UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Up Jacob's ladder: Andrew Johnson's rise to power, 1835-1857 Williams, Raymond Brinley 1969

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1969_A8 W57.pdf [ 9.75MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0104393.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104393-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104393-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104393-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104393-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104393-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104393-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0104393-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0104393.ris

Full Text

UP JACOB'S LADDER: ANDREW JOHNSON'S RISE TO POWER, 1835-1857 RAYMOND BRINLEY WILLIAMS B . A . , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia , 1968 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FUI^IIMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of A r t s i n the Department of H i s t o r y We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the r e q u i r e d s t andard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1969 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C olumbia, I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and Study. I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s thes,is f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f H i s t o r y  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada i ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to critically examine Andrew Johnson's early political career, from 1835 to 1857* Johnson remains today one of the most controversial figures in American history. His role as President during Reconstruction has initiated a century of debate over his character and behavior. In the process of this bitter controversy, few scholars have attempted to explain his personality and political behavior in terms of his early public l i f e . This thesis will systematically investigate Johnson's career as a Tennessee representative and senator (1835-1&±3) > United States Congressman (18^3-1853)^ Governor of Tennessee (l853-l857)» ' Through an intensive analysis of Johnson's letters and speeches, as well as contemporary accounts and newspaper'sources, i t will be established that throughout the period examined, Andrew Johnson behaved as a loyal Jacksonian Democrat and an ardent Southerner. In the process, the study will refute the modern historical interpretation which contends that Johnson was a political maverick and an abnormal personality. Through the use of recent social science methods such as r o l l - c a l l analysis and attitude scaling, Johnson's voting pattern in Congress will be scrutinized and pre-sented to determine political consistency and allegiances. Johnson's political progression from a minor border state politician to presidential aspirant will be discussed in terms of his participation in the slavery controversy, the debates over tariffs, internal improvements, land, and other divisive and national issues, to bring into focus his political behavor in relation to the behavior of his contemporaries. Andrew Johnson will emerge as an ambitious Southern Democrat, who followed his party, represented his people, and was ,loyal to his section, from the necessity of political expediency and from a sense of idealistic i i conviction. Although neither a contemner of the popular w i l l nor a selfless consul of the people's interests, Johnson achieved reforms and "benefits for the people that could only have "been achieved as a result of his driving ambition. One fact w i l l he obvious: he did not act as the paranoidal and masochistic apolitical fanatic that modern scholarship has pictured him. ALONE? Is lie alone at whose right side rides Courage, with Skill within the hands and Faith upon the left? Does solitude surround the brave when Adventure leads the way and ambition reads the winds? -- Harold M. Anderson New York Sun, May 21, 1927 T A B L E OF CONTENTS P a g e A B S T R A C T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i I N T R O D U C T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 C H A P T E R O N E . " I A M A C A N D I D A T E " . 1 9 C H A P T E R TWO. " I A M NO S I X MONTHS M A N " 4 0 C H A P T E R T H R E E . " I A M A N A M E R I C A N " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57r C H A P T E R F O U R . M U P ' J A C O B ' S - L A D D E R ' " . 8 0 C H A P T E R F I V E . " Y O U R D E S T I N Y I S MY D E S T I N Y " 9 8 C O N C L U S I O N S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 8 B I B L I O G R A P H Y . . . . 1 2 1 A P P E N D I X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 9 1 INTRODUCTION "JOHNSONOGRAPHY" IN PERSPECTIVE Centennials are a t r a d i t i o n among h i s t o r i c a l l y minded peoples. They are usually celebrated with pride and patriotism. May 26, 1968, marked the hundredth anniversary of Andrew Johnson's a c q u i t t a l by the Senate. Johnson's impeachment and subsequent a c q u i t t a l i n 1868 have become sym-b o l i c of the triumph of the Presidential authority over Congressional au-t h o r i t y , yet t h i s symbolism is:-neither r e a l i s t i c nor accurate. Johnson's impeachment was a partisan p o l i t i c a l act, conceived and executed by p o l i -t i c i a n s . Nevertheless, the characters of that h i s t o r i c impeachment have come to represent much more than the obvious. Since 1868, Andrew Johnson and the Radical Republicans have connoted many images to generations of historians--who have tended to project the solutions and attitudes of the present into the complex problems of the Reconstruction era. The result i s often symbolism and imagery: a history of Reconstruction where the Radical Republicans are Negrophile fanatics and Andrew Johnson i s a p a t r i o t i c defender of the Constitution, a bulwark against Congressional usurpation; or a history where the Radicals are honest men with humanitarian ideals and Andrew Johnson i s a blundering, v i n d i c t i v e Negrophobe. Moral indictment such as t h i s may s a t i s f y the moralizing h i s t o r i a n , but adds l i t t l e to a h i s t o r i c a l understanding of the period. The hist o r y of "Johnsonography" reveals that even today his person-a l i t y and role are i l l - d e f i n e d . Most interpretations have been based a l -most e n t i r e l y on his p r e s i d e n t i a l career. Few scholars have undertaken a systematic study of his early public l i f e . The studies of Johnson's p r e s i -d e n t i a l career are so contradictory that he s t i l l remains an enigmatic 2 figure i n American history. Contemporaries had argued about Andrew Johnson. P o l i t i c a l opponents such as Henry Wilson, James G. Blaine, and James R. Lowell portrayed Johnson as an obstinate, conceited, boorish, and inept man who w i l f u l l y defied 1 Congress and Northern public opinion with his plan of Reconstruction. Other contemporaries viewed the seventeenth President i n a more favorable l i g h t . Cabinet members Gideon Welles and Hugh McCulloch, as" w e l l as many Southerners, praised Johnson for his dignity, s i n c e r i t y , and i n t e l l e c t u a l 2 . prowess. I t was not u n t i l the turn of the century that professional historians devoted t h e i r studies to Andrew Johnson. John W. Burgess provided one of the f i r s t scholarly evaluations of Johnson i n Reconstruction and the Consti- t u t i o n I866-I876. "Mr. Johnson was an u n f i t person to be President of the United States," declared Burgess, "he was low-born and low-bred, violent i n temper, obstinate, coarse, v i n d i c t i v e , and lacking i n the sense of prp-3 p r i e t y . . . . " This harsh condemnation was concurred i n by David M. De Witt, k and Edward Ghanning, as w e l l as other scholars of the period. I t was the appearance i n 1906 of James Ford Rhodes's six t h volume of his History of the United States From the Compromise of 1850, which f i r m l y established the interpretation of Andrew Johnson as an inept, obstinate p o l i t i c i a n , who, through his blundering, helped the Radical Republicans i n s t i t u t e a harsh and v i n d i c t i v e Reconstruction. "Of a l l men i n public l i f e , i t i s d i f f i c u l t to conceive'of one so i l l - f i t t e d f o r t h i s delicate work as was Andrew Johnson," Rhodes exclaimed, " . . . the extremely e g o t i s t i c a l , the self-confidence of the self-made man [obtruded]itself i n most of his ut-terances." Rhodes believed Johnson was incompetent, "representing no considerable or enduring phase of sentiment i n the North [in 1865]and had l i t t l e comprehension of Northern public opinion, which Congress stood f o r . . . ." 3 The Senate's passage of the C i v i l Rights b i l l over his veto i n 1866 demon-strated " . . . the defects of his character and especially his lack of p o l i t i c a l sense. . . . His pride of opinion, his desire to beat, blinded him to the r e a l welfare of the South and of the whole country." Rhodes con-cluded that Andrew Johnson " . . . i n s i s t e d on doing things exactly his own way and no other; he thought that his wisdom was superior to the c o l l e c t i v e wisdom of Congress. . . . I t was dogmatism run mad." I t was Rhodes's fi r m conviction that "no one else was so instrumental i n defeating. Johnson's 5 own aims as was Johnson himself." Rhodes and other scholars who shared the same view of Andrew Johnson were Northerners by education or background. Rhodes's father was a fr i e n d of Stephen A. Douglas, and Rhodes himself viewed the C i v i l War i n moralistic terms. Although his h i s t o r i c a l works are standard references, Rhodes knew l i t t l e of the materials of the Reconstruction; period. This, tempered by his doctrinaire preconceptions of the era, formed his condemnation of 6 Johnson almost before i t was written. In addition, the period i n which Rhodes was w r i t i n g r e f l e c t e d a reaction against the restoration of Southern r u l e , invariably connected to Johnson's reconstruction p o l i c i e s . Rhodes's presentation of Johnson and Reconstruction was refined by William A. Dunning, Columbia University scholar and student of John W. Burgess. Dunning ref l e c t e d both the attitudes of his mentor and of Rhodes. Although he u t i l i z e d the Johnson manuscripts more f u l l y than did Rhodes, Dunning did not r a d i c a l l y a l t e r the Rhodes thesis. " I t was not long before the bad judgment and worse taste of the President," Dunning wrote, "drove over to his enemies nearly the whole body of Republican congressmen, and compelled him to look for' support to an i n s i g n i f i c a n t minority. . . ." Andrew Johnson was an unwise p o l i t i c i a n and statesman who accepted the advice of "outsiders" i n c r u c i a l matters. There was, however, a positive side to Johnson. He was "aggressive, and violent i n controversy, fond of the f i g h t i n g by which his convictions must be maintained." Nevertheless, i n the formation'"of his opinions of great questions of public policy was as d i l i g e n t as any man i n seeking and weighing the views of a l l who were competent to aid him." Involved i n Johnson's poli c y "was a clear and promising scheme of party re-adjustment." Yet, Dunning i n s i s t e d that Andrew Johnson forced most Republicans into the Radical camp and therefore was not "a statesman of 7 national s i z e . " World War I and the years, immediately, following revealed no s i g n i f i -cant additions to the Rhodes-Dunning interpretation. The school of history at Columbia University, under the guidance of Burgess and Dunning, educated a generation of scholars. These men, such as Dunning's student Walter L. Fleming i n The Sequel of Appomatox (l919)> described Johnson as " i l l -Q educated, narrow, v i n d i c t i v e . . . stubborn, i r r a s c i b l e , and undignified." These historians viewed Andrew Johnson and the Radical Republicans un-favorably. Harvard h i s t o r i a n , James Schouler, blamed the e v i l s of Reconstruction on the Radical Republicans, who were "revengeful and visionary." Andrew Johnson was almost schizophrenic. He was "proud, d i g n i f i e d , statesmanlike i n action and utterance, f u l l y i n s e l f - c o n t r o l , " yet he was also "boastful, loquacious over his self-made image." Schouler blamed Johnson for pos-sessing a " w i l f u l and i n f l e x i b l e temper," for his adherence to "plans 9 impossible.of execution." Several scholars agreed with Schouler. John B. McMaster, along with E. P. Oberholtzer, viewed Johnson as a man of " s i n c e r i t y " and "tact" as w e l l as "decision," but blamed his f a i l u r e on certain inconsistencies of p o l i t i c a l behavior as w e l l as the influence of his p o l i t i c a l enemies. The concept of Andrew Johnson as an ' incompetent p o l i t i c i a n and non-5 p o l i t i c a l personality persisted into the 1920's. By the end of the decade, however, there was a movement to challenge the Rhodes-Dunning thesis. This reverse was marked "by the Supreme Court decision i n the Myers V. United  States case, i n 1926, which ruled that Congress could not l i m i t the President's power to remove executive o f f i c e r s . This was the essence of one of the charges against Johnson i n his impeachment t r i a l . He had removed Secretary of War Stanton, against Congress' wishes, a decision which has received the indictment of contemporaries and historians a l i k e . The late 1920's and early 1930's witnessed the appearance of a new school of h i s t o r