tv Lectures in History Abraham Lincoln and Native Americans CSPAN September 8, 2019 12:00pm-12:56pm EDT
1672. >> learn more about the history of u.s. automobiles sunday at 6:00 and 10:00 eastern. you are watching american history tv, only on announcer: next on lectures in history, stony brook university professor paul kelton taught a class about abraham lincoln and native americans. he talked about the dakota wars in minnesota which resulted in 38 executions, the removal of the navajo, and the 1864 sand creek massacre. prof. kelton: so, good afternoon everyone. thank you. today's lecture will be on abraham lincoln.
many of you probably do not think about abraham lincoln in context of american indian or indigenous history. that is what we're going to talk about today. after all, abraham lincoln had a lot on his plate. when he was president. the civil war. and that dominated most of his attention. but underneath the surface of the civil war, lay some important events involving american indians. events that might make abraham lincoln more of a problematic figure than he ordinarily is. so let's consider some u.s. events in american indian affairs that happened during his presidency. it was during his presidency that the so-called great sioux uprising or what we might call the dakota war of 1862 occurred. a conflict in which the state of minnesota was drenched in blood, as impoverished and hungry dakota waged war on settlers, then faced the wrath of whites, who hunted down susspected culprits, tried, convicted, and
sentenced to death 303 men. lincoln commuted the sentence of most of these individuals, but in the end, 38 were hung. in what remains america's largest mass execution. it was during the american presidency that the navajo or dineh were made to endure the long walk. a forced journey of hundreds of miles from their homeland to a wretched and barren reservation in eastern new mexico. to commence the navajo on their long walk, american soldiers burned crops, destroyed livestock, and sacked the dineh's homes. in their new reservations, the dineh suffered immensely from lack of food, diseases, and raids by other indians. it was during the lincoln presidency that one of the most atrocious episodes in u.s. indian affairs occurred. that was the massacre of cheyenne at sand creek in eastern colorado. on november 29, 1864, colorado volunteers burst upon a cheyenne village, killing 270 natives, two thirds of them women and children. some terrible events indeed.
should we today adhere to a 'buck stops here' interpretation about lincoln - that he has responsibility for this, for these terrible events in american indian history? or should perhaps we give him a pass. after all, lincoln had a lot on his plate. he was fighting the civil war, had the task of defeating the confederacy. perhaps some of these events out west were out of his control? how can these events, then, reflect inevitably upon his stature. let's wrestle with some of these questions in this class today. growing up in the early 19th century, abraham lincoln must have formed impressions of american indians. he lived in indiana and illinois, shortly after tecumseh's defeat. and during a time when numerous indigenous peoples were facing
increased pressure to give up their lands and move west. this happened during lincoln's transformative years. lincoln could not have been egner and of these troubles. indeed, when troubles erected with the sack and fox led by blackhawk, lincoln volunteered for military service, was elected captain of a militia unit. lincoln served in the military. he did not see much military action. he later recalled about his military career, it gave me or - more pleasure than i had ever had since. but i had a good many bloody struggles with the mosquitoes, but did not see a live fighting indian. this was unlike his grandfather and namesake who suffered death from indian attack, after moving from virginia to kentucky in the early 1780's.
lincoln only mentioned this family history in passing. it does not appear that his willingness to engage in combat with the sack and fox occurred due to a desire for revenge. lincoln seems to have been driven by something more useful to him. a desire for prestige. indeed, after the black hawk war, he would use his prestige in the military to run for elected office for the state legislature in illinois. he lost. but of course he would be involved in many other elections. some he won and some he lost. the ultimate, he won the presidency. he was a whig. a member of the whig party during the indian removals of the 1830's and 1840's. but he seemed to say very little about indian removal. the one thing he did say was a criticism of the democrats, for being inefficient or spending too much money on removals of groups like the cherokee, and wars against the seminoles. he praised winfield scott, the military commander who oversaw cherokee removal, that we have learned about already. he said of winfield scott, and coming to winfield scott's defense. winfield scott was actually a whig. but he was ordered to oversee cherokee removal.
