Really Cool Stuff about Andrew Johnson
1. He only lost one election in a forty year span. In 1829, “The tailor was defeated, the only time he was to lose an election until after the Civil War” (p. 40).
2. Before the Civil War, Johnson was a staunch Unionist, which earned him some enemies in his own state. At one point, he was almost lynched, ironically, in Lynchburg, TN. “When the train reached Lynchburg, an infuriated crowd, egged on by a Tennessee secessionist, invaded the car in which he was sitting, and one ruffian pulled his nose. He drew his pistol to defend himself, but the railroad officials calmed the mob so that he was permitted to ride on” (p. 140).
3. In an age when candidates for office did not campaign outright, Johnson did. “Although it was not customary for candidates to campaign actively, Johnson violated the rule, not only in Tennessee, but also elsewhere” (p. 182).
4. Johnson was drunk at Lincoln’s second inaugural! He had left for Washington from Tennessee at the last minute and was feeling quite unwell once he got there. Unfortunately on the morning of the inauguration, he had several shots of whiskey which he hoped would steady him but instead made him very inebriated. “Hamlin made a few remarks, and then Johnson, unsteady because of his condition, began his speech. The noise in the visitors’ gallery made his remarks barely audible, but as he proceeded, it became evident that he was drunk. Glorying in his rise from the masses, he pointed out that all who were sitting before him owed their positions to the people. He turned toward the cabinet. ‘I will say to you, Mr. Secretary Seward, and to you, Mr. Secretary Stanton, and to you, Mr. Secretary—(to a gentleman near by [Forney], sotto voice, Who is the Secretary of the Navy? The person addressed replied in a whisper, Mr. Welles)—and to you, Secretary Welles, I would say, you all derive your power from the people.’ Before he ended his harangue, he stressed the fact that Tennessee was a state in the Union and had never been out. Hamlin finally nudged him to stop, and the ordeal was over. The audience was horrified…Matters were not helped by Johnson’s performance when taking the oath. His hand on the Bible, he turned and held the book up, saying in a loud and theatrical voice, ‘I kiss this book in the face of my nation of the United States’” (p. 190-91). There would never be another such episode for Johnson but unfortunately, he was remembered as a drunkard. Years later, Johnson would lose one of his sons to alcoholism and suicide.
5. During the beleaguered strife with congress, Johnson was prone to being riled up by hecklers and would not think about what he was saying in return. In the midst of one such speech, Johnson even compared himself to Jesus. “Generally recounting his rise from the tailor’s bench to the presidency, he compared himself to Jesus Christ and explained that like the Savior, he, too, liked to pardon repentant sinners” (p. 263).
6. I always thought that Alaska was purchased under the Lincoln administration but it was under Andrew Johnson’s instead. “In the meantime, the administration was able to achieve a definite success, the purchase of Russian America, which Sumner renamed Alaska” (p. 288).
7. Charles Dickens met Andrew Johnson and greatly admired him. “Charles Dickens, who also met the president during his 1867-68 trip to America, agreed. ‘I was very much impressed with the President’s face and manner,’ was his comment. ‘It is, in its way, one of the most remarkable faces I have ever seen. Not imaginative, but very powerful in its firmness (or perhaps obstinacy), strength of will, and steadiness of purpose.’ Dickens was also struck by Johnson’s obviously composed manners as well as his excellently tailored clothes” (p. 347).
8. Johnson, through his ambitious secretary of state, also bought Midway Island. “Seward also acquired Midway Island in the Pacific, although some of his other expansionist schemes, such as the purchase of bases in the Caribbean and of the Danish West Indies, failed” (p. 348).
The author, Hans, really did a wonderful job of not biasing us as to what he personally felt or did not feel about Andrew Johnson. He just gives it to us plainly that this is who Johnson was, what he stood for, and these were the decisions that he made. There is probably no more controversial president, after all he was the only one to be impeached, and yet, I found him a sad study.
It’s true—Andrew Johnson had probably one of the poorest origins of any of our presidents and yet, he rose above it in a truly American-Dream sort of way. His overwhelming ambitions and acute business sense naturally propelled him into the political arena and it is no wonder that he excelled there. I find it rather funny that many people disliked him and yet he won election after election. He must have been one of those people that once you meet them you either like them a lot or dislike them a lot and nothing is ever going to change that feeling. The common people of his state loved his bombastic speeches which were quite graphic and highfalutin, however, his fellow politicians were enamored neither of his personality nor his political ideals. Johnson had a very cut and dried approach to politics and to what his state required in Washington. For instance, he was absolutely obsessed with governmental economy and so fought the Smithsonian tooth and nail, believing it was a grave extravagance. I also thought it was interesting that before he was president he was one of the wiliest politicians in antebellum America and yet, once in office, acted foolishly and obstinately.
Should he have been impeached? Probably not. In the United States, our system of electing presidents ever four years is wonderful and I believe that one of the main reasons that Johnson was eventually acquitted was due to the fact that his term was about to expire anyways. I believe Johnson’s immediate presidential problems stemmed from the fact that he played fast and loose with everyone’s expectations after Lincoln’s assassination. Messing with people’s expectations is not cool and can do some serious damage to your cause, right? Johnson, even though he was an acclaimed states’ rights and pro-slavery man, managed to assure just about everyone that he would uphold Lincoln’s Reconstruction program and that everything would be the same. Everyone went away sighing with relief when all of a sudden, Johnson’s true self emerged and all his old pro-southern, pro-slavery leanings emerged in force. After the rude awakening, Johnson did nothing to assuage his opponents, merely insisting getting his way for his policies to the exclusion of all else. So it’s really no wonder that the bulk of Congress took exception to the president’s idea of Reconstruction and even hauled him before the entire world on very thin impeachment charges.
And despite all that, Johnson wanted to be reelected! He really thought that he could nab the Democratic nomination but what he did not understand is that he really had no party at all. It made me think of John Tyler, the party-less president numero uno, to see Johnson stepping on each party’s toes one after the other. Technically he was elected as a Union Party candidate but he ruined his relationship with the Republicans with his Reconstruction policies. Then the impeachment trial and all the other problems proved to the Democrats that Johnson probably wasn’t safe to touch right then. Thus a president without a party only seems to end one way—in retirement.
What made me sad about Johnson was that he was almost doomed from the start. His personality was abrasive in that special way that should have kept him from the presidency to begin with. Not to mention, he became president after one of our all-time best presidents ever! Lincoln, in contrast to Johnson, was political suavity itself and although he seemed amenable to each politician’s suggestions, he always made his own way and ended up winning the war. It is a fact that Lincoln’s idea for Reconstruction was much, much different from Johnson’s and this juxtaposition was too hard for anyone to handle at the time. Poor Johnson believed that he was the hero of this piece, upholding the Constitution and bringing the Union back as it should be. Although I do not believe that he did anything really wrong—anything that would necessitate impeachment charges, per se—he could rationally be blamed for not heeding the mood of the people or taking the time to diplomatically work his policies out through Congress. Sheesh.
No comments:
Post a Comment