Walter Coffey's Blog, page 191

The Enrollment Act

In March 1863, President Abraham Lincoln signed a controversial bill into law, titled ”An Act for enrolling and calling out the National Forces, and for other purposes,” or the Enrollment Act.

Intending to generate more manpower for the war effort, this required all able-bodied men between the ages of 20 and 45 to register at local draft boards for potential military service. Draftees would be selected by a lottery system, and presidential appointees would establish draft quotas for each congressional district; the quotas were to be based on population and the number of men already serving in the district.

The law’s most divisive provision allowed men to buy their way out of the draft by either paying a $300 commutation fee or hiring substitutes to serve in their place. This intended to give war dissenters an option to avoid service, but the provision sparked outrage because most men could not afford such a high fee.

Congressman Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania declared, “(This law) is a rich man’s bill, made for him who can raise his $300, and against him who cannot raise that sum.” Lincoln tried setting an example by hiring a substitute, but that did little to satisfy the detractors. The provision was later repealed.

The Enrollment Act ironically prompted more men to volunteer for service since volunteers were offered bounties that draftees were not. The law also helped working men who could hire substitutes to avoid military service and continue providing for their families.

However, the commutation and substitute provisions mostly led to resentment and resistance. Many hired substitutes were either mentally defective or physically unable to serve. Other substitutes took the money and deserted the army, then repeated the scheme by hiring themselves out again.

In addition, many northerners opposed the overall notion of a military draft. Workers feared that they would be pulled from jobs that would be taken by freed slaves coming north. Many resentful immigrants noted that they came to America because of the promises of the Homestead Act of 1862, not to serve in the military. And many argued that compulsory military service violated civil liberties. On the whole, only six percent of Federal military personnel were recruited by draft over the course of the war, and two-thirds of these draftees hired substitutes.

The Civil War This Week: Mar 4-10, 1863

Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest

Wednesday, March 4

In Tennessee, Federal forces were surrounded by Confederates under Generals Earl Van Dorn and Nathan Bedford Forrest at Spring Hill. The cavalry escaped, but the infantry was captured the next day. Skirmishing occurred in Virginia and Tennessee.

Thursday, March 5

In Mississippi, Federal troops under General Ulysses S. Grant continued digging a canal to approach Vicksburg through the swamps north of the city; they were fired on by occasional Confederate artillery. In Ohio, Federal troops attacked the headquarters of Crisis, a pro-southern newspaper in Columbus. Skirmishing occurred in Missouri and Arkansas.

Friday, March 6

Skirmishing occurred in Arkansas, and a Federal expedition began from New Berne to Trenton and Swansborough in North Carolina.

Saturday, March 7

The Federal military commander of Baltimore prohibited the sale of “secession music” and ordered the confiscation of various song sheets. The commander also prohibited the sale of pictures of Confederate generals and politicians.

In Louisiana, General Nathaniel Banks and 12,000 Federals began moving north from New Orleans in an effort to capture Port Hudson on the Mississippi River. Port Hudson prevented Federal gunboats in New Orleans from moving upriver and protected the Red River which the Confederates used to connect to the West. Banks planned to feign an attack on Port Hudson while Federal gunboats moved past the stronghold to isolate it from the north.

General Edmund Kirby Smith assumed command of all Confederate forces west of the Mississippi River. Skirmishing occurred in Virginia, western Virginia, and North Carolina.

Sunday, March 8

In Virginia, Captain John S. Mosby and 29 Confederate raiders attacked Fairfax County Court House and captured Federal troops and supplies. The captured troops included General E.H. Stoughton, who had been assigned to stop Mosby, along with two captains and 38 others. The captured supplies included 58 horses, along with arms and equipment. The southern press celebrated Mosby’s daring raid.

A Federal expedition began from La Grange and Collierville to Covington in Tennessee. Skirmishing occurred at New Berne, North Carolina.

Monday, March 9

On the Misssissippi River, Federal forces sent another “Quaker” boat, or fake ironclad, past Vicksburg; it was constructed from logs and pork barrels. Skirmishing occurred in Kentucky, Louisiana, Virginia, and Florida. A Federal expedition began from Bloomfield, Missouri to Chalk Bluff, Arkansas. Another Federal reconnaissance began from Salem to Versailles in Tennessee.

Tuesday, March 10

President Abraham Lincoln issued a proclamation granting amnesty to soldiers who had deserted the ranks if they voluntarily returned to their units by April 1; otherwise they would be prosecuted as deserters.

In Florida, Federal troops occupied Jacksonville. Skirmishing occurred in North Carolina and Tennessee. A Federal reconnaissance began from La Fayette to Moscow in Tennessee. Confederate President Jefferson Davis questioned General John C. Pemberton about Federal efforts to capture Vicksburg.

