April 8, 2025 • 56 mins
We introduce listeners to Thaddeus Stevens, a significant yet often overlooked figure in American history. As an ardent opponent of slavery, Stevens played crucial roles in the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, and led efforts to impeach President Andrew Johnson.
Bruce Levine, author of Thaddeus Stevens: Civil War Revolutionary and Fighter for Racial Justice, joins the discussion to provide in-depth insights into Stevens' life, his relentless fight for abolition, equal rights, and free public education, and the powerful legacy he left behind. The episode delves into Steven’s contributions, his complex relationship with Abraham Lincoln, and his radical yet unfulfilled vision for racial equality and land redistribution during the Reconstruction era.
[00:00] Introduction to a Historical Figure
[01:22] Meet the Hosts
[02:01] Sponsor Message and Listener Engagement
[03:32] Introducing the Guest: Bruce Levine
[04:56] Thaddeus Stevens: Early Life and Influences
[08:42] Stevens' Political Career and Ideals
[18:57] Stevens' Role in the Anti-Slavery Movement
[27:07] Sponsor Message and Historical Recording
[30:07] Thaddeus Stevens and the Underground Railroad
[32:30] Stevens' Political Career and Opposition
[36:33] Stevens' Radical Ideas and Reconstruction
[43:29] Stevens' Views on Tariffs and Capitalism
[46:56] Legacy and Recognition of Thaddeus Stevens
[49:13] Conclusion and Final Thoughts
Takeaways:
- Thaddeus Stevens was a pivotal figure against slavery, known for his radical ideas and determination.
- Stevens played a crucial role in the passage of the 13th and 14th amendments, pushing for racial equality.
- Despite his significant contributions, Stevens faced backlash and was often marginalized in historical accounts.
- His vision for land redistribution to freed slaves, known as '40 acres and a mule,' was ahead of its time but ultimately rejected.
- Stevens' fierce opposition to President Andrew Johnson's policies showcased his commitment to Reconstruction efforts.
- His legacy reminds us that true progress often requires bold action and unwavering conviction, even in the face of adversity.
This is Season 8! For more episodes, go to stlintune.com
#thaddeusstevens #civilwar #reconstruction #gettysburg #14thamendment #waysandmeanscommittee #uscongress #40acresandamule
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
We're going to talk about anindividual today who maybe you'd
know and maybe you don't know,but he was one of the most important
opponents of slavery inAmerican history. He was the chairman
of the Ways and MeansCommittee and helped guide measures
essential to finance the CivilWar. He's also in charge of the Appropriations
Committee duringReconstruction. He's considered the
father of the 14th amendment.He was a key mover of the 13th amendment
(00:23):
and advocated for passage ofthe 5th, 15th amendment. He prevented
the takeover of Congress bySouthern and Northern Democrats immediately
after the Civil War. Hisunsuccessful plan to confiscate land
from rich Confederates andredistribute it to freed slaves was
also known as 40 acres and amule. He led the impeachment of Andrew
(00:44):
Johnson. He was the mostpowerful congressman during and after
the Civil War and one of themost revered men in the country.
When he died but a decadelater, he was one of the best hated
men. He fought for theabolition of slavery, equal protection
under the law, universalsuffrage and free public education.
And his grave is emblazonedequality of man before his creator.
(01:05):
We're going to find out who hewas today on St. Louis in Tune. Welcome
to St. Louis in Tune. We thankyou for joining us for fresh perspectives
(01:26):
on issues and events withexperts, community leaders and everyday
people who make a differencein shaping our society and world.
I'm Arnold Stricker along withMark Langston. Marcus Langston is.
Mark, how you doing?
I know. How are you? I'm doingfine, actually. I know.
Did I spark your curiositywith that introduction?
I did. For a minute there, Ithought, how old is our guest?
(01:46):
No, it's not our guest. It'sthe person we're going to talk about.
Yeah, he was born before theCivil War.
Whoa, hold on.
He's very seasoned.
Resume there, right?Somebody's propping him up.
We're glad that you've joinedus today, folks, and I want to thank
our sponsor, better ratemortgage. Betterratemortgage.com
(02:07):
you can listen to previousshows of St. Louis intune@stlintune.com
please help us to continue togrow by leaving a review on our website,
st.luntune.com, apple podcastor your preferred podcast platform.
Our Return to Civility Todaydeals with travel and if you're traveling
with a colleague, have aconversation with them.
(02:30):
Wow.
Yeah. That's remarkable. Justdon't focus on your computer screen
or your phone. Take theopportunity to learn something new
about your colleague.
There you go. I think that'sGood advice it is.
Why ignore? I walk around andI see people walking the dog and
all. They got their head downin their phone. And I'm like, we
(02:51):
live in the city. Thingshappen in the city. Be aware of your
surroundings. Enjoy whatevertrees and grass we have in the city.
Does it mean that when I seesomeone with their head down and
they're walking towards me andthey're going, they're gonna hit
me. I just don't move. I waitto see if they put their head up.
And it's usually the last moment.
(03:13):
Unless they've got earbuds in.
Oh, yeah.
Then that's. They have no clue.
Yeah. That's a whole otherthing. I've been talking to my family
members. You know, my sonMichael, I was talking to him the
other day and I. Not answeringme. And he had headbutts. Earbuds
in. Yeah. Okay, never mind.
It's something else. If you'retraveling with a colleague, have
a conversation with him. Ourconversation today is with Bruce
(03:35):
Levine. He's author andprofessor emeritus. He's the J.G.
randall Distinguishedprofessor of History Emeritus at
the University of Illinois. Hepreviously taught at the University
of Cincinnati and theUniversity of California at Santa
Cruz. He's published fivebooks on the Civil War era, including
the Fall of the House ofDixie, the Civil War, and Social
Revolution that Transformedthe South. His book Confederate Southern
(03:59):
Plans to Free and Arm Slavesduring the Civil War, received the
Peter Sieberg Award for CivilWar Scholarship and was named one
of the 10 best nonfictionbooks of 2005 by the Washington Post.
His essay entitled the VitalElement in the Republican Party,
Anti Slavery, Nativism, andAmerican and Abraham Lincoln appeared
on the Journal of the Civilwar era in December 2011. And his
(04:21):
research interests are theCivil War, comparative study of bound
labor, revolution, andemancipation. He has a PhD from the
University of Rochester. Andwe're going to talk about his book
from 2021, Thaddeus Stevens,Civil War revolutionary and fighter
for racial justice. Bruce,welcome to St. Louis in Tune.
(04:43):
Thank you, Arnold. Goodmorning to you both.
I am really. I've been lookingforward to this because I think we.
I contacted you. It wasprobably about a month and a half
ago and we were able tofinally get this together. But Thaddeus
Stevens, he is. Who wasThaddeus Stevens and why are we not
familiar with him and thethings that he accomplished that
(05:04):
I read about at the beginningof the show.
You did a good job at thebeginning of the show in saying who
he was. He was a fighter forthe Abolition of slavery, and after
the Civil War, the fight afighter for a genuinely multiracial
democracy in the UnitedStates. And I think one reason we
(05:30):
don't know more about him isthat the history we learn and the
history we remember tends tofocus on a handful of individuals.
When we talk about the Civilrights movement, for example, we
almost always focus solely onMartin Luther King, as though he
pulled the Civil rightsmovement out of his thumb, rather
(05:53):
than that it was a massmovement of a large number of people
and a large number of otherleaders. So we've had a Mount Rushmore
way of thinking about history,but of course, history is a lot more
complicated than that. Theother reason that we don't know more
about him is that he was avery radical opponent of slavery.
(06:17):
And once slavery was abolishedand those who put an end to it began
to settle back into theirolder ways of thinking and got comfortable
and began to pull back fromthe radicalism that had put an end
to slavery. They began tothink of Stevens as a dangerous man,
(06:39):
as someone who was tooradical, too revolutionary and blackened
his name. And that remainedtrue until not very long ago.
And what was the reason? Iknow that there was a movie that
was put out on Lincoln. Wasthat kind of the impetus of bringing
Stevens really good qualitiesto the forefront in your book also?
(07:02):
Because previously he wasreally not known. There was not a
lot of, what I would say, goodpress on him.
That's right. There was not alot of good press on him. The press
on him began to improve, asyou might Expect after the 20th century
Civil rights movement, as thecountry began to rethink its views
(07:24):
on the relationship betweenblack and white. It also began to
rethink its attitude towardthose who had fought for what we
call racial equality. Butuntil the movie about Lincoln and
the 13th Amendment, very fewpeople knew anything at all about
(07:45):
him. Though I'd have to addthat the depiction of Stevens in
that movie is very ambivalent.On the one hand, it gives him more
attention and more positiveattention than he'd received, certainly
in anything produced byHollywood in a long time. But on
the other hand, he's made toappear too radical, too brittle,
(08:10):
too stubborn, almost as muchan obstacle to the passage of the
13th Amendment as afacilitator of that amendment. So
even that film, I think, givesa false impression of the role of
Stevens. For example, you'dnever know from that movie, which
focuses on Lincoln's role,that Thaddeus Stevens had been advocating
(08:35):
the substance of the 13thAmendment at least a year before
Lincoln agreed to endorse it.
Bruce, did Thaddeus Stevensget along with Abraham Lincoln? Were
they allies?
They were allies, but theywere not identical. Politically steep
had been in contact withLincoln for many years, back into
(08:59):
the days when both of thembelonged not yet to a Republican
party which had not yet beenformed, but to the old Whig party.
And they had been incorrespondence with one another.
But Thaddeus Stevens wasalways ahead of Lincoln, always readier
than Lincoln, to advocate forthe abolition of slavery and for
(09:24):
measures associated with theabolition of slavery. And Lincoln
eventually came to findStevens once Lincoln is in the White
House and Stevens is, in acertain sense, on the outside, pounding
on the door, demanding thatLincoln move more quickly. Began
to think of Lincoln as arather annoying fellow, but nonetheless
(09:46):
recognized that people likeStevens were on the same side of
history, that he was just.
Lincoln was moving too slow.
So that's certainly howStevens and people who saw things
the way Stevens saw things,thought of Lincoln.
