tv The Civil War CSPAN April 2, 2016 6:00pm-6:51pm EDT
that denied equality for soldiers, aican division mirrored in american society at large. this talk was held at the library of virginia in the next speaker, dr. caroline janney is professor of history at purdue. she will always be a virginia girl kerry she received her phd from the university of virginia, go hoos. she is also a familiar face to museum audiences. spoke on the subject of her latest book at the university of richmond -- "remembering the civil war." she returned to richmond the following june to accept the jefferson davis award for the same book. book, "burying the
dead but not the past," is a personal favorite of mine kerry as she well knows. -- also edited an addition edition of a travel account which unfortunately is out-of-print and unavailable. carriey knows -- as knows, i have given a talk on her first book i think it many times as you have. [laughter] branch of history that so many people do not know about and since we are in the postwar sesquicentennial timeframe, it is especially important. co-editedney also with gallagher, our last
speaker, a book about the overland campaign. we keep it all in the family here at the museum. chance today if you are interested in getting that book, you can get both editors to sign it at the same time. it is available for sale after the break. today, carrie janney will be speaking about the civil war, and the spanish-american war and the limits of national reconciliation. ladies and gentlemen, one of my personal favorites, carrie janney. [applause] dr. janney: thank you to waite so much. it is always a treat to get to come back to virgin you and richman in particular. i used to joke that people thought i worked at the museum of confederacy because during grad school, i was there every day and the staff started
letting me in before anyone was allowed in there. mentioned, -- and also, thank you to john kosley. today, i am going to talk about the spanish-american war and civil war memories. we are not going to speak about the spanish-american war per se but the way the veterans of this double work thought about their role in the spanish-american war and vice a versa. the spanish-american war has often been described as the moment that knit the nation back together. this popular image that is on the front of nina silvers great book "romance of reunion," depicts -- the tableau depicts the confederacy coming back together. this war bringing the sections back together. the popular narrative is that by 1898, white northerners and
southerners locked hands together in reconciliation to fight together as white americans. historians have said that in doing so, this is the moment when union veterans forgot that ignited byught a war slavery. that they remain silent that the union victory had resulted in emancipation. out tog so, they sold confederate memories as a lost cause. this afternoon, i hoped to convince you that the place of the spanish-american war and the story of national reconciliation is much more complicated than this. i want to talk you about the ways that buries groups used the war to reflect back on the civil war and vice a versa. african-americans for their part pointing out that their participation proved that they were citizens entitled to civil and political rights. thatr confederates argued
their service in the war proved that they were loyal americans and it simultaneously emboldened their defense of the lost cause. while white union soldiers agreed that former confederates might now be committed to fighting a foreign, a common foreign foe, union veterans have not forgotten that there had been a white and wrong side in the civil war. this in to put all of context, i want to give a brief background on the role of reconciliation and the place of reconciliation as we get to 1898. in the years after the civil war, former confederates and unionists worked tirelessly to enter that their respective memories of the war would dominate kerry they did so through the creation of national cemeteries. national cemeteries exclusively for loyal union soldiers. you can see a memorial day
observance in ohio. they did so through the creation of veterans organizations including the grand army of the republic. here is another group from st. mary's, west virginia. richmond, the camp of confederate veterans were no less dedicated to creating and protecting their memory of the lost cause. this is an image from gettysburg where veterans had gathered to make this the union memorial park. after -- african-americans for their part, another picture from richmond, celebrated emancipation day. for the most part, confederates the lost cause and african-americans along with their abolitionist allies the emancipation cause. despite the fact that there were very distinct memories of the war and concerted efforts on the
part of all of these groups to protect what they saw as the truth of the war, despite this, 1890's, there and was a culture of reconciliation. americans were celebrating that they had come back together. they created the first national military park. the first one was in chattanooga. it was authorized by congress in 18 -- in 1880. this was proof that the nation had come back together. union and confederate soldiers united to dedicate the national military park. popular plays and musicals at the time celebrating the reunion of the nation. even political campaigns, the populist campaign celebrated reconciliation. in all of these efforts, there was a focus on the bravery and valor of the american soldier, not the union or confederate soldier. , thereen that not always
