done a really good job

with this, particularly with the federal society, starting in the 1980's, conservatives have built some incredible networks that have resulted all the way to the nomination of judge gorsuch. brian: it might be hard to do but oliver wendell holmes was on the court -- i wrote it down -- 10,000 and some days. what would be his biggest legacy? we haven't got much time. i want to do that with three people but what would be his biggest legacy? mr. snyder: his free speech of dissents. we had no free speech jurisprudence in this country until holmes and then brandeis started dissenting. brian: what would have been louis brandeis' biggest legacy? mr. snyder: free speech, this idea of a constitutional right to privacy which he had written in his on dissent. brian: did conservatives not believe in free speech? mr. snyder: i think

conservatives believe in free speem but the peoples whose free speech they were protecting were people being prosecuted under the espionage act. brian: and felix frankfurter's legacy, how far away are you from this book being completed? mr. snyder: light years. probably another five or six years. his legacy was really a profound belief in the federal government and what it could accomplish during periods like the new deal. brian: so of all these people who you wrote about, who do you think you would have least liked? lippmann:? mr. snyder: lippmann. i felt like walter lippmann was out for walter lippmann. i think i would have liked him the least. brian: how much did you find that had already been written about him? much? mr. snyder: oh, yeah. there's been a lot written

about him. others are still writing about him. but i think what makes my book different than other books about lippmann, about holmes, about borglum, frankfurter is their relationships with each other. and how these relationships with each other impacted their lives. brian: you are married and where did you meet your wife? mr. snyder: i met my wife in washington in dupont circle not not far from the house of truth. brian: how long ago? mr. snyder: 10 years ago. brian: how many children do you have? mr. snyder: two. brian: how old are they? mr. snyder 4 and almost 6. brian: clearly they have not read your book. mr. snyder: no. they are my house of truth. they help me keep it real. brian: the name of the book is "the house of truth: a washington political salon and the foundations of american liberalism." our guest has been brad snyder and we thank you. mr. snyder: all right, brian. it's been a dream. thanks.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. isit ncicap.org] >> for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at q&a.org. q&a programs are also available on c-span podcast. >> and the u.s. house back at 4:30 eastern time to debate several bills dealing with s.e.c. regulations and a bill setting up a commission to mark the 400th anniversary of african-americans in the united states. later in the week the house will take up a $1 trillion spending bill to keep the government open until september 30 and includes extra money