And he was like that even inPennsylvania. It's what I gleaned
(10:07):
from your book. Because evenin saving education in Pennsylvania,
as the way the legislature wasgoing, was it because of he was such
a great writer or a greatorator, or he just really pushed
things politically. He knewwho to push when or was able to engage
the masses to support hiscause. What made him who he was back
(10:31):
in the state of Pennsylvaniawhen he was in the state legislature
there.
So we're now back in the1830s, right? We're back into the
mid-1830s, when Lincoln is amember of the Pennsylvania House
of Representatives and he isinstrumental, as you suggest, in
passing a law that provides,for the first time in that state
(10:54):
for what was then called thecommon school system, a system of
public education, free publiceducation at the elementary level
that was open to all residentsof the state, and he got it passed.
But then there was a reactionagainst that passage on the part
(11:16):
of citizens who had a verynarrow view, by modern standards,
of what the government shouldbe doing and what their responsibilities
were to their fellow citizens,who felt that each individual should
be in charge of obtainingeducation for his or her own children,
(11:37):
but not for the children ofothers. And that public pressure
for a time got the measurethat Stevens helped to pass reversed,
withdrawn, and Stevens foughtvery hard to have it restored. And
at one point, when he was inthe state Constitutional Convention,
(12:00):
if I remember this correctly,it was a very effective speech that
he delivered about theimportance of public education for
all that turned the tide inthe convention and salvaged that
law.
Was this his feeling aboutwhat I'm going to call the underdog
(12:22):
of society. Because he grew uppoor? Was it because of the people
who he mixed with or rubbedshoulders with? But his support of
public education, for all, hissupport of blacks being freed and
having equal status in societywas really way ahead of where the
rest of the country was atthat time. Where did this come from?
(12:44):
Yeah, I think there aremultiple sources. I read pretty deeply
into the sources on hischildhood and youth, and what came
to light was that there weremultiple sources, multiple influences
on his early devotion to whatyou rightly called the underdogs
(13:06):
of society. First of all, hewas raised in a state, Vermont, that
was probably the mostradically democratic in the Union
in the early years, in partbecause that state had been through
a major struggle precisely forthe rights of the underdogs, the
(13:28):
rights of small farmers, andthe rights of people to have a government
that was responsible,responsive to them. And Vermont created
the early state of Vermont foritself, a state government that was
one of the most democratic instructure in the country. It was
also the state whoseconstitution was the most hostile
(13:50):
to slavery in the country.It's the only state in the Union
at that point thatspecifically denounces slavery. His
family's religion, Baptism,furthermore, was a radically democratic
religion, at least in thenorthern states. It derived from
(14:10):
the 17th century revolution inEngland against the monarchy. And
that was another influenceupon him because members of that
religion, including, andperhaps specifically in Vermont,
were very devoted todemocratic rights, partly to defend
themselves against religiouspersecution of the kind that they
(14:35):
had faced back in England.And, of course, he, as you say, did
indeed credit his own earlypoverty with empathy for others who
had not the advantages of thewealthy, and especially the hereditarily
wealthy people who hadinherited wealth from their parents
(14:58):
and grandparents. So these andother multiple influences shaped
him, and they continued toshape him as he went through school
and read various books andspoke to teachers who had one or
another of these same views.
He was born with a disability,too, I believe, and that probably,
(15:20):
I would think, affected howpeople looked at him and his family
as he grew up back in that time.
Yes, he was born with a clubfoot, and a neighbor recalls that
other boys made fun of him andthat this really stung. And it's
(15:40):
been suggested that this, toomade him more sympathetic with people
who, in general, weredisadvantaged. And that seems to
me quite possible, thoughStevens himself, to my knowledge,
never said so. But it seemslogical to me that he would have
carried that feeling forward.
(16:01):
I agree.
This is Arnold Stricker WithMark Langston of St. Louis in Tune,
we're talking to Bruce Levine.He's the author of the book we're
talking about, ThaddeusStevens. And we'll post that, folks,
so you can get that book on.It's on Amazon, and it's a really
good read. Bruce, you've donesome extreme thorough research about
this. I had wanted you tocontinue with his life because he
(16:22):
went from Vermont, he was justnot poor. He got a law degree, he
went to Pennsylvania, and hewas a businessman also. Can you talk
about his career prior to himgetting into the US Congress?
Yeah, he was. He. He was, asyou say, an attorney. By all accounts,
a very good, very effectiveattorney. An individual able to understand
(16:45):
quickly what was involved inany case that came before him and
able to express clearly, moreclearly than most others, before
a jury or before a judge, therights and wrongs of the case that
made him an effective attorneyand a popular attorney. So he prospered
(17:07):
as an attorney. And with theproceeds of that prosperity, he began
to invest in real estate andin ironworks, which were, of course,
by later standards, prettysmall scale, but nonetheless invested
in them and had substantialnumber. Those ironworks didn't always
(17:30):
do very well, but Stevenswould never close the ironworks down
so that those employees wouldcontinue to have work. And those
who worked for him were quiteattached to him. And during the Civil
War, when Confederate troopswere approaching his ironworks in
(17:50):
Pennsylvania, it was hisemployees that made sure that he
got the hell out of therebefore the Confederates could reach
the works. Because Stevens wasa marked man in the eyes of the Confederates.
He eventually went intopolitics and started off at the town
(18:11):
level and eventually got into,as we said earlier, the state legislature,
where he was elected andreelected multiple times. He served
as a member of the conventioncalled in 1836, 37, to revise the
state constitution. And heplayed an important role there on
(18:33):
a number of issues and was amember of various political parties
before the Republican Partywas formed.
Yeah. My next question yourolled. You must be looking at my
questions here, becausethere's the dynamics. And I thought
it was very interesting in thebook when you were talking about
all the different parties thatwere going on at the time. This is
(18:55):
like prior to the war,probably 18, in the 1850 decade.
And the dynamics of thesemultiple parties, strife within parties,
strife between parties. Heseemed to move through all that dynamics
to still accomplish things.How did he do that?
He was somebody who had apretty good idea of what he stood
(19:18):
for and a pretty good idea ofhow to navigate choppy political
waters. And so as partyorganizations rose and fell, he managed
to leap from one to the nextas though they were icebergs passing
in front of him. Not sure howgood a metaphorical image that is,
(19:40):
but I hope you understand whatI mean.
I get it.
He first belonged to somethingvery oddly named the Anti Masonic
Party, A party dedicated, asits name implied, to fighting the
order of the Masons. And a lotof historians have looked back and
thought of this simply as acrank outfit and a sort of strangely
(20:06):
paranoid organization thatfocused on something that shouldn't
have been important toanybody. The Masons, but the Masons.
Yeah, but if we think of theMasons as they exist today, we do
not understand how theyappeared to people in the 1820s.
It was a secret society whosemembers pledged themselves secretly
(20:30):
to support one another overall others in all aspects of life,
including both business andpolitics. And to somebody who believed
in democracy and believed thatsecret political alliances and secret
political organization wasdangerous to democracy, the Masons
(20:50):
looked, I think, legitimatelyquite dangerous. And it was Stevens
insistence on democracy andhostility to secrecy that drove him
forward and drove that partyforward. And it exercised a considerable
political attraction for thepopulation and considerable political
(21:11):
power for some years until thepoint was reached that the Masons
actually were forced intoretreat. And only at that point did
the Anti Masonic Party loseits purpose and people like Stevens
had to find someplace else togo. And that's when he went into
what was called the WhigParty, W H I G, which is named after
(21:36):
an English party from earlierperiod, end from the 19th century
as well.
Now that's a different partythan the Whig Party that was at the
beginning of our democracy.Wasn't. Was.
Yes.
Okay, so Washington was in theWhig Party, Was he or no, I think.
You'Re thinking of the Federalists.
(21:57):
Okay.
Because there was as yet,people referred to themselves in
the revolutionary era as Whigswith a small wood. But it was an
informal category. It wasn'tthe political party.
Okay, thank you. Thank you forclearing that.
Sure. The Whig Party doesn'tform until a number of decades later.
(22:19):
And it forms as the partywhich is most single mindedly devoted
to what we would call thedevelopment of American capitalism
and to state support for thatdevelopment. And Stevens very strongly
believed in the development ofagain, what we call capitalism, what
(22:41):
they call free labor society,and believed that this was the engine
of human progress in general.And so his adherence to the Whig
Party was quite natural andseemed quite logical.
What was underlying all theseparties and his Jumping from what
(23:03):
I would call iceberg toiceberg was the anti slavery movement
was really the abolition ofslavery. And how they all believed
that, to the extent that theybelieved it and how he was pushing
them, it seemed like he would.That party's really not coming out
as strong. This party iscoming out stronger. And that was
(23:26):
even presented whenpresidential candidates were put
up from these particularparties. Correct. Am I reading that
correctly in your book?
You are reading thatcorrectly. When he was in the anti
Mason Party, it was he and hisfellow members of that party who
in the PennsylvaniaConstitutional Convention most consistently
(23:49):
fought for the rights of blackpeople in Pennsylvania. When he went
into the Whig Party, hisnatural allies were members of that
party who were the mostdetermined to do away with slavery
and to give equal rights toformer slaves or to free black residents
(24:11):
of the North. And ultimately,when the Whig Party proved unwilling
to do what Stevens considerednecessary along those lines, he left
the Whig Party and set out tojoin the Republican Party, which
of course was much morecommitted to anti slavery policies.
(24:33):
But even there, he was wayahead of most members of that party
and had to struggle in orderto get that party to adopt the measures
that he deemed necessary bothbefore, during, and after the war.
He's answering questions,answering questions that I want to
(24:54):
ask about the RepublicanParty. Seems like they were on the
cutting edge, even though theyweren't moving as quickly as he wanted
them to. They were on thecutting edge, though, of everything.
Yeah, they were. In themid-1850s, the Republican Party was
by far the most radicalpolitical party of any size around.
