The quiz show, “College Bowl,” was first broadcast on radio in 1953, 71 years ago. The show transitioned to television in 1959 and stayed there until 1970.

Its first host was Allen Ludden, the future husband of Betty White. He hosted the show until 1962 when he left to host “Password.” Robert Earle replaced him, and he remained until 1970.

The game show pitted four students from a college, such as Rutgers or Princeton, against a second team composed of four students from a second college, such as Colgate or John Hopkins.

The host, Ludden or Earle, would begin by reading a question until one of the eight players pressed a buzzer and gave an answer. If the player answered correctly, then the team earned 10 points. The host would then give that team 3 additional bonus questions, each worth 5 points.

The team’s members would then huddle and whisper among themselves for 15 seconds and arrive at an answer. The game was thus both an individual effort and a team effort.

In the 1960’s, I enjoyed watching “College Bowl” on Sunday afternoons and felt disappointed when it disappeared off the air waves. I liked it as well as “Jeopardy.”

Others have tried to revive “College Bowl” since 1970, but each attempt was short-lived.

Peyton Manning tried. Yes, that Peyton Manning! The Indianapolis Colts and Denver Broncos quarterback and two-time Super Bowl champion hosted “College Bowl” in 2021 and 2022.

Where the show’s format has enjoyed fabulous success is in the United Kingdom. There it is called “University Challenge.” It first ran from 1962 until 1987, and then started anew in 1994.

Its long-time host was Jeremy Paxman, a very British guy, formal and business-like. On July 17, 2023, Paxman stepped aside, allowing Amol Rajan, who was born in India, to host the show.

The game show appears on the BBC Two on Monday nights at 8:30 p.m.

Two weeks ago, on Monday night, April 8, a team from Imperial College in London won the finals, earning that college’s fifth championship, the most of any British college ever. Imperial won in 1996, 2001, 2020, 2022, and now in 2024.

Players on this year’s team included Justin Lee of Hong Kong and Canada; Adam Jones, of Hong Kong; Suraiya Haddad, of Manchester, England; and Sourajit Debnath, of India.

I watch the show on YouTube, and I think the questions are beyond difficult.

For example, question: “A little larger than Scotland, the northeast part of Australia’s northern territory has what name?” Answer: “Arnhem Land.”

Question: “Including the language sometimes known as Shanghainese, what two-letter term denotes the Sinitic language group spoken around the lower Yangtze?” Answer: “Wu.”

Question: “In cytogenics, what term describes the chromosomal complement of a cell which may be observed during the mitotic metaphase?” Answer: “Karyotype.”

Students are expected to know minutiae associated with all forms of knowledge.

In the “New York Times” April 7, 2024 edition, there appeared a feature article on Imperial College’s more flamboyant player, Brandon Blackwell, an African-American from New York City.

Blackwell applied to Imperial College in 2018, earned a spot on the college’s “University Challenge” team, and he—along with Richard Brooks, Caleb Rich, and Connor McMeel—won the finals in 2020, defeating Corpus Christi College by a lop-sided score of 275 to 105.

To train for the 2020 competition, Blackwell relied upon flash cards, some 30,000 of them. On each card he jotted a small isolated fact and then reviewed each of the 30,000 cards 8 times.

The Americans came up with the game show’s format, the British adopted it, but an American showed them how play it in a strategic style and win.

Two weeks ago in these pages, I looked at the second and third sections of the 14th Amendment. Today I continue with its two final sections, the fourth and the fifth.

Section 4 clarifies which debts the U.S. Federal government will honor as valid.

The first sentence reads: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”

In other words, the federal government will continue to pay interest and principal on those debts that it “incurred” through four years of Civil War to crush the rebel states, including Union veterans’ benefits, namely “pensions and bounties.” Those debts, “shall not be questioned.”

The second sentence reads: “But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave;

“But all such debts, obligations, and claims shall be held illegal and void.”

In other words, the U.S. Federal government or any state government shall not “assume or pay” any of the Confederacy’s debts incurred during the Civil War. Section 4 declares that the rebel states’ debts are forever “illegal and void.”

Also, this section states that the U.S. Federal government will no longer toy with the idea of reimbursing former slaveholders for the loss of their property because of emancipation.

Prior to the war, two ideas were often bandied about as a means to extricate the country from the grip of slavery: the first was to deport all slaves to a colony in west Africa, and the second was for the Federal government to pay slaveholders for their property and set the slaves free.

Lincoln talked often of colonization, but few black people wanted to migrate to Africa. As the bloody war progressed, Lincoln’s thoughts moved from colonization to emancipation.

Also, few people wanted the Federal government to borrow funds to pay slaveholders market value for their slaves. At an average fair market value of $750 per slave, total funds required to recompense all slaveholders would have approached $3 billion.

The U.S. census of 1860 counted a total population of 31,443,321, and of those 3,953,760 were slaves and an additional 488,070 free blacks. So, one in eight residents were slaves.

By Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, all slaveholders’ claims for reimbursement for loss of their property because of emancipation were pitched aside, and declared “illegal and void.”

