tv The Civil War CSPAN November 15, 2015 2:00pm-3:46pm EST
and has been >> where did you get that uniform? >> i came here in uniform and this was taken away from a substitute. condemned to death as had another american in this camp. fortunately, the american division came through at this time. >> i am the officer commanding artillery guarding this camp. task has beenant making the ss, of which there are about 60, bury the dead. we have buried about 17,000 people. expect to bury about half as
much again. >> up next on american history tv, historian don doyle discusses his book, "the cause of all nations, and international history of the american civil war." the war looks at how was viewed around the world and the perspectives of the foreign-born soldiers fighting in it. this event is a little over an hour and 45 minutes. >> it is my pleasure to welcome don doyle who graduated from the university of california at davis. during his sophomore year, he took off a semester and travel to europe, where he developed a lifelong pastor -- lifelong question for history which took
him to northwestern university, where he earned his phd. he spent much of his career at vanderbilt university where he developed a strong interest in the civil war era. the professorcame of history at south carolina. he also enjoyed numerous overseas teaching and research experiences. he was a fulbright professor of american history three times, and rome, italy, genoa, italy, and rio de janeiro, at universities in all three places. he also taught at university of leeds in england and has spent a good deal of time traveling in europe and latin america. seven books and five edited collections of essays in addition to numerous articles, logs, and guess ed leases. essays came out
of the research for the cause of all nations, on which he will speak tonight. he has written for salon.com, usa today, and other popular journals. of his early research involved the social history of 19th-century america, but he withed out -- branched out u.s. and italy. tonight, he will speak on his latest book, and international history of the american civil war. this book has been named one of the best nonfiction books of the year. welcome dr. doyle. [applause] dr. doyle: thank you, very much for that very fine introduction. to bob for all the logistical
support, and all of you coming through the rain to talk about the civil war. i'm delighted to know this will be going out to a larger audience through c-span. trying to say something new about the american civil war is no easy challenge. began, i was on sabbatical in washington, d.c. and was across from the ford museum where abraham lincoln died. if you go out to the second floor to the bedroom, you come out and go down to the gift store, there's a stairway and eight-hour of translucent plastic that goes through both floors. it must be 10 feet wide and must be 40 feet. the tower is filled with books
on lincoln and the american civil war. i was thinking as i'm beginning that book is that it's a great deal of scholarship from generations to this man into this war and i'm thinking i'm going to have just one more brick on the pile. what on earth do i have to say that is new? the american civil war lies at the heart of our national identity. of the conversation we have with ourselves about ourselves. for a long time, it was regarded as a tragic others war, a kind with issues that should have been resolved, northcs on both sides, and south, inflame the passions of the people and led the men to this disastrous war. in the 1960's, we began to turn war asward the civil
dealing with real issues and issues that were unresolved, having to do with race and the legacy of slavery. unfinishede revolution. it became the prelude to the american civil rights movement and the war took on this effect -- we were talking about the civil war and also talking about ourselves and this long, relet reckoning with race and the legacy of slavery. my view takes us out of this narrative be on the battlefield, beyond the political arenas, beyond the bounds of the nation, north, south, lincoln, davis, lee, grant, the symmetry that we have to this national narrative we have and to look at it from outside from a global view or at least transatlantic you and
understand what the war meant to the world. exchange across the atlantic as well as to europe affected the way americans understood their war. this global perspective tell us that his new about the american civil war? first thing i discovered is this war that we think of as an american event fought i american soldiers, about issues that were peculiarly american, it mattered a great deal to the rest of the world. this war and reported on it and discussed it. it was discussed in the parliaments of -- written and france and germany for top it was an important event a followed with great interest. discoveryance of this
came at the end of the war when they heard the news of the union's victory and within days, the news of lincoln's death and, all over, the european and american world, people came out into the streets to hear the news, by newspapers and learn more. they wrote letters and resolutions, tens of thousands of letters came in, letters of sympathy and solidarity to express condolence over lincoln's death. it was a measure of just how much this war meant to the rest of the world. why did it matter so much? this was not as obvious. there was a huge economic impact -- 80% of the world's supply of cotton came out of the american south. that supply was cut off deadly,
first by the south. lifewanted to force europe forcing an embargo. then one way or another, very totle cotton was eating out europe and there was talk of a cotton famine sweeping through not just the district of northern england but northern europe, france, belgium, italy, germany and all the industrial world depended on cotton from the south and the other supplies would be developed but that was yet to come. they were afraid of not just losing profits or even losing jobs, but social unrest and fervor working up in the lancashire district of written and northern europe. there was a political fear as
well. but the material interest and economic concerns were there and they were grave. what they talked about most was the social impact of the war and what it would mean for the future of world history. contest, this was a that involved the future of the republican experiment and the future of slavery and free labor. did his annual address in 1861 and said america was last best hope of earth, we have used that as a bragging point of america's exceptionalism. but it is not a boast. lament. a
there were not any republics outside of switzerland in a few small city state. republicanism and the idea of government by the people had died. it had been defeated in the revolution of 1848 and there was an idea that government for the people just did not work and now america was proving that again. had republics but they were in turmoil. revolutions right and left. the republican experiment as they referred to it was unproven. there was an idea that republics ever since the time of the ancient republics in rome and greece, that they were inherently fragile and weak and would always descend into anarchy or despotism.