i -c a l interpretation. Men of t h i s school--"revisionists"--saw Reconstruction as a grandiose scheme of giant c a p i t a l i s t s to exploit the South. This economic interpretation was highlighted "by a favorable analysis of Andrew Johnson. Five r e v i s i o n i s t works within three years i n the la t e 1920's and 1930 s o l i d i f i e d the revolt against the Rhodes-Dunning thesis. In 1928, Robert W. Winston published the f i r s t authoritative biography of Johnson: Andrew Johnson, Plebeian and Patr i o t. Based upon extensive use of the Johnson papers and newspapers, Winston's biography pictures Johnson as a unique i n d i v i d u a l who brought " s i m p l i c i t y , dignity and honesty to the White House." Johnson's courage was indomitable, his determination to win and advance the interests of the common people incessant. Winston be-lieved that these personality t r a i t s set Andrew Johnson against "Southern tradition,- Southern aristocracy." Johnson's f a u l t was not that he had changed from his supposed Radical i n c l i n a t i o n s when he became President, but "that he had not changed, and would not change. . . . Andrew Johnson did not appreciate t h i s f a c t . He set himself against a force. . . . " I t seemed i r o n i c a l to Winston that "the most democratic of presidents should have happened to be a man . . . who was so tac t l e s s i n his own way, and r an aga ins t snags t ha t might have "been a v o i d e d . " In words t ha t more than f a i n t l y foreshadowed E r i c L . M e K i t r i c k ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n 1960/ Wins ton ana lyzed the p e r s o n a l i t y nuances t h a t prompted Johnson t o a c t i o n , and he o f f e r e d a theory t h a t "Johnson 's neg l ec t ed and impover ished i n f a n c y de-,,1.1 ve loped a complex, perhaps an underdog and plebeian complex. ' I n g e n e r a l , Rober t Wins ton viewed Andrew Johnson as a p r o t a g o n i s t , b a t t l i n g aga ins t the fo rces of e v i l . A l though W i n s t o n ' s b iography i s noteworthy i n many r e -spec t s , h i s l a c k o f s u f f i c i e n t evidence f o r many of h i s a s s e r t i o n s r e v e a l a n o n - p r o f e s s i o n a l background, and the " n o v e l i s t i c " nature of h i s work. Other r e v i s i o n i s t s r e a f f i r m e d . W i n s t o n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . L l o y d P . S t r y k e r , Claude Bowers, George F . M i l t o n and Howard K . Bea le su s t a ined the a n a l y s i s of Johnson as a competent p o l i t i c i a n , and added a severe c r i t i -c i sm o f the R a d i c a l R e p u b l i c a n s . ' S i g n i f i c a n t l y , of these r e v i s i o n i s t s o n l y 12 Beale was a t r a i n e d h i s t o r i a n . S t r y k e r ' s b iog raphy of Johnson, Andrew Johnson, A Study i n Courage (1929)^ i s a r d e n t l y p a r t i s a n . The author u t i l i z e d ex tens ive newspaper accounts , and h i s s t y l e i s animated, bu t the d e t a i l s of h i s judgment are o f t en f a u l t y . He views Johnson as an i d e a l i s t i c p a t r i o t wi th , no major f a u l t s ; the R a d i c a l Republ icans as v i n d i c t i v e f a n a t i c s . ' S t r y k e r a t t acked Rhodes f o r h i s condemnation of Johnson, c l a i m i n g t h a t e a r l y h i s t o r i a n s were r e l u c t a n t t o g ive Andrew Johnson h i s due p r a i s e because t h i s would have e n t a i l e d a condemnation of Genera l U l y s s e s S. Grant and h i s admin i -13 s t r a t i o n . Claude G. Bowers, a j o u r n a l i s t , he lped t o p o p u l a r i z e the b r i g h t image Andrew Johnson. The T r a g i c ' E r a : The R e v o l u t i o n A f t e r L i n c o l n (1930), por t r ayed Johnson as a " J e f f e r s o n i a n , " the i d o l o f the working c l a s s e s . Bowers saw Johnson as a complex man—"honest, t ender , a b l e , f o r c e f u l and t a c t l e s s . " Al though Johnson was a hero i n Bower ' s mind, h i s fundamental f a i l u r e was "an incurable deficiency i n ta c t . " George Fort Milton agreed. In The Age of Hate; Andrew Johnson and the Radicals (1930), Johnson was a shining example of "honesty of character" as we l l as " j u s t i c e " and a " d i s c i p l e of Jefferson and an apostle of Jackson." 15 In contrast, the Radical Republicans were black i n character and deed. The Stryker, Bowers, and Milton accounts are as melodramatic as'they are partisan. Anyone who wants to approach the study of Andrew Johnson through a crowded and s t i r r i n g narrative i n which Andrew Johnson and Thaddeus Stevens are cast respectively as Gabriel and Satan, w i l l f i n d these books to his taste, but historians must doubt t h e i r permanent c o n t r i -bution to h i s t o r i c a l understanding. The most important work.in the r e v i s i o n i s t period i s Howard K. Beale's The C r i t i c a l Year: A Study of Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction (1930). The election year .of 1866 i s c r i t i c a l l y examined through the use of con-temporary newspapers, private correspondence,, and l o c a l campaign speeches to determine the true motives of Andrew Johnson and the Radical Republicans. Beale argues that the election was a decisive test of power between the r i s i n g i n d u s t r i a l i s t s and businessmen of the Northeast, represented by the Radical Republicans; and the agrarians of the South and West, represented by Andrew Johnson. Professor Beale u t i l i z e s the theories of economic determinism and monolithic economic and p o l i t i c a l interests, and concludes that the v i c t o r y of the Radicals i n 1866 was achieved by adroit propa-ganda. The campaign appealed to- the sectionalism and post-war extremism of the electorate, rather than presenting any actual issues. "Andrew Johnson's reputation," Beale contends, "suffered from the enmity of news-papermen," who hated him because "he dealt with them brusquely." Yet Johnson was an honest, e f f i c i e n t and competent executive, worthy of more respect than historians have given him, Professor'Beale i n s i s t s . In his p o l i c i e s , 8 Johnson displayed "unusual patience and wisdom." With one eye on p o l i -t i c s , he constantly counselled the South to "be reasonable and t a c t f u l , yet his p o l i c i e s were made to look worse than they were by the impetuous and indiscreet actions of Southerners. Beale was convinced that Johnson possessed certain character t r a i t s which aided his downfall. He had an inordinate f a i t h i n his own power of persuasion over the people; he was unable to gain personal l o y a l t y from the people; he was too reserved and aloof; he was indecisive and unable to compromise. Howard K. Beale concludes that Andrew Johnson was neither a i " f o o l nor a contemner of the popular w i l l , " but he was "perverted by the guiles of t r a i t o r s and the dream of power." Yet had Johnson succeeded i n hi s Reconstruction po l i c y , his uncompromising sense of duty which brought obloquy upon his name would have been accredited the highest virtue of a great man. Beale was convinced that "Johnson possessed those character-i s t i c s what make men blessed or damned, famous or infamous, because chance leads them to success or f a i l u r e . The depression and World War I I produced no new monographs to a l t e r the r e v i s i o n i s t t h e s i s . Histories tended to follow the economic i n t e r -pretation of Reconstruction and the textbooks of the era contained basic r e v i s i o n i s t portrayals of Andrew Johnson. Charles and Mary Beard's The Rise of American C i v i l i z a t i o n (193^-) i s an example of t h i s textbook interpretation. Andrew Johnson emerges as a staunch conservative Democrat, a "foe of capitalism and slavocracy a l i k e > " a "primitive agrarian" who was 17 rendered impotent by his foes, the Radical Republicans. Many other general h i s t o r i e s r e f l e c t e d t h i s r e v i s i o n i s t analysis, the most notable was James G. Randall's C i v i l War and Reconstruction (1937)• E. Merton Coulter's The South During Reconstruction also presented a d i s t i l l e d Bealean .version of Andrew Johnson, and most studies during the 19^0's 9 18 revealed nothing radical.. In a p o l l of f i f t y - f i v e American histo r i a n s , conducted by Arthur M. Schlesinger i n 19^-8, which rated the presidents according to "greatness," Andrew Johnson was ranked nineteenth on the l i s t , i n the "average" category. Although his reputation had undergone a drastic re-evaluation, he was s t i l l 19 c l a s s i f i e d by most historians as being less than great as a President. During the 1950's there were some indications that the r e v i s i o n i s t views of Andrew Johnson were being redefined. In 1952 Gregg Phifer studied Johnson's "Swing Around the C i r c l e ; " Phifer demonstrated that Johnson had obtained much i n i t i a l support on his campaign tour, but he played into the hands of the Radicals by refusing to emphasize economic p o l i c i e s . Johnson's f a i l u r e to attack the Radicals for t h e i r exclusion of certain Southerners from public o f f i c e was a p o l i t i c a l "blunder," and his arguments for states' ri g h t s and decentralization came too late for maximum effectiveness. Phifer contends that Johnson l o s t his best chance to win his objectives through a t h i r d party when the National Union Convention i n Philadelphia adjourned without an organized party machinery. What was the result? Phifer con-cludes that "Johnson f a i l e d as a p r a c t i c a l p o l i t i c i a n who neither held nor won party support. Johnson r e l i e d upon the weapon he knew best; his own power of o r a l persuasion." But his stump-speaking tour- i n 1866 was grossly misrepresented and misconstrued. Only 5$ of the voters heard Johnson; the other 95$ learned of the tour from the newspapers—most of which were con-20 t r o l l e d by Republicans.. -During the 1950's the only substantial challenge to the r e v i s i o n i s t thesis was a challenge to the alleged economic and p o l i t i c a l s o l i d a r i t y of The Radical Republicans. Although Johnson was s t i l l viewed favorably, i t was asserted by some that he was a "blunderer-." David Donald announced: " i n the u n s k i l l f u l hands of Andrew Johnson, - Lincoln 1s suggestions were 10 converted into dogmas. . . ." In another a r t i c l e , Donald argued that through Johnson's unwillingness to "recognize his weak position, his i n -a b i l i t y to function as a party leader, he had s a c r i f i c e d a l l the influence with the party which had elected him, and had turned over i t s control to Radicals v i n d i c t i v e l y opposed to his p o l i c i e s . . . . Through p o l i t i c a l ineptitude he threw away a magnificent opportunity. Other studies re-iterated Donald's view, although most concentrated on determining Recon-22 struction as an era of warring economic and p o l i t i c a l factions. The f i r s t noteworthy study of Andrew Johnson since 1930 appeared i n i960. E r i c L. McKitrick's Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction almost con-vinces the reader of the c y c l i c nature of h i s t o r i c a l interpretation. A l -though McKitrick follows the ideas of the "New School" of historians who questioned the monolithic nature of p o l i t i c a l parties and economic groups during Reconstruction, he comes.close to. the interpretations of Robert Winston and William Dunning. "How Andrew Johnson threw away his own power both as President and party leader, how he assisted materially, i n spite of himself, i n blocking the r e c o n c i l i a t i o n of North and South, and what his behavior did toward disrupting the p o l i t i c a l l i f e of an entire nation" i s the thesis of•• McKitrick's study. Andrew Johnson was a "lone wolf" i n almost every sense of the word; he was a "maverick, operating out of the fringe of things." The role of an outsider shaped the man. A Democrat, but never a party man, Johnson was obsessed with himself, and with his grim ambition evolved an inner world of suspicious fantasy, a credo of plebeianism. Professor McKitrick concentrated upon a c t i v i t i e s between May 29, 1865 and March 2, 1867. Within t h i s short period, Johnson had f a i l e d as a party leader, chief executive, and consul of the people. McKitrick contends that Johnson was:ani-mated both by his mystic v i s i o n of the people and a bizarre sense of con-11 spiracies and plots. The Radical Republicans helped to destroy Andrew Johnson, but "there was a deep psychological need to eliminate Johnson from American l i f e forever, and i t was p r i n c i p a l l y Johnson himself who had created 23 i t . " 2 The McKitrick thesis remains the modern interpretation of Andrew 2k Johnson. In 1962, Arthur Schlesinger 1s p o l l on presidential greatness was conducted again, and Andrew Johnson had dropped- to twenty-first place, but 25 s t i l l within the "average" category. Minor challenges to the McKitrick thesis were forthcoming i n studies by John H. and LaWanda Cox, and David Donald» In an a r t i c l e examining President Johnson's Freedman's Bureau and C i v i l Rights veto messages, the Coxes retracked the path-followed by Dunning f i f t y - f i v e years e a r l i e r . William H. Seward, Henry Stariberry, Gideon Welles, James D o o l i t t l e and Edwin Stanton a l l advised Johnson on his f i r s t veto,•some contributing drafts. Yet Andrew Johnson's decision on whose advice and material to i n -clude i n his message reveals considerable p o l i t i c a l sagacity. He showed acute s e n s i t i v i t y to the p o l i t i