Primary source: The Civil War Day by Day by E.B. Long and Barbara Long (New York, NY: Da Capo Press, Inc., 1971)

Nat Turner’s Murderous Rampage

In August 1831, a slave named Nat Turner led a bloody revolt against the slaveholders of Southampton County, Virginia. This boosted calls in the North to abolish slavery, and it prompted slaveholders to take more stringent action to prevent future uprisings in the South.

Nat Turner’s Background

Nat Turner was a slave who belonged to the Travis family in Southampton County. He had originally belonged to Samuel Turner, who had given Nat his name. Turner’s son had taught Nat to read, and Nat gained a passionate interest in the Bible.

As he grew older, Nat’s interest in religion intensified, and he began preaching to fellow slaves. This earned him the nickname “The Prophet.” Nat also began seeing visions that he interpreted to have come from God, and he became convinced that he “was ordained for some great purpose in the hands of the Almighty.”

One of Nat’s visions urged him to “slay my enemies with their own weapons.” This vision came to him several times. Nat also perceived weather phenomena as signs from God. These signs told him that he needed to lead the slaves in rebellion against their masters.

Seeds of Uprising

The idea of a mass slave uprising frightened most southerners, especially in regions like Southampton County, where black slaves outnumbered free whites. Slaveholders were quite familiar with stories about the Haitian Revolution of 1791-1804, in which over 80,000 whites and an unknown number of blacks were killed during a black slave uprising against white French masters.

Prior to the Haitian uprising, most American slaveholders viewed slavery as an institution that had been unfortunately inherited from England. After the uprising, many saw slavery as a necessary evil to prevent a similar violent rebellion among the millions of slaves in the South.

The sky turned blue-green on August 13, 1831. This was most likely due to either an eclipse or debris from the eruption of Mount St. Helens. To Nat Turner, this was God’s signal to launch the slave revolt.

The Brutal Rampage

After a week of planning, Nat and seven other slaves entered the Travis home at night and murdered the family in their sleep with axes and hatchets. Then they left the plantation, seeking to gather more slaves and attack other homes. Nat instructed his group to “kill all whites.”

Using knives, axes, hatchets, and blunt instruments to keep quiet, Nat’s force invaded random homes and slaughtered about 55 white men, women, and children in a 48-hour rampage. Then they moved on to the county seat of Jerusalem (now Courtland) to seize the armory.

However, Nat’s force was disorganized and undisciplined; many were drunk. When they reached Jerusalem, they were dispersed by the Virginia state militia. Nat and some of his followers escaped, but the militia, along with angry white mobs bent on revenge, went on the warpath. Ultimately 56 blacks were tried, convicted, and executed for alleged connections to the uprising. Another 200 were beaten, tortured, or murdered in reprisals.

Nat and some of his followers eluded capture until October 30, when they were finally apprehended. In Jerusalem, Nat was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death by hanging. He was executed along with 16 followers on November 11.

The Spread of Fear and Division

Nat Turner’s rebellion sparked a wave of terror throughout the South for several reasons:

It was the bloodiest slave uprising in American history up to that time.
Nat testified that his masters had been kind to him, dispelling the theory that showing kindness to slaves prevented rebellions.
Nat had been a preacher, dispelling the theory that teaching Christianity to slaves kept peace.
Free blacks had participated in the uprising, which turned southern opinion against emancipating slaves. After debating whether or not to free the slaves, the Virginia General Assembly voted against freeing them. The Assembly also enacted stricter laws prohibiting slaves from being educated and limiting the rights of both free and enslaved blacks.

Prior to Nat’s rebellion, over 100 of the 130 anti-slavery societies in the U.S. had been in the South. This changed drastically after the rebellion, as southerners were urged to support slavery in order to prevent future uprisings. Many southern states enacted laws banning abolitionist material from the mail and restricting speech, expression, and the press. Southerners also expressed outrage and horror at northerners who supported and celebrated Nat’s rebellion.

Conversely, the abolition movement grew rapidly in the North after Nat’s uprising. Southerners resented northern abolition societies mainly because the groups often expressed hatred and intolerance for the southern way of life. Vicious northern literature shocked southerners, making the northern abolitionists seem more radical and dangerous than the southern societies. To counter the northern threats, many southerners began defending slavery no longer as a necessary evil but as a moral good because it provided slaves with free food, clothing, shelter, and Christian values.

The Nat Turner uprising helped polarize the U.S., and it inspired future campaigns both for and against slavery. Many blacks have since viewed Nat as a hero because of his effort, however misguided, to obtain his freedom and purge America from the sin of slavery. Moreover, Nat inspired the fanatical John Brown to launch a similar attack on the South a generation later that led to the southern secession and the War Between the States.

Opening the Panama Canal

On August 15, 1914, the Panama Canal officially opened for business. In joining the Pacific Ocean to the Caribbean Sea, this was the greatest engineering feat in history. The U.S. had acquired the Canal Zone and built the canal, but the legality of the acquisition remains questionable.