Section 5 is a single sentence, the same that concludes the 13th and 15th Amendments: “The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

Section 5 leaves the 14th Amendment open to further laws that Congress would deem necessary to ensure all its sections were enforced.

The House passed the 14th Amendment on May 10, 1866, by a vote of 128 to 37, the Senate passed it on June 8 by a vote of 33 to 11, and the House concurred on June 13.

On June 16, 1866, Secretary of State William Seward submitted the 14th Amendment to the governors of the states for ratification. At first, all former Confederate states rejected it.

A year passed. On June 15, 1867, Nebraska ratified it, becoming the 22nd state to do so, but 28 states were needed for it to become law, the required three-fourth’s.

Nine months passed. Then, on March 16, 1868, Iowa ratified it. That same month, on March 2, 1867, Congress passed a law that required each former Confederate state to ratify the 14th Amendment before “said State shall be declared entitled to representation in Congress.”

Seven Southern states changed their vote from rejection to ratification in April, June, and July of 1868: Arkansas, Florida, North Carolina, Louisiana, South Carolina, Alabama, and Georgia.

On July 28, 1868, Secretary Seward certified the adoption of the 14th Amendment, twenty-five months after the House and Senate passed it, and it became law then and ever since.

Bill Benson, of Sterling, is a dedicated historian.

Last time in these pages I looked at Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. Today I continue.

The last phrase in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment declares that no state can “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.” All races are equal under the law.

Section 2  begins: “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers.” By these words the committee eliminated the 3/5’s rule.

Section 2 continues: “But when the right to vote at any election . . . is in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.”

What do these words mean? The authors of Section 2 created a mathematical equation and said that if a state refuses to allow most men of age to vote, then that state will suffer a reduction of its representatives to Congress and also within the Electoral College.

Eric Foner, a Reconstruction historian at Columbia University, says that “Section 2 has never been enforced.” No state has suffered a loss of representatives because of restrictive voting rules.

The states knew that without a federal bureaucracy—officials to count the numbers who were denied the right to vote—the Federal government would find Section 2 difficult to enforce.

Akhil Reed Amar, legal scholar at Yale University, points out that Section 2 does introduce into the Constitution the most important words, “the right to vote.” Citizens have a right to vote.

Section 3 says: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or Elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, who . . . shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same.”

The intent of Section 3, when drafted in 1866, was to push out of Congress ex-Confederates. Again, this Section proved difficult to enforce at first.

In recent days certain people have dusted off Section 3 and applied it to January 6, 2021.

Per the case “Donald J. Trump v. Norma Anderson” that appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court weeks ago, “A group of Colorado voters wanted Secretary of State Jena Griswold to exclude former President Trump from the Republican primary ballot in the State.”

“The Colorado Supreme Court agreed with that contention.”

On March 4, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed that decision, by pointing to Section 5, of the 14th Amendment, a single sentence that reads: “Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

The justices reasoned that it is Congress’s duty to determine who has participated in a rebellion, not the individual states. They wrote: “Congress’s Section 5 power is critical when it comes to Section 3.” “States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3.”

The justices dug into the history behind Section 3 and pointed out:

“Indeed, during a debate on enforcement legislation less than a year after the 14th Amendment’s ratification, Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois noted that ‘notwithstanding [Section 3] . . . hundreds of men [were] holding office’ in violation of its terms.”

The justices said: “The enforcement mechanism that Trumbull championed was later enacted as part of the Enforcement Act of 1870.” Federal prosecutors then had the power to remove ex-Confederates from their respective offices within the Federal government.

Whereas Section 2 was never enforced, Section 3 was, but not until 1870.

Next time in these pages I will look at certain details within Sections 4 and 5.

Bill Benson, of Sterling, is a dedicated historian.

In early 1866, the Joint Committee of Fifteen on Reconstruction in the 39th Congress wrestled with the idea that they must write a 14th Amendment to address certain issues:

Who is a citizen? How does the country’s laws apply to former slaves and slave owners? Will former Confederate officials hold elected office now in the Union? Will former slaveholders receive any compensation for the loss of their property? Who will pay the Confederacy’s debts?

Most importantly, who will rule supreme: state governments or the federal government?

The Joint Committee members wanted an all-encompassing Amendment that addresses each issue because they understood that future Congresses or the courts may disavow the laws that they would write and pass now but an Amendment would make it more or less permanent.

The Joint Committee members argued, debated, negotiated, and compromised, until they submitted to the House and Senate a 14th Amendment that contained five sections.

Section 1 begins: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Historians have pointed to John Bingham, representative from Ohio and member of the Joint Committee, as primary author of Section 1.

They point out that Bingham’s words in Section 1 unraveled Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Roger Taney’s words when he wrote the Dred Scott decision back in 1857, that black slaves are not citizens, that they never can become citizens, and that they are without any rights.

Taney based his decision on the Constitution, what some call a slave-holding document.

Remember the 3/5’s clause in the Constitution? Southern states received more representation in Congress and in the Electoral College because each slave was counted as 3/5’s of a person. This unfair advantage meant that the Southern states would control the Presidency until Lincoln.

Bingham declared, “All persons born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens.” That means both black and white, Jew and Gentile, male and female, oldest in the family or youngest. It makes no difference where a person’s parents were born, their religion, or their culture.

