fight harder. prisonered the exchange breakdown and the potential for positive postwar relations. for us today, including the story of black sentinels in helps us toalso better understand the means and methods of retaliatory methods used in the war and the degrees of compliance with the labor code, especially this idea of humiliation. watch the entire program on on colored troops as prisoner guards on c-span3's american history tv. c-span, where history unfolds daily. 1970 nine, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. up next on american

history tv, texas christian university history professor jean smith talks about thomas jefferson's challenges with the louisiana purchase treaty. he discusses jefferson's concerns over whether it was unconstitutional come at the resistance from the federalist party, and the territories inhabitants demands. > >> hello, everyone. welcome to the seminar room under the dome on the fourth floor. i am doing this for television, so excuse my formality. i am a professor of history here at the university of missouri and the director of the institute on constitutional democracy. tonight, we celebrate constitution day 2017. constitution day was on sunday this past year, so we decided to

the clear it constitution week with two speakers. we would like to thank the council providing grant that allows us to double and add a second speaker, and force th fon coming tonight. i also wanted to give an explanation, a formal thectation is of what candor institute is. founded in 2014, the institute is a joint project of 20 university of missouri and political science and history departments and cooperation with other scholars across campuses. researchicated to teaching and community engagement on the subject of american political thought and history seen in the broad context through a wide variety of perspectives. he was created through a generous gift through the candor

foundation. are so grateful for the candor supporting the humanities among the many philanthropic endeavors they could have. i hope it the candor institute is to teach and learn about american constitutional democracy as the founders created it, but not just that. we want to understand the ideas that inspired the founders. we want to understand our shortcomings and accomplishments come the changes it has gone through. finally, here is a big win, we want to model what we like to think of as the truce. of constitutional democracy and academia properly understood. justice for all and renewal of our democracy through searching inquiry and vigorous discussion. finally, let me just say you can find all about the candor institute and all of our programs online and on twitter.

to introduce tonight speaker, i would like to turn it over to our good friend and partner in , executiveors director of the missouri council and a distinguished historian in his own right. steve. [applause] >> thank you for that wonderful introduction. i've never been called honorable. could you say it again? want to thank everybody for being here tonight. this is a fantastic crowd. i promise you that my colleague will not disappoint you. he can talk about anything. it will be a great lecture tonight. he has been a history professor at tcu for over four decades. during that time, he has published numerous books and articles on american territorial expansion.

a grad student, phd mississippi state, this is one of the first books i read. one of the most recent ones, the slaves gamble, the war of 1812, a fantastic look. he does early american warfare, naval maritime history, and has received numerous awards. he has served as a museum curator and was a distinguished chair of naval heritage at the u.s. naval academy. he is currently serving as the which isof the center at tcu, and i would be a mess if i did not tell you he is a rabid tigers fan. he is actually going to be at the game saturday routing on the .igers, his alma mater

please welcome jean helen smith. [applause] -- jean allen smith. , thank you so much for letting me come here and bore you today. i am happy to be here. they said i had about an hour, between our -- between an hour and two hours to talk to you. before i begin, i would certainly like to us -- like to thank the humanitarian council for the opportunity to be here. thinks without saying, steve and the university. and thank you guys for taking time out of your day. 6:00, so it is almost happy our time. the fact you are here today speaks highly of your desire to learn and hopefully be

entertained. if you can't tell, i'm not from misery. -- for missouri. i grew up in a southern baptist church. i sometimes have that desire to pound the podium and have someone scream out hallelujah. feel so moved, please do so. what i want to talk to you today about is thomas jefferson, and really look at his concept of and thenrt of liberty look at louisiana and how louisiana and the state of missouri become a part of this union. jefferson is an idealist. certainly he is an idealist. his idealism doesn't always conflate or certainly matchup with his realism. they are two very different things.

that many years ago without working on my own project about thomas jefferson and the navy. the reality of the world in which he lived was something different. jefferson's united states is an unfinished republic. it is an empire of liberty that was rough, unfinished. it was a land of unlimited potential. it could and would be exploited by u.s. government. and in his inaugural address, jefferson said the united states was a chosen country. ouraid it would ruin up descendents to the 100,000th generation. jefferson was specific about calculating time. he calculated a generation at 30 years.