democracies could not fight wars. they could not sustain the strain of war. democracies do not make war with each other -- that is very popular. there was an idea democracies could not fight wars or were incapable of it. when america descended into war and ink and abandon habeas about and there was talk the american bastille being raised and medical prisoners being put in, it was despotism as well as anarchy the great republic was descending into. one of the french republicans who plays a minor but poignant "americay story said is not only america.
one place or when race more on the map. it is especially the model school of liberty. if against all possibility, america had perished, with it would fall a great experiment. idea of democracy being an experiment, not the future, but an imperiled experiment that was about to fail was foremost on the minds of european us. people who believed in government by aristocracy and inherited power, dynastic rule, they were happy to see the great republic fail. they were trying to overthrow the regime and establish a experiment in europe.
many believed by the end of the century, the united states and all the trouble republics in the new world would make their way back to monarchy. some under the protection of britain, france or spain. they would be restored to monarchy and catholic authority in latin america. i tell the story about many of my antecedents and self carolina promoting the idea of monarchy in america in the south. mob -- look of this what they have done -- they have elected abraham lincoln. we want to be stored to some sort of monarch a goal order. the south carolinians were telling william howard russell isn't there some friends that can come and take us over? can't we be repatriated?
in rebellion against the idea of extreme democracy as they called it. also to the question why did it matter, there was a geopolitical contest that had grave consequences for the entire euro american world. greatan powers, the ,owers of britain, france lesser powers like spain, russia, italy, many were not interested in just waiting for republicanism to fail. they were there to help and restore monarchical rule even before the guns fired at fort sumter in march of 1861.
later, in the 1860's, they would pick fights with peru and chile in an attempt to restore lost empires. the spectacular intervention came in mexico in the first year of war, as early as october, the part powers formed a try alliance in london and agreed to an allied invasion and put pressure on or overthrow the elected republican regime of the neato warez. the idea, as it developed in
napoleon the third's mind, the nephew of napoleon the first two overthrows the second republic of france. hey try again in 1848 and crowned himself emperor, taking andge from his uncles book had the idea of restoring the glory that was france under his uncle and that it would he not just the greatest power in power, but establishing over the latin race in the new world. showcaseuld become the against theal order shambles of republicanism in the rest of america. the archduke of austria and restore the church to power.
this would be not just the takeover of mexico but it would create a hegemonic power over all of latin america. the very term was coined in this of latinunified race peoples who included the french, the portuguese and italian and the latin race would be restored to power against the anglo-saxon, teutonic order in the old world and the new. would block third the insidious influence of the anglo-saxon republicans in the muchd states and restore of what had been given up to the united states under this mexican empire under maximilian.
it was a big clash between historical forces and republicanism, slavery, and freedom. forcesflict between the of good and evil or order and chaos, depending on your point of view. intellectuals, reformers, political speakers of the american contest as a way of talking about what was going on in europe and latin america. for aame a proxy war contest that was global or at least transatlantic. listened to one of my favorite french republicans -- a history professor, one of the leading
experts on american constitutional law in france. solidarity and the cause of america is the cause of liberty. so long as there should be across the atlantic a society of 30 millions of men living under a government of their choice with laws made by themselves, liberty will cast raise over europe like an illuminating pharaohs. america, dis-encumbered of slavery, will be the comfort of all spirits and generous hearts. but should it become eclipsed in the new world, it will become night and we will see the work , spithington, franklin upon and trampled underfoot.
essay offrom an reelections in 1864. karl marx, exiled radical in london writing for the new york daily tribune, one of the largest in the world at the time found in article analyzing the nature of his content. the first grand war of contemporaneous history is the american war. the highest form of popular self-government is giving battle to the meanest and most shameless of man's enslaving recorded in the annals of history. america, ramon castillo, the president of peru said latin america was about to of the crowns
against the liberty caps. would haveis tremendous consequences for them. was an epic battle that would decide the future and it was a battle that had been going on since the french revolution in american revolution over the basic principles of human thelity upon which rested idea of popular sovereignty that people could be sovereign and people collect their own government and decide laws and power would come from the people and not divine rule. foreigners were romanticizing this war and it became a moral conflict of enormous consequence. to beericans seemed
wanting to keeping it as small as possible and the union denied this was over slavery. lincoln was trying to discredit any idea that he was out to abolish slavery or transform the south. lincoln had to discredit the idea there was any reasonable cause. he did not want sympathy for the south which was trying to say they were being oppressed by some tyrannical force before lincoln had taken power. they were suffering from the abolitionists that were going to overthrow their system of labor racial warfare or a racial holocaust in the south. sayoln was careful to there's no cause for revolutionary overthrow of this government.