was the culture of reconciliation and it tried to stay away from the topic of slavery and reconstruction. rething brought more i from former confederates then discussion of slavery and reconstruction. war, thers of upheavals of reconstruction were behind americans. at the height of the spirit came the spanish-american war. in the spring of 1898, theodore roosevelt, will you and randolph hearst and other village hurry -- and other military officers understood that expelling spain from cuba would open up naval bases, foreign markets, and extend u.s. power around the globe. when the battleship maine was seriously damaged in the havana harbor in 1898, killing 260
, the drumbeat for war grew louder. congress would join newspapers in calling for a war and in calling for retaliation. president mckinley, the last union veteran to hold the office was not yet convinced. i have been through one war he famously wrote a friend and i have seen the dead piled up. i do not want to see another. nevertheless, by april 11, he had acquiesced authorizing congress to declare war on spain in the name of cuban independence. think about the ironies. southern independence, cuban independence. war was declared. the president called for 125,000 volunteers to fight for the freedom of cubans as the u.s. army at this point is about 28,000 men. throughout the spring of 1898,
letters poured into president mckinley from union and confederate veterans. the letters are in the national archives. you can go and look and see what they are writing. on one hand, many veterans very veryliked mckinley -- were much like mckinley and thought there had been enough bloodshed. others recognized that war with might provee useful beyond the so-called purpose of liberating the cubans. the confederate veterans in particular, the war offered the opportunity to prove their allegiance, to prove their loyalty to the united states. countless letters. i will give you an example from one. a veteran from the texas brigade offered to raise a regiment of former confederates. here is what he writes -- the confederates to our government has been made the subject of criticism.
all we ask is an opportunity to let our actions speak for our loyalty. there are countless letters along the same lines. there are also letters who together offered to create united regiments. president mckinley and others recognized as this envelope should suggest that the war was in fact perfectly positioned to capitalize on the existing reconciliation sentiments. two and sectional bitterness. i amar was very brief as sure you all know kerry it lasted only 114 days. it would claim the lives of 460 americans in battle and another 5200 by disease. regardless, this was a war that ,as to be fought by a united reunited nation. as such, president mckinley appointed both union and confederate veterans to key positions. most prominent among the white
southerners was none other than lee. this picture comes from the virginia historical society. [laughter] rather see he was a martial looking character by that time. maybe it is the fact that he had been a governor of virginia by that point. that may be the reason for his repose. he was currently serving as consul in havana at the time. joseph wheeler, also named a major general. for more political reasons than experience. he also had been a former confederate leader but also probably more importantly, a democratic congressman from alabama in the first major engagement, many of you have probably heard his quote -- let us go boys, we have the damn yankees on the run again. whether or not that is true, we
do not know but you can see how it fueled the notion that the confederates are now part of the fight against kerry i don't have a picture of thomas rosser but he is another interesting one that was named a brigadier general. he was one of the fellows who refused to surrender at in 1865.x courthouse he finally turned himself in for parole in may of 1865. he would train recruits at the new battlefield. beginning of the spanish-american war. william oates, the one armed former colonel of the 15th alabama, perhaps best known for his attempts at little round top. another former governor of alabama. was a surprising choice considering the fact that he had viciously attacked union veterans and their cause at the 1895 dedication in chattanooga.
now, he has changed his tune. along with these men and other former confederates, former confederates from the rank as well as their sons who had not yet achieved time on the battlefield. the former confederates, white southerners joint horses with their former enemies under this ours and stripes. a few key figures here. nelson miles, perhaps best known for his war against the native americans. he would lead the invasion into puerto rico. general wesley maritz, another survivor of gettysburg. he had been present at appomattox. and second from the left, general arthur macarthur who i have always thought had a great name. and of course, you probably know who his son was. veterans who union are now in key leadership positions in the spanish-american war. newspapers across the country got just that the war.