the thousandth generation would be 30,000 years. he saying there is enough land here between 3000 and 30,000 years. of course we know that is not right. there is nothing right about that whatsoever. -- i can'tuy remember his name. but he said there was enough land for 500 years. know by 1890 the frontier has banished. there is no longer a frontier in american history. the idea that there was enough land for 100,000 generations was absolutely ridiculous. jefferson also said it is not impossible to look forward when rapidtimes multiplication will expand

itself and cover the northern if not southern continent. that is confined. on the north confined by the great lakes. on the west combined by the in mississippi river. and not only is it confined, it is confined by enemies. to the north there are british. in the west there are native americans or indians. and to the south and west there are also spaniards. all of these groups pose a threat to jefferson's vision of an empire of liberty. he knew for his empire of liberty to be successful he had to remove these threats. if he did so it would preserve the young republics cherished principles and imperialistic europe. here lies major challenges.

remember i said jefferson is an idealist. the waywn mind, here's he rationalized creating a new republic, a larger republic. the time most americans believe a large republic was inevitably doomed to fail. because large republics cannot sustain themselves. they collapse from their own corruption. jefferson said this republic will not do that because certain things. it wouldot territory satisfy that energetic nature of our government. allow people to just share in their own rule. those chosen people would have a chance to buy land at low prices.

once you bought that land, the revenue drive would extinguish the nations that. once that happened jefferson believed it would create this government which would be founded on the ideas and contracts of agreement. that's very idealistic. is going toerson find these ideals hard to employ. jefferson presided over the expansion of the country. we know it is not by accident. ohio has admitted at the 17th state in kentucky and the original 13, that same year

indiana becomes a territory. indicated is that americans were looking to the west, as i often say in my class. far as the eye can see there was land. land waiting to be taken. for jefferson this was his empire of liberty. the purchase of louisiana in 1803 theoretically solved jefferson's problem. it provided the security of the mississippi river. forlso provided the hope the future, for those human farmers. i tell my students all the time it would let jefferson create his vision of a perfect world where everybody had a white picket fence, a two carb garage

and a beamerrage and a land rover. the louisiana purchase also debate intense political over this concept of what a and less empire would be. from the beginning jefferson, who had been the strict construction, someone who adhere to the words of the constitution, he had to rationalize how can i purchase louisiana. he drafted to versions of a constitutional amendment that would give the president the power to do so. abandoned both of those after concluding these revisions were neither feasible nor necessary. he looked at article two, section two of the constitution and says it grants the power to negotiate treaties, he shall have power with the advice and

consent of the senate to make treaties providing two thirds of the present. then he could make a treaty to purchase land. treasury asretary only wayended that the of extending the country's territory by treaty could not be be ifidential power would the constitution specifically excluded it. we know in the narrative of american history this is one of the great flip-flops. the strict constructionist and at this point he is going to adopt a broader view of the constitution. for jefferson, he looked at this strict construction.

he wanted to stay within the bounds, but he was ultimately willing to acquiesce if congress approved the treaty. during the debate over this, they were going to attack this treaty remorse they. one of the first arguments they have is does the president have the power to do this? jefferson is able to refute that. he is able to deflect that particular charge. then does france have the power to sell this? friends had secured louisiana territory from spain. said france did not use it, then spain would be given that territory back.

napoleon does not return it to spain. he sells it to the only country that could pay money for it. the unites states buys louisiana, burroughs money from british merchants, british banking houses, money that would be loaned by the british, paid the americans, paid to france, and then france and the plan was spend that money. it's a perfect circle. funding warfare. then there were the new england federalists who saw some thing that scared them to death. the idea that this would create a nexus of people from new england to the west. many new england speculators and entrepreneurs, thinking that by in northern new england and western new york, that ultimately they would be

able to make money on that land. the louisiana purchase was going to open up lots of land to the west. now these onto governors and merchants are we can't oh my god, compete with this cheap land to the west. louisiana posed a threat to their commercial interests as well. ofn there was this fear foreigners. sounds familiar today. spaniards and frenchmen who had -- who cannot be expected to take two republican government. argument,he unspoken the one about race or slavery. convinced thate

with each new western state than most likely founded under republican regime it would be republican. and it would be slaveholding. while diluting the power of new england federalism. this, of course is going to lead to plans for separation. it begins during jefferson's first term. to create a plan to break off from the united states. the senate is going to quietly endorsed the treaty by 24-7 vote. and jefferson and the republicans had to stomach this change. the party that previously championed state reconstruction