(25:15):
To call yourself anti slavery,to fight against slavery, did indeed
put you on the cutting edge.And as. And the Republican Party
is raised to popularity andpower only as the Northern population
begins to recognize thatslavery does indeed threaten its
(25:40):
own rights and its owninterests, as it becomes not simply
a moral question, but apractical question for them. But
the Republican Party in 1856,when it runs its first presidential
campaign, does not stand forthe abolition of slavery. It only
stands. But I say only, eventhough that was still a pretty radical
(26:05):
position at the time, at leastin many parts of the country, it
stood only for preventing thefurther expansion geographically,
of slavery, said nothing aboutdoing away with slavery and made
no pretension to doing awaywith slavery.
Interesting.
Yeah. Just to make sureCalifornia and New Mexico didn't
(26:26):
have slavery.
Yeah.
And it was on that basis thatAbraham Lincoln gets elected to the
presidency four years later.
Wow. Crazy.
We're talking to Bruce Levine.He is the J.G. randall Distinguished
professor of History, Emeritusat the University of Illinois and
we're talking about his book,Thaddeus Stevens, Civil War revolutionary
and fighter for racialjustice. We're going to come back
(26:48):
and talk more to Bruce aboutsome other questions and other items
about Thaddeus Stevens. Sodon't go away. This is Arnold Sterk
with Mark Langston of StLucian. Tunes as strange as it may
sound, at Better Rate Mortgagewe love talking to people about mortgages.
(27:12):
Everyone in St. Louis promisesa better mortgage rate. But what
you really need to turn thatperfect house into your dream home
is a better mortgage. AtBetter Rate Mortgage, we open the
door to so much more. So whereare you in the home buying process?
Researching, maybe wonderinghow much you can afford? House hunting.
Get a pre approval from BetterRate Mortgage Ready to buy. Our team
is ready to make your mortgageprocess fast and easy, whether you're
(27:32):
purchasing your first home ortaking cash out to make your dream
home even dreamier. Our dooris open. Come on in and get started.
Today we'll show you how. CallSean directly at 314-375-3293 or
online@betterratemortgage.comRemember, at Better Rate Mortgage,
a Better Rate is just thebeginning. Betterratemortgage.com
and MLS hi, each 401-335 andequal housing lender.
(27:56):
I didn't know you could readso fast.
Foreign.
Welcome back to St. Louis inTune. This is Arnold Stricker with
Mark Langston. And Mark, wehave actually a recording of Thaddeus
Stevens in the House debateover the Fugitive slave Act from
(28:17):
June 10, 1850. Here it is. Itis my purpose nowhere in these remarks
to make personal reproaches. Ientertain no ill will toward any
human being, nor any brutethat I know of, not even the democratic
skunk across the way to whichI referred. Least of all would I
reproach the South. I honorher courage and fidelity. Even in
(28:41):
a bad, a wicked cause, sheshows a united front. All her sons
are faithful to the cause ofhuman bondage because it is their
cause. But the north, thepoor, timid, mercenary, driveling
north, has no such uniteddefenders of her cause, although
it is the cause of humanliberty. She has offered up a sacrifice
(29:04):
to propitiate Southerntyranny, to conciliate Southern treason.
We were able to dig that outof the St. Louis in tune archives.
Bruce, I don't know if youwere able to hear that when you were
doing your research.
That can't be Thaddeus Stevenshimself, because there were no such
(29:26):
devices that could record Aperson's voice in those days.
Very good. Very good.
Letting us see behind the curtain.
Yeah, yeah. Don't open thatcurtain up.
But those were certainly his words.
Yes, he had. Something Igleaned from your book is that even
though he may have disagreedwith things that were going on or
(29:48):
the direction that they weregoing on, he would abide by them
because they were part of thelaw. But he wouldn't stop trying
to push the envelope, per se,to correct it into the course that
he thought was a more accurateand true course.
I think that's generally true,but I also think that that observation
(30:13):
has its limits becauseThaddeus Stevens was active in the
Underground Railroad, and theUnderground Railroad was doing things
that were illegal. TheFugitive slave law of 1850 made it
illegal to help an escapedslave to flee from his or her master.
(30:35):
And that, of course, wasprecisely the purpose of the Underground
Railroad. So Stevens ingeneral, abided by the law, but not
always.
He even used. I don't say usedis probably not the right word for
that. I'm finding my note. Hissecretary, or what we would call
(30:57):
maybe common law wife at thetime, helped with that. And he had
a network that he haddeveloped around his business in
Pennsylvania, especially onthe border of Maryland, and was able
to see those who were escapingget names of maybe some of the slave
hunters who were fighting. Andhe would.
(31:18):
That's right.
Make sure that they would knowmore about this than I do. I'm just
regurgitating some of thethings that.
But you're right. But you'reright. All indications are that his
offices became a secret hidingplace for fugitive slaves as well.
Archaeological work that'sbeen done on the. Really, the ruins
(31:39):
of his office gives goodindication that it was used that
way. And we also have recordedstatements from fugitives in later
years, in the later 1850s, tothe effect that they were told to
go to him to seek assistance.We also have communicationswritten,
(32:00):
communications by him sayingthat he knew of dangers, threats
to fugitives in his area andwas urging them on to Canada in order
to escape those slave hunters.So there's not much question about
that at all, that he activelyused whatever means were at his disposal
(32:25):
to undermine slavery and toassist people fleeing from it.
Move a little bit into when hebecame a congressman and was really
getting involved in the warstarting. And he's now in probably
one of the most powerfulpositions as chairman of the Ways
and Means Committee.
He had quite a lot ofopposition, didn't he? Running for
(32:47):
Congress. I don't think Therewas a lot of people against that
idea of him running.
From what I've read, he hadbeen in Congress at the end of the
1840s and the beginning of the1850s on the Whig party. But he opposed
the Compromise of 1850, whichwas a political compromise put together
(33:13):
by leaders of both the Whigand the Democratic party to overcome
major controversy concerningthe question whether slavery should
exist in the parts of Mexicotorn out of that country as a result
of the Mexican American War.And the Compromise did not abolish
(33:35):
slavery in those parts of thecountry. And it also included the
Fugitive Slave Law, which madeit easier for slave hunters to recapture
alleged fugitives and deniedpeople accused of being fugitives
virtually any right to defendthemselves, whether in court or anywhere
(33:58):
else. The Democrats and theWhigs supported it. Abraham Lincoln
supported it. Abraham Lincoln,who was a Whig like Stevens supported
it. Stevens opposed it, loudlyopposed it. And as a result of which
his relationship with the Whigparty broke down. And the Whig party
(34:19):
in Lancaster, where he livedrefused to re nominate him for his
seat in Congress and refusedto nominate an ally of his for the
same seat when it became clearto Stephens that he himself could
not regain that seat. And thatwas really the end of Stevens relationship
(34:39):
with the Whig party. Once hejoined the Republican Party, though,
he had the strong support ofthat party when he ran once again
in 1858 successfully and wasoverwhelmingly victorious against
his Democratic party opponent.
Wow. Okay.
(34:59):
How did he. Was it because hischairmanship of the Ways and Means
Committee and because of hisfirm convictions that he became such
a major force in the Congressduring the time?
It certainly gave him thatkind of formal power as chair of
the Ways and Means Committee.He was the equivalent of a majority
(35:23):
leader on the House floor. Sohe had a good deal of power in organizing
the Republican caucus in theHouse of Representatives. But it
was his personal abilities andhis personal opinions that transformed
that formal political powerinto effective anti slavery action
(35:46):
that made him the figure thathe was. He was really riding two
horses at this point. He'sboth a leader of the party as a whole
in his capacity as chairman ofthat committee and as floor leader.
But he's also a leader of theminority radical wing of the Republican
(36:07):
Party in Congress. The radicalwing of the Republican Party in Congress
was a minority of theRepublican Party there. Excuse me.
And so he managed ratheramazingly to do both things at once.
Excuse me.
(36:29):
His ideas and very good ideas.The Freedmen's Bureau, the 40 acres
in a mule and all of thosethings to really not make it be A
conceptualize it, but make ita reality for all blacks to be equal
(36:50):
part of a society. From theDeclaration were just. He really
pushed those but got shut downduring a reconstruction time. And
I know he battled with AndrewJohnson fiercely. They I think Johnson
really hated him a lot. Not alot hated him completely. Didn't
have anything good to sayabout him. But he really wanted to
(37:11):
press those things further andsee them to fruition. And even keeping
the south, those people whohad decided to not secede if they
wanted to come back, they hadto adopt and ratify the 14th Amendment.
He made some steps for them,some hoops to jump through. But it
just seems there's a time thatwas a time in our country where we
(37:32):
fell. That and the election inwhat is it, 1876 or 72, when.
76.
76. That just things fellcompletely away. And I often wonder
what our country would be likehad those things come to fruition.
But it's a good question onthe issue of land, which was a major
defeat that he suffered.Stevens, as you said earlier, wanted
(37:55):
to confiscate all the largeslaveholding estates or the estates
that had previously been basedon slave labor and divide them up
into small farms among theformer slaves. And he didn't originate
that idea. The former slavesthemselves originated that idea and
tried to carry it out wheneverthey could during the war and after.
(38:19):
But he is the one whospearheaded the measures in the Congress.
And from one point of view,one would have thought he'd have
every opportunity to achievesuccess there. Because in one kind
of measure after another, hehad started off introducing a radical
idea that had seemed tooradical for most of his, even his
(38:43):
Republican colleagues, and hadwon them over only when circumstances
demonstrated to them that hehad been right, that these things
were necessary, such as, forexample, bringing black men into
the Union army as full fledgedsoldiers, which was a very radical
(39:03):
idea at first. But on thesubject of seizing land, he ran up
against the brick wall and theRepublican Party would not support
him. The Republican Party hadmoved to abolish slavery because
they had always consideredenslavement to be illegitimate. Even
(39:25):
though they had not been quickto seek its abolition. They had always
considered it to be a wrong.That was not true, however, of the
holding of land which they theright to hold land they held as dear
as anybody else. And so whenhe introduces the idea of confiscating
(39:49):
that land, the Republicanparty basically says no. He's also
running into the problem morebroadly, as I mentioned earlier,
that once the war is over andOnce slavery is abolished, a substantial
portion of the Northernpopulation, which had moved steadily
(40:14):
to the left, towards more andmore radical measures against slavery.