slavery is safe in the states where it exists. the republican party wants only to limit its expansion. quoting himself from an earlier speech -- i have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. i believe i have no lawful right to do so and no inclination to do so. that last bit is what got a lot of europeans. ofe was after 10 years arguing over this issue of slavery, foreign onlookers had seen this young democracy tearing itself apart. partyy, the anti-slavery mobilized and almost overnight, it seized national power for the first time. you have a president in power
that is openly hostile to slavery and now in his inaugural address says i don't have any power to do anything about slavery. to preserve the union and the slavery is safe where it exists. foreigners cannot understand the constitution. they are accustomed to monarchical power. constitution the limiting power. lincoln hadon -- his reasons, both the internal and domestic political constraints that also did not want foreign powers to come in and intervene or recognize the south. it wasn't just lincoln. bestam seward, one of our
secretaries of state, very shrewd. the beginning of this was really disappointing to a lot of deny any intention of the union to use this war to bend slavery. he was terrified foreigners would see that threat of abolition as a threat to business interests and that would rebound to the benefit of the south and britain and france might come in and intervene in order to stop this demolition of the cotton market. as he instructed, whether the
revolution shall succeed or fail, the condition of slavery will remain just the same. this was not just lincoln speaking to this was domestic and foreign policy. this.egan questioning the diplomats begin writing back. he was interested in using his diplomats not just for him but as their eyes and ears of washington. he asked them right back what is going on. on. us what is going very interested in public sentiment and opinion. i argue they were on the cutting edge of a new public diplomacy -- a term a did not use at the time. public diplomacy and soft power -- very contemporary phrases, but that is what they were doing here.
a german immigrant, a radical who had come over after the quickly inand rose the republican party, helped lincoln get elected by deliberate part of the german vote and wanted to be an ambassador. everyone wanted to be an ambassador. it was lucrative and prestigious. he wanted to show them this was going to be a representative of the great republic. they appointed him to spain. offensive it would be to european governments to send this radical revolutionary over as our ambassador and first wanted italy but lincoln finally -- he was frustrated
after the battle of bull run and could see the tide turning against the europe -- turning against europe. he wrote this wrong -- this long dispatch hoping it would get to lincoln. that the ruling classes of europe wanted america to fail. they wanted democracy to fail. but the public was hopeful. assuming the war would be nothing than a grand up rising. assumed it would be nothing more than a grand uprising of the popular conscience in favor of a great unitarian principle. he said the union was squandering its most valuable moral capital by denying slavery
be an issue. why should europeans support the north if its only goal was the privilege of being where he associated with the imperious and trouble slave states. waraid we must place the against the rebellious slave states against a higher moral basis and thereby give us the control of public moral opinion. if you control the public, even in autocratic nations like france and spain, the autocratic governments are even more afraid they are not going to let it out in an opposition party. they are going to go to the barricades in france and are very sensitive to that. must arouseing they that public sentiment in a war
not just against slavery but in favor of republican principles. precisely as he was writing to seward, seward had already authorized and other diplomatic mission. he sent one of his most trusted , a man by the name of henry sanford, a career diplomat and had beencut posted in various places in europe before the war and was now in brussels. he was on officially the head of what they called secret service also known as propaganda, managing the press, whatever you want to call it. he sent him to this remote island in the mediterranean. i open my book with this story -- to issue an invitation to another of the most famous people in the atlantic world at national the italian
hero, just that, the hero of two worlds. circulating all that summer that era baldy was willing to come to america, to raise his sword for the cause of american unity, this hero of italian unification. garibaldi, i'm sure a lot of people are familiar with him. he has a statue in washington square and is very famous, especially among italians. he was one of the first modern global heroes. everybody knew who garibaldi was, what he looked like -- women adored him. the garibaldi fashion was very important. blouses andeve military jackets. the garibaldi cookie became
popular in london. there were songs about him and andas famous in print admired greatly. america andto south fought for the republican movement of brazil and fought for a secession movement against the empire of brazil. he returned to italy, fought for the roman republic, gallantly defended rome against the french, made a stunning speech in st. peter's square, telling the italians i promise you nothing but hard marches and sleepless nights. who loves italy, follow me. churchill'swinston
led sweat and tears speech. he goes into exile and his wife dies. and can'tto exile stand the weather in london and comes to america. in 1850, he takes up residence in new york, later in staten island and leads a quiet life. you may have been to the house and that an island. some school groups till to it. wife'spressed about his death and the failure of italy's revolution spent some time regrouping. p apply for citizenship and referred to america as his second country. he never completed the naturalization process, but in his heart, this was his second country. thers that went out to
international press were sensational. the headlines were garibaldi is coming. back and forth and neither garibaldi nor the u.s. government would verify. they were planting leathers -- planting letters saying i would like to come and help. was him wanting to put pressure on the king of , but the ideanue of bringing garibaldi to america seems bizarre from our perspective. it was a sensational idea at the time. 1860, wentis man in back and led a motley crew of about a thousand volunteers, students, soldiers, professors,
merchants with rusty muskets and went down to marsala and threw ,ack a professional german army a bourbon army of about 25,000, marched across sicily across the straits of mussina into naples to southern italy, to king victor emmanuel, just a year before. italy was uniting as america was falling apart. as i went across southern italy, the garibaldi union would hold up a finger and yell -- now garibaldi was coming to raise his sword for america. of publicory full diplomacy and advantages.
