April 12, 2023: Remembering Reconstruction: Andrew Johnson

[This week marksthe 150th anniversary of thehorrific Colfax Massacre, one of many such Reconstructionsesquicentennials over the next decade. So this week I’ll AmericanStudyfive Reconstruction histories we need to better remember, leading up to aspecial weekend post on a vital new scholarly book.]

On three tellingstages in the life and career of one of our worst presidents.

Maybe it’s justa coincidence that Horatio Alger’s rags-to-riches young adult novels firstbecame bestsellers with 1868’s Ragged Dick,Fame andFortune, and StrugglingUpward, but I don’t think so. In many ways, these works can be seen asReconstruction texts—their protagonists tend to begin their stories at thelowest possible point, after all, and struggle to work their way toward a morestable, successful, and even ideal future. Seen in that light, Andrew Johnsonwas a perfect president for the start of the Reconstruction era, as his life tothat point seemed to mirror an Alger story. Born into abject poverty inRaleigh, North Carolina, where his father died when Andrew was only three yearsold, he began his professional life as a tailor’s apprentice before runningaway to Tennessee, entering politics at the most local level, and working hisway up to Governor and then Senator. And it was his bold and impressive choiceat one crucial turning point, his decision to side with the Union whenTennessee seceded (he was the only Senator not to give up his seat when hisstate seceded), that cemented his national status and led to his appointment asMilitary Governor of Tennessee and then his nomination as Lincoln’s runningmate in the1864 election.

As I wrote in thathyperlinked piece on 1864 and expanded in thisSaturday Evening Post column,however, “impressive” is one of the least likely words that historians wouldapply to Johnson’s term as president, which began when Lincoln was assassinatedonly a month into his second term. It’s not just that Johnson was anovert white supremacist—he had never tried to hide that perspective, whichof course he shared with many of his fellow Southerners and Americans. Nor isit that he advocated for a different form of Reconstruction (Presidential,as it came to be known) than Congressional Republicans—policy disagrements arepart of governance and the separation of powers, and Johnson did seek touphold the Constitution as he understood it. Instead, what truly definesthe awfulness of Johnson’s presidency was how far out of his way he went tooppose even the most basic rights for freed slaves and African Americans, astance exemplified by hisveto of the 1866 bill that would have renewed the Freedmen’s Bureau.Johnson’s concludes that veto by arguing that in taking this action he is“presenting [the] just claims” of the eleven states that are “not, at thistime, represented by either branch of Congress”—yet of course, the veto servedonly the claims of the white supremacists within those states. The questionof whether Johnson deserved to be impeached for actions such as hisveto (and other similar stances taken in opposition to Reconstruction) is athorny one (and was not the actual statedreason for the impeachment trial), but I have no qualms in saying hedeserves our condemnation for it, and all that it illustrates about hispresidency.

Johnson survivedthe impeachment trial (by one Senate vote), and continued his destructivepolicies for the remainder of his presidential term (although he did alsosupport the proclamation that nationalizedthe 8-hour workday, evidence that even the worst presidencies are notwithout their complexities). Yet his life and career did not end with UlyssesGrant’s 1868 election to the presidency, and two 1870s moments reflect how bothsides of Johnson’s American story continued into his later life. In 1873,Johnson both nearly died of cholera and lost $73,000 in thenational Panic, but recovered from both of these traumas to successfullyrun for the Senate once more in 1875, becoming the only past president to servein the Senate and adding one more rags-to-riches moment to his legacy. Yet inhis brief stint as a Senator (the seat was only open for one special session),Johnson’s only significant contribution was a speech attackingPresident Grant for using federal troops as part of Reconstruction inLouisiana; “How far off is military despotism?,” Johnson warned, one finalmythologized and destructive critique of Reconstruction from the man who did asmuch to undermine it as any American.

NextReconstruction remembrance tomorrow,

Ben

PS. What do youthink? Other Reconstruction histories you’d highlight?