by president van buren, democrat. and he came under scrutiny for his operations for being too lenient about the cherokee, as i mentioned. he got criticized by the democrats. but the whigs countered. lincoln said of winfield scott that he was as noble hearted man and christian gentleman who did basically a good job and was no fool. there is very little in the documentary record to believe that abraham lincoln deviated
much from widespread assumptions about american indians and u.s. indian removal policies. policies of concentrating them on reservations, and insisting on their cultural transformation. jumping ahead, when he is president, for example, he once told a visiting delegation of plains indians. this delegation that visited in march of 1863, pay attention to that date, march of 1863. he said to these native visitors, the paleface people are numerous and prosperous because they cultivate the earth, produce bread, and depend upon the products of the earth rather than wild game for a subsistence. this is the chief reason of the
difference. but there's another. although we are now engaged in a great war between one another. we are not as a race so much disposed to fight and kill one another as our red brother. i can only say that i can see no way in which your race is to become numerous and prosperous as the white race except living as they do by the cultivation of the earth. of course this is in march of 1863. what is very ironic about the way he characterizes indigenous peoples? >> we were right on the cusp of the civil war and the expansion of slavery had numerous violent out bursts. among white men. prof. kelton: right. tens of thousands of americans are dying in these horrendous battles and he is saying that indians are inherently warlike. so, left unsaid, in abraham lincoln's words, is this idea that westward development must proceed. lincoln is a proponent of manifest destiny, the great engine of destruction that bore down on native american people. he was all in favor of building
railroads and bringing western resources into eastern markets, including the gold and silver of western minds that led to things like the genocide of california indians. and of course he was all in favor of white people being able to expand into the west and settle and carve up the land into farms. in that degree he agreed with southerners that western devout and should -- that western development should
continue. he disagreed with southerners is on the expansion of slavery. lincoln of course believed as many northerners did that slavery should not be allowed to expand in the west. that it would be unfair competition from ordinary-- being able to make a living on the western land. for southerners as we've talked about before, they believed ardently in the expansion of slavery that if it did not expand it would die and their way of life would end . southerners and northerners were part of this settler colonialist mentality that dominated america at the time. that western lane should become available, indigenous people should be eliminated and the land should be developed by whites in the case of
northerners with free labor. or in the case of southerners, or whites who owned african-american slaves employing slave labor. that is the root of the civil war. who should get control of the western land? slave owners or humble white folks. indeed, much of the events that we're going to talk about here, are very much part of the civil war. if the civil war was about furthering the expansion of slavery, or stopping the expansion of slavery. onto whose peoples these events are very the civil war was about furthering the expansion of slavery, or stopping the expansion of slavery. onto whose land? indigenous peoples these events are very much part of this larger story of the
american civil war. the first episode i want to talk about that lincoln played a direct role in is the dakota war of 1862. as i've talked about before, dakota belonged to a larger group of people that outsiders called the sioux indians-- the sioux, but they they called themselves dakota, lakota or others depending on the dialect, which means the people. many of the others moved on to the western plans planes to become full-time buffalo hunters living in teepees and hunting buffalo in the west but a group remained in minnesota. they called themselves the dakota and traded first with the french, then the british, then the americans. as we talked about, when these trade relations are going on and when
indigenous peoples are giving items, beaver pelts, buffalo hides, deer skins to these newcomers and newcomers are giving them manufactured goods, that's not just about an economic transaction. what is that about? what is being built? kinship. so the dakota believed they had kinship relations with these newcomers. but by 1840s these relations begin to break down. by the 1840s the dakotas are lacking in wild game to trade with traders. they are falling into debt. this is all to the joy of us policymakers because it's part of us policy which we've talked about, to purposely force indigenous peoples into that so they would have nothing left to sell but, everyone can see this, land. so the dakota signed a few treaties including one in 1851 that gave up a large chunk of what is today the state of minnesota leaving them a small sliver of land along the minnesota river. these treaties, as many of the treaties were, rife with
problems. the dakota would be paid in annuities, yearly payments, but these annuities often would never reach the dakotas. they would go straight into the pockets of traders who claimed the dakota owed them for past debts. one episcopal bishop that became aware of these problems and this fraud going on declared that a nation that selling robbery would reap a harvest of blood. and of course he cannot be any more correct. tensions got very intense in the summer of 1862. the dakotas who had adapted to euro-american ways, some including going to church or becoming farmers, more full-
time farmers instead of hunting gathering and farming, wearing euro-american clothing, and learning to speak english. but others had not of course. as i mentioned, the summer of 1862, the circumstances had grown very tense. they had grown tense because many dakotas were very hungry. cops had not been - crops had not been as abundant as they had. they've lost access to traditional resources and they depended on those annuities. they depended on these annuities to buy food. the federal government had not sent money to minnesota to pay the dakota's, money they could have used to buy food. there was plenty of food and it was stored in a warehouse near the agency. when the dakotas approached the agent and asked for food, they were denied. one declared to the dakotas who
didn't have money to pay for the food, declared to them, let them eat grass. well, many dakotas had had enough. one of those individuals was the leader, little crow. he had accommodated euro- american and us civilization policy to a degree. he believed that the dakotas must change in order to survive on their land in minnesota, on their land. he had trouble becoming a farmer, becoming a christian, so he did not fully buy into the civilization program. he was looked upon as a brave leader and was approached by young warriors who had had enough and appealed to his valor
that they must attack to drive the settlers out of their traditional hunting ground. and little crow reluctantly agreed. he agreed to lead the dakotas into war against the settlers. and indeed they attacked minnesota settlers. killed hundreds. captured many others, and put minnesota citizens in a state of panic. minnesota militia came in and counterattacked. the minnesota militia led by col. henry sibley reached the dakota reservation and undertook the pursuit of little crow. the forces chased the dakota northward. but the dakota could not mount much of a counterattack. so it was mostly warriors who waged the war.