garibaldi had conditions. one of them was he wanted absolute full command of absolute all armed forces. a pilot in a storm have full command of his crew. i would be useless as a subordinate. he wanted the power to declare the war against slavery. universalr is not for emancipation, he said, this would be another intestinal war. war overnother civil territory of no real interest to the world. he could not give into the spiel
garibaldi is just the wilderness again, just a leader -- the president of your country can't do something to and slavery -- that is incredulous. the union would have to find answers to this question. what are you fighting for? later in the book -- i have another chapter called garibaldi's answer. it goes to the question of what ors it matter what garibaldi karl marx or all of these other
intellectuals and politicians and reformers are saying about the american war? here's another example in publicer of 1862 of diplomacy and soft power affecting the outcome of the war. or september, britain and france, the prime minister together with john russell's, the secretary of state, minister of foreign affairs and others in the british cabinet agreed with -- with otherthey countries trying to get russia, possibly spain to go together and as a group, offer to mediate renew the flow of
cotton as it came to the gathering season. usually going back to the famous law of nations suggested if third parties, one or more third-party nations harmed by wareffect of an ongoing one party mediate, if accepted in the other party did not, that would justify the foreign powers from recognizing more eating at cooperative party. this is exactly what russell and palmerston had in mind. it was great because they were not in london and russell was down with queen victoria.
she was visiting her relatives and had to telegram and the written record is all there. we are going to going to offer mediation and we will go when. the die was cast. it was all set and things were in motion. then, in southern italy, garibaldi -- this was not a plot. i do know garibaldi was on the payroll of the state department. touppose it's not impossible imagine somehow orchestrating this. to sicily andrned
was arousing huge monster they were chanting to march on rome. been the movement. garibaldi now wanted to go on and crossed the straits of mussina, picking up men along the way, the red shirts leading this mass of people. garibaldi confronted a regiment of italian soldiers to stop thising movement. they were afraid it would spark an international war. want garibaldi
setting off this war and setting france against italy. these soldiers asked them to lay down their arms. garibaldi was expecting the soldiers to come and join him. , twort -- a shot was fired bullets hit him, one in the sky and one in the ankle. thought he was going to be tried for rebellious treason and executed. thousands of people began italy.ng in doctors are coming from all over europe because the wounded his ankle with not heal. this is a huge event. are depicting
garibaldi with his wounded leg. they compared the festering wound with the stigmata and asigens were collect it relics by the people waiting outside the prison. obscure american german immigrant and she was given a post indiana. glory, he wrote and said he wanted him to come to america and since he has had beenk for italy,
blocked and that he was working in america. whole civilized world, he told terra baldy, garibaldi hoped to and he had satisfy the desire of the great american public. of which i am a citizen. and fights for universal liberty. garibaldi had made up his mind. lincoln is signing the proclamation, the emancipation proclamation, but it would not be known in europe until october 6. there are huge demonstrations and with his own, goes to the
press in vienna and was probably a little hard up for rent. went public with this correspondence. thereports went across wildfire -- went across like wildfire. he was none too pleased when he read the reports for the first time in the "new york times" while the slowly consort in vienna was making diplomacy on his own. in late hospital bed september, before he knew about lincoln's emancipation proclamation, garibaldi wrote a public letter to the english 3, dated october september 28. they won't know about the
emancipation proclamation until october 6. republicgreat american -- she is your daughter. risen from your bosom and struggling for the abolition of slavery. showed generously proclaimed by you, the british, help her escape from the terrible strife waged against her eye the traders -- traders in human flesh. letter to the english nation went through the international press and incited tremendous enthusiasm, not among everyone, but around -- among republicans and liberals in europe.
now this was a full throated endorsement of the union cause as a cause for universal liberty and this, before lincoln made his proclamation known to the world. at the same time, huge riots were breaking out in different parts of europe in favor of garibaldi against any efforts to execute him or try him. london, hyde park, 150,000 people gathered, not all of them for garibaldi, but many of them to give speeches and show their support and solidarity. , they of irish toughs thought hired by someone, came in in support of the pope with stilettos and shillelagh's flying. there was a melee in hyde park on two successive sundays after his letter to the english nation.
certainly and, --ers in europe, there was they were aware of the dangers of aligning themselves with this confederacy in america. the garibaldiint, andis caused a shakeup napoleon wanted nothing to do with any kind of joint intervention in america. earl russell said to charles francis adams, i bet you are glad garibaldi isn't causing all this trouble because we have nothing else to think about. until this garibaldi ruckus plays out, there's no chance of any recognition. garibaldi really helped save the
least force europe to pause in its lands for intervention. it wasn't just these great and illustrious leaders like garibaldi or the intellectuals like karl marx pronouncing on the american war. i took a great interest in foreign-born soldiers who fought this war, particularly for the union. this is something i think everybody knows the basic facts but the foreign-born immigrants soldier is a neglected subject and one that i think has been shrouded in a bit of embarrassment about how many foreign soldiers fought for the union.
of aan interesting example history. all you think you've read the history about the civil war, one dark corner about civil war history -- i want to show you some slides for the recruitment of foreign soldiers. garibaldi didn't come to america. but, tens of thousands of european soldiers and latin americans came just to fight the war. the foreign-born soldiers that fought for the union in the south were already here. they had been years and 1848. formed -- had soldiers like the red shirts who , oned to sign up and fight
ligation in germany -- this is a legation of the united states. overseas recruit during a war. of the hostlation nations neutrality. it had to be done quietly and unofficially, but it was done. one in four union soldiers were born in a foreign country. one in four. the records are incomplete does no one cared where they were born. a massiveis from statistical study done at the end of the war. wonderful collection that was
compiled and analyzed by benjamin gould from boston. he showed another 18% of union soldiers and sailors were the children of immigrants. together, 43% of the union army were immigrants and the sons of immigrants. of another 10% african-american soldiers and southern white soldiers who came as the selfion army was invaded. the union could never have won this war without the help of these immigrant soldiers. they report -- they supplied a replenishing stream during the war that helped relieve the political and economic strain of the draft and of this war of attrition.