c a l implications of r a c i a l attitudes, and his C i v i l Rights veto was not a simple argument against the b i l l , but a "contradictory composite designed to attract p o l i t i c a l support among both Republicans and Democrats." There i s much evidence that Johnson exhibited evasive contradictions, r a c i s t attitudes, and p a r t i c u l a r l y concessions to 26 p o l i t i c a l expedience. In t h e i r P o l i t i c s , P r i n c i p l e and Prejudice (1963), the Coxes did not see Johnson as "a p o l i t i c a l l y inept chief executive during the f i r s t year of his administration, nor as a martyr to uncompromising cons t i t u t i o n a l p r i n c i p l e s . Rather . . . |the^} found him a seasoned p o l i -t i c a l veteran, who with good reason, accepted a view of p o l i t i c s then widely c u r r e n t — t h a t the times were ripe for a new or transformed Union party centered about his leadership and his restoration p o l i c i e s . " Andrew 12 Johnson here emerges a:s an ambitious p o l i t i c a l opportunist who was f l e x i b l e i n most issues except one: c i v i l r i g h t s . Stubbornness and i d e a l i s t i c p r i n c i p l e s cannot explain Johnson's p o l i t i c a l behavior, the Coxes i n s i s t . He took care to create the public image of himself as one who could "afford to do r i g h t , " who thought only of the Union, and one who rested secure i n the approbation of the people. The Coxes present convincing evidence to demonstrate that one of Johnson's motivations was his desire to erect a t h i r d party to carry him to vi c t o r y i n 1868. Andrew Johnson was an astute, c a l -culating p o l i t i c i a n , but he refused to y i e l d on the c i v i l r ights issue. He may have been blinded by his own r a c i a l attitudes, or by his v i c t o r y over Congress's Freedman's Bureau b i l l . He may have been guided by the hope that he would gain ultimate v i c t o r y by encouraging extreme action on the part of the Radicals with the hope of garnering popular support for himself. But, by his decisions, Johnson "precipitated a great issue of moral p r i n c i p l e central to the b a t t l e over' Reconstruction: and he brought upon himself an 27 unparalleled humiliation." In his P o l i t i c s of Reconstruction (1965), David Donald abandoned his former position. Donald agreed with the Coxes and biographer Winston by asserting that Johnson never espoused r a d i c a l ideas before his Presidency, and therefore cannot be accused of reneging on any promises. Donald doubts Johnson's alleged i n f l e x i b l e adherence to the Constitution, and the as-sumption that he was f l a t t e r e d into submission by Southern ar i s t o c r a t s . On the contrary, " p r a c t i c a l p o l i t i c a l considerations" account for Johnson's behavior. Confronted with the problem of the restoration of the South i n I865, Johnson revealed himself to be a "virtuoso of p o l i t i c s . " Why then did he f a i l ? Wot because of personal f a u l t s such as i n f l e x i b i l i t y of temper or intemperateness of language, contends Professor Donald. Rather, Johnson . f a i l e d because he was associated with the Democratic party i n the North and 13 the Democratic party vas associated with d i s l o y a l t y during the C i v i l War. Also, Andrew Johnson, p o l i t i c i a n , misread the basis and extent of the d i f -ferences between the Moderate and Radical Republicans. ' Capable though he 28 was, t h i s one miscalculation proved f a t a l to his program and his career. Although the Coxes and Donald pointed out some serious weaknesses i n the McKitrick thesis, the McKitrick interpretation of Andrew Johnson i s the one most subscribed to by modern scholars. I t i s apparent that the conception of Johnson as a man out of place i n his o f f i c e , and i n p o l i t i c s i n general, has taken hold of the historian's fancy, a hold which has survived for a century, and does not appear to be relinquishing i t s pressure. Dunning, Winston, Beale, and McKitrick a l l worked with similar sources. Yet Andrew Johnson remains an enigmatic figure. Curiously, historians for a century have studied Johnson on the basis of his pres i d e n t i a l career. Only his non-professional biographers attempted to systematically examine his early career. Although Johnson did not learn to read or write u n t i l he was a grown man, and thus did not leave a great store of papers r e l a t i n g to his early l i f e , enough material i s available to make a thorough study of his public career, p r i o r to the Senate,. worthwhile. I t i s important to discover continuity and consistency i n Andrew Johnson's behavior as i t i s to account for the changes and inconsistencies. A study of Andrew Johnson as state p o l i t i c i a n , • Congressman and Governor re-veals much about Andrew Johnson as President. The popular view i s that Johnson was a plebeian--simplex munditius--a natural leader and p o l i t i c i a n , and that his career represented the r i s e from poverty and ignominy to fame and fortune. But what was his p o l i t i c a l philosophy? Was he a shrewd and calculating p o l i t i c i a n , and i f so, how did he achieve his ambitions? ' Was he a regular party man—did he vote consistently withi his party and section i n Congress on the great national issues of the period? Was he an i d e a l i s t i c 11+ reformer or an opportunist; a maverick and outsider, or an ambitious p o l i t i c a l infighter? No Johnson biography has s a t i s f a c t o r i l y answered these ques-tio n s . The purpose of. t h i s study i s to c r i t i c a l l y examine Andrew Johnson's early p o l i t i c a l career. A presentation of the man i n h i s own words and actions,, tempered by the observations and reactions of his contemporaries, w i l l exorcise many of the stereotypes r e l a t i n g to Johnson, the man and the p o l i t i c i a n . 15 NOTES FOR INTRODUCTION 1 James R. Lowell, Works of.James Russel Lowell (10 vols., Boston: L i t t l e , Brown, 1893), V, 289-326; Henry Wilson, History.of the Rise and  F a l l of the Slave Power i n America (3 vols., Boston: J. R. Osgood, I 8 7 7 ) , I I I , 595-97J James G. Blaine,.Twenty Years of Congress: From Lincoln to  G a r f i e l d (2 vols., Norwich: Henry B e l l , 188*0, I, 241, 263,. 267, 306. I t could "be argued that t h i s evaluation derived more from t h e i r membership i n the opposition party, than from any sense of conviction. 2 Gideon Welles, The Diary of Gideon ¥elles, edited by Howard K. Beale (3 vols., New Yorki W.-W. Norton, i 9 6 0 ) , I I , 246, I I I , 4 0 , 6 l ; Gideon Welles, "Lincoln and Johnson," Galaxy, XI I I ( 1872) , 663; Hugh McCullock, Men and Measures of Half a Century (New York:- Charles Scribners, 1 :888),' pp. 4Q3-4©7; Alexander Stephens, .A Constitutional View of the Late  War Between the'States (2 vols., Philadelphia: McCurdy, 1870), I I , 646-49; Richard Taylor, Destruction and Reconstruction, edited by Charles P. Roland (Waltham, Mass: B l a i s d e l l , 1968, e d i t i o n ) , p. 236. 3 John W. Burgess, - Reconstruction and the Constitution I866-I876 (New York: Charles Scribners, 1902), pp. 1 9 1 - 9 2 .Burgess was a Northerner and established the highly i n f l u e n t i a l Columbia University School of History and P o l i t i c a l Science. 4 David. M..De Witt, The Impeachment and T r i a l of Andrew Johnson (.New York: MaeMillan, 1903); Edward Charming, History of the United States (New York: MaeMillan, 1904). Charming, a Harvard graduate, viewed both Southerners and the South with a certain disdain. • De Witt was also a Northerner by education. 5 James Ford Rhodes, History of the United States From the Compromise  of I850 (9 vols., New York: MaeMillan, 1900-1928), V, 517-19, 523, 529, 573, ' 5 8 7 , 589-90. 6 Dictionary of American Biography, edited by Allen-Johnson and Dumas Malone (22 vols., New York: Charles Scribners, 1928-44), V I I I , 531-33-7 William A. Dunning, Essays on the C i v i l War and Reconstruction (New York: MaeMillan, 1897), p. 253; Dunning, "More Light on Andrew Johnson," .American H i s t o r i c a l Review (hereafter referred to as A.H.R.),XI ( 1906) , 577' Dunning here asserts that George Bancroft, h i s t o r i a n and Johnson advisor, composed Johnson's f i r s t message to Congress. See also Dunning, Reconstruc- t i o n , P o l i t i c a l and Economic 1865-1877 (New York: Harper and Row, 1907) pp. 19, 4 3 , 72, 8 2 . 8 Walter X. Fleming, The Sequel of Appomatox (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1919), pp. 71-72. 9 James Schouler, History of the Reconstruction Period 1865-I877 (New York: Cooperative 'Publication Society, 1913), p. 142. Schouler r e l i e d heavily upon the Johnson Papers, and p a r t i c u l a r l y on the Gideon Welles Diary. See also Schouler, "President Johnson's Papers," Massachusetts H i s t o r i c a l Society Proceedings, Series 2 , XX (1907) , 428, 432, 436. 16 10 - John B. MeMaster, A History of the People of the United States  Since the G i v i l War (New Yorki D. Appleton, 1927), P- 199I E l l i s P. Oberholtzer, A History of the United States Since the Givil'War (5 vols., New York:' MaeMillan, 1926), I, 143, 148, 178, 439, 471 . 11 Robert W. Winston, Andrew Johnson, Plebeian and Patriot (Hew York: Henry Holt, 1928), pp. x i v , xv, 31, 263, 295, 325, 327-28. Winston was a Southern d i s t r i c t court judge by profession. 12 Stryker was a lawyer; Bowers and Milton were j o u r n a l i s t s . 13 Lloyd P.' Stryker, Andrew Johnson: A Study i n Courage (New York: .MaeMillan,"1929), pp. v i i i , 138-39, 205, 278, 491, 797* 14 Claude G. Bowers, The Tragic Era: The Revolution After Lincoln (Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n , 1930), .pp. 28-42 , 4 3 - 4 4 . 15 George Fort Milton, The Age of Hate: Andrew-Johnson and the  Radicals (New York:' Archon, 1965 e d i t i o n ) , pp. 87, 97* 16 Howard' K. Beale, The C r i t i c a l Year: A Study of Andrew Johnson and  Reconstruction (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1930), pp. 11, 18-20, 24-26, 37-38. 17 Charles and Mary Beard, The Rise of American C i v i l i z a t i o n (2 vols., New York: MaeMillan, 1937), I I , 56, 119: Tw° other widely read general h i s t o r i e s of the period contained similar views: Samuel E. Morison and Henry S. Gommager, The Growth of the .American Republic (New York: Oxford University. Press, 193©)? and Morison, The Oxford History of the American  People (New York: • Oxford University Press., 1927). ' See also James S.'Allen Reconstruction: The Battle for Democracy (New York: Internation, 1937)^ and Robert S. Henry,.The Story of Reconstruction (indiannopolis: Bobbs-M e r r i l l , 1938), Thomas B. Abernathy i n From Frontier to Plantation i n  Tennessee, A Study in. Frontier Democracy (Chapel H i l l ' : University of North Carolina Press, 1932), p. 296, contends that democracy i n Tennessee t r i -umphed under Governor Andrew Johnson during the 1850's, claiming that Johnson was "the only true and outstanding democrat produced by the old South." 18- James G. Randall, The C i v i l War and Reconstruction (Boston: D. C.- Heath, 1937); E. Merton Coulter, The South During Reconstruction, I865-I877 (Volume V I I I of A History of the South, edited by W. H.' Stephenson and E. Merton Coulter, Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 19.47); H. J. Carmen and Reinhard H. Luthin, Lincoln and the Patronage (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943); see also Richard N. Current, Old Thad  Stevens A Story of Ambition (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1942) . 19 Arthur M.' Schlesinger, Paths to the Present (New York: MaeMillan, 1948), pp. 9 6 - 9 8 . 20 Greg Phifer,' "Andrew Johnson Takes a Trip," "Andrew Johnson Argues a Case," "Andrew Johnson Delivers His Argument," "Andrew Johnson Loses His Bat t l e , " Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XI (1952) , 3-23; 148-171; 212-234; 291-328. 17 21 David Donald, Lincoln Reconsidered (New York: Vintage, 1956), p. 139; Donald, "Why They Impeached Andrew Johnson," American Heritage, V I I I (1956), 103;' see also Ralph Korngold, Thaddeus Stevens (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1955), P P ' 251-270, who saw Johnson as an unprincipled p o l i t i c i a n who displayed an "amazing lack of judgment and grasp of r e a l i t y " ; Margaret S.' Royall, Andrew Johnson—Presidential Scapegoat-: A' Biographical  Re-evaluation (New. York: Vintage, 1958); and Milton Lomask, Andrew Johnson:  President' on T r i a l (New York: Farrar, Strauss, and- Gudahy, i960), both present a d i s t i l l e d r e v i s i o n i s t interpretation. 22 For examples see: Robert P. Sharkey, Money, Glass and Party: , An Economic Study i n C i v i l War and Reconstruction (Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press, .1959)J Stanley Coben, "Northeastern Business and Radical Reconstruction: A Re-examination," M i s s i s s i p p i Valley H i s t o r i c a l . Review, XLVI (1959), 67-90; Irwin Unger, "Business Men and Specie Resumption," P o l i t i c a l Science Quarterly, LXXIV (1959), 46-70. These writers further emphasized the fact -that Johnson had succeeded i n securing the support of. many i n f l u e n t i a l New York financiers. ' For a more recent view see: - Peter Kolehin, "The Business Press and Reconstruction," Journal of Southern  History,'XXXII (1967), 196. 23 E r i c L. McKitrick, Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, i960), pp. 14, 85-91, 134-140, 190. 