Background

Since the time Europeans began colonizing the Americas, explorers sought easier ways to trade goods between Europe and the Far East. When the United States began trading with China in the 18th century, merchant vessels leaving the East Coast had to sail around the southern tip of South America to get to Asia, which took several months. And when the U.S. went to war against Mexico, eastern warships had to make the same arduous journey to get to California.

With the advent of new technology in the 19th century, engineers began planning ways to dig a canal in the narrow part of Central America that would connect the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. This would drastically reduce travel times, which would increase trade and enhance national security.

The narrowest point of Central America was in Panama, a territory of Colombia. For many years, transporting goods across Panama involved stopping on one coast, loading and unloading goods on trains, moving them by rail to the other coast, then unloading and loading them onto a ship to make the remaining journey. A canal was the natural alternative to this difficult process.

French Failures

Despite U.S. interest, a French company initially bought the rights to build a canal across the Isthmus of Panama in 1879. The company was headed by Ferdinand de Lesseps, the engineer of the Suez Canal. U.S. President Rutherford B. Hayes, invoking the Monroe Doctrine, declared, “The policy of the country is a canal under American control.”

French efforts to build a canal were thwarted by corruption, bad planning, earthquakes, yellow fever, and malaria, as thousands died from accidents and disease. After 10 years and $400 million, the French gave up amidst a national scandal, leaving their machinery and a partial canal behind.

Deep in debt, the French tried selling their rights to the canal to the U.S. for $109 million, but U.S. officials believed the price was too high. An easier canal route through Nicaragua was proposed, but the region was susceptible to earthquakes. Then the French lowered their price to $40 million, and Panama suddenly reemerged as the top choice.

Enter Teddy Roosevelt

In 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt sent Secretary of State John Hay to negotiate a treaty with Colombia based on France’s asking price of $40 million for the rights to the Panama Canal Zone. Hay and Tomas Herran of Colombia reached an agreement whereby the U.S. would own the Canal Zone for 99 years in exchange for $10 million down and $250,000 per year.

To Roosevelt’s dismay, the Colombian government rejected the Hay-Herran agreement. Although Colombia offered several potential replacements, Roosevelt refused to renegotiate a deal he believed was final. He accused Colombia of blackmail, calling the Colombians “homicidal corruptionists,” “greedy little arthropoids,” and “dagoes.” In so doing, Roosevelt failed to acknowledge that Colombia had the sovereign right to administer its own territory, which included accepting or rejecting agreements regarding Panama.

Later that year, a New York speculator named Philippe Bunau-Varilla met with Roosevelt at the White House. Bunau-Varilla was an agent of the French Canal Company who had lobbied Congress to approve a canal in Panama after the French company gave up. He confided in Roosevelt that a revolution in Panama was imminent due to Colombian rejection of the Hay-Herran agreement; that rejection had cost Panamanian businessmen millions of dollars. Seeing that this could solve the problem of having no agreement, Roosevelt immediately ordered U.S.S. Nashville to the port of Colon in Panama.

Although Roosevelt did not openly encourage a revolt in Panama, he did not discourage reports that a revolt could result in Panama’s secession from Colombia. In fact, Roosevelt had planned to recommend that the U.S. take Panama in his annual message to Congress. However, events preceded him.

The Panamanian Revolt

Under President Roosevelt’s orders, U.S.S. Nashville entered Colon Harbor on November 2, 1903, to prevent hostile forces from seizing the Panama Railroad. This effectively prevented Colombia from moving troops by rail to stop the revolt. The next day, the anticipated revolution began.

Many Colombian soldiers were bribed $50 each to lay down their arms, and the new Panamanian constitution had been drafted by U.S. officials in advance. By November 6, 10 U.S. warships were in Panamanian waters, and Panama declared its independence from Colombia.

At 11:35 a.m. on November 6, Roosevelt was notified by the U.S. consul in Panama that the independent Republic of Panama existed. At 12:51 p.m., Secretary of State Hay instructed the consul to recognize the new country. This marked the quickest U.S. recognition of a new government in history. Bunau-Varilla was named the first Panamanian minister to the U.S.

Less than two weeks later, Hay and Bunau-Varilla signed a treaty granting the U.S. control of the 10-mile Panama Canal Zone “in perpetuity.” In exchange, the U.S. paid $10 million and an annual fee of $250,000 after nine years. The U.S. also bought shares in the company Bunau-Varilla had formed to build the canal, totaling $40 million, and Panama was guaranteed its independence. No Panamanians signed this treaty.