is him, they had 10 now back off of that. ultimately what they would do, the party that cried out with all of a sudden this party now will adopt from article one section eight the inherent powers clauses using the necessary and proper clause and the general welfare clause. what is happening here is republicans are using any expediency they can find to justify their actions. that jefferson the idealist is telling us one thing, jefferson the realist is doing something completely different. winning the vote for the purchase of louisiana is one

thing. incorporating it into the union under the constitution would be far more difficult. the debates in congress at the fall of winter 1804 were intense. they knew this would have ramifications for other territories. how would the country incorporate louisiana a echo jefferson and the republicans argued through article three of the treaty. i don't need to read this to you. the most important part of this is the last clause. they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property and religion, which they professed. of compact idea

inequality. federalist and even some republicans would argue they could not incorporate louisiana. absolutely too many foreigners. ring them to you the american experiment echo most federalists and many republicans thought they cannot he brought in. , a new hampshire republicangested our government derives its authority and momentum from the frequent meetings of the mass of the people of towns and county assembly. louisianaition of would hasten the dissolution of that kind of participatory democracy.

the problem is the united states had a model by which we incorporated territories into states. landlord and its and northwest ordinance created a method by which the survey land, you organize that land and you created a government and brought it into the union. that is the method by which louisiana could be wrought into the union. louisiana as soon as it's purchased have 50,000 habitants. they were going to be adamant about protecting their rights and being given what they believe was rightfully theirs.

this northwest ordinance creates a method. we incorporated mississippi in 1978. it worked when there weren't a lot of foreigners. how do you do that? back, they hearken her to 1774, in which after britain had in the process of creating its north american empire had respected the right of frenchmen and quebec, had respected their language, it's and their culture, imperialistic model.

why not? thatbelieve universally public groove, what is going to happen? it's going to collapse. going to fall into corruption. the policy have to reap the benefits of a new expansion while implementing certain safeguards that incorporated louisiana in a methodical method. , congressmen were absolutely's -- aptly scared to these -- scared to

death. he said louisiana's white residents were not familiar with the american model, and in fact they were too ignorant to elect suitable men. well maybe it was more to hit the nail on the head. we can not and should only make them citizens. rather than be outnumbered in their own republic. creating that static an empire. area and then the we could eventually allow them

so it would be a slow maturation process. oldof my favorites is good pennsylvania. he's actually a frenchman. my french was not good as you can tell. i grew up in alabama. spanish,ak a little brito, taco, that kind of thing. john lucas were not prepared to receive the principles of the american government. how do you make them prepared? you can only do that through naturalize ancient. you had to naturalize these people.

even the federalist newspaper asked can be conceived that these people befriend up in arms of destitute? are they with it or of constitution, our nature -- our language, or manners, qualified to have the same influence in the senate as two senators from virginia or maryland or pennsylvania? these federalists certainly did not. they had been reared on despotism. up for you it distinctly when he acknowledged neither conquests nor purchase can incorporate them into the union. they must remain in condition of

colonies and be governed accordingly. herehas been highlighted is territory. incorporating people and to the american nation is far more difficult and impossible. the acquisition would strengthen the inequity of the 3/5 compromise and fisher reigns cut right to the heart of the matter in which he argued a large nation would create separation. separation to protect the northern states from the corrupt andcorrupting influence oppression of the aristocratic democrats of the south. the white and black population will mark the boundary.

willritish providence become members of the northern confederacy. he is talking about is the possibility of the union already breaking apart. john lucas came up with a plan for naturalization. you guys know what it is. we still have it today. process, a legal process in which you become the citizen of a country. sometimes different benchmarks have to be met. in our country you have to file for petition. the literate in the english language, although that is debatable. b of a good moral character, sometimes in question as well. they take a test. i imagine most all of you could easily pass the test.

take the oh so allegiance, this affirmative. the naturalization act was very similar. the head one year in the state. had to be good moral character. after the louisiana purchase there was an addendum added to alienshich basically set residing in the u.s. between 98 and 1802 without previous declaration were naturalized automatically. that's before the louisiana purchase. put the had decided to government into place in the southwest first, republicans created a vision of citizenship that was adapted tule -- adapted

to louisiana, rooted in the protection of basic civil liberties while abandoning the probationary naturalization period. republicans interpreted it in end,-- as the means to an rather the end -- rather than the end in and of itself. they would become americans. the quality would make louisiana and sent to americans while making of people appreciate the advantages of american -- advantages of a member -- advantages of membership. it made the territorial process, the territorial system itself

the process of naturalization. , and this notants is written by thomas jefferson, introduced by john breckenridge, the kentucky politician who had introduced jeffersons kentucky resolution in 1798. what it was going to do was permit the president to appoint a governor and appoint a council by which to rule in louisiana. this oligarchy, the small group will have theower chance to introduce american andoms, american laws, slowly bring louisiana's into the union.