the majority of the dakota did not want anything to do and tried to remain peaceful even surrendering to sibley's forces. in the end, little crow never had the unity that minnesotans believed he did. and he had few options, but to take the followers that remained and flee to the great plains. friends and captives remain behind, as did a number of those who participated in the war but refused to go on to the parent planes. sibley's forces surrounded the encampments.
by october 3, sibley had 1200 dakotas under his control. men were disarmed and tried by military commission. warriors who simply admitted to being at one of the battles were determined guilty and even the death sentence. by november 4, 303 dakota men were sentenced to die. think about it. 303 men were sentenced to die in one execution. unlike military affairs in other places, lincoln played a more direct role in events from minnesota. he ordered general john pope to
take command in the minnesota war and he indeed was willing to prosecute with brutal rigor. when he arrived in minnesota he informed sibley, it is my to exterminate the sioux if i have the power to do so and even if it requires a campaign lasting the whole of next year they are to be treated as maniacs or wild beast and by no means are people with whom treaties or compromises can be made. pope proved quite successful at bringing the dakota into submission. he expressed enthusiasm for the mass execution of those 303 men sentenced to die. upon receiving news of the upcoming execution lincoln requested the transcript of the trials. he and his lawyers looked through these transcripts and he found that many of these men were sentenced on the flimsiest of evidence. and he pardoned or dismissed the executions of all but 39. but still, 39 were slated to die. the execution date was set for
december 6. one more was pardoned and 38 were hung, marking the largest mass execution in us history. now this marker is no longer there in minnesota to mark this event. you listen to a podcast you folks at home cannot see this but it says the little war on the prairie. it's the american life podcast. it was a broadcast in november of 2012. can someone tell me, or think about, why did minnesota citizens forget about this? one of the shocking things for the people involved, they didn't even know this happened. why? >> opted out of history.
prof. kelton: prof. kelton: annabelle's -- enemy else? >> they kind of tried to [indiscernible] prof. kelton: ok. logan makes a good point. minnesota still, officials want people to come. you do not advertise and indian war to get able to come into his territory right? >> the recent history at the time would view this as a relatively heroic act given that they were seen as an enemy. it was a mode to preserve the manifest destiny reasoning at the time period. prof. kelton: ok. it was talked about it all, it was talked about as a justified war. it seems uncomplicated people embracing the complexity and thinking about the complexity they simply chose to ignore. very good.
what about lincoln? lincoln following the mass execution was still under great pressure from the minnesota congressional delegation and voters in minnesota. and there's an election coming up in 1864. lincoln reduced the he already angered -- he already angered the minnesotans. the minnesotans wanted three or three men to die and lincoln had reduced the number. but lincoln did capitulate to the minnesotans by forcing even the from the dakotas to be moved into the western plains. the dakotas were forced into the west. not only the dakotas but also a
group of people that had nothing to do with the war. the hochunks. minnesotans wanted them gone as well. lincoln has seen for the emancipation proclamation, he also signed the winnebago removal bill, the americans called the hochunks the winnebago. this passed in february 1863 stipulating in june 1863, the whole chunks would be removed - hochunk would be removed, and indeed they were in a grueling process where many died on their
come back into minnesota and he's picking berries in a farmer's field. the farmers son sees this man, didn't know who he was. just knew he was a native person, and shot him. killed him. later, the farmer and the neighbors realized this was the infamous little crow. his body was mutilated and his remains would be put in the minnesota historical society were would remain until 1971 until returned to a descendent.