24 See Benjamin P. Thomas and Harold M. Hyman,' Stanton: The L i f e  and Times of Lincoln's Secretary of War (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1962), pp. 440, 467, 497, 510; Hyman, Johnson, Stanton, and Grant: :A Reconsider-ation of the Army's Role i n the Events Leading to the Impeachment," A.H.R., LXVI (i960), 85-IOI. For general h i s t o r i e s and textbook presentations see: John H. Franklin, Reconstruction After the C i v i l War (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961); James G.' Randall and David Donald, The G i v i l War  and Reconstruction (Boston: D. C. Heath, 2d rev. ed., 1961); Donald revised the section on Reconstruction to accord with the McKitrick interpretation. See also, Kenneth M. Stampp, The Era of Reconstruction, I865-I877 (New York: A l f r e d Knopf, 1965); and Rembert W. Patrick, The Reconstruction of the  Nation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967). 25 Arthur M. Schlesinger, "Our Presidents: A Rating by Seventy-Five Historians," New York Times Magazine, July 29, 1962, 12-13. Clinton Rossiter i n The American Presidency (New York: Mentor, 2d ed. rev., i960), pp. 95-101, saw Johnson as a man of few t a l e n t s , but s t i l l places him above Presidents Madison, Monroe, Fillmore, Benjamin Harrison, Coolidge, Pierce, Buchanan, Grant, and Harding, mainly on the basis of surviving the: impeachment; ^Wilfred E. Binkley i n The Man i n the White House (New York: Harper and Row, 1964), sees .Johnson more favorably, and i n opposition to Thomas A. Bailey i n P r e s i d e n t i a l Greatness, The Image of, the Man From George Washington to  the Present (New York: Appleton and Gentry, 1966), who i s very c r i t i c a l of Johnson. 26 John H. and LaWanda Cox, "Andrew Johnson and His Ghost Writers: An Analysis of the Freedman's Bureau and C i v i l Rights Veto Messages," M i s s i s s i p p i Valley H i s t o r i c a l Review,' XLVII (1961), 46l, 467, ^70, 476-71. 18 27 Coxes, P o l i t i c s , P r i n c i p l e and Prejudice, 1865-1866 (New York: Free Press, 1963), p. v i i i . For the growth of the Johnson party throughout the'country, see Edward Bates to Andrew Johnson, A p r i l 14, 1866, Union-Johnson Club of Tennessee' to Johnson, A p r i l 6, 1866, Union-Johnson Club of Louisiana to Johnson, A p r i l 7, 1866, Andrew Johnson Papers, Library of Congress, Series 1 (microfilm copy i n U.B.C. Library). See also Thomas Wagstaff, "The Arm-in-Arm Convention," C i v i l War History, XIV" (1968), 101-119; Coxes, P o l i t i c s . . . Prejudice, pp. 97-105, 134, 179, 195, 203, 229-32. 28 David Donald,- The P o l i t i c s of Reconstruction (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1965), pp. 21-26. 19 CHAPTER OWE " I AM A CAWDLDATE" '"The secret of success i s constancy of purpose" --Benjamin D i s r a e l i Along with his appointment as M i l i t a r y Governor of Tennessee i n March 1862, Andrew Johnson received a warning. "You must not expect to be re-ceived with enthusiasm; but rather the reverse," wrote Union General Don Carlos B u e l l . East Tennesseans welcomed Johnson as a Unionist hero, but i n other parts of the state he was considered a " t r a i t o r . " He had become an enemy of the state he had served with s i n c e r i t y and devotion. Before he l e f t for Nashville to assume his new duties, Johnson may have contemplated past events to fathom the irony of the si t u a t i o n . I f so, he was undeterred. President Abraham Lincoln wanted a l o y a l Unionist as M i l i t a r y Governor; Johnson would "rather die i n the l a s t d i t c h than be scared off the track." In t h i s he had remained steadfast since he was a young boy. L i f e began as a struggle against poverty. As a young apprentice t a i l o r i n Raleigh, Worth Carolina, Johnson assumed the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the l i v e l i -2 hood of his mother and brother soon after his father's t r a g i c death. To most observers, Johnson was an independent boy determined to r i s e above his indigence. His aggressive characteristics served him w e l l throughout half a century of p o l i t i c a l l i f e . From t a i l o r , he rose to alderman and to mayor of his town council. Entering state p o l i t i c s , he became state l e g i s l a t o r , then state senator. Johnson subsequently rose to United States Congressman, Governor of Tennessee, United States Senator, M i l i t a r y Governor, Vice-President, and ultimately, President. On the strength of his own a b i l i t i e s , Johnson had r i s e n from the t a i l o r shop to the highest o f f i c e i n the land. 20 After h i s unhappy "boyhood i n North Carolina, Johnson migrated to Greeneville, East Tennessee. There he found the western environment con-genial. By 1827, a year after s e t t l i n g i n Greeneville, he had established a t a i l o r shop and married E l i z a McCardle, daughter of a Scotch shoemaker. His wife was to provide a calming influence on his sometimes v o l a t i l e temper, and remain his most steadfast supporter throughout his public l i f e . In Greeneville, Tennessee,'Johnson l a i d the foundations f o r p o l i t i -c a l power and material success. A profitable business as t a i l o r was the r e s u l t of his determined labors, and i t was not long before he was finan-c i a l l y independent. This economic security allowed him to devote some of his time to two important avocations: self-education and l o c a l p o l i t i c s . Eager to acquire knowledge and involve himself i n debate, Johnson was stimulated by various individuals i n Greeneville, when he took part i n the debating societies of the l o c a l colleges and academies. As he approached manhood, his i n t e l l e c t and o r a t o r i c a l a b i l i t i e s blossomed. Within two years of a r r i v i n g i n Greeneville,'he had entered municipal p o l i t i c s . In 1828, he successfully ran for alderman of the town council. At the early age of twenty, Johnson had celebrated h i s f i r s t p o l i t i c a l v i c t o r y . A majority of the artisans and tradesmen i n Greeneville supported Johnson. Yet, few people were elected to responsible o f f i c e s i n the early 1800's i n the South without the support of the l o c a l "aristocracy." Johnson probably r e a l i z e d t h i s and went out of his way to establish f r i e n d l y 3 relations with l o c a l patriarchs such as Alexander Williams. Later i n his career, Johnson would s o l i c i t the power and influence of the wealthy and prominent, but only i f i t served his p o l i t i c a l ambitions. Once secure i n the knowledge that he no longer needed the aid of patricians, Johnson did not hesitate ending any a l l i a n c e s . In one public address, he spared no epithets i n his denunciations of former patron Alexander Williams: 21 He goes about through the community with his nostrils dis-tended in quest of a l l the unsound spots upon character, like a green f l y passing over a l l the pure places or sound portions of flesh, alighting upon the sores and scabs, for ^ the purpose of satiating his depraved appetite. By 1833, Andrew Johnson had successfully survived five years of p o l i -t i c a l battles. He was re-elected alderman of the Greeneville council in 1829, elected mayor in I83O, and retained that post u n t i l l833» During these years, Johnson advocated municipal reform, economy of government, and offered other proposals for the advancement of a l l the people of Greeneville. Andrew Johnson's rise i n municipal p o l i t i c s reflected certain changes in the social and p o l i t i c a l structure of the nation in the l820's and 1830's. Although the results of Jacksonianism became manifest by l8k0, 5 the seeds of change had been evident a decade before. Particularly in the South, p o l i t i c a l office was the domain of "aristocrats." Wealth, birth,edu-cation,and marriage were the determinants for office, although social 6 mobility was considerable. The Age of Jackson broke the aristocratic rule of the Virginia Dynasty, and introduced the "common man" to a f u l l e r p a r t i c i -7 pation in the processes of democracy. These changes occured at an opportune time for Johnson's entry into public l i f e . By 1834, Johnson had concluded that the time had come for his p o l i t i c a l advancement. As alderman and mayor of Greeneville, he had observed the broadening of the base of pol i t i c s in Greene county: two tradesmen, John Balch and Jacob Bewley had risen from obscurity to prominence and power. Balch and Bewley had s p l i t the county into factions, and the state of 8 affairs had become chaotic. Johnson was elected a delegate to the State Constitutional Convention; he made himself known throughout the county, probably as strategy for his move into state p o l i t i c s , an open f i e l d l e f t by the retirement of Balch and Bewley. At the conclusion of the Convention, Johnson announced his candidacy for the State Legislature, representing 22 Greene and Washington counties. Culminating a spirited campaign against a prominent Revolutionary War veteran, Johnson emerged victorious. He rose quickly in Tennessee politics, an impressive accomplishment con-sidering the able men he encountered. Johnson's abilities did not escape the attention of prominent politicians such as James K. Polk, Cave Johnson, Felix Grundy, Amos Kendall, John Bell , and Samuel Houston. Physically and mentally, Johnson was imposing. About five feet ten inches t a l l and one hundred and seventy-five pounds, Johnson was a striking figure when he entered the Tennessee State Legislature in l835« His limbs were strong and muscular, his movements quick and powerful. A massive, round and broad head was supported by a short thick neck and large shoulders. His forehead was not high, but was very wide and perpendicular, and he pos-sessed the famous knowledge bumps. Johnson's complexion was dark; comple-mented by black and piercing eyes. His countenance, when in repose, appeared gloomy, yet when expressed with a smile, was attractive. In ordinary con-versation, Johnson's voice was low and soft, but when he became excited, i t reverberated with power and volume. Nature had stamped him, like 9 Jefferson Davis, an impressive personage. When only a freshman in the Tennessee Legislature, Johnson had been noticed. One member of the House observed of him: Though plainly clad . . . his marked and expressive features presented him well, and engaged attention when he arose to speak. He made more than the ordinary impression of a new member. He was punctual, laborious . . . kept a vigilant eye on the legislation proposed in molding the order of things under the new Constitution, and judiciously participated in JQ debate. His style was . . . ready and pointed. Although Johnson's presence in the Legislature was marked by many members, few were aware of his polit ical principles or party loyalties. Andrew Johnson's vague polit ical allegiances were compounded by the factionalism in Tennessee polit ical parties. In 1835, he was known as a 23 Whig because he had taken part i n a l e g i s l a t i v e caucus which nominated Judge Hugh Lawson White (and not Jacksonian Martin Van Buren) as Tennessee's pr e s i d e n t i a l candidate. Yet Johnson professed support f o r the Democratic party on numerous occasions. During the 1839 campaign for the State Legislature, he declared himself a John C. Calhoun Democrat, although East Tennesseans acknowledged Johnson as a Whig. In l a t e r campaign speeches, he "bitterly attacked Martin Van Buren with the same "breath that he assailed Henry Clay and the Whig party. Declaring allegiance to the regular Demo-cr a t i c party leadership i n 181+0, Johnson nevertheless asserted that he would have "no hesitancy i n speaking out f o r John C. Calhoun," dissident Southern 11. Democratic leader. Andrew Johnson probably recognized the p o l i t i c a l i n s t a b i l i t y i n Tennessee during the 1830's. His f l e x i b i l i t y of p r i n c i p l e indicated that he would not l e t p o l i t i c a l success be determined by party l o y a l t y alone. A l -though outward allegiance to Andrew Jackson was s t i l l a s i g n i f i c a n t aspect of a p o l i t i c i a n ' s success, Jackson's economic p o l i c i e s had produced p o l i -t i c a l cleavages. The eventual rev o l t against the Jackson• party was, -in- part-, an expression of d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n by r i s i n g young p o l i t i c i a n s such as Andrew Johnson, who became increasingly disaffected with the old party "hacks": " l e t the superannuated and broken down p o l i t i c i a n s have f u l l swing and we modern men must step into the front ranks of the p o l i t i c a l cohorts." Both Andrew Johnson and James K. Polk were part of t h i s "Young Democracy," each struggling to achieve his own ambitions. Unlike Johnson, the oppor-t u n i s t , Polk could never sever the t i e with the old party leaders. A l -though Johnson was as much a Jacksonian Democrat as Polk was, Johnson's p o l i t i c s i n these early years were determined more by p o l i t i c a l expediency 12 than by s t r i c t adherence to p r i n c i p l e s . Johnson served i n the Tennessee Legislature as representative and 24 senator from 1835 to 184-3• In 1837 he was defeated for re-election, but he would not face defeat again f o r thirty-two years. He was consistently re-elected although the p o l i t i c a l opposition had ushered many of his prominent associates out of o f f i c e . What can explain Andrew Johnson's unerring a b i l i t y to remain i n power? The rapport that Johnson had with the people of East Tennessee partly explains his p o l i t i c a l success. He presented before the Tennessee House and Senate hundreds of h i s constituents' petitions and resolutions. As a member of the 1835 Legislature, he proposed to d i s t r i b u t e