That portion of the Northernpopulation began to back away. The
job is done. They basicallysaid the south, the threat to the
Union is removed. Slavery nowis abolished. Now let's get back
(40:35):
to business, business asusual. Let us re knit cordial relations
with the white south and letus get back to making money, which
involves smooth dealings withthe south and commerce between north
and South. And now the windthat had previously been in Stephen's
(40:56):
sails suddenly dies out and hefinds himself without the same power
that he had prior to andespecially during the war and leads
him to very pessimisticconclusions on the eve of his own
death.
(41:17):
That's something that. Ihaven't finished the book. I think
I've got one more chapter togo. That what you just said makes
perfect sense. The war isover. Everybody wants to get back
to quote unquote normal, butmaybe normal for them. But there's
still the slaves and otherfree blacks who are still struggling
to be able to vote, be able tobe free, be able to have the same
(41:38):
rights that everybody elsehas. And now that energy is focused
in another direction. Thatmakes perfect sense to me.
Well, that's what you justsaid is quite right. And it points
us toward an important factand all of this, which is the north
was not anti racist. Youdidn't have to oppose racism to oppose
(42:00):
slavery. You didn't have tosympathize with black people in order
to oppose slavery. The northturned en masse against slavery only
when it decided that slaverythreatened its own rights, its own
interests. And once that wasaccomplished, support for those measures
(42:25):
dissolves. And the fact thatblack people are still endangered
more than in danger. The factthat black people are being killed
by the tens and hundreds andthousands after the Civil War is
of little import to hugenumbers of whites in the North. And
it didn't matter that peoplelike Stevens kept sticking these
(42:49):
facts under the noses of hiscolleagues. It did not motivate them.
It did not impress them. Theyhad other axes to grind and most
of those were the ones Imentioned a moment ago. Prosperity,
commerce and political compromise.
(43:11):
We painted him in a. He's verytruthful in what he believes and
put his money where his mouthwas and his actions with what he
believed. Knowing what we knownow about what's going on today in
the world with the tariffs andeverything. And it's interesting
that you mentioned aboutcommerce. He believed in tariffs,
but this was during the CivilWar time. Correct. And talk about
(43:35):
the exertion of his belief.Was he full in on that or was it
just like a temporary thingor. I'm not comparing that to President
Trump now and what's going onin our world today, but wanted to
get an understanding of whathis tariff belief was.
Of course, the larger point isthat being a strong advocate of capitalism
(43:56):
in 1850 or 1860 had adifferent charge than it has today.
Capitalism was in its infancy.It was still struggling throughout
the world to remove morebackward forms of economy and political
organization. It was indeed avery progressive force. And when
(44:21):
Stevens equated the future ofcapitalism with the future of freedom,
he was speaking aboutconditions of his day and did indeed
have his finger on something.Even people far more radical than
Thaddeus Stevens, people likeKarl Marx and Frederick Engels, saw
(44:43):
capitalism as a progressiveforce compared to slavery, feudalism
and other forms of oldersociety, and supported struggles
to bet the further developmentof capitalism, which you can bet
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engelswouldn't be doing today as a young,
(45:09):
newborn capitalist economy ina former colony. Stevens and others
supported tariffs to protectwhat they called infant industries
against the competition of theBritish Empire. That we could not
develop industries like ironand textiles and others without some
(45:32):
kind of tariff protection sothat these industries could at least
get off the ground. We'retalking about a time when probably
the average number ofemployees in any given enterprise
is something between 5 and 10.
Right.
Not hundreds and thousands.And so it's. His support for the
(45:53):
tariffs is specific to itstime and place.
Perfect answer.
I think.
Yeah. Tariff protection iswhat you used. I think. And that
to me explains exactly whatwas going on. They're trying to protect
a brand new industry and abrand new economy. And I think it's
very proper in that context touse tariffs and the tariff protection
(46:17):
that it offers. I think that'swhere it really means a lot. Yeah.
If we get into the area ofopinion, then it seems to me, my
personal opinion is a tariffmeans one thing. If it's in a little
landlocked African countrylike Lesotho trying to protect its
(46:37):
meager resources and industrycompared to tariffs imposed by these
great big powerful economieslike the United States or Europe
or Japan, which has anentirely different significance in
my opinion today.
I agree. I totally agree with you.
Perfect sense.
Can I say also something I hadno idea about Thaddeus Stevens? He
(47:02):
we should be teaching in theschools. I've never heard of him.
My academic career never knewabout Thaddeus Stevens. I'm reading
some things on him. He evenworked on the impeachment of President
Johnson back then. Oh, yeah.And the education, it just goes on
and on. Bruce, he's an amazingcontributor, I think, to the development
(47:27):
of our country.
I, of course, I agree, whichis why I invested all the time and
energy in this book to try tobring him to a bigger audience. To
this day, I'm startled by howfew people know about him. Even I'll
say to somebody, have you seenthe. You know, I'll tell them about
(47:49):
this book, and they'll give mea blank look and I'll say, did you
see the Lincoln movie? And I'mshocked at how few people even saw
that movie.
Really.
Yeah, I get that, too. Yeah.I'm so glad that you did this book.
I'm sorry to take theselective ramp here in this little.
But I'm finding it to befascinating to delve into. And we've
(48:10):
only got an hour here to talkabout Thaddeus. But my goodness,
even if you go to Wikipedia,it is a long page on Thaddeus Stevens
and all of the contributionsand different things that he did.
We should have a statuesomewhere on the guy. I don't know
if there's anything.
I think, in fact, inLancaster, they did just raise a
(48:33):
statue to him. I've got a copyof. Or at least a bust of him. I've
got a copy of. It doesn't looka whole lot like him, but better
than nothing. And his officesare in the process in Lancaster of
being turned into a museum.
Correct.
And I'm looking forward to itsopening. And there's another, smaller
(48:54):
museum in Gettysburg createdby the Thaddeus Stevens Society and
Ross Hetrick, who is itspresident. I suspect, by the way,
that the recording that youhad earlier is Ross's words.
Very good.
Ross's voice.
Yeah, Very good.
I really want to thank you,Bruce, for writing the book. And
(49:18):
you have to have a real manjust burning desire to find out about
something like this. And,folks, you don't realize how much
time it takes to write a booklike this. Matter of fact, Bruce,
how much. How many years didit take you to do all the research
and get the book completed?
The book itself took aboutfive years, but the book was only
(49:40):
possible. It was only possibleto do it in five years because I
had been teaching about theCivil War and its causes and its
aftermath for 20 to 30 yearsby the time I got around to this
book. And during the course ofall those years, I had been reading
and thinking and writingSmaller things about Stevens. So
(50:03):
it was a major undertaking.
So again, thank you forwriting the book, folks. The book's
called Thaddeus Stevens, CivilWar Revolutionary and Fighter for
Racial Justice. It waspublished in 2021. Don't think that.
Oh, it's not current. It isthe most current book in the last
150 years on Thaddeus Stevens.
(50:23):
Thank you.
I'm not sure if the titlereally tells the tale because there's
so much here about ThaddeusStevens. Thank you for the contribution
of this book to our society.Honestly, this will long live past
your days and mine.
And it's a. I would encourageeveryone to get this. I'll post a
(50:43):
link to Amazon for you to beable to check that out. Bruce, is
there any effort to maybe doan abridged version or a younger
version? This is. It's apretty intense read. Not that any
high school student or middleschool student who really knew how
to read could get the content.But is there thoughts to make it
a little more junior high schoolish?
(51:05):
Not to my knowledge, though Iwould, of course be open to it. There
is also a recorded booksversion of this book for people who
don't enjoy reading as much.And of course, this book itself is
in paperback, so it makes it alittle more obtainable.
And it's also available on aKindle. That's how I have mine.
(51:27):
That's right.
Oh, wait. Okay. All right.
Rich Levine, thank you verymuch for taking your time to talk
to us on St. Louis in Tunetoday. This has been an outstanding
show and a great, greatunderstanding of who Thaddeus Stevens
was. And again, thank you,Bruce, for your time today and the
book.
The contribution. Yes, great contribution.
Thank you, Arnold and Mark, Ireally appreciate your having me
on.
(51:47):
Yeah.
You take care, sir.
Such smart questions.
Thank you so much.
Have a great week, sir.
Tell my wife that, would youplease, that I. Smart questions.
Appreciate that a lot. Youtoo. Bye bye now. There you go.
This is one of those things,Mark, that it's like a piece of gold
(52:09):
or a diamond that you have towork for to get, but once you get
it, it's. Wow.
Really? I went to Wikipediaduring this because who is this Thaddeus
Stevens guy? I've never reallyever heard of Thaddeus Stevens before
today. And there is so much onhim and so much what he did to help
(52:32):
the country in so manydifferent ways.
Yeah, his Wikipedia page is huge.
It is.
It's really huge. And Bruce'sbooks on there. And folks, these
are the kinds of things thatwe like to do here on the show to
give you information and spuran interest for you to check this
out. And maybe you don't getBruce's book. Maybe you just read
(52:52):
the Wikipedia page. You'rejust that much more knowledgeable
about why we are in the shapewe are today. The good things about
it, the bad things about it.How many guys are like that in the
Congress today? Not very manyare there who have the courage and
the conviction to stand forwhat they believe no matter what.
(53:15):
Yeah. And he had a. Allstarted off with a club foot. Him
and his brother was even born.
Brother had two club feet.
Oh, is that right? Okay, soit's. Yeah. What a tough beginning.
And dad left them when theywere young.
Unbelievable.
On a farm with mom. Butsomething also interesting is he
was so successful in hiscapitalistic enterprise that he bought,
(53:35):
I think it's his mother, a 200acre farm. And when he died, he left
Lydia Hamilton Smith, hissecretary maybe would be called common
law wife. $500 to sustain. Andwhen she. That doesn't sound like
a lot now, but it was then.And when she died, she left money
(53:56):
for the perpetual care of her grave.
Oh.
So check these folks out.Thaddeus Steam. We'll put all the
links in in the show notes soyou can take a look at those.
Yeah. Modest beginnings.
Yes.
Didn't let that hold them back.