they also talked about the fact that white southerners in atlanta and vicksburg celebrated july 4 for the first time since the war. here is a union veteran -- the word in spain is worth all it will cost in blood and treasure for the confident -- confidence it begets in both -- in soldiers of both armies. asy saw this war as much liberating cubans as an opportunity to bind the nation back together. southerners, this was an opportunity to do more than just relish reconciliation. in fact, it also vindicated the things that they had been saying about the confederate cause, their lost cause for years now. -- the wordid look traitor and rebel no longer apply to us. former confederate general stephen lee -- there is a sow's
of no small pride that the whole country has at last learned its true value, the depth and fervor of southern patriotism. indeed, the lost cause was in itself in many ways a justification for fighting. white southerners reminded those from other regions that their motivation was the same motivation that had motivated them in every other war in history. the same patriotism that prompted them to fight in 1776, 1812, in the mexican-american war and even in the great struggle between the states had motivated them now. in each instance they said that they had fought for the principles that were constitutional and unequivocally american. a had fought in 1861 as they did in 1898, now in the name of cuba for the principle of self governance and liberty. for the lost cause, they are holding up. the reason they went to fight in 1861 is the reason they are
fighting now. surely, no one could argue that the lost cause was immoral. by highlighting their own fight for liberty, albeit now on behalf of the cubans, and in a so-calledion veterans claims of fighting to free the slaves, white southerners could simultaneously claim loyalty to the united flag and to their confederate heritage. most important, the war with spain allowed former confederates to accomplish on an international stage what the lost cause had been claiming for years. vindication of southern honor, manhood, and loyalty. they were not the only groups that looked to the spanish-american war and the connections with the civil war. african-american men did the same. cubamun likewise look to for another opportunity to prove their patriotism. to prove their masculinity.
just as they had tied their civil war service to a demand for political rights, in 1890 eight, many african hoped their participation might help turn back the growing tide of disenfranchisement. turn back the growing tide of segregation. the iowa state bystander, a newspaper and noted -- our fathers labored, fought, and died to leave a heritage for us. parking back to 1863, the paper continued -- let us be men and show loyalty and we will be rewarded. not everyone was on board with this. a number suggested that most of the 10,000 african-american men who did volunteer for the war were from northern states as opposed to southern states. much of that might be because of the effort of men like john mitchell. again, it right here in richmond, editor of the richmond planets. he insisted that black and should only fight if they did so
under black officers. with the ranks of kernel and major. a departure from what had been the case during the united states colored troops. no officer, no fighting. we will wait for the change. many white southerners were content to wait, responding to mckinley's call for colored troops. the new orleans times democrat insisted on the speedy and see -- expediency of registering african-americans. invoking the civil war's memory, mitchell responded that in fact this was the same logic issued to lincoln. even robert e. lee had -- recommended the confederates arm the same negroes and use them to fight against the united states. mitchell pointed out the results were clear. lincoln enlisted these -- and won.
history repeats itself according to mitchell. iner unionists joined recalling the civil war service of african-americans during the current conflict. it seemed hardly quince at dental that thomas wentworth biography,rote his his lengthy articles detailing the valorous contribution of the first south carolina volunteers during the midst of the spanish-american war. the heroics of the soldiers had not been should not be forgotten he insisted. black soldiers had volunteered, fought valley and late during the civil war and that fought fought valiantly during the civil war and will again. tock soldiers a signed pacify the indians in the american west, the so-called upload soldiers were among the first to be mobilized in 1898. this was in part the scientific
racism that goes with this that many white americans thought physiologically and biologically they were better suited to fight in the caribbean and the tropics. work, the short approximately 10,000 african-americans served. many of them, too much acclaim. news of the ninth and 10th cavalry's heroics, under the overall command of none other than former confederate general joseph wheeler. it field -- filled newspapers throughout the nation. booker t. washington likewise chimed in. just as he had praised the 54th massachusetts or their civil war service, he lauded the service of civil war soldiers -- excuse me of african-american soldiers during the spanish-american war. he addressed the largest audience he had ever spoken to the -- oom -- at
he claimed this was the largest audience he had ever spoken to. in it he celebrated the heroic sacrifice of african-american men throughout the nation's history. brave colored troops at fort wagner to the heroism of black -- innts that stormed santiago -- in all of these victories, black men had fought for their nation. with that, he looks at mckinley sitting in the box. he looks up at mckinley and thanks kim are recognizing the contribution of black men to the work. there is an election in the audience. people are standing up and waving handkerchiefs and clapping. finally, washington gets them to settle back down. he continues reminding them that there is still one more victory. for americans to win.