evidenttical strain is in the new york city draft. unioner in 1963 when the imposed a draft. can democracies fight wars? can you force people to fight wars? it was still a question. the foreign source of recruitment was very important. let me turn to a few of these slides. let me go back just a little bit. is a german artist. the germans were experts at lithographs and this captures the idea. i don't know how well you can see it that these early founding
the indigenous looking liberty with the flag thenorn on the eagle and beneath them is this netherworld of enslaved peoples and a crocodile like king with a cotton mail as a body. a melodramatic, metaphorical image of what the war meant. artist fora scottish sheet music depicting a kind of withean-style lady liberty her cap, a symbol that went back to the french revolution and way back to ancient rome as a symbol of revolution. and other german artist depicting the allegory of
lincoln and the union on one side and the rebels on the other with justice glaring at jefferson davis. suggesting this artwork was produced in america by foreign immigrants filtering this war through the 19th century view of good and evil and expressing this as something between twowar territories in the united states, two different systems of society and different visions of the future. "punch" magazine. they were very clever. everyoned where not could read, these have much greater impact. guard is one of my
favorites. the 39th. they have a group of reenactors. i invited them. they are very colorful and they were organized early during the time these rumors were spread about garibaldi coming to america. hungarian whoed raised the garibaldi guard and it included some italians, a lot -- allans, swiss, french kinds of different people. the had young women and daughters of the regiment would come along and provide food. really splendid uniforms. appeal the multilingual
hungarians, swiss, patriots of all nations, fight for your adopted country. freedom fighters, german freedom fighters, arouse, arouse, arouse. it is your adopted country, patriotism being transferred. there is the garibaldi guard marching interview in front of abraham lincoln. they carried green sprigs in the god and people. this is said to be the same flag garibaldi defended in rome and here are the reenactors. i tried to find the one with michael bloomberg. .ook at those uniforms who wouldn't want to join the garibaldi guard?
after thedeled italians with the large plumes on top -- brilliant uniforms. german -- iu read had a german friend help me translate some of these. citizens, your country is in danger. germans were the largest foreign-born group, they are probably one of the least but many of them came with military experience. there was a universal conscription in russia and other german states. they came with military training and rose rapidly and brought a lot of experience american volunteers did not have. spinella -- an italian american
here in new york, really great at recruiting, terrible at leading troops in battle that a wonderful recruiter who appealed to foreign-born immigrants with this idea that this is not just their cause, it is our cause too. these are the symbols of what in europe they would call, "red republicanism." the red cap of liberty and revolution. lady liberty at her staff. very familiar to all americans.
cities of flame, schools and churches on the right as they go off to defend their country. there is liberty again. in these images, in this appeal soldiers,-born counties and inducements were advertised, but also iconography , to suggest that the battle that you or your parents bought -- fought in europe we are fighting here. between monarchy and republicanism. between slavery and freedom. listen to some of the immigrants
. i should mention that some of the confederates said that the union will not find its own war. they are hiring mercenaries. soldiers of fortune. a derogatory term now. bounties,ighting for for adventure, but they are not committed. the other implication is that they are not regular soldiers. they will not stand under fire. the is a criticism that americans made of the immigrant soldiers. the germans came in under a bad people were shouting orders, and people do not understand them and they were treated instead of charging. it was a lot of misunderstanding or i.
said there are not as many foreign-born soldiers as they claim. the yankees were not fight their own war. the expression about a rich man's war and a poor man's f ight. there was an embarrassment on the union side in an effort to downplay the role of immigrant soldiers. marshals said they are double and triple counted because they sign up to get a bounty, and then go down to the next county and sign up again. they are being counted three or four times. that was not true. there was a lot of bounty shunting, but it was not the immigrant soldiers. these were young men. the immigrant population was young, more mail. they had a larger proportion of the military population between 18 and 44.
immigrants made up only 15% of the population at this time. more in the north. 25% of thetute about union army. even when we break it down and ,ontrol it for the population they still were above quota. listen to the letters they have ridden home. a lot of these have been ignored for generations. a scholar translators a lot of the german letters and they are wonderful. men, 25 years old. full of patriotic spirit wrote to his parents from the battlefields of virginia and the first summer of war. even if i should die in the fight for freedom and the preservation of the union of this my adopted homeland, then you should not be too concerned for many brave sons of the
german fatherland have already died on the field of honor. more besides me will fall. much the same as it is in germany, the free and investors people of the north are fighting against the lazy and haughty younger spirit of the south. down with the aristocracy. a little simplistic, but here is explaining why he is fighting of what he is fighting for to his parents. favorites frommy a young irishman by the name of teacher welsh. peter welch went to boston with his wife and he had just gotten married. he had a young child. he went out and got into a big fight with the family and got very drunk. to try to retrieve his soiled honor he signed up as a volunteer for the massachusetts 28: tears. he went to war.
