On March 4, 1789, New York City's church bells pealed, cannons fired, and flags snapped in the wind to celebrate the date set for the opening of the First Federal Congress. In many ways the establishment of Congress marked the culmination of the American Revolution as the ship of state was launched from the foundation of the legislative system outlined in Article I of the Constitution.
"Inventing Congress" presents the latest scholarship on the interrelated intellectual, institutional, cultural, and political antecedents of the formation of the First Federal Congress. The first section covers the origins of the body, ranging in discussion from the question of how the founders' understanding of classical Greek and Roman republican precedent shaped their thinking, to the political lessons learned during the Continental and Confederation Congresses.
The second section concerns itself with the establishment of the First Federal Congress, examining several heretofore little-treated aspects of the most important Congress in history, including its relationship to the press, morality, the arts and sciences, and economic philosophy.
"Inventing Congress" represents the papers from the first two conferences sponsored by the United States Capitol Historical Society in its series, "Perspectives on the History of Congress, 1789-1801."

Few images of early America were more striking, and jarring, than that of slaves in the capital city of the world's most important free republic. Black slaves served and sustained the legislators, bureaucrats, jurists, cabinet officials, military leaders, and even the presidents who lived and worked there. While slaves quietly kept the nation's capital running smoothly, lawmakers debated the place of slavery in the nation, the status of slavery in the territories newly acquired from Mexico, and even the legality of the slave trade in itself. "In the Shadow of Freedom," with essays by some of the most distinguished historians in the nation, explores the twin issues of how slavery made life possible in the District and how lawmakers in the District regulated slavery in the nation.

Amid the turbulent swirl of foreign intrigue, external and internal threats to the young nation’s existence, and the domestic partisan wrangling of the 1790s, the United States Congress solidified its role as the national legislature. The ten essays in The House and Senate in the 1790s demonstrate the mechanisms by which this bicameral legislature developed its institutional identity. The first essay sets the scene for the institutional development of Congress by examining its constitutional origins and the efforts of the Founders to empower the new national legislature. The five following essays focus on two related mechanisms -- petitioning and lobbying -- by which citizens and private interests communicated with national lawmakers. Although scholars tend to see lobbying as a later nineteenth-century development, the papers presented here clearly demonstrate the existence of lobbyists and lobbying in the 1790s. The final four papers examine other aspects of the institutional development of the House and the Senate, including the evolution of political parties and congressional leadership. The essays in this collection, the third volume in the series Perspectives on the History of Congress, 1789-1801, originated in a series of conferences held by the United States Capitol Historical Society from 1994 to 2001.

During the long decade from 1848 to 1861 America was like a train speeding down the track, without an engineer or brakes. The new territories acquired from Mexico had vastly increased the size of the nation, but debate over their status-and more importantly the status of slavery within them-paralyzed the nation. Southerners gained access to the territories and a draconian fugitive slave law in the Compromise of 1850, but this only exacerbated sectional tensions. Virtually all northerners, even those who supported the law because they believed that it would preserve the union, despised being turned into slave catchers. In 1854, in the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Congress repealed the ban on slavery in the remaining unorganized territories. In 1857, in the Dred Scott case, the Supreme Court held that all bans on slavery in the territories were unconstitutional. Meanwhile, northern whites, free blacks, and fugitive slaves resisted the enforcement of the 1850 fugitive slave law. In Congress members carried weapons and Representative Preston Brooks assaulted Senator Charles Sumner with a cane, nearly killing him. This was the decade of the 1850s and these were the issues Congress grappled with. This volume of new essays examines many of these issues, helping us better understand the failure of political leadership in the decade that led to the Civil War.

"When Lincoln took office, in March 1861, the national government had no power to touch slavery in the states where it existed. Lincoln understood this, and said as much in his first inaugural address, noting: 'I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists.'" How, then, asks Paul Finkelman in the introduction to Lincoln, Congress, and Emancipation, did Lincoln-who personally hated slavery-lead the nation through the Civil War to January 1865, when Congress passed the constitutional amendment that ended slavery outright? The essays in this book examine the route Lincoln took to achieve emancipation, and how it is remembered both in the United States and abroad. The ten contributors-all on the cutting edge of contemporary scholarship on Lincoln and the Civil War-push our understanding of this watershed moment in US history in new directions. They present wide-ranging contributions to Lincoln studies, including a parsing of the sixteenth president's career in Congress in the 1840s and a brilliant critique of the historical choices made by Stephen Spielberg and writer Tony Kushner in the movie Lincoln, about the passage of the thirteenth amendment. As a whole, these classroom-ready readings provide fresh and essential perspectives on Lincoln's deft navigation of constitutional and political circumstances to move emancipation forward.

0n July 24, 1989, the Committee on Ways and Means celebrates its bicentennial. The Committee on Ways and Means is the oldest committee of the Congress. Its history is a large part of our nation's history. The responsibilities vested in the committee have placed it at the center of some of the most critical legislative decisions faced by the Congress. The prestige accorded the committee is due in part, of course, to the breadth of its legislative jurisdiction: all revenues, the management of the public debt, tariff and trade laws, the Social Security and Medicare systems. These responsibilities alone would make it a committee of note. But just as important to its reputation has been the manner in which the members of the committee have exercised those responsibilities. One cannot read the history of the Committee on Ways and Means without recognizing the important role played by certain individuals at critical points in our nation's history. The history of the committee is replete with examples of legislators who, through the strength of their convictions, were able to lead the country in a direction it might not otherwise have gone. Examples include Gallatin, Randolph, Stevens, Underwood, Hull, Doughton, and Mills. Today we face enormous and seemingly permanent budget deficits the likes of which have never been seen in our history. This generation's unwillingness to pay for the government it demands means that future generations will be saddled with an intolerable debt burden. This situation did not begin in the 1980s, but it has increased dramatically during this period. What is disturbing is not so much the size of the debt; significant debts have accumulated in the past, especially in times of war. Much more troubling is our seeming inability to even debate, much less decide, on those changes necessary to reduce or eliminate the oppressive budget deficit. However, in the end it must be done or our nation will suffer the consequences. One can only wonder if this is not one of those critical periods when it is necessary to look beyond narrow parochial interest, a time when strong leadership is required. The future of our children and their children depends upon the leadership we exert today.