-- we havehington succeeded in every conflict except in the effort to conquer -- conquer ourselves and blotting out racial prejudices. we can celebrate the era of with a firmpeace resolve on the part of northern men and southern men, black men, and white men that the trenches we have together dug around santiago shall be the eternal burial place for all that separates us in our business and civil relations. here is booker t. washington offering the ultimate reconciliation message trying to reunite the nation in sectional and racial peace. of forgettingse the past but in an acknowledgment of the sacrifice of the devotion of black men that they had always shown to the united states. of course, this reconciliation
between the races was not to be at that moment. neither was there as much reconciliation between north and south as popular images would have us believe. popular images even from the tides such as this cover of puck suggesting former confederates and unionist veterans had reunited. 1865, the refusal of the united states government to bury confederate dead in national u.s. cemeteries alongside the concurrent development of confederate national cemeteries by the ladies memorial associations in the south. to hand her served feelings of reconciliation in the media post civil war. the dead had served to keep sectionalism alive. in 1898, the dead became the chief symbol of a reunited nation. or at least that was the hope of many. once again, the blood of north and south flowed.
this can come it did not do so under the name of contending sections but the need the same flag. when newspapers learned that one was a first war death sailor from north carolina and the son of a confederate withan, they reached sentiment. there is no north or south wrote the new york tribune. countrymen.agley's from tennessee came the story of two fathers, one a union veteran the other confederate. they agreed that their sons could fall in together on the hill. men who had once fought against one another now mingled their tears over sons who had sacrificed their lives on the altar of the united states. new birthhe so-called of freedom that lincoln has
spoken up at gettysburg, countless orders suggested the new nation might and fact be born from the spanish-american war. and from the dead in particular. here again is stephen lee, former confederate general. hateful memoryt that can divide our country is buried with them. about their grades we have a new nation involving all of her children anywhere, -- everywhere, this thing. at the atlanta peace jubilee, when the peace treaty is finally signed by the dashed by december of 1898, president mckinley uses this image of the dead reuniting the nation as a symbol of a reunited nation. in part, a gesture of aconciliation -- but also savvy political bid to get southern support for overseas at answer. a great many southern congressmen and senators were not on board with this.