surplus revenue from the State Bank among the counties according to t h e i r free white popu-l a t i o n . As a state senator i n 1842, Johnson proposed a resolution c a l l i n g for the establishment of the new state of Frankland, comprised of East Tennessee counties--a resolution that gained considerable public support throughout the state, and managed to pass the state senate. Later i n the same year, Johnson proposed that Congressional d i s t r i c t s be redrawn according to "the voting population, without.regard to the t h r e e - f i f t h s of negro population." This resolution benefitted the East Tennessee counties which would gain representation because of the large white population and small 13 slave population. Although he was accused of abolitionism because of t h i s proposal, Johnson advocated i t as a benefit to the white freemen of East Tennessee rather than as a benefit for the Negro slave. In general, he advocated reform measures that would further the interests of the white citizens,, proposals such as a state supported school system, and control over the State Bank. Johnson often had to determine the popularity of some of his reforms, such as the d i s t r i b u t i o n of surplus revenue. He re-quested his Greeneville associate, William Lowry, to keep him constantly i n -14 formed of the popularity of Johnson's proposals i n his constituency. P o l i t i c a l opponents often referred to Johnson as a demagogue because 25 of his close association v i t h his constituents, and his campaign rhetoric vhich pandered excessively to the prejudices of the people. Johnson appealed to the emotionality of the people i n attacking various i n t e r n a l improve-ment programs. He claimed that the railroads "would introduce the most f a t a l disease; "break down taverns, horses and wagons, and vi o l a t e the laws of nature i n p u l l i n g down h i l l s and f i l l i n g up hollows." Johnson was also accused of demagoguery for proposing a new state of East Tennessee. He often engaged i n acrimonious arguments because of his i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with his constituents. "Why I have brought down the i r e and indignation of a reckless press and i t s party upon my devoted head I cannot t e l l > " Johnson defended himself i n the Jonesboro Sentinel. "Is i t because I sprang from the ranks a humble mechanic . . . ? Is i t because a laboring man i s somewhat offensive to a kind of aristocracy that i n f e s t t h i s congressional d i s t r i c t ? " Johnson was incensed over the charge of demagoguery: " i t i s for being so r a d i c a l i n many things of t h i s sort that I have brought down the vengeance of the aristocracy upon my head. . . . " He expressed his bitterness over these attacks i n an intimate l e t t e r to l i f e l o n g f r i e n d and adviser, Blackston McDannel. Johnson hoped that when he died he would triumph over "the god for saken and h e l l deserving mony loving hypocrtical, back bighting sundy praying „15 scoundrels of the town of Greeneville. . . . Stump-speaking revealed Andrew Johnson's ruthlessness i n debate and excellence i n rhetoric. During election campaigns he could be frequently seen on the streets of a town engaged i n an animated p o l i t i c a l discussion with the people. As an orator, Johnson was f o r c e f u l and powerful without eloquence. His voice was loud, d i s t i n c t and adapted to the outdoors. In his speeches he l i b e r a l l y punctuated his address with popular anecdotes, often chosen to excite the emotions of his l i s t e n e r s . In debate, Johnson vigorously defended himself with wit, invective, and complete confidence i n 26 his knowledge of any issue. He rarely met his match on the debating p l a t -form. He had argued with such s k i l l e d men as John B e l l , John J . Crittenden, Jefferson Davis, Joshua Giddings, John S l i d e l l , Judah Benjamin, Robert Winthrop and Al f r e d Iverson, yet only on one occasion could his opponent claim the advantage. Considering Johnson was never formally educated, t h i s 16 accomplishment i s even more remarkable. In his f i r s t election campaign against Matthew Stephenson i n 1835> Johnson's a b i l i t i e s i n debate were manifest. Interested observers be-lieved that Stephenson, a well-known Greene County p o l i t i c i a n , would e a s i l y defeat Johnson. But the former t a i l o r had prepared himself w e l l . Johnson countered Stephenson with an impressive array of s t a t i s t i c s that showed how his opponent's_proposals f a i l e d to benefit East Tennesseans. He also attacked Stephenson's early public record and private character. Ending the debates with a direct emotional appeal to the people, Johnson asserted constantly that he was an ardent Jacksonian and would work incessantly 17 for h is constituents. During the l8k0 p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign, Johnson augmented his reputa-t i o n as an orator and debater. He was chosen elector-at-large f o r the Democratic party, although prominent Democrats Cave Johnson and Aaron V. Brown vied f o r the position. Whigs John B e l l , Ephraim Foster, and Spencer Jarnagin met Johnson i n a series of debates. One Democrat informed party leader, James K. Polk, that i n one exchange with the renowned Foster, "wherever Johnson gets a f a i r f i e l d at him he uses the gentleman up Completely." Polk believed Johnson was "greatly his [Foster's] superior i n debate." Whig opponents described Andrew Johnson as ""a strong minded l8 man who cuts when he does not with a razor, but with a case knife." The Tennessee State Senate, from l8kl to 184-3, provided a ready audience for Johnson's rhetoric and aided his p o l i t i c a l ambitions. As one of the 27 leaders of the "immortal Thirteen" Democratic senators, Johnson had asserted that the convention method of electing United States Senators was unconstitutional. Johnson and his twelve associates refused to s i t i n jo i n t session with the State House and elect Senators; by t h i s r e f u s a l , they successfully prevented the election of Whigs and thus silenced Tennessee's voice i n the Senate for two years. Throughout the lb%l-lb%2 session, Johnson championed his partisan cause i n f i l i b u s t e r fashion. He assaulted the Whig party as one of "dumb i d o l s , " at war with the best interests of the people." Consistently Johnson accused the Whigs of attempting the conversion of government into a "despotism." He proudly proclaimed that his words and actions were designed to "promote and advance the public interest by keeping r ~) 19 the Whigsj out of power." p o l i t i c a l b a ttles he studied the disposition of his adversary and af-fronted his opponent with as much personal indignity as he would endure. The,pungency of Johnson's words often exceeded the novelty or import of his subject matter. For these reasons, he frequently made b i t t e r enemies of his p o l i t i c a l adversaries. In the election campaigns from 1835 to 1857, Matthew Stephenson, Brookins Campbell, Ephraim Foster, John Aiken, William Brownlow, Oliver Temple, Landon Haynes, Gustavus Henry and Meredith Gentry a l l f e l t the sting of Johnson's personal invectives. The Nashville Whig, a partisan Whig newspaper, expressed anger over Johnson's personal attacks i n the. 1839 canvass: "he must have s i r the feelings of a scavenger, a kitchen s k u l l i o n , a r e p t i l e — ["and i s j a disgrace to his state." William G. Johnson's partisanship was often marked by ruthless techniques. In 11 personal affronts with slander: 28 . You, a l i v i n g mass of undulating f i l t h , a p o l i t i c a l Skunk . . . a man whose mouth i s always f u l l of "black guardism and profan-ation-.-whose soul i s saturated with sin—whose heart i s covered with the blackness and darkness of crime . . . . a protest was drawn up, signed by ninety c i t i z e n s of Greeneville and v i c i n i t y , of both p o l i t i c a l parties, declaring every charge you made to be false and slanderous. Johnson was renewed with courage and determination by such l i b e l . He declared that he did not l i k e to be "tafujsted too much by his enemies," 20 yet he refused to abandon his p o l i t i c a l obligations. At times, Johnson made no d i s t i n c t i o n between enemies i n opposition parties and those i n his own party. I f adversaries attempted to thwart his purposes, he assailed them with vigor. During the "Immortal Thirteen" controversy, Johnson had differences with two fellow Democrats, Samuel and Hopkins Turney, both of whom were wavering i n t h e i r support of his leader-ship. He attempted gentle persuasion, but when t h i s f a i l e d , Johnson took every opportunity to attaqh them p u b l i c l y . As a member of the senate com-mittee on reapportioning the state d i s t r i c t s , Johnson clashed with fellow-Democratic committee members, John A. Gardner and Brookins Campbell, over the d i s t r i c t i n g of East Tennessee counties. P u b l i c l y and privately, he referred to Campbell as a p o l i t i c a l "judas," and accused Gardner of "im-b e c i l i t y . " Both had sold the freemen of East Tennessee for " t h i r t y pieces of s i l v e r . Andrew Johnson's behavior i n these situations raises several im-portant questions. Was he a p o l i t i c a l outsider--radically different i n p r i n c i p l e and behavior from the leaders and members of his own party? Did he refuse to adhere to the party leadership ajii- established Democratic principles? Was he as t a c t f u l and diplomatic as he was caustic and vituperative? Among members of his own party, Johnson provoked either l o y a l t y and confidence or condemnation and d i s t r u s t . Few men reacted toward him with 29 indifference. In contrast to Brookins Campbell, John- Gardner, and Hopkins Turney, who took every opportunity to attack Johnson as a maverick, Samuel Laughlin, close adviser to James K. Polk, believed Johnson was "an i n t e l l e c t and leader of the f i r s t magnitude." Polk recognized Johnson's talents and 22 l o y a l t y to the party and argued that he would make a'"reputable Senator." From 1835 to 184-3, Johnson worked d i l i g e n t l y for the Democratic party. I t i s reasonable to assume on the basis of existing evidence that he was sincere. Johnson informed an associate i n 184-0, "our cause i n going bravely Greene county w i l l gain a much larger vote f o r the democratic t i c k e t next f a l l than was given'last summer . . . and i f we succeed i n getting Powell [jiounty]} established, there w i l l not be one modern Whig i n i t . " Prior to the 184-1 election, Johnson assured Polk of his l o y a l t y : I am for commencing the work of reformation at' once i n our ranks. Put up the best material we have a l l over the State . . . . then l e t s make one more vigorous e f f o r t to redeem the State, and once redeemed resting upon pure democratic p r i n c i p l e s , ; . . our over throw w i l l be impossible . . . . Johnson pledged with uncharacteristic modesty his personal support for Polk: " i f I thought that I could give you any additional strength by run-ning [jfor state senator} I would be w i l l i n g to make any s a c r i f i c e . . . . " Like a true party man, he promised h i s associates that he would do a l l he could " i n or out of the canvass." On the eve of h i s entrance into Congress l f l 184-3, Johnson pledged his allegiance to the Democratic party, and attempted to r a l l y the Democracy: Let the Democracy organize and act as one man. The people of Tennessee are Democratic i n p r i n c i p l e , and are opposed to a l l the tendencies of Henry Clay's policy. . . . Then organize, organize, organize. . . ascertain the weak points and repair the breach . . . l e t the war be carried into the enemy's t e r -r i t o r y . . . . Many Democrats heard these sentiments and observed Johnson's l o y a l work and were convinced he was as he claimed, "no s i x months man," but was " e n l i s t e d during the war." Andrew Johnson also played the role of c o n c i l i a t o r and mediator for the warring factions of the Democratic party. A r i f t had occured between leaders James K. Polk and A. 0. P. Nicholson. Johnson had the confidence of both men and prior to the 184-3 Congressional elections, made a,sincere attempt for t h e i r r e c o n c i l i a t i o n . " I was a frien d to both of you, and wanted to soothe insted of exciting and widening the misunderstanding," Johnson wrote to Polk. "You have always been my f i r s t Choice for•any thing, and I am equally frank i n Saying that Nicholson has been my Second, and I am i n hopes by t h i s time that you and him are on good terms." Later, Nicholson thanked his "true friend" Johnson for his role as mediator, i n d i -24-eating that relations with Polk were again c o r d i a l . While he favored compromise rather than confrontation, the facet of the chronic dissident was an i n t e g r a l part of Johnson's character. The Democratic party should espouse the princ i p l e s of Jacksonian Democracy, he i n s i s t e d ; deviations from these pri n c i p l e s should bring the censure of a l l Democrats. Johnson also believed that he had a right to act as an in d i v i d u a l , and would follow the party according to the dictates of his conscience. Yet he could not abandon the party completely or refuse to support i t s leaders during times of c r i s i s , as Robert B. Rhett and others had done. Throughout his career, Johnson may have vocalized his disaf-f e c t i o n , but he campaigned vigorously for the same p o l i c i e s and men he had c r i t i c i z e d . In 1836 and 184-0, Johnson expressed his