Despite Colombian protests, initial construction on the canal was set to begin the following year. And since the Canal Zone comprised most of Panama and would be guarded by U.S. troops, the U.S. would effectively control the country. Thus, Panama was created by a French agent and the U.S. military without the consent of Congress. Essentially, after Colombia rejected the initial agreement, the U.S. solution was to help create a new country that would be more agreeable to its aims. Roosevelt later admitted, “I took the Canal Zone. I… left (it to ) Congress, not to debate the Canal, but to debate me.”

Building the Canal

In early 1904, President Roosevelt appointed the Panama Canal Commission to supervise construction. The commission included the U.S. Army engineers supervised by John F. Wallace. Wallace oversaw construction of entire towns with plank walkways, hospitals, mess halls, and general stores.

The malaria and yellow fever threats were met by breakthroughs in treating the illnesses from U.S. doctors in Cuba. The workers were segregated, as Caribbean black laborers were fed and housed separately, and they were paid in silver rather than the gold paid to whites. Blacks also suffered five times more fatalities by accident and disease than whites.

By 1907, Wallace realized that a sea-level canal would be too difficult to construct, and instead proposed a system of locks and channels to raise vessels above the oceans. Colonel George Goethals used over 2,500 men to dynamite mountain walls, excavating over 200 million yards of dirt and rock. Some 19 million pounds of explosives were used, resulting in only eight deaths. Through these efforts, the canal was completed ahead of schedule and under budget, despite the challenges and changes to the original plan. The canal was also completed without suspicion of corruption, graft, kickbacks, or bribery.

When the Panama Canal finally opened in August 1914, Roosevelt was out of politics but he could claim substantial responsibility for the greatest engineering feat in history. The Canal was Roosevelt’s most famous and historically significant foreign policy achievement. Upon its completion, the canal shortened the route of freighters between San Francisco and New York City by 8,000 miles.

Returning the Canal

Over the years, relations between the U.S. and Panama deteriorated to the point that Panamanians demanded a revision to the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty of 1903. The U.S. agreed to renegotiate, and in 1977 the Torrijos-Carter Treaties were signed and ratified.

Under these treaties, named for Panama General Omar Torrijos and U.S. President Jimmy Carter, the U.S. pledged to cede control of the Canal Zone to Panama by January 1, 2000 while retaining the right to defend any threat to the canal’s neutrality.

Most Americans bitterly opposed these treaties because they signified the surrender of a strategic asset to an unstable, corrupt country led by an unelected military dictator. The New York Times and Chicago Tribune later reported that had the U.S. Senate not approved the treaties, Torrijos had empowered Manual Noriega to sabotage the canal.

Nevertheless, on December 14, 1999, a delegation led by former President Carter handed control of the Panama Canal to Panama.

The Civil War This Week: Feb 25-Mar 3, 1863

U.S.S. Vanderbilt

Wednesday, February 25

An international crisis threatened to erupt when U.S.S. Vanderbilt seized the British merchant ship Peterhoff off St. Thomas in the West Indies. Peterhoff was bound for Mexico and suspected of being a Confederate blockade runner. Ironically, the seizure was ordered by the same admiral who had ordered the seizure of a British ship in 1861 that nearly sparked war between the U.S. and Britain.

British officials protested that the U.S. had no right to interfere with trade between Britain and Mexico, even if most of the shipments to Mexican ports were being funneled into the Confederacy. International courts later ruled that the U.S. could not halt the shipping of goods into neutral ports.

President Abraham Lincoln signed the National Currency Act into law, which established a national bank charter system and encouraged development of a uniform national currency. This answered Lincoln’s call for currency reforms, and it was supported by financiers as a means to not only pay for the war, but also to further centralize the economy. Critics argued that this law was an unconstitutional Federal takeover of banks. Supporters viewed this as a necessary wartime measure, even though the Republican Party had actually advocated nationalized banking before the war. The new banking system appealed to private bankers and speculators, who profited as much as industrialists during the war.

Confederate General D.H. Hill assumed command of troops in North Carolina. In Virginia, skirmishing occurred at various points.

Thursday, February 26

The Cherokee Indian Council repealed its ordinance of secession, abolished slavery, and officially announced its support for the U.S.

Confederate General James Longstreet assumed command of the Department of Virginia and North Carolina. In Tennessee, Confederate raiders captured a Federal freight train loaded with supplies.

On the Mississippi River, Federals sent an empty coal barge past Vicksburg. The Confederate defenders mistook the barge for an ironclad and destroyed the ship Indianola to prevent its capture.

Friday, February 27

Confederate President Jefferson Davis called for a national day of fasting and prayer for March 27. Confederate General Sterling Price was ordered to the Trans-Mississippi Department. Skirmishing and scouting occurred in Virginia and Tennessee.

Saturday, February 28

In Georgia, the Federal warship U.S.S. Montauk destroyed C.S.S. Nashville on the Ogeechee River, south of Savannah. President Lincoln called for a special Senate session to begin on March 4 to consider numerous appointments and promotions. Skirmishing occurred at Fort Gibson in the Indian Territory.