he proposed that the federal government should assist, monetarily assist in caring for the grades of all civil war soldiers. sectional lines no longer marred the united states, min -- mckinley asserted. it no longer holds back the love that we bear each other. i want you to listen to this next passage, i read it as him invoking the union cause as much as reconciliation. he rejoiced that the most recent war had proven that -- the union , the common atlas of our love and loyalty. the time has now come in the evolution of sentiment and the evolution of feeling under the providence of god when the spirit of fraternity we should share with you in the care of grades of the confederate soldiers. at this, newspapers reported that the men who had fought in the audience leapt to their feet or tottered to their feet as the case may be -- [laughter]
and they applauded madly for mckinley for binding the nation together. it was a short-lived victory for the present. the limits of reconciliation would bear their teeth. hoping to capitalize on such sentiment, a southern congressmen and entered her opensed bills that would the national soldiers homes to confederate veterans and they would offer pensions, federal pensions to confederate soldiers. yes. you know where this is going. [laughter] he says the federal government is willing to shed out money for the confederate dead, why not for the living? why not provide for the impoverished men who fought for the cause. union veterans would have none of this. they found the idea of pensions insulting. here is the editor of a major newspaper, the national tribune -- the editor conceded he did
not have a problem honoring the dead of those who were diluted and deceived into joining the rebellion. listen to the language there. they are americans and countrymen. to tend to them places where their fallen were buried he said was an act of brotherly sympathy. he added though that it did not mean there would be no distinction between union and confederate graves. union grace should get more money and attention because their shed always be a distinction for those who fought for the flag and those who fought against. he went on. placing rebel survivors on the pension rolls or admitting them to soldiers homes would be -- subversive to every principle upon which the war for the preservation of the union was waged. in fact, many confederate veterans agreed with him albeit for different reasons. the united confederate veterans camp a cross the south along with the southern -- immediately
issued statements denouncing pensions for x confederates. -- ex confederates. said belonged to the south in particular to the noblewoman who cared in 1865. after a spirited debate at the annual reading in may 1899, the confederate veterans voted to decline mckinley's offer, with the exception of the confederate drapes located in the north. mainly those it point lookout and other prisons. the care of the south was "a sacred trust due to the hearts of southern women and we believe it can safely remain there." to accept aid for either living or dead confederates from the federal government would be a concession, a failing of the honor and pride among those who had fought and died for the south. it would be a failing and
holding up the lost cause. even his former confederates rejected federal pensions, even as a rejected cemetery a, the color line was more readily apparent in the wake of the spanish-american war. one example. this is the national union cemetery in florence, south carolina. like florence and other national cemeteries throughout the south, four years after the war the primary people who has showed up for memorial day have been african-americans. they had been the ones to show up in place flowers and other markers on digging graves. -- union graves. memorial day 1899, white leaders of south carolina observed that the african-americans who had so long participated in the day had failed to decorate the graves of florence. and the names of reconciliation
fostered by the spanish-american members called for a blue and great memorial association. --s is directly responding their founding documents say they are responding to mckinley's call. their goal is to sponsor memorial days and decorate the graves of those union and confederate soldiers in the area. significantly the group elected to bar african-americans from the day of observances. this is in the south. i want to make it clear, and as doug pointed out earlier, there were integrated gar posts mainly in new england at this point. nevertheless what we start to see increasingly white only affairs that occurred at the same time that northern and southern whites were talking about reconciliation. talking about the spanish-american war. they all revealed a heightened
sense of anglo-saxon is an -- anglo-saxonism in this period. the war seemed to confirm the national unity of southern and northern white people uniting for imperialistic ambitions. the war in the colonial expansion of followed in the philippines, puerto rico seemed to confirm the backward characteristics of nonwhite people and therefore the common superiority of anglo-saxons. this new emphasis on anglo-saxonism did not mean that white union veterans had forgotten that the civil war had been about slavery. to return to our starting point, white unionists had not forgotten that african-americans or slavery had been part of the war. in just one of many examples, this is the soldiers and sailors monument in indianapolis outside of the lincoln memorial.
this is the largest civil war monument in the country, allcated in 1902 to hoosiers and everywhere they had five. including the spanish-american war. thatan see clearly here the plight of sleep -- freeing the slaves was essential to the message that union veterans wanted to remember in their central war memorial in indiana. this did not mean that most white union veterans or white northerners in general thought civil and political rights for african-americans. in recent years historians seemed to have forgotten that racism and remembering that slavery was part of the war did in fact go hand in hand for many union veterans. slavery in race for not interchangeable in the minds of white union veterans. when you to be careful about them today. althoughrap up, americans had come together in
the dissent of the nation in so bythey had not done merely agreeing to remain silent on the memory of the civil war. or because of ideas about what supremacy. allowedpremacy had been out -- around a long time before 1898. the spanish-american war left the mixed legacy for the reconciliation for the age. for african-americans like booker t. washington, finding the common history with white neighbors was imperative. for others a fiercely challenged reconciliation. leither had sectiona reconciliation triumph or white union and confederate veterans. even the spanish-american war, long championed is evidence of the white north and the white south had reunited to fight a foreign foe, a nonwhite foe, could not thoroughly bind of the nation's loads.