d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with Martin Van Buren. Although he canvassed the state for Van Buren i n the 184-0 p r e s i d e n t i a l election, Johnson had pr i v a t e l y indicated that Lewis Cass of Michigan "should have been the choice of the party." He frequently expressed h i s discontent with members of the party: 31 there are too many i n our ranks that cant and prate a great deal about democracy that r e a l l y does not understand one thing about i t and too many of those that do, preach one thing to the people and then act out a very different set of p r i n c i p l e s . P r i o r to the pr e s i d e n t i a l election of 1844, Johnson c r i t i c i z e d the party's strategy. Selecting a candidate too early was a mistake, he i n -formed an associate: I think i t would have been best for the people to have moved off f i r s t , and.while we were appearently waiting for the people to indicate there preference, our presses should have been pouring hot shot into the Clay doctrines . . . the public mind would have been so prejudiced i n r e l a t i o n to Mr. Clay that i t would have been prepared for the reception 2t-of any candidate. . . . Although Johnson was not the p o l i t i c a l theorist that John C. Calhoun or Daniel Webster were, i n many matters r e l a t i n g to constitutional or economic questions, h i s i n t e l l e c t contained a depth of o r i g i n a l thought. As one of the managers of the "Immortal Thirteen," Johnson was not content with simple partisanship i n preventing the election of Whig Senators. He offered a complex co n s t i t u t i o n a l - l e g a l argument, which could have come from one of the nation's f i n e s t l e g a l minds. Johnson argued that the con-vention method of electing Senators changed the d i s t i n c t i v e character of the State Legislature. This l e f t future changes to "the w i l l and pleasure of the two Houses . . . \~and thus} the Constitution becomes a perfect nul-l i t y which can be expanded and contracted at the w i l l and pleasure of every party i n power. . . . The Senate representSothe whole people of Tennessee: so does the House . . . {both are) responsible to the people . . . and not to one another./' Johnson's elaborate defense was not one of temporary im-portance, for his argument was sustained by the Tennessee Supreme Court i n 1909• He revealed a deep understanding of the economic and p o l i t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s that governed the nation. In a series of debates with noted lawyers John B e l l and T. A. R. Nelson, neither "could get the better of Johnson on economic issues." The prin c i p l e s of Jacksonian Democracy were a s i g n i f i c a n t part of Andrew Johnson's credo. Some of these prin c i p l e s were: popular p a r t i -cipation i n the processes of democracy, including such reforms as popular election of the President and Vice-President; a national homestead plan; opposition to a national hank, to in t e r n a l improvements and to a protective t a r i f f . An in t e g r a l part of Jacksonian Democracy was i t s d i r e c t i o n by the people: "we have an abiding confidence i n the v i r t u e , i n t e l l i g e n c e , and f u l l capacity for self-government, of the great masses of our people—our industrious, honest, manly, i n t e l l i g e n t m i l l i o n s of freemen," a Democratic newspaper of the era contended. The Democratic society would establish a system of advancement based on human merit and would "abolish a l l a r t i -f i c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n s , preventing the accumulation of any s o c i a l obstacles . . and would permit the free development of every germ of talent . . . whether on the proud mountain summit, i n the humble va l l e y , or by the way-side of common l i f e . " God directed t h i s progress of democracy. The Democratic party contained the sense of "manifest destiny" which was "to lead our race toward the high destinies." Andrew Johnson consistently followed these party standards. Faced with popular support for i n t e r n a l improvements i n East Tennessee from 1835 to 184-3, he opposed the schemes as "unconstitutional" and detrimental to the Democracy. Throughout his p o l i -t i c a l career, he resisted "excessive banking, and paper currency i n a l l i t s forms." Johnson also contended that additional taxes would "most grievously oppress the poor man;" His stand against the protective t a r i f f was evident for three decades; he often c r i t i c i z e d those men who were " c a l l i n g themselves democrats what are for the protective t a r i f f . " One of the tenets of his p o l i t i c a l creed, he proclaimed,.was that "there are no good laws but such as repeal other laws." His b e l i e f i n the sovereignity 33 of the people Johnson expressed constantly; he also indicated that "a b e l i e f i n the pure and unadulterated p r i n c i p l e s of Democracy, i s a b e l i e f i n the r e l i g i o n of our Savior. P o l i t i c a l power and sovereignity of government resided with the people, Johnson argued fervently. As early as 1836, he advocated the popular election of the President and Vice-President; l a t e r , he also argued for popular elec-t i o n of United States Senators. A "Democrat i s one who i s i n favor of government by the people," Johnson contended. The functional aim of the Democratic party should be "to preserve our Government i n i t s o r i g i n a l purity and s i m p l i c i t y . " He argued that a l l Democrats must r e l y upon the people for i n s p i r a t i o n and success: The Spartan Democracy of the Mountains have thrown t h e i r banner to the breeze, and though recently battered and torn, they have nailed i t to the outer w a l l , and are now ready to come forward and swear by the Gods and t h e i r a l t a r s that both s h a l l sink i n the dust together rather than a base sub-mission to an upstart swell-headed monied aristocracy, such 29 as now proposed by Clay and his party. There i s no doubt that Johnson's p o l i t i c a l power and constant success derived, i n part, from his direct appeal to the people. He confided to an associate p r i o r to an election campaign, "there i s one thing that i s certain, that i s , the common people by a large majority are f o r me:" He proudly boasted that he had "sprung from the ranks a humble mechanic," and that he would stand f i r m l y "on the ramparts of equal r i g h t s , advocating to the utmost of. . . [ b i s ] a b i l i t y , the interest of the common man." Johnson invariably ascertained how the people would receive his p o l i c i e s and speeches. He often wrote to his friends, i n s t r u c t i n g them to inform him how his l a t e s t 30 position "taks, with the people." His rapport with h i s constituents was so substantial that Johnson could have been re-elected without the aid of the party organization. In the Gubernatorial, State, and Congressional elections of 184-1 and 184-3, prominent Democrats James K. Polk, A. V. Brown, 34 Samuel Turney, Samuel Laughlin, and John Gardner were a l l defeated. Andrew Johnson was returned to o f f i c e by substantial majorities, although he ran 31 i n a Whig stronghold. While his p o l i t i c a l success could have been achieved independently, Johnson reaffirmed his l o y a l t y to the party organization. Prior to the 184-3 canvass, he assured Polk, " I am a Candidate Subject to a decision of the democratic party through a Convention." In reference to other candi-dates, Johnson affirmed that he would y i e l d "his own i n d i v i d u a l pjjrjefer-32 ences for the good of the common cause." He probably realized that power within-the party could only magnify his p o l i t i c a l fortunes. As a state l e g i s l a t o r , Andrew Johnson was intensely passionate. Few things were accomplished with indifference. He loved and hated, believed and disbelieved, rewarded and took vengeance, served and opposed, with an i n t e n s i t y of righteous conviction. Men reacted toward him with undying l o y a l t y or unending hatred. Johnson was a l o y a l party man as w e l l as a chameleon. He could be f l a t t e r i n g , persuasive, and diplomatic or i n -transigent and v i n d i c t i v e . As a p o l i t i c i a n , he was more than successful. Johnson practiced his arts with extraordinary a b i l i t y . Throughout years of internecine party warfare arid p o l i t i c a l upheavals i n Tennessee, he re-mained i n power. Beneath his dynamic and v o l a t i l e personality lay his drive for power. And driven he was. L i t t l e else can explain his tenacity of purpose, his willingness to s a c r i f i c e party and friends when expedient. Yet, f o r Andrew Johnson, t h i s ambition was i n a sense s e l f l e s s . For i n the acquisition of power, and the r e a l i z a t i o n of his goals, came the advance-ment of the people he represented. There was no c o n f l i c t between his i n -terests and those of h i s constituents. Only i n the successful f u l f i l l m e n t of his ambition lay the amelioration of h i s people. 35 NOTES FOR CHAPTER ONE 1 United States War Department, War of the Rebellion: A Compila- t i o n of the O f f i c i a l Records of the Union and Confederate Armies (128 vols., Washington: Government Pri n t i n g Office, 1880-1901), Series I, Vol. X, pt. 2, 612. Hereafter c i t e d as O.R. See also O.R., Ser. I, V I I , 426, 436-37; X, pt. 2, 20; Robert U. Johnson and Clarence C. Buel, editors, Battles and Leaders of the C i v i l War (4 vols. New York: Century, 1887-1889), I, 485. Andrew Johnson to George W. Jones, December 25, 1836, The Papers  of Andrew Johnson, edited by LeRoy P. Graf and Ralph W. Raskins ( l v o l . to date. Knoxville: Universityjof Tennessee Press, 1967), I, 19; hereafter c i t e d as Johnson Papers, I. 2 The events of Johnson's f i r s t twenty years are r e l a t i v e l y obscure due to the absence of written records: Johnson did not learn to read or write u n t i l he was a grown man, and h i s parents were not educated. For similar biographical accounts see: John S. Savage, The L i f e and Public  Services of Andrew Johnson (New York: Darby and M i l l e r , 1866); James S. Jones, The L i f e of Andrew Johnson (Greeneville: East Tennessee Publishing Co., 1901); Robert W. Winston, Andrew Johnson, Plebeian and Patriot (New York: Henry Holt, 1928); Lloyd P. Stryker, Andrew Johnson, A Study i n Courage (New York: MaeMillan, 1929). 3 Andrew Johnson to Alexander Williams, January 27, 1836, Johnson to Valentine Sevier, June 7, 1832, Johnson Papers, I, 14, 16. Both Williams and Sevier were wealthy and s o c i a l l y prominent. 4 Andrew Johnson to the Freemen of the F i r s t Congressional D i s t r i c t of Tennessee, October 15, 1845, Johnson Papers, I, 220-272. 5 Richard P. McCormick, "New Perspectives on Jacksonian P o l i t i c s , " A.H.R., LXV (1959), 288-301, asserts that i t was not u n t i l the election of 1840 that the Democracy flocked to the p o l l s ; i t was then that the Jacksonian one-party system was replaced by a viable two-party system which gave voters a choice. 6 See Charles S. Sydnor, American Revolutionaries i n the Making:  P o l i t i c a l Practices i n Washington's V i r g i n i a (Mew York: C o l l i e r , 1962). He claims that up to the time of Jackson, i t was custom for the•aristo-cracy to f i l l public o f f i c e s ; few commoners enter public l i f e i n the Old South. I use the terms "aristocracy" and "commoners" i n my paper i n a lim i t e d sense, and distinguish these terms from t h e i r application i n the B r i t i s h or European context. In America there was neither the hereditary landed aristocracy nor the feudal serfdom that existed i n Europe. However, for want of better terms, aristocracy best describes the existence of a group i n Southern American society which was determined by wealth, educa-t i o n , b i r t h , and marriage, and exercised considerable influence and control over the economic, p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l l i f e of the community. The feudal serfdom of Europe did not have i t s p a r a l l e l i n America—commoners i n Southern society were aggressive tradesmen, artisans and yeoman farmers who owned t h e i r own land, and were capable of upward mobility. Johnson often refers to commoners and aristocrats without knowledge of the meaning of the terms, but generally, he was no fr i e n d to the indigent poor, and no f r i e n d to an aristocracy which had achieved i t s position without merit or honest labor. 36 7 ; Qf course there is s t i l l argument over the origin and significant results of the Jacksonian movement. For an examination of the various interpretations see: Charles G. Sellers, Jacksonian Democracy (Washington: American Historical Association, 1958)* Arthur M. Schlesinger, J r . , The Age of Jackson (Boston: Little., Brown, 194-5), saw the movement as a class movement; Marvin Meyers, "The Jacksonian Persuasion," American  Quarterly, V (1953), 3-15, s a w "the Jackson movement as a conservative appeal to return to the old Jeffersonian order; Bray Hammond, Banks and Politics  in America From the Revolution to the Civ i l War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957), asserts that socially, the Jackson movement signi-fied a revolt against the rule of the Virginia Dynasty, and economically, signified that a nation of potential money makers could not abide by tradi-tional conservative limitations set by the established capitalists. Regard-less of the details of the debate, i t is well established that the common man was considered as an active force in the l820's in a way he was at. no time before then. In Tennessee, participation of the people in politics was evident early: Gharles G. Sellers, J r . , James K. Polk,•Jacksonian 1795- 184-3 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957), P« 66; Dewey Grantham, J r . , The Democratic South (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1963), p. 12. 