processeavy-handed based on the realism jefferson encountered. this act creates a structure, a government structure. it creates a way to deal with even slavery. and it prohibits the born slave trade. by doing that it meant there would not be slaves brought in whatever slave insurrections. a system byted which slaveholders from the east are able to sell their slaves to the west to louisiana, thereby merging the sudden interest of the publicth interest and prosperity of louisiana.

create a thriving republic. louisiana will remain a territory from march 1804 to june 18 oh 12 -- 1812. exceeding by three years the length of time it took to become a net realized citizen. when louisiana becomes a state its inhabitants will become citizens. the fact jeffersons process had notn so long, believe it or it really ticked them off. protests thattant they are not being treated fairly. the fact that jefferson's system did protect slavery and their institution would pay great evidence by the war of 1812.

and by the fall of 1814 engineering 1815 british agents were operating in louisiana waters. does affectng to the spanish and french population. they were trying to turn them against the americans. british agents try to encourage the free men of color to side with britain. also trying to encourage slaves to rebel. and jackson is able to cooperate with the british. he convinced them to side with the americans. jackson even promised, equality to free men of color. and he promised freedom to slaves. promises, these jackson is able to mobilize a multiethnic cosmopolitan population that is able to defeat the british on january 8,

1815. safe new orleans, save louisiana, and by doing so he earned the respect of the citizens and goodwill of the nation. those free men of color that had been promised equality never quite achieved that equality. and the slaves were promised freedom were never given freedom. there again, political reality versus idealism. when louisiana became a state in 1812, the original louisiana territory becomes the missouri territory. if you probably know in your own louisianaat the purchase was two territories, the southern part was the territory of orleans, that becomes louisiana.

the northern part was the louisiana territory. louisiana becomes a stated becomes the missouri territory. 1812, missouri organizes five administrative units, counties. since louisiana had emerged as a slave state, people in missouri were adamant that slaves and would also be permitted in missouri. reportedly several planters had brought their slaves thousands of slaves with them into the area believing congress would do nothing about the institution. ultimately the slavery plantation agriculture was not going to prosper in this territory. happen is thatto

him could be a commercial crop that could be acceptable for agriculture. be by 1820 there could 10,000 slaves. there were be the belief that missouri would be a slave state. however february 1819, introducing resolution that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude would be permitted, and slaves would be freed by age 25. by this time the proverbial feces hit the fan. proslavery republicans countered how much was claimed by saying the constitution had long been

interpreted as having relinked any claim to slavery in territory and state. the free inhabitants of missouri had the right to establish or disestablish slavery. exclusive of the central government under the louisiana purchase treaty article three. they shall be maintained and , which they profess. that is jeffersons heavy-handed compact equality. and washington, rather than debate the moral question, congress would focus on the constitutional issues. in louisiana at had been the question of incorporating

with their naturalization and hopefully the federal government had ignored the issues and counted territorial status. in missouri the question will be about whether the federal government could put restrictions on the admission process. delegate will argue, using article three of that louisiana purchase treaty that congress cannot prohibit slavery in any territory or state. once a territory had a requisite population, it should be incorporated into the union with all the rights, advantages, communities as other citizens of the united states. there a faulty argument here.

later the supreme court would .ule into particular cases the case of 1889, congress could pass legislation. the argument for specious to begin with. howoff told story about henry clay negotiates and to the , that missouri would enter as a slave state, maine would separate from massachusetts to be a free state. -- not would not be able be allowed above that 30 minute line.

congress agreed -- the did not anticipate there would be one final step. one final step that had the proved. that final step was missouri drafting a constitution. i'm not going to read it to you because it is this end to more paragraphs. what it is really telling us is , the missouriri constitution made it illegal for the states to free slaves without owner's consent, it permitted slavery, it made the institutional and pop -- made the institution impossible to end and they had to make whatever laws necessary to prevent free blacks and malala's from entering the state.