is there any evidence that part of this reunion between north and south was subliminally coming out of their common ,acism towards people of color sharedhis time a antipathy towards roman catholics? ms. janney: let me start with joseph wheeler and say the fact that wheeler is in arlington national cemetery is only because of his service in the spanish-american war. he was a u.s. veteran after that. there is a confederate section in arlington. that is a hold of a story. -- whole different story. he is in fact there. the argument you ask about
whether the north and the south came together over common issues of race, that has very much been a predominant argument in the last couple of years. historians have said white northerners and southerners came together, agreed to let bygones be bygones because of their common issues, their common ideas about race. while that is certainly a thread of it, i don't see that as the main impetus for reconciliation. racist by had been our 21st-century terms well before the civil war. they did not discover they have this common idea of white supremacy in the aftermath of the civil war and that allowed the to agree to let bygones be bygones. 's think back to dr. ayer lecture in the fall of 1864, we see these divisions in many ways had nothing to do with race. at the same time they have everything to do with race.
the idea it was something as simple as white supremacy to let to reconciliation i think is a party's implicit way of looking at how -- is a far too simplistic way of looking at it. it lasts well into the 20th century. complex ideas about race are part of that but that is not story. -- the whole story. >> [indiscernible] ms. janney: the question is about protestant anti-catholic sentiment. that one and say that is not something i found a great deal of and don't see that as part of the reconciliation story. >> thank you. it seems to me our culture today in historical memory is almost assessed with a good guy versus bad guy narrative.
you see it all the comic book movies. can you validate that? roadblock that as a in the spanish-american war efforts in reconciliation, needing to have one construct of a good guy versus bad guy without hampering the efforts of reconciliation? ms. janney: i'm not sure i can stay to the comic book part of the question. i'm not an avid comic book reader. say the notion of the righteousness of one cause, and which cause was righteous is something that was fought about even during the war. deciding how do you explain what it is you are fighting for. are you fighting to save the union or to free the slaves or to protect your home or states rights? of of this is very much part
the 150 year long discussion we are still having about what the civil war meant. it's very much a question of who is on the right side of history. it was on the moral high ground. debate,the heart of the the heart of what union veterans are saying about and to confederate veterans about the 1860's and well into the early 20th century. they are saying you might've fought honorably, you might even brave, do what you fought for was morally repugnant. confederate veterans will spend that on its head and say you were not actually fighting to free the slaves. you might recall that now, but you also raped and pillaged the south. those total war issues that professor grimsley talked about. the question of who is the good guy and bad guy are absolutely what motivates and propels forward much of the discussion
about civil war memory. had he found any comments from spain on the comments you made about this subject? ms. janney: no, i have not but i have not looked either. that would be an interesting question to look at. beginning about the late 1880's and through the turn-of-the-century there was an increasingly explicit institutionalization of racial restrictions in law and custom throughout the country but especially in the south. to what extent was there a cause-and-effect relationship either way between this burst of the desire for national reconciliation and these heartening racial attitudes as expressed in specific things like state codes and the civil code's? ms. janney: i don't see that as being the motivating factor of civil war memory shaving that.