8 Oliver P. Temple, Notable Men of Tennessee I833-I875, Their Times  and Their Contemporaries (New York:Cosmopolitan, 1912), p. 216; Robert W. White, ed., Messages of the Governors of Tennessee (7 vols. Nashville: Tennessee Historical Commission, 1952—), II, 601. 9 Temple, Notable Men, p. 4-51; Winston, Andrew Johnson, p. 205; Charles A. Dana, Recollections of the C i v i l War (New York: Appleton, 1909), p. 196, gives a similar portrait. 10 Quoted in Jones, Life of Johnson, p. 22. 11 Johnson to Alexander Williams, January 27, I836, Johnson Papers, 1, 16; Williams was a prominent Whig and pro-White man. Johnson to George W. Jones, December 25, 1836, Johnson Papers, 1, 18; Johnson says in this letter that Van Buren was his second choice for the nomination. Johnson to Robert B. Reynolds, September 9, 184-3, Johnson Papers, I, 121. 12 "Letters of James K. Polk to Cave Johnson 1833-184-8, "Tennessee  Historical Magazine, I (1915), 212-238, exhibit many examples of dissatis-faction with Jackson. See also, Sellers, Polk, Jacksonian, p. 66, 104, 196-197; Sellers, James K. Polk, Gontinentalist, l843-l8"4~6" (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1966), pp. 20-65; Philip M. Hamer, Tennessee, A History 1673-1932 (4 vols. New York: American Historical Society, 1933), I, 265; Arthur C. Cole, The Whig Party in the South (Washington: American Historical Association, 1913), passiiru For a discussion of the factional nature of Tennessee politics, see: John E. Trieamo, "Tennessee Politics 1845-1861," unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, I965 (microfilm copy in author's possession); Eric L. Lacy, "Sectionalism in East Tennessee, I796-I86I,"•unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Georgia, 1963 (microfilm copy in author's possession). H. B.'Wright to James Buchanan, January 23, 1844, quoted in Sellers,- Polk, Continentalist, p. 20.. Andrew Johnson to David T. Patterson, May...13, 1844, Johnson Papers, 1, 162. 37 13 Tennessee gpu.se Journal. 1836, 4 l ; t h i s resolution benefited Johnson's constituency; Senate Journal. 1841-1842, 288, 493-557, quoted i n White, Messages of the Governors, I I I , 5 7 6 - 8 I ; Knoxville Post. December 2 2 , 1841; Knoxville Argus,: December 22 , l 8 4 l , quoted i n White, Messages of the  Governors. I l l , 577; Nashville Union.and American, A p r i l 10, 1856. 14 House Journal, 1839, 210, 216, quoted i n White, Messages of the  Governors, I I I , 312; S e l l e r s , Polk, Jacksonian, p. 386; Johnson to William Lovry, January 9, 1842, Johnson Papers, 1, 7 4 . 15 Nashville Whig, May l 4 , 1&53; Savage, The L i f e of Johnson, p. 2 8 . In contrast, other.Democrats such as Alvan Cullum, A. 0 . P. Nicholson and Hopkins Turney advocated i n t e r n a l improvements, although none represented East Tennessee. Jonesboro Sentinel, November 18, 1843, quoted i n Jonesboro  Whig, December 13, 1843; Johnson to the F i r s t Congressional D i s t r i c t of Tennessee, October 15, 1845, Johnson Papers, I, 270; Johnson to Blaekston McDannel, January 10, 1847, Andrev Johnson Papers, Series I. 16 Savage, L i f e of Johnson, p. 2 9 . I have examined a l l the debates i n Congress i n which Johnson took.part, and only i n the exchange with A l f r e d Iverson of Georgia i n 1858 could either man claim vic t o r y : Con- gressional Globed 35th Congress, 1s t session, 766. 17 Savage, L i f e of Johnson, pp. 26-27; Jones, L i f e of Johnson, p. 22; Chattonooga Times, January 2 8 , 1900, quoted i n Winston, Andrew Johnson, p. 30; Stryker, Andrew Johnson, p. 6. 18 Robert B. Reynolds to James K. Polk, June 3 , 1840, quoted i n Temple, Notable Men, p. 376; James K. Polk to A. R. Crozier, A p r i l 6, 1840, quoted i n White, Messages of the Governors, 'Gill, 4 l 7 ; James Campbell to William Campbell, June 18, 1840, quoted i n Thomas B. Alexander, Thomas A. R. Nelson (Nashville: Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Commission, 1952), p. 23 ; James K. Polk to A. 0 . P. Nicholson, May 2 8 , 184©, "Letters from James K. Polk to A. 0 . P. Nicholson 1835-1849," edited by Joseph H. Parks, Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, I I I (1944), 67-80; Jonesboro Whig,•October 7, 19 Senate Journal, l 8 4 l , 228, 280, quoted i n White, Messages of the  Governors, I I I , 597; Knoxville Argus, A p r i l 13, 1842, quoted i n Johnson Papers, I, 35-^-0; Nashville Union, February 10, 1842; Hamer, Tennessee, I, 298-99.. 20 Nashville Whig, December 2, 1837; Jonesboro Whig, December 13, 1843; Johnson to George W. Jones, December 25 , 1836, Johnson Papers, I, 19; Johnson to Blaekston McDannel, October 24, l 8 4 l , Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 21 J. P. Hardwicke to James K. Polk, December 15, 1844, quoted i n White, Messages of the Governors, I I I , 542; Senate Journal, November 14, 1842, quoted i n White, Ibid., 6 l 6 . 22 Samuel H. Laughlin Diary 1840-1844, February 7, 1842 (microfilm copy, Tennessee State Library and Archives); James K. Polk to Sameul MacLin, January 17, 1842, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 38 •23 Johnson to John Young, March 10, 1840, Johnson Papers, I, 27; Johnson, to James K. Polk, March 4, l8 4 l , i b i d . , 30-31; Johnson to William Lowry, October 24, 184-1, Johnson to Lowry, January 9, 184-2, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Nashville Union, September '15, 184-3. 24- Johnson to Polk, February 20, 184-3, Johnson Papers, I, 113-114-; Johnson to A. 0. P. Nicholson, January 6, 184-2, Samuel M i l l i g a n to David T. Patterson, November l6, 184-5, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series, I. 25 Johnson to Polk, March 4-, 184-1, Johnson to George W. Jones, February 13, 184-3, Johnson to Robert B. Reynolds, September 9, 184-3, Johnson Papers, I, 30, 111, 121. Johnson was acute i n h i s judgment con-cerning a pr e s i d e n t i a l candidate. Support f o r Martin Van Buren was announced early by many state delegations, and they had to defend him against Whig attacks for months; d i s s a t i s f i e d Democrats could not defend Van Buren with enthusiasm because of his opposition to Texas annexation. James K. Polk, a dark horse for the nomination, was not selected u n t i l after nine b a l l o t s at the Democratic Convention, and subsequently won the election. 26 Knoxville Argus, A p r i l 13, 1842, quoted i n White, Messages of the  Governors, I I I , 556-57; Nashville Union, July'20, l84o. 27 Andrew Jackson's Message to Congress, • December 8, 1829, Senate  Documents (1829-I830), I, Doc. 1; Daniel Boorstin, ed., An American Primer (New York: Mentor, 1968),-pp. 282-292; United States Magazine and Demo- c r a t i c Review, I (1837)7 T 1, quoted i n Expansion and Reform I815-I85O, ed., Charles M.'Wiltse (New York: Free Press, 1967), pp. l43-l6l. For a wide-ranging discussion of the development of American democratic ideas, consult: Wiltse, The Jeffersonian Tradition i n American Democracy (New York: H i l l and Wang, i960 e d i t i o n ) ; Ralph H. Gabriel, The Course of  American Democratic Thought (2d ed. New York: Ronald Press, 1956); Arthur A. Ekrich, The American Democratic Tradition (New York: MaeMillan, 1963)« The votes of Democrats i n Congress on t h i s platform i s ( i l l u s t r a t e d by J o e l H. Silbey, The Shrine of Party, Congressional Voting Behavior, l 8 4 l - I852 (Pittsburg: University of Pittsburg Press, 1967). 28 Johnson to George W. Jones, December 25, 1836, Johnson Papers, I, 18; White, Messages of the Governors, I I I , 473; Nashville Union, October 18, 1842; Johnson to A. 0. P. Nicholson, February 12, 1844, Johnson Papers, I, 148; Johnson to the Freemen of the F i r s t Congressional D i s t r i c t of Tennessee, October 15, 1845, i b i d . , 240. 29 Johnson to George W. Jones, December 25, 1836, Johnson Papers, I, 18; Speech i n Defense of the "Immortal Thirteen," October 27, 28, 1841, i n Knoxville Argus, A p r i l 13, 1842, quoted i n White, Messages of the Governors, III,.557; Johnson to the Democratic Committee of Maury County, August 29, 1843, Johnson Papers, I, 119-120; Nashville Union, September 15, 1843. 30 Johnson to George W. Jones, February 13, 1843, Johnson Papers, I, 111; Jonesboro Sentinel, November 18, 184-3, quoted i n Jonesboro Whig, December 13, 1843; Johnson to William Lowry, January 9, 1842, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 31 Temple, Notable Men,, pp. 62, 216-17; Jones, L i f e of Johnson, p. 32. 32 Johnson to Polk, February 20, 184-3, Johnson to Robert B. Reynolds September 9, 184-3, Johnson Papers, !,• 113, 121. 1+0 CHAPTER TWO " I am no s i x months man" "The d i f f i c u l t y i n l i f e i s choice" —George Moore The importance of class and s o c i a l acceptance "churned sourly i n Andrew Johnson's v i t a l s . . . . his own struggle to r i s e consumed and ob-sessed him. Grimly ambitious, he brooded over the wrongs, r e a l or imaginary, which were thoughtlessly f o i s t e d upon him by his s o c i a l betters, and out of his inner world of suspicious fantasy he evolved an extravagant credo of plebean democracy and honest t o i l . " This statement by Professor E r i c L. McKitrick represents the modern interpretation of the character and person-a l i t y of Johnson. Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction, as w e l l as some mono-graphs by David Donald and others, studied Johnson's role as President during Reconstruction. E x p l i c i t and i m p l i c i t i n the McKitrick analysis i s that Johnson's personality possessed a certain constancy of behavior, and therefore he exhibited h is same t r a i t s of character while state p o l i -t i c i a n , congressman, governor and senator."^" McKitrick presents h is thesis i n the most v i v i d terms, embellishing 2 his views with modern psychological and so c i o l o g i c a l terminology. According to t h i s "New School" of thought advanced by McKitrick and others, p o l i t i c s for Andrew Johnson "was es s e n t i a l l y a matter of principles that had to be defended rather than of a party organization that had to win elections. He was a Democrat,' but never r e a l l y a party man." The texture of Johnson's mind, t h i s interpretation contends, was es s e n t i a l l y abstract. Concrete problems never had the power to engage his interest that " p r i n c i p l e s " had. Despite h is tendency to boast, Johnson was not f u l l y confident of his i n t e l -4 l l e c t u a l powers. He was "obsessed with himself to a degree that exceeded the normal" and with a "dogged masochism, he never ceased to harp p u b l i c l y on h i s own humble origin s . " Professor McKitrick contends that Andrew Johnson operated as an out-sider a l l h is l i f e . A s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l outsider, Johnson's role was based on n o n - p o l i t i c a l behavior. Never a party leader, Johnson had been "tempermentally and s o c i o l o g i c a l l y a ' r a d i c a l , ' " opposed to the regular i n -3 sider i n the American p o l i t i c a l system. The McKitrick analysis makes several unsubstantiated, deductive as-sumptions. I f Andrew Johnson behaved i n an abnormal manner during Recon-struction, then he must have done so during his e a r l i e r p o l i t i c a l career. Yet McKitrick presents no evidence to support.this analysis of Johnson's behavior before Reconstruction. Also, there i s the assumption that the modern analyst can accurately l a b e l the behavior of a man a century i n the past, using behavioral s c i e n t i f i c d e f i n i t i o n s . At best, there i s s t i l l argument'over these d e f i n i t i o n s and t h e i r application today; to accurately delineate a dead man's psyche and personality nuances using those techniques 4 exclusively taxes h i s t o r i c a l c r e d i b i l i t y . Professor McKitrick observed the Radical Republicans' warm and l o y a l response to Johnson shortly after his inauguration i n 1865. Yet within a short time, these same Radicals--Charles Sumner, Thaddeus Stevens, and Benjamin Wade, to mention a few--hated the new President, and planned his downfall.' This i s an example of the basis f o r McKitrick's analysis of Johnson's p o l i t i c a l behavior. The foundation for such observations and subsequent conclusions regarding Johnson's character were the memoirs and l e t t e r s of the Radicals and other Republicans, as w e l l as contemporary newspapers. On the v a l i d i t y of t h i s type of evidence, • McKitrick concluded that Johnson was an incompetent "outsider"—because the sources said he was. Deductive assumptions complete the theory: therefore Johnson must have been an incompetent outsider throughout his l i f e t i m e . To delineate a man's personality and behavior i n h i s entire public career r e l y i n g upon such l i m i t e d evidence i s a kind of documentary deter-minism- -conclusions became inevitable given the nature and scope of the 5 examined documents. To be sure, i n some instances, t h i s type of contem-porary evidence i s , a l l that i s available to the researcher. But when a wealth of various kinds of material remains i n t a c t , i t i s the historian's task to u t i l i z e as much of the various types of evidence as possible, i n order t o accurately portray both the p o l i t i c i a n and the man. Andrew Johnson e l i c i t e d almost violent responses from those he con-tacted. Anorexia was ra r e l y a frame of mind of men who l