Perpetuate or not perpetuatedpropelled them forward into greatness.
(54:17):
It did propel them forward into.
I always love to see storieslike that.
Yes, we do. And so folks, ifyou want to catch more of those stories,
you can catchthose@stalentune.com that's all for
this hour. We're not going todo any jokes today. Oh, you probably
had all the sound ready to go.
I'm ready. I know there's somein there.
Thank you for listening. Ifyou enjoyed this episode, you can
(54:39):
listen to additional shows. AsI mentioned@stalentune.com Consider
leaving a review on ourwebsite, Apple Podcasts, Podchaser
or your preferred podcastplatform. Your feedback helps us
reach more listeners andcontinue to grow. Want to thank Bob
Bertha Sell for our thememusic, Better Rate Mortgage, to be
our sponsor, our guest, BruceLevine and co host, Mark Langston.
(55:00):
And we thank you, ouraudience, for being a part of our
community of curious minds.St. Louis in tune is a production
of Motif Media Group and theUS Radio Network. Remember to keep
seeking, keep learning, walkworthy and let your light shine.
For St. Louis in tune, I'mArnold Stricker.
We're going to talk about anindividual today who maybe you'd
know and maybe you don't know,but he was one of the most important
opponents of slavery inAmerican history. He was the chairman
of the Ways and MeansCommittee and helped guide measures
essential to finance the CivilWar. He's also in charge of the Appropriations
Committee duringReconstruction. He's considered the
father of the 14th amendment.He was a key mover of the 13th amendment
(00:23):
and advocated for passage ofthe 5th, 15th amendment. He prevented
the takeover of Congress bySouthern and Northern Democrats immediately
after the Civil War. Hisunsuccessful plan to confiscate land
from rich Confederates andredistribute it to freed slaves was
also known as 40 acres and amule. He led the impeachment of Andrew
(00:44):
Johnson. He was the mostpowerful congressman during and after
the Civil War and one of themost revered men in the country.
When he died but a decadelater, he was one of the best hated
men. He fought for theabolition of slavery, equal protection
under the law, universalsuffrage and free public education.
And his grave is emblazonedequality of man before his creator.
(01:05):
We're going to find out who hewas today on St. Louis in Tune. Welcome
to St. Louis in Tune. We thankyou for joining us for fresh perspectives
(01:26):
on issues and events withexperts, community leaders and everyday
people who make a differencein shaping our society and world.
I'm Arnold Stricker along withMark Langston. Marcus Langston is.
Mark, how you doing?
I know. How are you? I'm doingfine, actually. I know.
Did I spark your curiositywith that introduction?
I did. For a minute there, Ithought, how old is our guest?
(01:46):
No, it's not our guest. It'sthe person we're going to talk about.
Yeah, he was born before theCivil War.
Whoa, hold on.
He's very seasoned.
Resume there, right?Somebody's propping him up.
We're glad that you've joinedus today, folks, and I want to thank
our sponsor, better ratemortgage. Betterratemortgage.com
(02:07):
you can listen to previousshows of St. Louis intune@stlintune.com
please help us to continue togrow by leaving a review on our website,
st.luntune.com, apple podcastor your preferred podcast platform.
Our Return to Civility Todaydeals with travel and if you're traveling
with a colleague, have aconversation with them.
(02:30):
Wow.
Yeah. That's remarkable. Justdon't focus on your computer screen
or your phone. Take theopportunity to learn something new
about your colleague.
There you go. I think that'sGood advice it is.
Why ignore? I walk around andI see people walking the dog and
all. They got their head downin their phone. And I'm like, we
(02:51):
live in the city. Thingshappen in the city. Be aware of your
surroundings. Enjoy whatevertrees and grass we have in the city.
Does it mean that when I seesomeone with their head down and
they're walking towards me andthey're going, they're gonna hit
me. I just don't move. I waitto see if they put their head up.
And it's usually the last moment.
(03:13):
Unless they've got earbuds in.
Oh, yeah.
Then that's. They have no clue.
Yeah. That's a whole otherthing. I've been talking to my family
members. You know, my sonMichael, I was talking to him the
other day and I. Not answeringme. And he had headbutts. Earbuds
in. Yeah. Okay, never mind.
It's something else. If you'retraveling with a colleague, have
a conversation with him. Ourconversation today is with Bruce
(03:35):
Levine. He's author andprofessor emeritus. He's the J.G.
randall Distinguishedprofessor of History Emeritus at
the University of Illinois. Hepreviously taught at the University
of Cincinnati and theUniversity of California at Santa
Cruz. He's published fivebooks on the Civil War era, including
the Fall of the House ofDixie, the Civil War, and Social
Revolution that Transformedthe South. His book Confederate Southern
(03:59):
Plans to Free and Arm Slavesduring the Civil War, received the
Peter Sieberg Award for CivilWar Scholarship and was named one
of the 10 best nonfictionbooks of 2005 by the Washington Post.
His essay entitled the VitalElement in the Republican Party,
Anti Slavery, Nativism, andAmerican and Abraham Lincoln appeared
on the Journal of the Civilwar era in December 2011. And his
(04:21):
research interests are theCivil War, comparative study of bound
labor, revolution, andemancipation. He has a PhD from the
University of Rochester. Andwe're going to talk about his book
from 2021, Thaddeus Stevens,Civil War revolutionary and fighter
for racial justice. Bruce,welcome to St. Louis in Tune.
(04:43):
Thank you, Arnold. Goodmorning to you both.
I am really. I've been lookingforward to this because I think we.
I contacted you. It wasprobably about a month and a half
ago and we were able tofinally get this together. But Thaddeus
Stevens, he is. Who wasThaddeus Stevens and why are we not
familiar with him and thethings that he accomplished that
(05:04):
I read about at the beginningof the show.
You did a good job at thebeginning of the show in saying who
he was. He was a fighter forthe Abolition of slavery, and after
the Civil War, the fight afighter for a genuinely multiracial
democracy in the UnitedStates. And I think one reason we
(05:30):
don't know more about him isthat the history we learn and the
history we remember tends tofocus on a handful of individuals.
When we talk about the Civilrights movement, for example, we
almost always focus solely onMartin Luther King, as though he
pulled the Civil rightsmovement out of his thumb, rather
(05:53):
than that it was a massmovement of a large number of people
and a large number of otherleaders. So we've had a Mount Rushmore
way of thinking about history,but of course, history is a lot more
complicated than that. Theother reason that we don't know more
about him is that he was avery radical opponent of slavery.
(06:17):
And once slavery was abolishedand those who put an end to it began
to settle back into theirolder ways of thinking and got comfortable
and began to pull back fromthe radicalism that had put an end
to slavery. They began tothink of Stevens as a dangerous man,
(06:39):
as someone who was tooradical, too revolutionary and blackened
his name. And that remainedtrue until not very long ago.
And what was the reason? Iknow that there was a movie that
was put out on Lincoln. Wasthat kind of the impetus of bringing
Stevens really good qualitiesto the forefront in your book also?
(07:02):
Because previously he wasreally not known. There was not a
lot of, what I would say, goodpress on him.
That's right. There was not alot of good press on him. The press
on him began to improve, asyou might Expect after the 20th century
Civil rights movement, as thecountry began to rethink its views
(07:24):
on the relationship betweenblack and white. It also began to
rethink its attitude towardthose who had fought for what we
call racial equality. Butuntil the movie about Lincoln and
the 13th Amendment, very fewpeople knew anything at all about
(07:45):
him. Though I'd have to addthat the depiction of Stevens in
that movie is very ambivalent.On the one hand, it gives him more
attention and more positiveattention than he'd received, certainly
in anything produced byHollywood in a long time. But on
the other hand, he's made toappear too radical, too brittle,
(08:10):
too stubborn, almost as muchan obstacle to the passage of the
13th Amendment as afacilitator of that amendment. So
even that film, I think, givesa false impression of the role of
Stevens. For example, you'dnever know from that movie, which
focuses on Lincoln's role,that Thaddeus Stevens had been advocating
(08:35):
the substance of the 13thAmendment at least a year before
Lincoln agreed to endorse it.
Bruce, did Thaddeus Stevensget along with Abraham Lincoln? Were
they allies?
They were allies, but theywere not identical. Politically steep
had been in contact withLincoln for many years, back into
(08:59):
the days when both of thembelonged not yet to a Republican
party which had not yet beenformed, but to the old Whig party.
And they had been incorrespondence with one another.
But Thaddeus Stevens wasalways ahead of Lincoln, always readier
than Lincoln, to advocate forthe abolition of slavery and for
(09:24):
measures associated with theabolition of slavery. And Lincoln
eventually came to findStevens once Lincoln is in the White
House and Stevens is, in acertain sense, on the outside, pounding
on the door, demanding thatLincoln move more quickly. Began
to think of Lincoln as arather annoying fellow, but nonetheless
(09:46):
recognized that people likeStevens were on the same side of
history, that he was just.
Lincoln was moving too slow.
So that's certainly howStevens and people who saw things
the way Stevens saw things,thought of Lincoln.
And he was like that even inPennsylvania. It's what I gleaned
(10:07):
from your book. Because evenin saving education in Pennsylvania,
as the way the legislature wasgoing, was it because of he was such
a great writer or a greatorator, or he just really pushed
things politically. He knewwho to push when or was able to engage
the masses to support hiscause. What made him who he was back
(10:31):
in the state of Pennsylvaniawhen he was in the state legislature
there.
So we're now back in the1830s, right? We're back into the
mid-1830s, when Lincoln is amember of the Pennsylvania House
of Representatives and he isinstrumental, as you suggest, in
passing a law that provides,for the first time in that state
(10:54):
for what was then called thecommon school system, a system of
public education, free publiceducation at the elementary level
that was open to all residentsof the state, and he got it passed.
But then there was a reactionagainst that passage on the part
(11:16):
of citizens who had a verynarrow view, by modern standards,
of what the government shouldbe doing and what their responsibilities
were to their fellow citizens,who felt that each individual should
be in charge of obtainingeducation for his or her own children,
(11:37):
but not for the children ofothers. And that public pressure
for a time got the measurethat Stevens helped to pass reversed,
withdrawn, and Stevens foughtvery hard to have it restored. And
at one point, when he was inthe state Constitutional Convention,
(12:00):
if I remember this correctly,it was a very effective speech that
he delivered about theimportance of public education for
all that turned the tide inthe convention and salvaged that
law.