wrote thislater letter to his father-in-law. he had a lot of explaining to do. his father-in-law's back in ireland. it is written and very primitive english and the ideas are unsustainable. strange thatm very i should voluntarily join the bloody strife of the battlefield. here thousands of the sons and daughters of ireland have come to seek a refuge from tyranny, americaion at home and is ireland's referee huge, ireland's last hope. when we are fighting for america, we are fighting in the interest of ireland. blow, cuttingble with a two-edged sword. i do not know how his father-in-law responded to this. he reenlisted in 1864. and he died from wounds later that year.
whatever their motives, and they , the immigrant sold or gave the union and decisive advantage in what became a war of attrition rate -- of attrition. who could left the longest. the union had a great manpower advantage. but the confederacy had the advantage of a lot of separatist movements. you don't have to win, you just have to not lose. all doubt, leave the enemy and wait for the political consequences. the political consequences of prolonged war two -- where the enemy down. during the 1850's leading up to the war american immigration was at its all-time high. we reached up to 13%. it is a little bit below that now. but this was the all-time high
in american history just before the american civil war. inwas the largest migration human history, this one between 1815 and 1920 or so. over one half-million immigrants arrived on average per year, and then the war came. 1961t went below 92000 and and it stayed there the next year. what this meant was that the supply not only of soldiers but of labor was suddenly drying up. one of the ways in which the union opened up this flow of little-known,t is is the passage of the homestead act. the way i learned about the homestead act, it was american farmers out on the planes
holding houses and going out to nebraska and places to saddle the west great but it was also woman to immigrants. it invited them to come and establish a homestand and to get free land. this was a hallmark of the republican platform that they had been promising ever since they were organized as a party. it was a nation of independent producers, and of the government is telling benefits on people. it was a socialist program. these republicans back in the 19th century there is -- telling what they would do. all types of public works. as domesticnot policy, but as foreign policy as well. circular 19th, which he instructed all of the
components and counsel over latin america and to distribute publicity that america is open for business. freeome here and you get land. he just have to pay a little feed. suggested that the war is actually producing higher wages, more demand for labor. they are advertising not just free land and the west but they are recruiting at a time when that was officially illegal. not as soldiers but indirectly. it was very powerful. immediatelyey published a circular across the continent. it had a sensational effect. big long lines on front of the litigation. government was the cannot pay passage for these immigrants. but there was a way to work around that. offered now were being for union soldiers.
collectedes could be by anyone who recruited a soldier. nowas a thriving business and agents, runners they called and, go over to europe posting bills saying that there are great opportunities in america. pay your passage. on ship, then they could be recruited into the army. all kinds of inducements and so on and a portion of the bounty. so this traffic in recruits place.o take unofficially of course. they are not union employees, not government officials. but it was a way of circumventing the neutrality laws. overation went up to 200,000. a quarter million in 1863. and it continued and exploded then after the war. complained agents
that these union recruiters were grooming these helpless, ignorant immigrants into war using alcohol, wars, deceit. and they sent squads of agents to ireland posting bills reproduction letters of the pope who was decrying the massacres in america and denouncing this unholy war and trying to align the pope against these fanatical puritans in the north. let me finish up because i'm getting to the end here. at the end of the war, again, all of this publicity and this public diplomacy and an effort to massage public opinion, none of the diplomats knew what effect it had. historians said that's public
opinion. no, newspapers are trying to produce or to manipulate, to manage public opinion but you don't really what people think. in france there weren't open elections. you don't have a loft free expression outside of britain. when the end of the war came and when the news of lincoln's death came, there was an explosion of interest and public manifestation. and much of this came in resolutions, condolence letters. and in france, they raised money for metal for mrs. lincoln. it was called the tuso prescriptions, about 2 cents. and then a group called the committee of the french democracy led by victor hugo, a
number of others that i mentioned in my book organized this subscription, took it in and dragged it out as a kind of protest against the regime. and then they got money. they had to strike the metal outside of france and switzerland. then the library of congress when i was there doing my research i asked for it. i held it in my hand. great experience. that's my picture of it. and it's in the same little box that helen presented it to john biglow the ambassador when he told them in this little box is the heart of france, tell mrs. lincoln. the idea of the encryption on this says that lincoln, an honest man abolished slavery, establish the union, the
republic without unveiling the statue of liberty. that caught my eye, that's a metaphorical expression that comes from the french revolution. and it just means that you did not squash liberty during this war. but it was at this same time that there was idea for a more permanent monument and some suggested it should be raised by the french but in new york city. to lincoln, to america, to the shared ideas of liberty, it was unclear but in labulays living room with a young artist to his face in the summer of 1865. france we had processed society. but 10 years later or after live fully the third is
overthrown it is revised. love lanes one of the organizers of it. it took 10 years for construction get underway. 1870's one can see the statue of liberty. liberty lighting the world rising over the streets of paris 10 years in addition in 1886 it it was finally, the pedestal was created here in new york irving and it was raised. and by that time and have become the monument to american immigrants, welcoming the immigrants. give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to live free. all those are wonderful sentiments. i think it has lost the original meaning of liberty and lightning the world with the lamp of liberty illuminating not just the atlantic war but all seven continents of the world.
this is the world's greatest monument to war that was fought not just for america but for cause of all nations. [applause] thank you very, very much. the draft riots by the irish had to cover in the foreign media and how did opposing sides used it or tried to use it or deal with it, excuse it or whatever. >> that was a great deal of interest in that. remember this was right after the battle of gettysburg. i think a lot of historians believe gettysburg, that's the decisive battling that turns back the tide.