here's a painting of the ho chunk. for them, lincoln is like jackson is to the cherokee. another group forcibly removed during lincoln's administration were the dineh, the navajo. at the outset of the civil war, there are composed of many loosely allied bands and some are quite wealthy in terms of livestock. they raised sheep, they farmed, they grew corn and other did a considerable amount of raiding. raiding had been a considerable part of their economy. they raided mexicans, livestock, for food, and rated into mexico as well. when the united states conquered and took half of mexico, now the united states inherits-- and step up their actions to police indigenous people during the
civil war, particularly as the union depended on communication with california, a northern state. a union state. particularly as gold was sent to the east to fund the civil war effort. indian raids was the last thing the union army wanted so they sent in american soldiers to stop these raids. here is the navajo nation's homeland in the four corners region of southwestern united states. kit carson was sent in to do something about the navajo raid and what he did was order that the navajo must go to eastern new mexico to a place called bosque redondo hundreds of miles away.
if they did not go they would be forced to go. many did not want to go. so carson in 1863 and 1864 sent in troops to round up the navajo. he pursued scorched earth tactics, destroying what could be consumed so they would be starved into submission, something he says very clearly in his own words. indeed, they surrendered. nearly 8000 and the best we can tell, the numbers vary. 8000 dine were forced to march in an event they called the long walk. on the long walk of course, navajos died from exposure, diseases, and other things. you
were to have read this letter and i'm sure you all read it and i was told earlier, you had not learned cursive writing so that's unfortunate for us that once you become history majors into historical research, it's looking at, like i tell my kid, old stuff. i like looking at old stuff that. once you get the hang of it, once you understand someone's writing you can really understand. i actually think this is really clear compared to a lot of the other stuff that i read. i asked you to read this and give your general impression of the attitude of george, the military officer who oversight contingent of denae on the long walk. how would you characterize his attitude? >> he had more of a sympathetic attitude. they were making them go to a
land that he knew they had no shot to survive on. prof. kelton: a lot of the think can be read differently. anyone else? prof. kelton: -- a lot of these can be read differently. >> once he arrived with the navajo at fort sumter, ho or bousquet redondo, he began to have sympathy because he was writing in another part of the letter to his wife that this is a terrible place.
and there is algae, the water is unsanitary. once he saw indigenous peoples beginning to become ill there, i think he started to display some civic they. -- to display some sip they. -- some sympathy. prof. kelton: it could be and once officer see this that's not in common. they might rather be dying in gettysburg. did anyone pick up anything different? raise your hand. >> i got more of a vibe of indifference. that he was more complying about
the journey than anything else. when he was walking over the mountains, he cursed that it is such a long walk. he did not seem to care about the people he was leading. more whining about the journey. prof. kelton: yes he does give us evidence in his journey that it was hardship, lack of food, people suffered. but he also complaining that he himself suffered as well. so that indifference comes out as well. what jumped out to me actually is this quote here. in this he uses the pejorative term that i will project appear. beef for indians died and were
buried on the road. and he says redskins causing me trouble. what was me. i have had some died. not have to feed them. -- woe is me. i have had some die. now i have to feed them. to me the skin encapsulates at best indifference. and also disdain. the people he was charged with. not even seeing them as peoples. but using the pejorative term here. and giving an indication of why that is a pejorative term for many indigenous people. that it dehumanizes real human beings. so you see it in these letters, as groups like the did they - the dineh are being forced onto a barren reservation. at bousquet redondo that come under the control of a military man. he is a firm believer, carlton is his name, who believes that in the civilization program and that indigenous people should
become euro-american, he takes it as his task, kind of this missionary zeal, that he will transform the navajos into this prosperous delightful pueblo of indians in eastern new mexico. of course he could not be any more wrong. anybody been in eastern new mexico? if you drive through it, there is not a lot there. if anybody from new mexico watches this on tv, i love new mexico by the way. i got pulled over there once. in this - -it is beautiful country. but it is not good farmland. and bosco redondo was a barren, desolate place. that when the dine reached the
location they suffered from lack of food, diseases, exposure, raids by nearby groups like comanches and kiowas and many more died. the united states government actually admitted that it was a mistake and in 1868 they negotiated another treaty in which they are allowed to go back to homelands to where the reservation is today, back to the four corners region. i had you guys listen to a brief npr newscast on the opening of bosque redondo interpretive center to memorialize those who suffered on the long walk. it of course becomes prominent in navajo oral history. it's something that unites them. a horrible member horrible memory in which they see themselves as all one people that have to join together to survive and have commemorated -- including
carrying rocks from the reservation and of course opening this new center. the npr newscast, the navajo's own the trail of tears, in the newscast you heard the voices of content very dine and their views of what their history was. what were some of the takeaways that you had from that newscast? anyone want to volunteer an answer? franklin? >> the modern day navajos in the podcast what they really were emphasizing is they want the memorial to serve as a way that their ancestors and stories can always be remembered by future generations who think that is their most important view. prof. kelton: good. it's a way to bring stories from oral history to the public to be remembered and not forgotten. i have one more appear. -- up here.