Was this his feeling aboutwhat I'm going to call the underdog
(12:22):
of society. Because he grew uppoor? Was it because of the people
who he mixed with or rubbedshoulders with? But his support of
public education, for all, hissupport of blacks being freed and
having equal status in societywas really way ahead of where the
rest of the country was atthat time. Where did this come from?
(12:44):
Yeah, I think there aremultiple sources. I read pretty deeply
into the sources on hischildhood and youth, and what came
to light was that there weremultiple sources, multiple influences
on his early devotion to whatyou rightly called the underdogs
(13:06):
of society. First of all, hewas raised in a state, Vermont, that
was probably the mostradically democratic in the Union
in the early years, in partbecause that state had been through
a major struggle precisely forthe rights of the underdogs, the
(13:28):
rights of small farmers, andthe rights of people to have a government
that was responsible,responsive to them. And Vermont created
the early state of Vermont foritself, a state government that was
one of the most democratic instructure in the country. It was
also the state whoseconstitution was the most hostile
(13:50):
to slavery in the country.It's the only state in the Union
at that point thatspecifically denounces slavery. His
family's religion, Baptism,furthermore, was a radically democratic
religion, at least in thenorthern states. It derived from
(14:10):
the 17th century revolution inEngland against the monarchy. And
that was another influenceupon him because members of that
religion, including, andperhaps specifically in Vermont,
were very devoted todemocratic rights, partly to defend
themselves against religiouspersecution of the kind that they
(14:35):
had faced back in England.And, of course, he, as you say, did
indeed credit his own earlypoverty with empathy for others who
had not the advantages of thewealthy, and especially the hereditarily
wealthy people who hadinherited wealth from their parents
(14:58):
and grandparents. So these andother multiple influences shaped
him, and they continued toshape him as he went through school
and read various books andspoke to teachers who had one or
another of these same views.
He was born with a disability,too, I believe, and that probably,
(15:20):
I would think, affected howpeople looked at him and his family
as he grew up back in that time.
Yes, he was born with a clubfoot, and a neighbor recalls that
other boys made fun of him andthat this really stung. And it's
(15:40):
been suggested that this, toomade him more sympathetic with people
who, in general, weredisadvantaged. And that seems to
me quite possible, thoughStevens himself, to my knowledge,
never said so. But it seemslogical to me that he would have
carried that feeling forward.
(16:01):
I agree.
This is Arnold Stricker WithMark Langston of St. Louis in Tune,
we're talking to Bruce Levine.He's the author of the book we're
talking about, ThaddeusStevens. And we'll post that, folks,
so you can get that book on.It's on Amazon, and it's a really
good read. Bruce, you've donesome extreme thorough research about
this. I had wanted you tocontinue with his life because he
(16:22):
went from Vermont, he was justnot poor. He got a law degree, he
went to Pennsylvania, and hewas a businessman also. Can you talk
about his career prior to himgetting into the US Congress?
Yeah, he was. He. He was, asyou say, an attorney. By all accounts,
a very good, very effectiveattorney. An individual able to understand
(16:45):
quickly what was involved inany case that came before him and
able to express clearly, moreclearly than most others, before
a jury or before a judge, therights and wrongs of the case that
made him an effective attorneyand a popular attorney. So he prospered
(17:07):
as an attorney. And with theproceeds of that prosperity, he began
to invest in real estate andin ironworks, which were, of course,
by later standards, prettysmall scale, but nonetheless invested
in them and had substantialnumber. Those ironworks didn't always
(17:30):
do very well, but Stevenswould never close the ironworks down
so that those employees wouldcontinue to have work. And those
who worked for him were quiteattached to him. And during the Civil
War, when Confederate troopswere approaching his ironworks in
(17:50):
Pennsylvania, it was hisemployees that made sure that he
got the hell out of therebefore the Confederates could reach
the works. Because Stevens wasa marked man in the eyes of the Confederates.
He eventually went intopolitics and started off at the town
(18:11):
level and eventually got into,as we said earlier, the state legislature,
where he was elected andreelected multiple times. He served
as a member of the conventioncalled in 1836, 37, to revise the
state constitution. And heplayed an important role there on
(18:33):
a number of issues and was amember of various political parties
before the Republican Partywas formed.
Yeah. My next question yourolled. You must be looking at my
questions here, becausethere's the dynamics. And I thought
it was very interesting in thebook when you were talking about
all the different parties thatwere going on at the time. This is
(18:55):
like prior to the war,probably 18, in the 1850 decade.
And the dynamics of thesemultiple parties, strife within parties,
strife between parties. Heseemed to move through all that dynamics
to still accomplish things.How did he do that?
He was somebody who had apretty good idea of what he stood
(19:18):
for and a pretty good idea ofhow to navigate choppy political
waters. And so as partyorganizations rose and fell, he managed
to leap from one to the nextas though they were icebergs passing
in front of him. Not sure howgood a metaphorical image that is,
(19:40):
but I hope you understand whatI mean.
I get it.
He first belonged to somethingvery oddly named the Anti Masonic
Party, A party dedicated, asits name implied, to fighting the
order of the Masons. And a lotof historians have looked back and
thought of this simply as acrank outfit and a sort of strangely
(20:06):
paranoid organization thatfocused on something that shouldn't
have been important toanybody. The Masons, but the Masons.
Yeah, but if we think of theMasons as they exist today, we do
not understand how theyappeared to people in the 1820s.
It was a secret society whosemembers pledged themselves secretly
(20:30):
to support one another overall others in all aspects of life,
including both business andpolitics. And to somebody who believed
in democracy and believed thatsecret political alliances and secret
political organization wasdangerous to democracy, the Masons
(20:50):
looked, I think, legitimatelyquite dangerous. And it was Stevens
insistence on democracy andhostility to secrecy that drove him
forward and drove that partyforward. And it exercised a considerable
political attraction for thepopulation and considerable political
(21:11):
power for some years until thepoint was reached that the Masons
actually were forced intoretreat. And only at that point did
the Anti Masonic Party loseits purpose and people like Stevens
had to find someplace else togo. And that's when he went into
what was called the WhigParty, W H I G, which is named after
(21:36):
an English party from earlierperiod, end from the 19th century
as well.
Now that's a different partythan the Whig Party that was at the
beginning of our democracy.Wasn't. Was.
Yes.
Okay, so Washington was in theWhig Party, Was he or no, I think.
You'Re thinking of the Federalists.
(21:57):
Okay.
Because there was as yet,people referred to themselves in
the revolutionary era as Whigswith a small wood. But it was an
informal category. It wasn'tthe political party.
Okay, thank you. Thank you forclearing that.
Sure. The Whig Party doesn'tform until a number of decades later.
(22:19):
And it forms as the partywhich is most single mindedly devoted
to what we would call thedevelopment of American capitalism
and to state support for thatdevelopment. And Stevens very strongly
believed in the development ofagain, what we call capitalism, what
(22:41):
they call free labor society,and believed that this was the engine
of human progress in general.And so his adherence to the Whig
Party was quite natural andseemed quite logical.
What was underlying all theseparties and his Jumping from what
(23:03):
I would call iceberg toiceberg was the anti slavery movement
was really the abolition ofslavery. And how they all believed
that, to the extent that theybelieved it and how he was pushing
them, it seemed like he would.That party's really not coming out
as strong. This party iscoming out stronger. And that was
(23:26):
even presented whenpresidential candidates were put
up from these particularparties. Correct. Am I reading that
correctly in your book?
You are reading thatcorrectly. When he was in the anti
Mason Party, it was he and hisfellow members of that party who
in the PennsylvaniaConstitutional Convention most consistently
(23:49):
fought for the rights of blackpeople in Pennsylvania. When he went
into the Whig Party, hisnatural allies were members of that
party who were the mostdetermined to do away with slavery
and to give equal rights toformer slaves or to free black residents
(24:11):
of the North. And ultimately,when the Whig Party proved unwilling
to do what Stevens considerednecessary along those lines, he left
the Whig Party and set out tojoin the Republican Party, which
of course was much morecommitted to anti slavery policies.
(24:33):
But even there, he was wayahead of most members of that party
and had to struggle in orderto get that party to adopt the measures
that he deemed necessary bothbefore, during, and after the war.
He's answering questions,answering questions that I want to
(24:54):
ask about the RepublicanParty. Seems like they were on the
cutting edge, even though theyweren't moving as quickly as he wanted
them to. They were on thecutting edge, though, of everything.
Yeah, they were. In themid-1850s, the Republican Party was
by far the most radicalpolitical party of any size around.
(25:15):
To call yourself anti slavery,to fight against slavery, did indeed
put you on the cutting edge.And as. And the Republican Party
is raised to popularity andpower only as the Northern population
begins to recognize thatslavery does indeed threaten its
(25:40):
own rights and its owninterests, as it becomes not simply
a moral question, but apractical question for them. But
the Republican Party in 1856,when it runs its first presidential
campaign, does not stand forthe abolition of slavery. It only
stands. But I say only, eventhough that was still a pretty radical
(26:05):
position at the time, at leastin many parts of the country, it
stood only for preventing thefurther expansion geographically,
of slavery, said nothing aboutdoing away with slavery and made
no pretension to doing awaywith slavery.
Interesting.
Yeah. Just to make sureCalifornia and New Mexico didn't
(26:26):
have slavery.
Yeah.
And it was on that basis thatAbraham Lincoln gets elected to the
presidency four years later.
Wow. Crazy.
We're talking to Bruce Levine.He is the J.G. randall Distinguished
professor of History, Emeritusat the University of Illinois and
we're talking about his book,Thaddeus Stevens, Civil War revolutionary
and fighter for racialjustice. We're going to come back
(26:48):
and talk more to Bruce aboutsome other questions and other items
about Thaddeus Stevens. Sodon't go away. This is Arnold Sterk
with Mark Langston of StLucian. Tunes as strange as it may
sound, at Better Rate Mortgagewe love talking to people about mortgages.