it wasn't. there was still a great deal interest in the war and in the possibilities of the war. feel that sooner or later, the union would just wear down. there was drama and caught the attention of all lot of foreigners. this was something that gave hope to those who sided with the confederacy for sure. >> thank you. harold wrote a book about lincoln and the press and how he affected the media. i'm just curious how much of them were there? >> they traveled to the south for months and writes letters
and it was that the south is not just engaged in a temporary uprising. this is -- this is a real war for independents and they're not going to give up easily. and second the union is not prepared to put it down. he reported the battle of bull run. we saw this reckless retreat. also that left an impression on europeans that the south was not goings to be defeated easily and that this -- you can't force a dissident territory, people back into a nation especially a democratic society. so he gave a lot of encouragement to the -- to that point of view. >> ok. i'm most skeptical about the
idea of europeans particularly english supporter of the confederacy. i mean, they had to realize that an independent confederacy would mean eventually they're going to be an industrialized confederacy using slave labor which would mean -- which would compete directly with their industrial capacity with a workforce that -- that provided no market whatsoever. >> i don't see any concerns about the future of the south as an industrial power. i think the british qualms had to do a lot more with the whole idea of helping to perpetuate a slave society. there was very strong anti-slavery but in britain -- but i don't think that the industrial competition of the south was a major factor in their thinking.
>> one thing that's confusing for me is the perception of the europeans that this was a battle for democracy or a republican form of democracy monarchy and correct me if i'm wrong. my understanding is that the south of the confederacy or the would be confederate state was set up as a democratic republic. which they put in something protective. and slavery wouldn't be the difference between the two because the north had slaves and america was very much a slave holding republic when you look at the south and the states that had it. i don't know if there was himi don't know if there was anymore, you know, universal suffrage in the north and in the south. i think the north had legislation and a congress, some form of democracy. so how did the idea arise that this was really a struggle against monarchy rather than a struggle against the north america having too democratic
republics rather than one. and one would perhaps is slaves and the other one not as many slaves. >> logically you're right. the constitution, it's essentially downloaded version of the old constitution. the amendments were, some of them compromised democracy. they had a one-year term, six-term presidency. there was no repudiation of republican principles or democratic practices, you're right. guarantees that slavery was the main difference that slavery had been there before. what it did was to give them safety. the ebbs of logic and the empirical event of the south as a monarchist ally, this was part
of the public diplomacy that the south was itself claiming that it was rebelling in part against the extreme fanatical authoritarianism and refusing this mob rule. and many europeans say we are an anglo-saxon. to the french they would say we are anglo or mans we come from louisiana, koreas and from south carolina and so there was a different spin on that. but still we are aristocratic. they were the best people in the south to govern. but you're right they had it in the ever piled republican party. these rumors that the south
wanted to go monarchists. they wanted him to hear it. that was part of their effort to kind of align themselves with them. your fight is our fight. we also are opposed to this extreme democracy that is the threatening. revolutionary upheaval from time to time. a lot of times we have to be the coach from the field. >> there's a fall-out affect that soldiers fighting in subsequent war like the greek war of independence. but also the latin american
wars. i wonder if there's a and you know, getting involved. in like the -- something like that. >> you see veterans from the america civil war fighting, many unions of veterans came over the border to mexico and fight with juarez who was executed in 1876. most were found in 1870 fighting again to overthrow tyranny. soldiers of fortune. that tradition, i think there is a lot of that in the 19th centuries who see their call not just as national but transnational. >> you mentioned russia at the beginning but i didn't hear that developed at all. could you comment about the -- the russian siding with the union and why that would have
there's at the end of the book i talk about the retreat of empire. they're kind of like vultures, france, others coming in to surround it. and at the end it can set it up. france withdraws from mexico. spain withdraws from santo domingo. >> alexander ii was inspired to feed them because of abraham lincoln's election and he saw this as the wave of the future. and the russians also were still feeling lingering grudges against the british and the french from the crimean war.