Sunday, March 1

President Lincoln conferred with Secretary of War Edwin Stanton and military officers regarding appointments and promotions. Skirmishing occurred in North Carolina, Tennessee, and Missouri.

Monday, March 2

The U.S. Senate approved the appointment of four major and nine brigadier generals for the Regular Army, and 40 major and 200 brigadier generals for the volunteers. The Senate dismissed 33 army officers from the service who had been convicted by courts-martial.

Skirmishing occurred in Virginia, Tennessee, and Missouri, and a Federal expedition left New Orleans bound for the Rio Grande River.

Tuesday, March 3

On the last day of the U.S. congressional session, President Lincoln signed several bills into law. These included authorizing the Treasury to seized captured goods in Confederate states, approving loans for the next two years to finance the war, creating the Idaho Territory, allowing the president to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, and empowering individuals to sue contractors for defrauding the government by selling shoddy war equipment.

Lincoln also signed the controversial Enrollment Act, which required all able-bodied men to register for a military draft. Critics denounced the provisions allowing men to buy their way out of the draft by either paying $300 or hiring a substitute. Only six percent of Federal military personnel were recruited by draft over the course of the war, and two-thirds of these draftees hired substitutes.

In Georgia, an eight-hour Federal bombardment of Fort McAllister below Savannah failed to capture the garrison. Skirmishing occurred in Virginia, Tennessee, and Missouri.

Primary Source: The Civil War Day by Day by E.B. Long and Barbara Long (New York, NY: Da Capo Press, Inc., 1971)

Civil War Spotlight: The Peterhoff Affair

U.S.S. Vanderbilt

In February 1863, an international crisis threatened to erupt when U.S.S. Vanderbilt seized the British merchant ship Peterhoff off St. Thomas in the West Indies. Peterhoff, bound for Mexico, was suspected of being a Confederate blockade runner. Ironically, the seizure was ordered by the same admiral who had ordered the seizure of another British ship in 1861 that nearly sparked war between the U.S. and Great Britain.

Peterhoff was escorted to New York by the U.S. navy to await adjudication by an international court. Peterhoff’s mail was to be opened to determine her true destination, but Secretary of State William Seward feared another potential conflict with Britain and ordered that the mail remain unopened. This infuriated Navy Secretary Gideon Welles, who felt that Seward exceeded his authority. President Lincoln sided with Seward.

British officials protested that the U.S. had no right to  interfere with trade between Britain and Mexico, even if most of the shipments to Mexican ports were being funneled into the Confederacy. The protests were tempered by the intervention of international courts, and no crisis ensued. The courts later ruled that the U.S. could not halt the shipping of goods into neutral ports, regardless of those goods’ ultimate destination.

The New Deal, Big Business, and Fascism

In 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt created the National Recovery Administration (NRA). As the centerpiece of Roosevelt’s New Deal program, the NRA sought to regulate most industries through cooperation among government, business, and labor. Cooperation would be ensured by codes that determined “fair competition” and “realistic production” limits.

Under the NRA, government bureaucrats were empowered to fix prices and wages, establish production quotas, suspend antitrust laws, abolish child labor, and grant organized labor the right to collectively bargain with employers. This effectively converted the industrial sector of the U.S. economy into one massive government-controlled cartel.

The NRA’s concept was based on the War Industries Board created during World War I, and it exemplified Roosevelt’s goal to compare the Great Depression to the Great War. Just as presidents had greatly exceeded their constitutional power during past wars, Roosevelt used the Depression to expand his power. The NRA was the main tool of that expansion.

To solidify the NRA’s warlike tendencies, the agency was headed by Army General Hugh “Iron Pants” Johnson. Johnson had formerly headed the War Industries Board from which the NRA had been derived. He had also directed the wartime draft, which he called “great schooling” for the New Deal. Critics immediately denounced the NRA as unconstitutional, fascistic, and even dictatorial, but nevertheless Johnson was named Time Magazine’s Man of the Year.

The Infamous “Blue Eagle”

Businesses that complied with NRA codes were given a Blue Eagle to display on their windows and doors to show their patriotism. The motto was, “We do our part.” Many joined in the patriotic display; even the Philadelphia Eagles of the National Football League were named for the Blue Eagle. However, many U.S. and German newspapers noted that the image of an eagle holding a lightening bolt in one talon and an industrial cogwheel in the other was strikingly similar to the Nazi swastika and the Reich eagle.

NRA head Hugh Johnson led an army of government enforcers and informants who coerced business leaders into compliance. Those refusing to participate were often harassed by officials and denounced in the press. A New York dry cleaner was given three months in jail for charging 35 cents to press a suit when the NRA code mandated that all “loyal” dry cleaners charge 40 cents.

