2J - Andrew Johnson: aims, conflict with Congress and impeachment
Learn why a Southern Unionist president became the opponent of congressional Reconstruction. Connect Johnson's principles and political manner to his restoration policy, Republican break and impeachment.
A Southern Unionist in the presidency
Andrew Johnson became president after Lincoln's assassination in April 1865, carrying convictions which did not match the aims of the Republican congressional coalition. A Tennessee Democrat from a modest background, he had opposed secession and remained loyal to the Union. He served as wartime military governor of Tennessee and joined Lincoln's National Union ticket in 1864 to broaden support. His selection as vice-president did not make him a committed Republican.
Johnson resented wealthy Southern planters and had spoken harshly about rebellion. This initially encouraged some radicals to hope for a firm settlement. But hostility to an elite did not mean commitment to Black equality. Johnson defended white political supremacy and believed that states should largely control their internal affairs. Once rebellion was defeated and allegiance restored, he saw little constitutional justification for withholding Southern representation indefinitely.
His priority was rapid restoration of the Union under presidential direction. He accepted abolition as part of victory, but opposed a broad continuing federal role in reorganising Southern society or protecting Black political participation. The distinction matters: a leader could oppose secession and legal slavery's restoration while rejecting the further rights needed to make emancipation secure.
Personality intensified the disagreement. Johnson was stubborn, sensitive to criticism and combative in public argument. He treated challenges to his settlement as attacks on the Constitution and sometimes on himself. These traits help explain why compromise became difficult, but they cannot replace the substantive cause: Congress and the president disagreed about the electorate, civil rights and authority over Reconstruction.
Presidential restoration and its consequences
Johnson acted while Congress was out of session in 1865, giving the president an opportunity to establish restoration before legislators could respond. His May amnesty proclamation pardoned many former Confederates who swore allegiance, while exceptions—including wealthier rebels—required individual applications. He subsequently issued many personal pardons. Provisional governors organised conventions under the prewar voting qualifications, so the electorate was overwhelmingly white.
Southern governments were expected to repudiate secession and Confederate debts and accept abolition, including the Thirteenth Amendment. These conditions secured essential results of Union victory, but did not require Black voting or equal civil treatment. Pardons and restored property enabled much of the former elite to recover influence. Freedpeople who hoped for land found their position weakened as estates returned to owners.
The new governments elected prominent former Confederates and enacted Black Codes. Restrictions on employment, movement and access to justice suggested that white authorities intended to preserve racial and labour control within the new free status. Johnson regarded state restoration as largely accomplished; many Republicans saw evidence that the fruits of victory were endangered. Johnson's North Carolina proclamation explicitly used the old franchise and left later electoral qualifications to the state.
When Congress met in December 1865, it refused to seat the Southern delegations pending investigation. That was a decisive institutional limit on presidential recognition: each house judged admission of its members. Moderates did not need to embrace confiscation or punishment to oppose Johnson. The return of former rebels and discriminatory law gave them reasons to demand loyal government and federal civil-rights protection.
Vetoes and the break with Republicans
Johnson's vetoes in 1866 converted disagreements into an open break with the Republicans. In February he vetoed a bill extending the Freedmen's Bureau. The initial override attempt failed. In March he vetoed the Civil Rights Bill, objecting to its constitutional reach and arguing that special federal protection favoured Black people over whites. Congress overrode that veto in April; a later Bureau bill also became law over his opposition.
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account