missourians were angry. to them there were different sets of rules being placed on them to enter the union. about ae angry government from the east. they are angry about the bank of the united states, alleviating the economic depression. they are angry about, almost everything. and then the anti-slavery elements. to delayoing to try further missouri's entrance into the union. two, which said citizens of each state shall be entitled and immunitieses

of citizens of several states. the second debate over this becomes a debated to nuance and interpretation of specific words. the second debate is a debate over slavery and political power. what missouri was doing was not by kentucky, ileana come -- kentucky, indiana, illinois. illinois had instituted the most slave codes inck the north. the cutters changing after the war of 1812. during the war british agents had operated in the chesapeake play operation. -- chesapeake bay operation.

they had liberated slaves, they and theyoyed farms, had liberated 4800 slaves that the vacuum to -- that they evacuated area -- evacuated. after the war, virginia and maryland implement very repressive slave statues. -- statutes. georgia bands manumission. delaware closed airport is to free blacks. states realized they had to protect their own institution. so in february 1821, henry clay offers another compromise. this time missouri would agree to enter in equal terms with the

original state. condition that the prohibition against free blacks in this constitution shall never be construed to authorize the passage of any law by which any citizen of the states of the union shall be excluded from enjoyment of any immunities to which such citizens are entitled under the constitution of the united states. terms, missouri had to admit or even declare, without amending or even , thatng its constitution the exclusion of free blacks meant not what it clearly said. so they said one thing and meant something else. louisiana andr

misery entering the union is really about political power over slavery. the louisiana it's about future of the west and the declining implement of the -- of new england and the atlantic. for missouri it's about slavery and the increasing political influence of the 3/5 compromise. politicians chose political expediency. ease to deflect from the real question. the real question was how to incorporate foreigners. in missouri the real question was how to incorporate the territory into the union without restriction. instances, the winning sides used article three. to bolster the arguments. in both instances once they won,

the victors easily overlooked and ignored what they had promised. in louisiana they simply use the territorial period to naturalize foreigners. the constitution was simply reinterpreted. the words were changed to miliary the opposition. both of these oppositions reveal to us something which you probably understand, throughout american history medical expediency almost always prevails over political reality. thank you very much, guys. >> we have time for a few questions.

make up questions, i will make up answers. >> remember the ground rules about blue mike -- the boom mic. >> i teach the american presidency. as i was listening to your talk, i was really struck by this tension between realism and idealism. >> doesn't it sound like today? history they seem to have a convenient interpretation of the constitution to fit their policy needs all the way through obama and trump. so i wonder what you think it is about the nature of the presidency itself or the constitution that creates this tension? i'm convinced that during campaigns candidates make becomes that when they

in charge they realize they cannot fulfill. ways toe to figure out keep their constituencies instance, and in that constitutional's googles always take a backseat to political reality. other questions? >> isn't that partly because the constitution is so flexible? >> that living breathing organ we constantly reinterpret. if you listen to certain americans today when they own their nightly news. they know is a very different constitution than the one we knew.

>> why did the 3/5, might turn out to be 3/5 and not 5/8? >> does during the constitutional convention. countrners wanted to slaves for taxation representational purposes. you had southerners who wanted to count them for representational purposes but not taxation purposes. south carolina threatened to leave the concession -- leave the convention. the 3/5 compromise is one of those. >> one thing when you are speak about the incorporation from louisiana's that she didn't mention what i think was a big factor, the religious factor.

and i just wondered if you could expand on that a little bit. french romanwas catholic. there is true and is concerned that these roman catholics would owe their allegiance and obedience to the pope. americans -- one cc claiborne's appointed governor, he is costly reporting back to jefferson and madison, the secretary of state. we need to tread lightly on their constitutional right. we have to be sure we respect their religion, we have to respect their speech, religion, cultures, institution. he comments on this, the fact he doesn't speak french, it cost him immense grief during his territorial governorship.

here is a guy who doesn't speak french, and he tries to work with the people. when they have the election, guess who's elected governor. he had won them over over the course of eight years. that's what jefferson anticipated. through this process of compact equality -- it is heavy-handed because you are not giving them a chance to govern themselves and you are placing rule on them. he hasaiborne gets there to give jefferson recommendations as to who should be on the council. he has to get people who will be supportive of the american , but they have to be well respected in their own communities. it becomes a problematic headache.

we all look at it. >> thank you for your talk. speak tod if you could the idea that jefferson's own or lack thereof to find his goals to deal with empire of liberty. >> jefferson, if there is anything -- in modern terms you may call him agnostic. he believes in something, but he doesn't want those shackles of religion to control their lives, so the idea that when you bring a new territory into the country , you have to create a system by religion can be the adhesive that holds everything together, but it cannot be the adhesive that

smothers the government. he is convinced religion has some role, can play some role in but it can't be an all-consuming role. >> obviously this was a period with some growing pains. problemsmilar kind of with states even further west. >> luta what happens in california 30 years later. california, it goes from being mexican province to immediately petitioning for statehood. question is would slavery be permitted in california? is a huge compromise that ultimately says no, slavery would not he permitted.