Johnson also encouraged compliance through patriotic rallies and parades. On September 13, 1933, the largest parade in the history of New York City took place in honor of “The President’s NRA Day.” Nearly 250,000 people marched past a crowd estimated at one million. A member of the British Parliament attended the event and remarked that it was frighteningly similar to rallies taking place in Nazi Germany at the same time.

The NRA codes administered by the Blue Eagle granted labor unions unprecedented power to collectively bargain with employers. Unfortunately, because racism flourished in many unions, this power was often used to exclude minorities from various industries. As a result, minorities, particularly blacks, were especially hard hit by the Depression, in part due to the NRA.

The NRA’s Fascist Roots

To regulate industry and force compliance, the NRA employed many of the same tactics being used at that time by Benito Mussolini’s Fascist Party in Italy. Many U.S. intellectuals, politicians, and business leaders tied to the Roosevelt administration expressed admiration for Fascist policies, and similar tactics included:

Both the NRA and Mussolini’s “corporative system” sought to artificially raise prices and wages.
Both forced cooperation among businesses within various industries.
Both waged massive patriotic demonstrations and propaganda campaigns promoting themselves.
Both decried the “evils” of free markets and individual liberty to get private business to serve the government, not the people.

Over 700 NRA production codes were imposed on industry by thousands of Code Authority enforcers. Many corporate leaders lobbied to impose these codes because they knew their smaller competitors could not afford to comply. In their idea of “fair competition,” big business leaders often used government force to crush competition, then used the profits to help fund Roosevelt’s reelection campaign.

Propaganda drowned out criticism. Competition was “economic cannibalism,” individualists were “industrial pirates,” price cutters were “chiselers,” and NRA-compliant businesses formed “cooperative arrangements.” U.S. politicians and business leaders employed fascistic economic policies that created true monopolies, diminished consumer choice, and ensured the Depression would last even longer.

The NRA’s Disastrous Results

The NRA’s efforts to centrally plan the industrial sector of the U.S. economy failed miserably. Reasons for the failure included:

The NRA raised wages and limited production in the interest of “fair competition.” But simultaneously raising wages and limiting production causes businesses to cut back on labor, which only makes unemployment worse.
The NRA imposed price increases on many goods and services to coincide with the wage hikes. But raising wages and prices at the same time only cancel each other out, thus providing no stimulus to the economy.
The NRA set minimum price levels to keep prices above the “costs of production” and prevent businesses from underselling each other. But artificially high prices means fewer purchases, which means decreased business revenue, which means fewer jobs.
The stringent NRA codes pushed many struggling businesses into bankruptcy because they could not afford to comply. This only further consolidated industries into large corporations, causing even more monopoly and unemployment.

The NRA Ruled Unconstitutional

Within a year, the NRA code enforcers had caused such an uproar for intruding on private business and individual liberty that the Senate forced President Roosevelt to appoint a commission to investigate. The commission, headed by famed attorney Clarence Darrow, issued a report denouncing the NRA in such harsh terms as “harmful, monopolistic, oppressive, grotesque, invasive, fictitious, ghastly, anomalous, preposterous, irresponsible, savage, wolfish.”

In 1935, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the NRA unconstitutionally infringed on state sovereignty. This ended an experiment in economic central planning that raised prices and wages at a time when production was at an all-time low. This only made the Great Depression worse and ensured that unemployment would remain in double-digits throughout the 1930s.

Civil War Spotlight: Confederate Issues of Feb ’63

Confederate President Jefferson Davis

In February 1863, the Confederacy was experiencing troubles on many fronts.

On the military front, General Braxton Bragg was facing heavy criticism for his defeat at the Battle of Stone’s River the previous month. President Jefferson Davis tried reconciling differences between Bragg and many of his critical subordinates. In a letter to General Joseph E. Johnston, Bragg’s superior, Davis wrote that he regretted “the confidence of the superior officers in Genl. Bragg’s fitness for command has been so much impaired. It is scarcely possible in that state of the case for him to possess the requisite confidence of the troops.” Nevertheless, Davis was reluctant to remove Bragg from command.

On the economic front, the Confederate Congress authorized the sale of war bonds to fund Treasury notes and help finance the war effort.

On the international front, the Confederate government continued working to garner foreign aid. James Mason, Confederate envoy to Great Britain, addressed a Lord Mayor’s banquet in London to push for British assistance. However, public gatherings in Liverpool and Carlisle supported President Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, and Queen Victoria informed Parliament that Britain had refrained from trying to “induce a cessation of the conflict between the contending parties in the North American States, because it has not yet seemed to Her Majesty that any such overture could be attended with a probability of success.”

The Civil War This Week: Feb 18-24, 1863

General P.G.T. Beauregard

Wednesday, February 18

In South Carolina, Confederate General P.G.T. Beauregard warned against potential Federal attacks on either Savannah or Charleston: “To arms, fellow citizens!”