Per the 14th Amendment, all are citizens if born here or are naturalized here, Mr. Trump.

Section 1 continues: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”

The words, “No state shall make or enforce any law . . . ,” is a radical change to the first words in the first Amendment in the Bill of Rights, “Congress shall make no law . . . ”

James Madison of Virginia, who wrote the Bill of Rights, feared a too powerful Congress, but the Civil War demonstrated that it was the states that can cause immense damage to the Union.

The words, “No state shall make or enforce any law,” indicates that the Federal government now stands supreme. Bingham pitched aside the Southern states’ ongoing cry for “States Rights.”

What are “the privileges or immunities of citizens?” Bingham believed they were the rights listed within the first 10 Amendments, the Bill of Rights.

Section 1 continues: “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

Please note here, Mr. Trump, that Bingham wrote “any person.” He did not write “citizen.” Any person, citizen or foreigner, is entitled to life, liberty, property, and the due process of law.

Akhil Reed Amar, legal scholar at Yale University, pointed out in his book, The Bill of Rights, that Bingham found this idea of extending rights to non-citizens in Exodus 22, in the fourth Commandment. “Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy.” All shall rest on that day.

That includes sons, daughters, manservants, oxen, and “the stranger that is within thy gates.”

Bingham asked, “Are we not committing the terrible enormity of distinguishing here in the laws in respect to life, liberty, and property between the citizen and stranger within your gates?”

Next time in these pages I will continue to unpack ideas out of the 14th Amendment.

Bill Benson, of Sterling, is a dedicated historian.

Two African-American slaves from the eighteenth century: Phillis Wheatley and William “Billy” Lee. The first a woman, the second a man. The first a poet, the second a valet. The two received their freedom from their respective owners, and they each knew George Washington.

First, Phillis Wheatley was born in Africa in 1753 or 1754, but when a child of 7 or 8, slave traders kidnapped her, sold her into slavery, and transported her to North America aboard the ship “The Phillis.” John and Susanna Wheatley of Boston purchased her in mid-July of 1761.

They gave her the name Phillis and asked their eighteen-year-old daughter Mary to tutor Phillis, who displayed a superb talent for learning English and Greek and Latin, for reading the Bible and classical works, and for composing poems. They encouraged the child’s literary talent.

In 1773, when Phillis turned 20, the Wheatley’s sent her to England, accompanied by their son Nathaniel, and there Phillis found a publisher willing to print her collection of poems that she entitled “Poems on Various Subjects, Religious and Moral.”

It was the first book written by an enslaved Black woman of America.

After Phillis returned to Boston in the fall of 1773, John and Susanna Wheatley set her free.

On Oct. 26, 1775, Phillis wrote a letter to General George Washington and enclosed a poem about him, entitled “His Excellency, General Washington.” Bold and daring she was.

In the cover letter she wrote, “I have taken the freedom to address your Excellency in the enclosed poem, and entreat your acceptance.” Note that her fifth word is “freedom.”

In the poem, she begins, “Celestial choir! enthroned in realms of light, Columbia’s scenes of glorious toils I write.” Then, she ends the poem,

“Proceed, great chief, with virtue on thy side, Thy ev’ry action let the Goddess guide. A crown, a mansion, and a throne that shine, With gold unfading, WASHINGTON! Be thine.”

On Feb. 28, 1776, Washington wrote back to Phillis Wheatley, saying, “I thank you most sincerely for your polite notice of me, in the elegant Lines You enclosed. If you should ever come to Cambridge, I should be happy to see a person so favored by the Muses.”

The historical record is unclear if Washington understood then that Miss Wheatley was a former slave. It is also unclear if Washington ever met the poet in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he and his army were holding a siege upon Boston that soon drove off the British army.

Phillis Wheatley passed away on December 5, 1784, at the age of 31.

Second, William Lee was George Washington’s slave and valet for two decades, including the years when Washington led the colonial army in a war with Great Britain, 1775-1783. “Billy” Lee rode his horse beside the general, and also set up and took down their tent.

In addition, Billy attended to Washington’s stack of papers, held onto his spyglass, combed his hair, laid out his clothes, mailed his letters, and delivered his messages. He was Washington’s manservant, and the two lived for “more than seven years in close proximity during the war.”

After the war, Billy hoped to continue to serve Washington in New York City, after voters elected Washington as the nation’s first president, but by then Lee’s knees were worn out, and he no longer could act as Washington’s valet. Washington sent him back to Mount Vernon.

There, Billy made shoes “in the small cobbler shop behind the greenhouse.”

George Washington died on December 14, 1799, at Mount Vernon. By his will, he set free one slave of the 317 slaves working then at Mount Vernon, and that was Billy Lee. Washington also stipulated that Billy was to receive “an annual allowance of $30 for the rest of his life, noting,

“This I give him for his faithful services during the Revolutionary War.”

Billy Lee remained at Mount Vernon until he too passed away in 1810.

Two former slaves to reflect upon during Black History Month: Phillis Wheatley and William “Billy” Lee. Also, a former President to consider on President’s Day: George Washington.