(27:12):
Everyone in St. Louis promisesa better mortgage rate. But what
you really need to turn thatperfect house into your dream home
is a better mortgage. AtBetter Rate Mortgage, we open the
door to so much more. So whereare you in the home buying process?
Researching, maybe wonderinghow much you can afford? House hunting.
Get a pre approval from BetterRate Mortgage Ready to buy. Our team
is ready to make your mortgageprocess fast and easy, whether you're
(27:32):
purchasing your first home ortaking cash out to make your dream
home even dreamier. Our dooris open. Come on in and get started.
Today we'll show you how. CallSean directly at 314-375-3293 or
online@betterratemortgage.comRemember, at Better Rate Mortgage,
a Better Rate is just thebeginning. Betterratemortgage.com
and MLS hi, each 401-335 andequal housing lender.
(27:56):
I didn't know you could readso fast.
Foreign.
Welcome back to St. Louis inTune. This is Arnold Stricker with
Mark Langston. And Mark, wehave actually a recording of Thaddeus
Stevens in the House debateover the Fugitive slave Act from
(28:17):
June 10, 1850. Here it is. Itis my purpose nowhere in these remarks
to make personal reproaches. Ientertain no ill will toward any
human being, nor any brutethat I know of, not even the democratic
skunk across the way to whichI referred. Least of all would I
reproach the South. I honorher courage and fidelity. Even in
(28:41):
a bad, a wicked cause, sheshows a united front. All her sons
are faithful to the cause ofhuman bondage because it is their
cause. But the north, thepoor, timid, mercenary, driveling
north, has no such uniteddefenders of her cause, although
it is the cause of humanliberty. She has offered up a sacrifice
(29:04):
to propitiate Southerntyranny, to conciliate Southern treason.
We were able to dig that outof the St. Louis in tune archives.
Bruce, I don't know if youwere able to hear that when you were
doing your research.
That can't be Thaddeus Stevenshimself, because there were no such
(29:26):
devices that could record Aperson's voice in those days.
Very good. Very good.
Letting us see behind the curtain.
Yeah, yeah. Don't open thatcurtain up.
But those were certainly his words.
Yes, he had. Something Igleaned from your book is that even
though he may have disagreedwith things that were going on or
(29:48):
the direction that they weregoing on, he would abide by them
because they were part of thelaw. But he wouldn't stop trying
to push the envelope, per se,to correct it into the course that
he thought was a more accurateand true course.
I think that's generally true,but I also think that that observation
(30:13):
has its limits becauseThaddeus Stevens was active in the
Underground Railroad, and theUnderground Railroad was doing things
that were illegal. TheFugitive slave law of 1850 made it
illegal to help an escapedslave to flee from his or her master.
(30:35):
And that, of course, wasprecisely the purpose of the Underground
Railroad. So Stevens ingeneral, abided by the law, but not
always.
He even used. I don't say usedis probably not the right word for
that. I'm finding my note. Hissecretary, or what we would call
(30:57):
maybe common law wife at thetime, helped with that. And he had
a network that he haddeveloped around his business in
Pennsylvania, especially onthe border of Maryland, and was able
to see those who were escapingget names of maybe some of the slave
hunters who were fighting. Andhe would.
(31:18):
That's right.
Make sure that they would knowmore about this than I do. I'm just
regurgitating some of thethings that.
But you're right. But you'reright. All indications are that his
offices became a secret hidingplace for fugitive slaves as well.
Archaeological work that'sbeen done on the. Really, the ruins
(31:39):
of his office gives goodindication that it was used that
way. And we also have recordedstatements from fugitives in later
years, in the later 1850s, tothe effect that they were told to
go to him to seek assistance.We also have communicationswritten,
(32:00):
communications by him sayingthat he knew of dangers, threats
to fugitives in his area andwas urging them on to Canada in order
to escape those slave hunters.So there's not much question about
that at all, that he activelyused whatever means were at his disposal
(32:25):
to undermine slavery and toassist people fleeing from it.
Move a little bit into when hebecame a congressman and was really
getting involved in the warstarting. And he's now in probably
one of the most powerfulpositions as chairman of the Ways
and Means Committee.
He had quite a lot ofopposition, didn't he? Running for
(32:47):
Congress. I don't think Therewas a lot of people against that
idea of him running.
From what I've read, he hadbeen in Congress at the end of the
1840s and the beginning of the1850s on the Whig party. But he opposed
the Compromise of 1850, whichwas a political compromise put together
(33:13):
by leaders of both the Whigand the Democratic party to overcome
major controversy concerningthe question whether slavery should
exist in the parts of Mexicotorn out of that country as a result
of the Mexican American War.And the Compromise did not abolish
(33:35):
slavery in those parts of thecountry. And it also included the
Fugitive Slave Law, which madeit easier for slave hunters to recapture
alleged fugitives and deniedpeople accused of being fugitives
virtually any right to defendthemselves, whether in court or anywhere
(33:58):
else. The Democrats and theWhigs supported it. Abraham Lincoln
supported it. Abraham Lincoln,who was a Whig like Stevens supported
it. Stevens opposed it, loudlyopposed it. And as a result of which
his relationship with the Whigparty broke down. And the Whig party
(34:19):
in Lancaster, where he livedrefused to re nominate him for his
seat in Congress and refusedto nominate an ally of his for the
same seat when it became clearto Stephens that he himself could
not regain that seat. And thatwas really the end of Stevens relationship
(34:39):
with the Whig party. Once hejoined the Republican Party, though,
he had the strong support ofthat party when he ran once again
in 1858 successfully and wasoverwhelmingly victorious against
his Democratic party opponent.
Wow. Okay.
(34:59):
How did he. Was it because hischairmanship of the Ways and Means
Committee and because of hisfirm convictions that he became such
a major force in the Congressduring the time?
It certainly gave him thatkind of formal power as chair of
the Ways and Means Committee.He was the equivalent of a majority
(35:23):
leader on the House floor. Sohe had a good deal of power in organizing
the Republican caucus in theHouse of Representatives. But it
was his personal abilities andhis personal opinions that transformed
that formal political powerinto effective anti slavery action
(35:46):
that made him the figure thathe was. He was really riding two
horses at this point. He'sboth a leader of the party as a whole
in his capacity as chairman ofthat committee and as floor leader.
But he's also a leader of theminority radical wing of the Republican
(36:07):
Party in Congress. The radicalwing of the Republican Party in Congress
was a minority of theRepublican Party there. Excuse me.
And so he managed ratheramazingly to do both things at once.
Excuse me.
(36:29):
His ideas and very good ideas.The Freedmen's Bureau, the 40 acres
in a mule and all of thosethings to really not make it be A
conceptualize it, but make ita reality for all blacks to be equal
(36:50):
part of a society. From theDeclaration were just. He really
pushed those but got shut downduring a reconstruction time. And
I know he battled with AndrewJohnson fiercely. They I think Johnson
really hated him a lot. Not alot hated him completely. Didn't
have anything good to sayabout him. But he really wanted to
(37:11):
press those things further andsee them to fruition. And even keeping
the south, those people whohad decided to not secede if they
wanted to come back, they hadto adopt and ratify the 14th Amendment.
He made some steps for them,some hoops to jump through. But it
just seems there's a time thatwas a time in our country where we
(37:32):
fell. That and the election inwhat is it, 1876 or 72, when.
76.
76. That just things fellcompletely away. And I often wonder
what our country would be likehad those things come to fruition.
But it's a good question onthe issue of land, which was a major
defeat that he suffered.Stevens, as you said earlier, wanted
(37:55):
to confiscate all the largeslaveholding estates or the estates
that had previously been basedon slave labor and divide them up
into small farms among theformer slaves. And he didn't originate
that idea. The former slavesthemselves originated that idea and
tried to carry it out wheneverthey could during the war and after.
(38:19):
But he is the one whospearheaded the measures in the Congress.
And from one point of view,one would have thought he'd have
every opportunity to achievesuccess there. Because in one kind
of measure after another, hehad started off introducing a radical
idea that had seemed tooradical for most of his, even his
(38:43):
Republican colleagues, and hadwon them over only when circumstances
demonstrated to them that hehad been right, that these things
were necessary, such as, forexample, bringing black men into
the Union army as full fledgedsoldiers, which was a very radical
(39:03):
idea at first. But on thesubject of seizing land, he ran up
against the brick wall and theRepublican Party would not support
him. The Republican Party hadmoved to abolish slavery because
they had always consideredenslavement to be illegitimate. Even
(39:25):
though they had not been quickto seek its abolition. They had always
considered it to be a wrong.That was not true, however, of the
holding of land which they theright to hold land they held as dear
as anybody else. And so whenhe introduces the idea of confiscating
(39:49):
that land, the Republicanparty basically says no. He's also
running into the problem morebroadly, as I mentioned earlier,
that once the war is over andOnce slavery is abolished, a substantial
portion of the Northernpopulation, which had moved steadily
(40:14):
to the left, towards more andmore radical measures against slavery.
That portion of the Northernpopulation began to back away. The
job is done. They basicallysaid the south, the threat to the
Union is removed. Slavery nowis abolished. Now let's get back
(40:35):
to business, business asusual. Let us re knit cordial relations
with the white south and letus get back to making money, which
involves smooth dealings withthe south and commerce between north
and South. And now the windthat had previously been in Stephen's
(40:56):
sails suddenly dies out and hefinds himself without the same power
that he had prior to andespecially during the war and leads
him to very pessimisticconclusions on the eve of his own
death.
(41:17):
That's something that. Ihaven't finished the book. I think
I've got one more chapter togo. That what you just said makes
perfect sense. The war isover. Everybody wants to get back
to quote unquote normal, butmaybe normal for them. But there's
still the slaves and otherfree blacks who are still struggling
to be able to vote, be able tobe free, be able to have the same
(41:38):
rights that everybody elsehas. And now that energy is focused
in another direction. Thatmakes perfect sense to me.