In Virginia, a portion of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia was transferred from Fredericksburg to positions east of Richmond to protect the Confederate capital from potential Federal attacks from the Peninsula between the York and James Rivers.

In Kentucky, Federal authorities dispersed a suspected pro-Confederate Democratic convention. Skirmishing occurred in Tennessee and Kentucky.

Thursday, February 19

In Mississippi, Federals under General Ulysses S. Grant skirmished with Confederates north of Vicksburg. Skirmishing occurred in Virginia, Tennessee, and Missouri.

Confederate President Jefferson Davis wrote to Western Theater commander Joseph E. Johnston that he regretted “the confidence of superior officers in Genl. Bragg’s fitness for command has been so much impaired. It is scarcely possible in that state of the case for him to possess the requisite confidence of the troops.” However, Davis was reluctant to remove Braxton Bragg as commander of the Army of Tennessee.

Friday, February 20

The Confederate Congress approved issuing bonds to fund Treasury notes. Skirmishing occurred between Federals and Indians in the Dakota Territory.

Saturday, February 21

In Virginia, two Federal gunboats attacked Confederate batteries at Ware’s Point on the Rappahannock River. In Washington, a public reception was held at the White House.

Sunday, February 22

To commemorate George Washington’s Birthday, the Central Pacific Railroad began construction on the transcontinental railroad project at Sacramento, California. Skirmishing occurred in Tennessee and Alabama.

Monday, February 23

Skirmishing occurred in North Carolina and Kentucky, and Union meetings were held at Cincinnati; Russellville, Kentucky; and Nashville, Tennessee.

Tuesday, February 24

On the Mississippi River, four Confederate vessels attacked the Federal gunboat Indianola. Among the attackers was Queen of the West, a Federal gunboat that had been captured and commandeered by the Confederates. Indianola was rammed seven times in the blistering fight, and Lieutenant Commander George Brown finally surrendered the ship, which he called “a partially sunken vessel.” This Confederate victory was a major setback to Federal river operations below Vicksburg.

Primary Source: The Civil War Day by Day by E.B. Long and Barbara Long (New York, NY: Da Capo Press, Inc., 1971)

Impeaching Andrew Johnson

17th President Andrew Johnson

On February 24, 1868, the House of Representatives voted 126 to 47 to impeach President Andrew Johnson for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” This was the first time that an American president had ever been impeached, and it set the stage for one of the most politically biased episodes in U.S. history.

Background

After the Civil War, there were many questions about how the United States would be restored. Even before the war ended, President Abraham Lincoln had initiated a lenient restoration policy whereby southern citizens could reform their state governments if they swore allegiance to the Union, denounced secession, repudiated the Confederate debt, and recognized the abolition of slavery.

When Lincoln was assassinated in April 1865, he was succeeded by Vice President Andrew Johnson. The Republicans had selected Johnson, a southern Democrat, to be Lincoln’s running mate in the 1864 election to reunite the country. Now that Lincoln was gone, Johnson was mistrusted by many Republicans. He was especially mistrusted by the extremists, or “Radicals,” in the Republican Party who sought to punish the South for supposedly starting the war.

The Radical majority in Congress passed a series of laws to subjugate the southern states by placing them under direct federal military control. Johnson vetoed much of this legislation, but his vetoes were often overridden by two-thirds majorities. Even so, the Radicals plotted to remove Johnson as an impediment to their political agenda.

The Impeachment Process

An “impeachment” is an accusation of wrongdoing, much like an indictment in a criminal court. All impeachment proceedings must begin in the House of Representatives. The House Judiciary Committee determines if a president deserves impeachment, and if so, submits the charges (or “articles”) to the full House for a vote. If the full House for impeachment, a trial is held in the Senate.

The chief justice of the Supreme Court presides over the Senate trial. House members (or “managers”) are selected to serve as prosecutors for the case, while the defendant can obtain counsel for his defense. After hearing arguments for and against impeachment, the senators must vote on guilt or innocence. Two-thirds of the senators must vote “guilty” to obtain a conviction. If the necessary two-thirds majority is secured, the accused is removed from office.

The Tenure of Office Act

In 1867, Congress passed a law prohibiting the president from removing executive officials without Senate approval. In early 1868, President Johnson directly challenged this act by firing Secretary of War Edwin Stanton and replacing him with Adjutant General Lorenzo Thomas. Stanton defied Johnson’s order by refusing to leave his office and having Thomas arrested. Thomas was quickly released on bail, mainly because he could have argued in court that the Tenure of Office Act was unconstitutional.

By firing Stanton, Johnson played right into the Radicals’ hands. They had made earlier impeachment attempts on vague premises, but they now believed they had a legitimate charge. Three days after Johnson fired Stanton, the full House (without even going through the Judiciary Committee) voted to impeach Johnson. The impeachment articles had not even been drafted before the vote.

