|
HarpWeek
Commentary: General Benjamin Butler was not well regarded in war or politics, but
he was in the front rank of the movement to impeach President Johnson. |
|
IMPEACHMENT AND GENERAL BUTLER
A President of the United States should be impeached only when his guilt
is so evident that the country has virtually convicted him before he is tried; or when the
revelations of his secret abuse of power are so overwhelming that they carry persuasion to
every mind. The reasons are obvious. An impeachment of the Executive officer in the midst
of fierce political differences would necessarily produce an excitement which should not
be hazarded for any but the most conclusive considerations.
There have been many rumors of an
intention of impeachment at the present session. But nothing is clearer than that the
country does not demand that the President shall be impeached for any thing which he is
known to have done. If there are secret plots and conspiracies and hidden Executive
attempts, they are yet to be exposed. If they are known, it is the duty of those who are
cognizant of them to bring them to the knowledge of Congress, which would then undoubtedly
and decisively act. But the general grounds upon which the proposition is made are
untenable, and are so judged by the country. We are, therefore, not surprised to see that
General Logan, who is a member of the next Congress, and who was said to be preparing
articles, has expressly denied the truth of the report; and Mr. Bingham, of Ohio, who was
declared to be ready to begin impeachment at the opening of the present session, is
equally decided with General Logan in his denial.
General Butler, a member of the next
Congress, is very strenuous in urging that the President ought to be arraigned. General
Butler is a man whose great services in peculiar exigencies of the late war are
undeniable. He is a man of undoubted ability and resolution, and he would probably be the
last man to deny that a gentleman who should claim to be a candidate for Congress from a
district in which he had taken but a summer residence will never die of modesty. As a
adroit and successful jury lawyer General Butlers eminence is conceded; while Great
Bethel and Fort Fisher and the James River campaign are willingly forgiven by the generous
public heart to the military Governor who tamed rebellious New Orleans, who peremptorily
hung rebels upon proper occasion, and who has not ceased to befriend the colored citizen
and claim for him every where equal rights.
Yet General Butler does not seem to us to
be the wisest national counselor at this time. He is emphatically a man for an active
revolutionary epoch, the interregnum of law. In a reconstructive period like this, it is
not only essential that a public counselor should be very sagacious and patient, as Mr.
Lincoln was, but that his character should inspire the fullest public confidence, as Mr.
Lincolns did. The moment self appears, the instant that personal ambition is
suspected, the power of the man is gone, and his counsel becomes merely a matter of
curious observation and criticism. The people no longer recognize in him their
representative, but they feel as if a clever manager were using them for his own
advantage.
Nor, is it doubtful that the general
impression of General Butler is that of a shrewd man bent upon personal success, who will
ride any horse that promises to bring him in? As he is reported to have said of himself, a
man who voted a dozen times for Jeff Davis for President in the Charleston Convention of
1860 is a man who will dare any thing; and we doubt whether many officers in the service
could have been found who, after the share which General Butler had in the closing
campaign of the war, and who had been even contemptuously mentioned by the commanding
General, would have gone home and made the speech which General Butler made at Lowell.
That he is determined under all circumstances to fall upon his feet and will never say die
is indisputable. But with all the popular admiration which General Butlers pluck
naturally commands, we doubt if there be a corresponding confidence in his wisdom.
In his late speech advising impeachment
the General leaned much upon the precedent of the impeachment and conviction of Judge
Humphreys of Tennessee for the words of a speech urging the State to secede. But even
allowing that "words" may justify impeachment, is it wise to proceed upon them
except in a case where the words plainly express something more than ill-temper? The
President has spoken contemptuously of Congress, but he has constantly recognized its
authority. Shall he be impeached for saying that he considers it an unlawful assembly if
he consistently treats it as a lawful power? Is it desirable that passionate words shall
suffice to impeach a President?
The other points of the Generals
argument seem to us as unwise and insufficient as this. All his political friends agree
with him that the President is the obstruction of the situation. They agree with Mr.
Wendell Phillips that it is foolish to suppose that the President understands, or could
understand, the principle which elected him, or the real purpose of the people. A narrow
and passionate man is unquestionably a dangerous executive officer, and the country has
been taught that the White House must be closely watched. But we have no right to hang an
ill-favored man for murder because we fear he may pick somebodys pocket. The law
must be satisfied with overt acts, or, in extreme cases, as in that of Judge Humphreys, by
words, when, in a quasi or actual state of war, words are effectively deeds. But that is
precisely what the Presidents are not. He has been upon all sides of the problem of
restoration. At different times Senator Sumner and Mayor Monroe have been equally
satisfied with him. His utter inconsistency convicts his intellect, but it pleads against
the assumption of subtle and sinister design. General Butler will always make a bold and
interesting speech, but he will hardly persuade the country that the President ought to be
impeached at present, whatever may be the case hereafter; and we doubt if the General
stands as the representative of the spirit which will compose the great difference. Not
because he is radical; for the settlement will be radical; but because of a certain
sensational quality which is felt not to belong to wise statesmanship.
Articles Related to the Initial Impeachment
Discussions:
The President Judged by Himself
August 25, 1866, page 530
Reconstruction and How
it Works (cartoon)
September 1, 1866, pages 552-553
Which Is The More
Illegal (cartoon)
September 8, 1866, page 569
The New Orleans Report
October 20, 1866, page 658
The New Orleans Massacre
IMarch 30, 1867, page 202
Text from Illustration of Andys Trip
October 27, 1866, pages 680-681
The Great Campaign of
66
September 29, 1866, page 610
What Next?
October 27, 1866, page 674
King Andy (cartoon)
November 3, 1866 page 696
Shall the President be
Impeached?
November 3, 1866, page 690
The Popular Will
November 24, 1866, page 738
Andy Makes a Call on
Uncle Sam, Who Rises to the Occasion (cartoon)
December 1, 1866, page 768
Impeachment and General
Butler
December 15, 1866, page 786
Congress
December 22, 1866, page 803
What Next?
December 29, 1866, page 818