joseph? >> i also found that many of the contemporary individuals were looking for acknowledgment from those not part of the community that such a thing did take place. prof. kelton: that's true. part of this is not just telling stories to each other but to the largest world so we don't forget this and we know this history as well.
i was taken with the dine woman who came in and her prayer to ancestors or her song, but it's about triumph as well for people overcoming these horrible ordeals and being here today, being survivors and telling the story of survival when many places such as where we lived today like long island, most people don't know the indigenous history of this island.
it's important that we know the history and not only that we know that history but we know that indigenous people still are here today. and of course does anyone recall how many people belong to navajo nation today? give me a ballpark figure on the podcast. >> over 300,000. prof. kelton: over 300,000. so a large nation of people still here today that have gone through this ordeal as well as the mescalero apache. the last - some of whom were removed with kit carson's raids. the last episode that i will talk about is perhaps the worst taste in someone's mouth about us indian policy and that is the sand creek massacre in colorado in 1864. this massacre involves the--colorado militia and cheyenne and arapahoe. they were people that often, they hunted the buffalo in band is that ranged from the northern rockies down into colorado on the front range of the rocky mountains. they often hunted together and lived together. -- in the same group, we often talk about them, the cheyenne and the arapahoe. with the mining strikes in the
rocky mountains in the 1850s there was great pressure on the western indian tribes to live on smaller reservations in which they would be confined to not interfere with overland travel. and the cheyenne and arapahoe supposedly agreed to a reservation under the fort wise treaty of 1861, a treaty that reduced cheyenne and arapahoe land to a small chunk of land in eastern colorado. this treaty was problematic as but most are, that not all cheyenne and arapahoe signed this treaty or acknowledged it as valid. or those that did sign it, that they actually know what it meant. these treaties are all problematic. many cheyenne and arapahoe did not agree to live on the reservation. and of course this angered coloradans who want the
cheyenne and arapahoe confined. by 1864 they had grown very fearful of indigenous peoples particularly because of news reports from minnesota and reports were circulating that the western indian tribes were planning what they said was an uprising. one of those who paid attention was the military commander of colorado's volunteer forces, the former methodist minister col. john chivington.
he is also known as the fighting parsons because he had been a minister and the word parsons of course for methodist minister. in spring 1864 when the grass started sprouting, various bands of cheyenne and arapahoe began to break out winter encampments to spread out and go hunt thing. - hunting. this of course put fear into whites who believed this uprising was going to take shipping 10 -- chivington soldiers were given orders to quote burn villages and kill cheyenne's whenever and wherever found. one band led by a pro-american chief for the first to encounter colorado volunteers and what was a prelude to the massacre. 2 cheyenne's road up to chivington's troops with papers bearing the mark of
abraham lincoln telling of black cattle. the two men were shot dead. in cold blood. shipping - chivington's forces then opened fire on the rest of the cheyenne. the indians returned fire but quit after black petal told them to stop. the soldiers retreated. leaving 28 dead. battles with lee, virginia in the coming election of the n64 paid no attention to the affairs of the great plains and left it to samual curtis to communicate with the governor of colorado and volunteers about how to handle the situation. on september 28, curtis informed col. chivington i want no peace until the indians suffer more. nevertheless, black cattle wanted peace and in november he and some of his leading men wrote into fort lyon. fort wise was renamed during the civil war to fort lion i believe after the virginia governor in colorado being a prounion state, renamed it fort lyon. so black cattle went into fort lyon asking for peace but the commanders told him they did not have the authority to accept his surrender, nor could they give cheyenne food. meanwhile the colorado papers were calling for extermination and chastised chivington as a coward. he had an opportunity and did not take it so he deployed 700 colorado volunteers to attack the cheyenne's. after seeing the approaching army, black cattle hoisted an american flag and a white flag, and sent a message to white antelope to greet the army. he was shot dead and soldiers launched into the village.
