|
The Impeachment of
Andrew Johnson |
|
»Key Political Issues Affecting the Impeachment |
back to
the Andrew Johnson Home Page |
|
|
|
|
|
Reconstruction:
Radicalism vs. Conservatism |
go to the top of this section
go to the next article in this section |
|
|
|
|
by John Adler,
Publisher
The debate regarding
the Reconstruction of the Union began well before the Civil War ended and it intensified
afterwards. The Radical goal of racial equality was to be accomplished by imposing strict
political, legal, and constitutional requirements on the former Confederate states before
they would be allowed to rejoin the Union on an equal basis with the other states.
Conservatives, such as President Andrew Johnson, opposed such prerequisites on
Constitutional and social grounds and advocated a quick and lenient Reconstruction
instead.Johnsons vetoes of major
Reconstruction laws passed by the Republican Congress, such as the Freedmens Bureau
Act and the Civil Rights Act, as well as his intransigence in implementing Congressional
Reconstruction in the South, played a major role in provoking Radical Republican attempts
to impeach and remove the President from office.
Harpers Weekly, led by editor George William Curtis and
cartoonist Thomas Nast, supported the Radical Republican policies for Reconstruction. In
his editorial of April 29, 1866, Curtis delineated
the Radical and Conservative positions on Reconstruction filtered through his perspective
as a leading Radical. He presented arguments for the reasonableness of the Radicals
case and the limitations of the Conservatives case.
Curtis discreetly distanced Harpers Weekly from more
acrimonious and extreme Radicals, such as Thaddeus Stevens and Benjamin Butler, who were
early advocates of impeachment. The newspaper held forth the same Radical ideals as
Stevens and Butler, but Curtis was more temperate in his rhetoric and, at times, policy
recommendations. Instead of overtly criticizing Johnson, as other Radicals were already
doing, the editor reminded the President of his own words and the vision of racial
equality under the law that they evoked. Instead of berating Johnson, Curtis encouraged
the President to do that which in his heart he knew to be just and right.
As time went on, Curtis became increasingly vocal in
his opposition to Johnsons policies, but the editor refused to advocate the
Presidents impeachment and removal until he overtly broke the law by violating the
Tenure of Office Act in 1868. Stevens and Butler, on the other hand, were early and
persistent promoters of Johnsons impeachment. Harpers Weekly looked with
disdain on the tactless Stevens and the bombastic Butler, and expressed the belief that a
more competent prosecutor than Butler might have achieved the conviction of President
Johnson.
Other Articles in this Section:
Future
Control of Congress
The Tenure of Office Act
Personal Considerations Affecting the
Vote to Impeach |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Website design © 1998-2005 HarpWeek, LLC
All Content © 1998-2005 HarpWeek, LLC
Please submit questions to webmaster@harpweek.com
|
|