Soon Radical congressmen, led by Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, drew up 11 articles of impeachment. Most articles concerned Johnson’s violation of the Tenure of Office Act. The 10th article accused Johnson of bringing disgrace upon the presidency. The 11th merely summarized all the charges; it was a clever catch-all in case any of the first 10 articles failed to convict. As Stevens explained, “If my article is inserted, what chance has Andrew Johnson to escape? Unfortunate man, thus surrounded, hampered, tangled in the meshes of his own wickedness—unfortunate, unhappy man, behold your doom.”

After struggling to find lawyers to represent him, Johnson secured former Supreme Court Justice Benjamin R. Curtis, Attorney General Henry Stanberry, William S. Groesbeck, and William Evarts. They were given little time to prepare for the trial, which began on March 30.

The Senate Trial

The Senate created a court of impeachment to hear the charges against Johnson. If he was convicted, he would be replaced by Senate President Pro Tempore Benjamin Wade. Wade was so confident that Johnson would be convicted that he had selected his cabinet members before the impeachment trial even began. Many expressed shock that Wade did not recuse himself from the proceedings, considering that he would have personally gained by voting for conviction.

The most important issue in the trial was whether cabinet members were included in the Tenure of Office Act. The Senate sponsor insisted that they were not, which would mean that Johnson was not guilty, while the House sponsors insisted that they were, which would mean Johnson’s conviction. Cabinet members were not explicitly included in the legislation, and this gave Johnson a legitimate defense.

When the trial began the House managers, mostly Radicals, presented their case against Johnson. Radical Benjamin Butler of Massachusetts railed against southern atrocities that had little to do with Johnson; even some fellow Radicals were embarrassed by the display. Other prosecutors tried to portray Johnson as a dictator plotting to overthrow the government.

Witnesses were bribed to testify against Johnson, and those supporting the president were denied testimony. Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase expressed shock at Senate shamelessness in excluding evidence “appropriate to enlighten the court as to the intent with which the act (of dismissing Stanton) was done.”

Meanwhile, Johnson’s defense attorneys argued two fundamental premises: 1) the Tenure of Office Act was not meant to include cabinet members, and even if it did, then 2) the Tenure of Office Act included the words “during the term of the President by whom he was appointed.” By this language, Johnson could not have violated the act because he did not appoint Stanton to the job in the first place; Lincoln did.

As the trial went on, it became clear that there was no evidence of criminal intent by Johnson. Many Radicals were disheartened because they knew they could not convict Johnson based on the evidence. However, there was still a Radical Republican supermajority in the Senate, which meant that conviction was still highly possible.

The Verdict and Precedent

If two-thirds (or 36) of the senators voted to convict on any of the 11 articles, Johnson would be removed from office. Of the 11 articles, eight had been voted down during the trial, leaving only the 2nd, 3rd, and 11th (catch-all) article. It was decided to vote upon the catch-all 11th article first.

The impeachers brought intimidators to Washington in an effort to force wavering senators to vote for conviction. Politicians canvassed the senators for votes against Johnson like a party caucus. On May 3, the odds were in favor of conviction, but by May 8 the odds were even. The Radicals grew desperate because they knew their case was not strong enough to stand on its own merits. Corruption ran rampant on all sides, as allegations spread that a Democratic slush fund had been created to bribe senators to vote for acquittal.

On May 16, the votes were tallied on the 11th article. The result was 35 to 19 in favor of conviction. This fell one vote short of the two-thirds majority needed to convict. No Democrats voted for conviction, and seven Republican senators defied their party by voting against conviction: William Fessenden of Maine, Joseph Fowler of Tennessee, James Grimes of Iowa, John Henderson of Missouri, Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, Peter Van Winkle of West Virginia, and Edmund Ross of Kansas.

Knowing that acquittal on the 11th article meant that the other two articles would also fail, the radicals adjourned for 10 days, hoping for a miracle. When they reconvened on May 26, the votes on articles two and three were both 35 to 19 to convict, once again falling one vote short. As a result, Johnson was acquitted of all charges and remained in office.

Some voting for acquittal were disturbed by how the Radicals had manipulated evidence; others were uncomfortable with the prospect of installing Wade as Johnson’s successor; and others simply felt that Johnson had not shown criminal intent. By voting to acquit, the senators adhered to the prevailing public opinion that opposed a Republican expansion of the federal government.

Andrew Johnson had broken no laws, and in fact had more closely adhered to the Constitution than the Republicans in Congress. Johnson was further vindicated in 1926 when the Supreme Court finally ruled that the Tenure of Office Act was unconstitutional.

Had Johnson been removed, he would have been replaced by Wade, a Radical, making both the executive and legislative branches uniform in ideology. This would have set a dangerous precedent that Congress could violate the separation of powers by removing a president not only for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” but for purely political reasons as well.