naples and affinity -- they felt an affinity with the united states. during the war, the polls rise against russians. and the polls i should have given them more credit because they hoped to upset these plans for intervention and to stymied the great powers, what looked like another possibility for the continental war. they send their fleets over to new york stand and to -- and the new york's coverage's time is perfect. there are other reasons for them to come here. but it was used by the united
states as a show of solidarity with the united states from their friends, the russians. >> two items. first of all the agreement between britain, spain, and secondly, find it sort of ironic that the only republican europe at that time was switzerland, yes, history shows that consequently switzerland was the last country to allow suffrage for women. they didn't get women the vote until 1971. >> switzerland was not always the same progressive. but it was a republic
established in 1948. modeled after the united states. it was a refuge for a lot of republican europe. and the only republic of any type. i deal with another tiny one from san marino. and there are other germans' states. she wrote a letter, congratulations to abraham lincoln and awarded him citizenship. i did a story on that for the new york times. and that renewed a letter to the president. honorary citizenship of san marino. wonderful story. that takes us back to 1300 and spanishritish and
joined in the allied invasion. city,arch toward mexico and later in april the spanish and then the british hold out. in the french win on to have low -- went on to the next town on the fifth of where they were may. where they were nobly defeated by the republican forces of juarez. and with that the invasion of mexico was postponed for year, where the union made great progress militarily, and the french if they had gotten to it 1862 instead of 1963 -- 1863, that would have changed drastically the situation with mexico and much of latin america. >> why didn't england and spain pull out? >> well, because they realized that the french was on this lunatic mission of installing
the european prints and imposing an elected government which was collecting debts. actually the british knew full well. they were there so they had to curve his enthusiasm for this. disastrous project it has turned out. and some things the british wanted napoleon with the support. >> did they only support the south because they were
anti-republican or was there anyone in europe who actually believed slavery was morally correct? >> that's a good question. officially no nation recognized the south. several declared neutrality and awarded what they called belligerent status. no, there's not war. the -- the -- but by support, some of the in britain and france wanted the south to win because you it would mean that an independent south would train cot month without any tariff's taxing on their imports and so the cost of it would go down. their profits would increase and
so there was an economic interest in that. but on the other side of that was the cost. slavery. it was humanitarian, rumors in europe but they were very concerned that they could not afford it politically. france and especially if the liberal public did not want any part to of helping to give birth to this nation. it's not just that they add slavery but the building was to perpetuate safety forever. that's what his constitution said. >> very compelling. the union army was the most powerful around the entire
world. >> yes. a million man in armies. they put together in this "short navy." he took all the diplomats from washington. and took them on tour. i want you to see what we're doing. you're saying this nation at war and this capital fortified and at war. i think that took a lesson from that. but yes, they saw a huge one. the most important thing is they expanded the army. and to use that army and that navy to expand to take -- first of all, to entice mexico. >> wow, ok.
>> first, i'd like to congratulate you because it didn't seem like you piled on to all of those books. you had a fresh enlightenment on this and that. the question is do you perceive the monroe doctrine would have been enforced and would have prevented the dominican republic re-expansion? and with this allied invasion have worked at there had not been the destruction of the confederacy? >> they wouldn't dare it. but so the debacle in america you see plays out.
from our own doctrine,e, the munro it was an incentive. the latin american countries were still struggling for independence. they landed at tampico and tried to take back mexico. threat in britain and france that using texas to try to gain a foothold in the north american continent. britain and canada in the pacific northwest. the munro doctrine were saying no more colonization. they didn't have the military power to back it up in 1860. but they did in 1865 because those europeans moved out pretty quickly.
i will end my compliments on a great presentation and a great job fielding a variety of questions. the british and the possibility of british intervention. i wanted to give you an opportunity to go back. one thing you're trying to do if you want to keep the british outcome is stopping british ships on the high seas with the union navy. maybe you want to talk about that a little bit. >> this is the trent affair you're talking about? in november of 1861, the two confederate envoys john slidell and james mason were coming but -- by ship, by british ship. the trent. a union naval officer apprehended them on the high seas then took these two men and secretaries off the ship.
this was an affront of british intelligence -- neutrality, they claimed. it was a long legal argument but britain very nearly came to war. in november, december of 1862 the war drums were beating. they were in a fever for war. it was a matter of honor. it did not harm them materially. it suggests they were looking for an excuse. the press was whipping it up. men -- andthe words here, the men went over without knowing it was going to blow up. but he went to another new yorker.
he also got a few other men. what do they have to do with diplomacy? a great crucial role. i have more in the book then i can share here. played a very crucial war in diffusing that incident. give us a face-saving way out of this. wasalso the other factor prince albert. he softened the language and demand that british made on the lincoln administration. then he died. the queen was in mourning. all of london was in mourning. , theally helped to defuse actions that were taken. it's another example of how close we came to world war i in 1861.
>> how do you account for the fact that they needed a blockade? the south was getting stuff from europe, specifically from britain. and two grams of yellow diamond, how did that happen? >> first of all, it's one thing to declare a campaign and another thing to enforce it. they didn't have much of a navy. so it's hard to enforce. the other thing they had was avenues into the confederacy. when was in mexico. and so they could land in matamoros and bring things into the confederacy. yes? [indiscernible] >> yeah. yes, they knew and they did everything they could to stop it.
you couldn't really be enforced effectively until they built a more powerful navy. there's one additional question here that he had his hand up forever and no one saw him. could we just get one more? >> was there a litigation in europe in 1830? >> yes. britain has abolished all slavery in 1833 and france had abolished it in now, russia has 1848. announced the emancipation of the serfs. and so the only european country that allowed it was spain. and then the empire of brazil and of course, it was an independent country.
so the american south, cuba, and puerto rico, and brazil where the only places where slavery was legal, african-american slavery. it's telling that they would end slavery after the american civil war. as the confederacy failed. >> dr. doyle, thank you. [applause] >> good question. thanks very much. [applause] ,> thank you for your support and for the kids just saying now. . thank you. my hope is that the women of the future will feel truly furry, to follow whatever path their
nature calls the. m. thought whitehey --se was dole, unglamorous, was dole and glamorous. all they saw were the parties and meeting people. i have to tell you, i never worked harder in my life. >> nancy reagan served as long partner,tical ferocious protector, and ultimately caretaker for president ronald reagan. and involves first later she was involved with key staff decisions, and campaigning. eastern on 8:00 p.m. c-span original series first adies, influence