if confederate veterans have never been allowed to form their organizations, never been allowed to have their cemeteries and things of that nature, if the confederate battle flag and been censored from the beginning and not allowed to be shown in public i still think those debates about race -- the country still wouldn't have this pressing questions. it probably still would have happened. i'm not sure seeing a cause-and-effect between the way andrans and women's groups did your segregation plays out. the south was to not on board with the imperial future of the united states. could you elaborate on that a little bit? ms. janney: one of the things that white confederates are talking about is to what extent -- they hearken back to reconstruction. they use reconstruction in two
very different ways. if we look at the history of reconstruction, we can say it is not right for government to come and -- in and try to tell other people to do. why is it right for us to do that? on the other hand they start talking about the fact that whether self rule is appropriate for people of color. do they have the capability to run their own government? they point back to reconstruction and they say to the white northern compatriots, look, we were right about reconstruction. black men were not able to run the show or run governments. we need to be careful about how we think about what is going on in cuba and puerto rico and the philippines. they use reconstruction and the memory of that to -- in two opposing ways.
it's very informative of how they think about the role of the united states in the colonies. thank you all. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> american history tv on c-span3. tonight at 10:00 eastern on real america -- >> all such farm jobs that are dirty or unpleasant are generally referred to as stoop labor. this is the only area in which the american farm labor supply falls short. and is supplemented by mexican citizens, sometimes called nationals or mexican nationals. the term is commonly used is brazeros. this means a man that works with his arms and hands. the big question in many minds is why brazeros?
>> this 20 minute film promoted program.rpos sunday morning at 10 about eastern on road to the white house rewind -- >> my view is that the soviets are aggressive, they have overstated in afghanistan. they have bitten off more than they should be allowed to digest. i think that the best answer to it is for them to know that the united states will keep its commitments. >> i agree completely. where people want to be free, soviet or cuban domination with proxy troops, the united states should be willing to provide weapons to any man that want to fight for their freedom against those all self forces. [applause] >> the 1980 texas republican primary debate between former california governor ronald
reagan and former cia director george h w bush. at 6:00 on american artifacts -- >> the hart building is the least of the classical buildings. the russell building is very neoclassical. the turks and building -- dirkson is a little plai ner. the hart building is very modern. it's a large ice cube tray. it's a very different looking building. >> john riccitiello's inside the newest of the three senate office buildings. the 1983 heart senate office building. on the presidency at 8:00, smithsonian national portrait gallery senior historian david ward chronicles abraham lincoln's life through photographs and portraits. >> a rather exasperated lincoln takes time off from writing the inaugural address to set for this last photograph.
he does look kind of peevish. the eyes disappear. the sense in which lincoln is present to the public in his suffering. >> for the complete we can schedule, go to c-span.org. >> the media teaches us that the democrats and republicans are supposed to be at all to each other -- at odds with each other. people need to recognize we need to be respectful towards each other and we need understand that senators are respect of -- respectful towards each other and that would be more conducive to getting real policy done instead of acrimony and vitriol. >> these people we see on television, on c-span are real people. only saw president obama, the thing that most stood out to me was he had bags under his eyes. he's a real person dealing with real things. i thought that was perhaps the most interesting.
top high school students from around the cultural attending the 54th annual u.s. about their experiences in the weeklong government and leadership program and their plans for the future. they never members of the executive, judicial and legislative branches of government, plus military and media representatives. >> began to talk to list. i loved the insight he gave us about being the outside source reporting back to us and the electorate about the government. >> ruth bader ginsburg was the most inspirational person we met this week. she has been one of my idols for a long time. i either want to be in the legal profession or possibly a senator. >> i understand the need for bipartisanship at times, by think it's important politicians go to washington whether state capitals with their eyes on a goal and are determined to meet
that goal and set of sacrificing get in the light of money or bipartisanship or whatever it is. >> we need to get back to constructive discourse. when you get back to all americans, no matter the backgrounds. and make this country in a more respectful place where people feel welcomed to give their opinions. this year marks the 250th anniversary of chief justice john marshall's appointed to the u.s. supreme court by president john adams. , jeffrey rosen lectures on the influence of john marshall, with opening remarks by chief justice john roberts. mr. rosen talks about the ideological differences between marshall and president thomas jefferson and his influence on later supreme court justices. the supreme court historical society and john marshall foundation cohosted the event and the supreme court chamber. this is about one hour. >>