-- not be permitted. look at the case of nevada. that is railroaded into the union to the american civil war. you need all of the electrical votes you can get. they give him those three electoral votes they thought would put him over the top three -- overats mcclellan the top. he beats mcclellan pretty handily. problematic keeps popping up, doesn't it? ofhow did the rhetoric thomas jefferson manifest itself in the rhetoric of james madison, james monroe with the monroe doctrine? how did they play a part?

>> i have an entire chapter which talks about jefferson, madison, and monroe's vision of an empire. jefferson is willing to much more articulate an idea of how to create an empire. none of these guys sit down and say if we are going to create an empire we need to do one-to-3-4. ultimately what happens is and vision idea becomes realized in the louisiana purchase. madison's vision is going to be more realistically realized in what is called the baton rouge rebellion. don't know anything about this it is september 1810. there are a group of americans living around baton rouge louisiana.

they basically say we have had enough of the spanish rule and they store the dilapidated spanish fort. they seize control. surrenders.r these americans call a convention. one of the first things they do is create a flag. a lieu flag with a single white star. that white star can join the constellation, the stars & stripes. they draft a constitution which looks eerily like the u.s. constitution. they send that the president madison saying we want to join the union. madison kind of sits on it.

he finally does say that west water and was part of the louisiana purchase all along. the whole idea of letting people themselves define their own identity. is not government getting involved, not threatening war, not dragging it into a war. these people are making their own decision. the governor invited americans to come to florida and said i wish 100,000 would go there. the whole idea of conquering that war, it works perfectly because there are a lot of americans there and few spaniards there. it's only a matter of time. to monroe, munro

sees himself as the diplomat of the revolution and he wants to export revolution. it will create american style republics around the world. document.aft that monroe's hand is pretty heavily involved. in western collection of states would be off-limits to the old world. they could form these american-style republicans in the united states. there are all three very interested in expansion and would be -- would be so throughout their lifetime.

>> i wonder how you might rationalize the citizenship of native americans and our response to that. how theyd tell you would rationalize, the liquid in indian would be a dead indian, that's what they would have believed. the idea that even jefferson to some extent believed that indians were blocking the progress of white civilization, could they be incorporated? jefferson said they could be if they are willing to accept the white man's ways. too often when you look at the creek war, when you look at a little later, the reluctance of ,he cherokee, to move west jefferson madison, monroe,

saying you have to get these people out of the way so you can create this empire of liberty, create his american dream. >> i think that is all the time we have tonight. [applause] >> i guess i can hang around for a few minutes. beat up onwants to me, ask questions. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> you are watching american history tv all weekend every weekend on c-span3. sais --on facebook on on c-span history. >> middle tennessee state

university professor ashley riley teaches a class on native americans and capitalism in early 19th-century california. here's a preview. beads with thee colors often demanded by indian consumers. likely to have been used as ceremonial and dormant during dances and other religious ceremonies. the ability to earn bees through work, especially of exotic material like glass would have been a tremendous economic asset. unlike other indians who you might trade with, imagine if you had to go out and get the clamshell, those are laden with value that reflects efforts. you have these jerks.

so they can do things like we will only have the red ones. they did not understand the value of the beads they were trading for. we are getting away something we don't need in exchange for money from heaven. access to a new source of cash would make anybody a rock star in their own community. it elevates the status of indian to have economic connections that would allow them to access these. not just the value of the beads in hand, but for the potential future beads that they could provide. i could have beads in the future as well. you are going to be a rock star. beads symbolize wealth in

hand, but also a man's connection to economic opportunity linked to market forces way beyond california. >> you can watch the entire lecture tonight on >> this is american history tv. this is a conversation about the union's decision to assign colored troops to confederate prisoners. this 50 minute talk was part of a symposium on great defenses of the civil war. kelly mezurek is an associate professor in ohio.