Well, that's what you justsaid is quite right. And it points
us toward an important factand all of this, which is the north
was not anti racist. Youdidn't have to oppose racism to oppose
(42:00):
slavery. You didn't have tosympathize with black people in order
to oppose slavery. The northturned en masse against slavery only
when it decided that slaverythreatened its own rights, its own
interests. And once that wasaccomplished, support for those measures
(42:25):
dissolves. And the fact thatblack people are still endangered
more than in danger. The factthat black people are being killed
by the tens and hundreds andthousands after the Civil War is
of little import to hugenumbers of whites in the North. And
it didn't matter that peoplelike Stevens kept sticking these
(42:49):
facts under the noses of hiscolleagues. It did not motivate them.
It did not impress them. Theyhad other axes to grind and most
of those were the ones Imentioned a moment ago. Prosperity,
commerce and political compromise.
(43:11):
We painted him in a. He's verytruthful in what he believes and
put his money where his mouthwas and his actions with what he
believed. Knowing what we knownow about what's going on today in
the world with the tariffs andeverything. And it's interesting
that you mentioned aboutcommerce. He believed in tariffs,
but this was during the CivilWar time. Correct. And talk about
(43:35):
the exertion of his belief.Was he full in on that or was it
just like a temporary thingor. I'm not comparing that to President
Trump now and what's going onin our world today, but wanted to
get an understanding of whathis tariff belief was.
Of course, the larger point isthat being a strong advocate of capitalism
(43:56):
in 1850 or 1860 had adifferent charge than it has today.
Capitalism was in its infancy.It was still struggling throughout
the world to remove morebackward forms of economy and political
organization. It was indeed avery progressive force. And when
(44:21):
Stevens equated the future ofcapitalism with the future of freedom,
he was speaking aboutconditions of his day and did indeed
have his finger on something.Even people far more radical than
Thaddeus Stevens, people likeKarl Marx and Frederick Engels, saw
(44:43):
capitalism as a progressiveforce compared to slavery, feudalism
and other forms of oldersociety, and supported struggles
to bet the further developmentof capitalism, which you can bet
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engelswouldn't be doing today as a young,
(45:09):
newborn capitalist economy ina former colony. Stevens and others
supported tariffs to protectwhat they called infant industries
against the competition of theBritish Empire. That we could not
develop industries like ironand textiles and others without some
(45:32):
kind of tariff protection sothat these industries could at least
get off the ground. We'retalking about a time when probably
the average number ofemployees in any given enterprise
is something between 5 and 10.
Right.
Not hundreds and thousands.And so it's. His support for the
(45:53):
tariffs is specific to itstime and place.
Perfect answer.
I think.
Yeah. Tariff protection iswhat you used. I think. And that
to me explains exactly whatwas going on. They're trying to protect
a brand new industry and abrand new economy. And I think it's
very proper in that context touse tariffs and the tariff protection
(46:17):
that it offers. I think that'swhere it really means a lot. Yeah.
If we get into the area ofopinion, then it seems to me, my
personal opinion is a tariffmeans one thing. If it's in a little
landlocked African countrylike Lesotho trying to protect its
(46:37):
meager resources and industrycompared to tariffs imposed by these
great big powerful economieslike the United States or Europe
or Japan, which has anentirely different significance in
my opinion today.
I agree. I totally agree with you.
Perfect sense.
Can I say also something I hadno idea about Thaddeus Stevens? He
(47:02):
we should be teaching in theschools. I've never heard of him.
My academic career never knewabout Thaddeus Stevens. I'm reading
some things on him. He evenworked on the impeachment of President
Johnson back then. Oh, yeah.And the education, it just goes on
and on. Bruce, he's an amazingcontributor, I think, to the development
(47:27):
of our country.
I, of course, I agree, whichis why I invested all the time and
energy in this book to try tobring him to a bigger audience. To
this day, I'm startled by howfew people know about him. Even I'll
say to somebody, have you seenthe. You know, I'll tell them about
(47:49):
this book, and they'll give mea blank look and I'll say, did you
see the Lincoln movie? And I'mshocked at how few people even saw
that movie.
Really.
Yeah, I get that, too. Yeah.I'm so glad that you did this book.
I'm sorry to take theselective ramp here in this little.
But I'm finding it to befascinating to delve into. And we've
(48:10):
only got an hour here to talkabout Thaddeus. But my goodness,
even if you go to Wikipedia,it is a long page on Thaddeus Stevens
and all of the contributionsand different things that he did.
We should have a statuesomewhere on the guy. I don't know
if there's anything.
I think, in fact, inLancaster, they did just raise a
(48:33):
statue to him. I've got a copyof. Or at least a bust of him. I've
got a copy of. It doesn't looka whole lot like him, but better
than nothing. And his officesare in the process in Lancaster of
being turned into a museum.
Correct.
And I'm looking forward to itsopening. And there's another, smaller
(48:54):
museum in Gettysburg createdby the Thaddeus Stevens Society and
Ross Hetrick, who is itspresident. I suspect, by the way,
that the recording that youhad earlier is Ross's words.
Very good.
Ross's voice.
Yeah, Very good.
I really want to thank you,Bruce, for writing the book. And
(49:18):
you have to have a real manjust burning desire to find out about
something like this. And,folks, you don't realize how much
time it takes to write a booklike this. Matter of fact, Bruce,
how much. How many years didit take you to do all the research
and get the book completed?
The book itself took aboutfive years, but the book was only
(49:40):
possible. It was only possibleto do it in five years because I
had been teaching about theCivil War and its causes and its
aftermath for 20 to 30 yearsby the time I got around to this
book. And during the course ofall those years, I had been reading
and thinking and writingSmaller things about Stevens. So
(50:03):
it was a major undertaking.
So again, thank you forwriting the book, folks. The book's
called Thaddeus Stevens, CivilWar Revolutionary and Fighter for
Racial Justice. It waspublished in 2021. Don't think that.
Oh, it's not current. It isthe most current book in the last
150 years on Thaddeus Stevens.
(50:23):
Thank you.
I'm not sure if the titlereally tells the tale because there's
so much here about ThaddeusStevens. Thank you for the contribution
of this book to our society.Honestly, this will long live past
your days and mine.
And it's a. I would encourageeveryone to get this. I'll post a
(50:43):
link to Amazon for you to beable to check that out. Bruce, is
there any effort to maybe doan abridged version or a younger
version? This is. It's apretty intense read. Not that any
high school student or middleschool student who really knew how
to read could get the content.But is there thoughts to make it
a little more junior high schoolish?
(51:05):
Not to my knowledge, though Iwould, of course be open to it. There
is also a recorded booksversion of this book for people who
don't enjoy reading as much.And of course, this book itself is
in paperback, so it makes it alittle more obtainable.
And it's also available on aKindle. That's how I have mine.
(51:27):
That's right.
Oh, wait. Okay. All right.
Rich Levine, thank you verymuch for taking your time to talk
to us on St. Louis in Tunetoday. This has been an outstanding
show and a great, greatunderstanding of who Thaddeus Stevens
was. And again, thank you,Bruce, for your time today and the
book.
The contribution. Yes, great contribution.
Thank you, Arnold and Mark, Ireally appreciate your having me
on.
(51:47):
Yeah.
You take care, sir.
Such smart questions.
Thank you so much.
Have a great week, sir.
Tell my wife that, would youplease, that I. Smart questions.
Appreciate that a lot. Youtoo. Bye bye now. There you go.
This is one of those things,Mark, that it's like a piece of gold
(52:09):
or a diamond that you have towork for to get, but once you get
it, it's. Wow.
Really? I went to Wikipediaduring this because who is this Thaddeus
Stevens guy? I've never reallyever heard of Thaddeus Stevens before
today. And there is so much onhim and so much what he did to help
(52:32):
the country in so manydifferent ways.
Yeah, his Wikipedia page is huge.
It is.
It's really huge. And Bruce'sbooks on there. And folks, these
are the kinds of things thatwe like to do here on the show to
give you information and spuran interest for you to check this
out. And maybe you don't getBruce's book. Maybe you just read
(52:52):
the Wikipedia page. You'rejust that much more knowledgeable
about why we are in the shapewe are today. The good things about
it, the bad things about it.How many guys are like that in the
Congress today? Not very manyare there who have the courage and
the conviction to stand forwhat they believe no matter what.
(53:15):
Yeah. And he had a. Allstarted off with a club foot. Him
and his brother was even born.
Brother had two club feet.
Oh, is that right? Okay, soit's. Yeah. What a tough beginning.
And dad left them when theywere young.
Unbelievable.
On a farm with mom. Butsomething also interesting is he
was so successful in hiscapitalistic enterprise that he bought,
(53:35):
I think it's his mother, a 200acre farm. And when he died, he left
Lydia Hamilton Smith, hissecretary maybe would be called common
law wife. $500 to sustain. Andwhen she. That doesn't sound like
a lot now, but it was then.And when she died, she left money
(53:56):
for the perpetual care of her grave.
Oh.
So check these folks out.Thaddeus Steam. We'll put all the
links in in the show notes soyou can take a look at those.
Yeah. Modest beginnings.
Yes.
Didn't let that hold them back.
Perpetuate or not perpetuatedpropelled them forward into greatness.
(54:17):
It did propel them forward into.
I always love to see storieslike that.
Yes, we do. And so folks, ifyou want to catch more of those stories,
you can catchthose@stalentune.com that's all for
this hour. We're not going todo any jokes today. Oh, you probably
had all the sound ready to go.
I'm ready. I know there's somein there.
Thank you for listening. Ifyou enjoyed this episode, you can
(54:39):
listen to additional shows. AsI mentioned@stalentune.com Consider
leaving a review on ourwebsite, Apple Podcasts, Podchaser
or your preferred podcastplatform. Your feedback helps us
reach more listeners andcontinue to grow. Want to thank Bob
Bertha Sell for our thememusic, Better Rate Mortgage, to be
our sponsor, our guest, BruceLevine and co host, Mark Langston.
(55:00):
And we thank you, ouraudience, for being a part of our
community of curious minds.St. Louis in tune is a production
of Motif Media Group and theUS Radio Network. Remember to keep
seeking, keep learning, walkworthy and let your light shine.
For St. Louis in tune, I'mArnold Stricker.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!