the cavalry continued their charge into the village, and for several hours butchered men women and children. cheyenne bodies were mutilated, even infants were stabbed by coloradans. immediately after the massacre the colorado press celebrated. colorado soldiers have again covered themselves with glory. some of the scalps were taken back to denver and paraded in a theater and the theater patrons see me cheyenne scalps, stood and applauded. lincoln unfortunately remains mute on the sand creek massacre. did the cries from extermination trouble him? perhaps not. after the stressful reelection campaign of 1864 the commissioner of indian affairs wrote his annual report and
praised the energetic action of governor evans. once the true reality of sand creek came to light, however, members of lincoln's party publicly condemned the atrocious event and called for reform of indian policy. a congressional committee was authorized to investigate and of the sordid affair ultimately concluded after lincoln's death that the cheyenne were mutilated in the most horrible manner. had he lived, perhaps he would
have been among those in which the sand creek massacre had left a bad taste in the mouth and more humane policies may have happened instead of militaristic campaigns for extermination. of course we will never know. his presidency gives us little clues of what he would have actually done. sand creek by any objective measure was an unprovoked murder of cheyenne and arapahoe. for many years, colorado celebrate this as a battle, battle of the civil war. more recently though, more recently. and thanks to the hard work and efforts of descendent survivors of cheyenne and arapahoe, now we know this and we should know this as a massacre site. and it has become a national historic site in eastern colorado.
so what about lincoln? what are we to make of him? he has left posterity with a troubling legacy. historians often get asked, who was the best president, i perhaps would say abraham lincoln because his determination to preserve the union and because he oversaw the end of slavery. but, when we look through the lens of indigenous history, lincoln is perhaps no different from any other president in the 19th century, someone who was in favor of westward expansions and believed in manifest destiny. perhaps it is star -- hard to say the buck should stop with him. he was busy fighting the civil war. there was a lot going on. but i supposed to those thousands of dakotas who were forced from their homeland, along with the hoe ho chunks, the buck should stop
with him. for the thousands of dineh, who had to endure the long walk and conditions of a bus to redondo, the buck should stop with him. of bosque redondo, the buck should stop with him. and for the hundreds of arapahoe and cheyenne who were murdered by military forces, the buck should stop more with him. thank you very much. we'll see you next time. [applause] >> listen to lectures in history . only on c-span3. >> this is american history tv on c-span3 where each weekend we feature 48 hours of programs exploring our nation's past. >> this weekend on real america,
washington. for -- in 1977nt , a u.s. information agency film . here's a preview. ♪ >> many people -- in reality, we are u.s. correspondents. during the campaign, i traveled a great deal between washington and various parts of the country because you must be out there. >> has this compare? >> in the old days, you had
people lined up. >> even during the later years, lyndon johnson, a special. >> i know many correspondents. we worked together. some of us are conservatives, some are liberal, and some are in the middle. but we have deep respect for each other. >> president of the united states jimmy carter. [applause]
>> harry truman, john kennedy, lyndon johnson. >> you are trying to verify. not the looks of television. his face is quite different from the behavior you are used to your -- used to. something not ordinarily associated because you see what the man is like in different circumstances, perhaps under threat. then you see what the reaction of real people needs to be. leaders of the country. ♪ the presidential campaign was like a marathon race. the head to keep up with the group everywhere. by air, by train, even by boat.
i went down to mississippi in a riverboat. perhaps the biggest freedom we had his freedom of movement. we can go anywhere we want. have been any underground headquarters in omaha, nebraska, with president johnson. ♪ you get a strong feeling of the country by meeting people in different states. >> icy. against congress, which would eliminate from the
u.s. foreign countries. these people would have lost their jobs. so they had an interest in getting the compromise will. a certain measure of the inspection. >> watch the entire film. sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern on real america. >> next, retired infectious disease specialist john talks about charles, the first dr. to treat the mortally wounded abraham lincoln after john wilkes booth shot him while he watched a plant ford's theatre and washington, d.c. he delivers an overview
IN COLLECTIONSCSPAN3 Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on