e f t his presence. This i n t e n s i t y of emotion reflected Johnson's own v o l a t i l e nature and dynamic personality. Consequently, the emotional reactions of Johnson, his associates, and opponents used as evidence i n the formulation of a person-a l i t y evaluation must be accepted with reservation and scrutiny by a l l i n -vestigators. To conclude, on the basis of one speech on the un d e s i r a b i l i t y of con-tinuing the Mexican War, that Johnson was anti-war and anti-expansion, and stood i n a r a d i c a l position contrary to the administration and his party on the issue,* assumes both the uniformity of a man's motivations and the i n -f a l l i b i l i t y of one document. The fundamental question that must be answered i s : was Andrew Johnson a p o l i t i c a l outsider and maverick, or a Jackson Democrat, l o y a l to h i s party and the South throughout his Congressional career? I t i s here that the value of recent research methods i n the 6 s o c i a l sciences becomes clear.. New s t a t i s t i c a l methods u t i l i z i n g r o l l - c a l l votes recorded i n each Congress have proved to be invaluable i n determining the behavior of not only groups of legislators, "but individuals as well. Used in conjunction with a Congressman's letters and other-documentary evidence, this new-method of investigation enables the historian to systematically analyze how an individual behaved in Congress. A pioneering study u t i l i z i n g these s t a t i s t i c a l techniques is Joel H. Silbey's The Shrine of Party, Congressional Voting Behavior I84I-I852, a work which analyzes the sectional nature of p o l i t i c s in the 184-0's and 185O's. Professor Silbey implements a method of scaling attitudes through a r o l l - c a l l analysis of Congressional votes. Silbey ranks each Congressman's votes on a scale indicating his voting position on any particular issue, 7 relative to the voting responses of his party and section. I have relied upon Professor Silbey's s t a t i s t i c a l information for Andrew Johnson's voting record on a l l major issues during his Congressional career. Most of Silbey's statistics are raw data; I have correlated and supplemented this data, unifying i t into cohesive tables specifically 8 relating to Johnson's voting response pattern. Certainly there must be reservations about such s t a t i s t i c a l evidence. Used by i t s e l f , i t offers only mathematical proof of the questions that the researcher wants answered. The chief value of this type of scaling pro-cedure is that i t provides a means of verifying general statements. R o l l -c a l l scaling offers a systematic method of testing hypotheses and, when used in conjunction with orthodox documentary evidence, can aid the historian 9 to a great degree. Thus, when the author asserts that Andrew Johnson throughout Congress was a vigorous Southerner in defending slavery, his voting record on this issue can verify this generalization. The kind of scale u t i l i z e d here reveals more than Johnson's f i n a l vote on a particular Issue like slavery--it i s a scale which reveals his attitudes toward slavery by comparing a number of voting responses in a continuum to other kk men's responses . The s c a l e ' s fundamental u t i l i z a t i o n i n my paper w i l l he t o supplement my a n a l y s i s o f Andrew Johnson 's p o l i t i c a l behav io r i n comparison t o the M c K i t r i c k t h e s i s . Dur ing the decade Johnson was i n Congress-lo^-3 t o 1853—the most s i g n i f i c a n t d i v i s i v e and n a t i o n a l problems o f the an te -be l lum p e r i o d r e c e i v e d the n a t i o n ' s a t t e n t i o n . I t was a p e r i o d which saw the a c q u i s i t i o n , o f huge t e r r i t o r i e s through a v igo rous expansion p o l i c y , as w e l l as a concomitant reopening of the s l a v e r y q u e s t i o n . Not o n l y d i d the o l d p o l i c i e s concern ing the t r a d i t i o n a l , i s sues of t a r i f f , i n t e r n a l improvements, and l a n d d i s t r i b u t i o n prove t o be even g rea te r d i v i s i v e n a t i o n a l problems d u r i n g the logo ' s and 1 8 5 0 ' s , bu t the s t a t i c nature o f the r o l e o f the c e n t r a l government r e v e a l e d i t s i n c a p a c i t y t o permanently so lve the s l a v e r y q u e s t i o n . I t i s d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d t h a t the nature of n a t i o n a l p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s would be a l t e r e d , and new p o l i t i c a l groups would form acco rd ing t o the d i s s i d e n t express ions of c e r t a i n Americans . Andrew Johnson 's p o l i t i c a l behav io r i n Congress d u r i n g t h i s e r a can be s y s t e m a t i c a l l y examined through an a n a l y s i s o f h i s v o t i n g r e c o r d on the seven major areas o f concern f a c i n g the American people : s l a v e r y , expans ion, war, compromise and s e c t i o n a l i s m , t a r i f f , i n t e r n a l improvements, and l a n d p o l i c y . V o t i n g pa t t e rns on these i s s u e s w i l l determine, t o a l a r g e degree, Johnson ' s c o n s i s t e n c y and l o y a l t y as a Democrat and Southerner . I n the l&if-O's, the American people had entered a p e r i o d o f r a p i d i n d u s t r i a l and commercial development. The two p o l i t i c a l pa r t i e s—Whigs and Democrats— were e q u a l l y s t rong and each had a c l e a r l y de f ined program f o r n a t i o n a l f u l f i l l m e n t . I n the mid- l&^-O's , new problems suddenly a rose ; new t e r r i -t o r i e s were added as a r e s u l t of P r e s i d e n t P o l k ' s aggress ive f o r e i g n p o l i c y . But the demands o f b o t h Nor the rn and Southern l eade r s f o r the f r u i t s o f t e r r i t o r i a l conquest r e v i t a l i z e d the s l a v e r y i s s u e , which had been t e m p o r a r i l y 4 5 10 s e t t l e d by the Compromise of 1820. Andrew Johnson had been elected to the Twenty-Eighth Congress i n l843> after an easy vi c t o r y over his Whig opponent i n East Tennessee. In his second major speech of the House, Johnson delivered a scathing attack on the a b o l i -t i o n i s t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y abusive to John Quincy Adams, and defended slavery with enthusiasm. I f slavery were abolished,. Johnson questioned, were the a b o l i t i o n i s t s prepared "to turn over two m i l l i o n of negores loose upon the country, to become a terror and burden to society?" Slavery had existed for f i v e thousand years, he emphasized. I t existed for a reason: "the black race of A f r i c a were i n f e r i o r to the white man." No i n t e l l i g e n t man would place every "splay-footed, bandy-shanked, hump-backed, thick-lipped, flat-nosed, wooly-headed, ebon-colored negro i n the country upon an equality with the poor white, man." The New England reformers, such as John Quincy Adams, should be the l a s t ones to crusade for equality f o r the black man, while white slavery existed i n the form of indenture i n New England f a c t o r i e s . R a l l y i n g his Southern associates, Johnson ca l l e d for the South to unite, swearing "by t h e i r a l t a r s and t h e i r God, that they w i l l a l l . s i n k i n the d i r t together before they w i l l y i e l d the great Compromise contained i n the Constitution. . . . " His e f f o r t impressed most observers. John Quincy Adams, having f e l t the b i t e of Johnson's invective, believed the young ..11 Tennessean was possessed of more native a b i l i t y than any man i n the House. Slavery was a d i v i s i v e emotional issue throughout James K. Polk's administration. The Wilmot Proviso marked the beginning of animosities. An amendment to the Mexican War appropriation b i l l , i t stipulated that none of the t e r r i t o r y acquired from Mexico should be open to slavery. When f i r s t introduced, the Proviso produced indifference or confusion among most Southerners. Few men agreed with John C. Calhoun, who saw i t as "an apple . . 1 2 of discord that w i l l do much to divide the party. k6 Did Johnson oppose the Proviso? Did he vote as he had spoken on the slavery issue? Johnson equated the Proviso with abolitionism--damnable and dangerous to the South. ' Recording his vote with such prominent Southern Democrats as Robert B. Rhett of South Carolina, James Seddon and Robert M. T. Hunter of V i r g i n i a , and Howell Cobb of Georgia on the slavery issue i n the Twenty-Ninth Congress, Johnson voted with 97$ of the Southerners i n the House i n defence of slavery. He contended that Congress had no r i g h t 13 to l e g i s l a t e on the slavery issue. Johnson joined most Southerners i n supporting the Democratic platform of 1848. This platform, r e f l e c t i n g the popular attitude that the Wilmot Proviso must be settled immediately, warned against Congressional interference with slavery as leading to "the most alarming'and dangerous consequences." During Zachary Taylor's administration, the agitation culminated i n Daniel Gott's resolution i n the House which proposed to abolish the slave trade i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia. Johnson joined many Southern associates i n Ill-c a l l i n g the resolution "insidious"--a "blow against Southern r i g h t s . " In 181+9, a s i n 1846, Johnson defended the South's peculiar i n s t i t u -t i o n with vigor. In t h i s T h i r t i e t h Congress, he voted with Robert B. Rhett, Howell Cobb, Robert M. T. Hunter, and Jefferson Davis, standing with 100$ of the Southerners, as w e l l as 63$ of the Democrats i n the House i n his 15 defense of slavery. Johnson had advised the people of Tennessee through-out t h i s c r u c i a l period that Southerners -must not view slavery as an i n -gredient of p o l i t i c a l weakness to the South. Slavery benefitted the common working people: "the laws of nature . . . make i t impossible for the white man to cultivate the hot s u l t r y cotton f i e l d s ; " The one and one-quarter b i l l i o n dollars invested " i n slave labor i s a powerful a u x i l i a r y on the side of high prices f o r labor. . ... The slave holder of the South i s the interested and therefore the most r e l i a b l e f r i e n d and ablest advocate of high prices for labor." On other occasions, Andrew Johnson consistently defended slavery. He t o l d a large audience i n 1849 that i t was unconstitutional for Congress to interfere with slavery; " i t i s an i n s t i t u t i o n l o c a l i n i t s character and peculiar to the states where i t e x i s t s . " Johnson attacked anti-slavery sympathizers such as Robert Winthrop, M i l l a r d Fillmore, and Abraham Lincoln. Winthrop recalled one such attack as "ferocious." The slavery question was one upon "which the Whigs and democrats of the South can, and . . . must unite>" Johnson entreated the people, "come take your stand against the encroachments of the North." The i n s t i t u t i o n of slavery had i t s foundation "and would f i n d i t s perpetuity, i n the Union," and the Union would f i n d i t s continuance by a "noninterference with slavery." Johnson prophesized that i f Congress and the North kept up t h e i r agitation, - " t h i s mighty Union w i l l melt i n twain." The Constitution and a l l i t s compromises were "our only ark of safety . . . (and) the palladium of our c i v i l and r e l i g i o u s l i b e r t y . " The movement toward westward expansion was an in t e g r a l part of the r e v i t a l i z a t i o n of the slavery question. When Johnson had entered Congress i n 184-3, Americans i n a l l sections had expressed t h e i r support for the acquisition of Texas and Oregon and further expansion. In general, voting on the expansion issue during the Twenty-Eighth and Twenty-Ninth Congresses (1843-1847) surrounded debate over Texas and Oregon. In the Twenty-Eighth Congress, Johnson strongly favored the admission of Texas as a state and the acquisition of Oregon up to 5^° 40'. He voted with 75$ of the Democrats and 64$ of the Southerners i n the House, including Jefferson Davis, John S l i d e l l of Louisiana, Sam Houston of Texas, William L. Yancey of Alabama, and Robert B. Rhett, f o r the prosecution of a vigorous expansion policy. During the Twenty-Ninth Congress, Johnson reaffirmed h i s l o y a l t y to party pri n c i p l e s and, along with Howell Cobb, Jefferson Davis, k& Robert B. Rhett, and Robert M. T. Hunter, voted with 77$ of the Democrats i n the House i n support of the administration's expansion program. The people had spoken, Johnson explained, "proclaiming i n thunder tones, our r i g h t to the whole of Oregon up to 5k kO1." Texas had a r i g h t to enter the Union, just as the decree from "Heaven had gone f o r t h against" Mexico and her dominions. The Anglo-Saxon race had been chosen as the power to redeem these areas. Any Americans who opposed t h i s expansion policy were "enemies of t h e i r country. Johnson's expressions, and his voting responses, were those of a vigorous Southern Democrat, not those of a party and sectional outsider. During the Mexican War, Johnson supported President James K. Polk's war policy. The war issue, during the f i r s t session of the Twenty-Ninth Congress, contained votes on additional war appropriations and the be-stowance of greater war powers to the President. In accord with 85$ of the Democrats i n the House, including Howell Cobb, Robert M. T. Hunter, Robert B. Rhett, and Thomas Bayly of V i r g i n i a , Johnson supported a vigorous war policy. Yet, d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with Polk's leadership was evident during the second session. Johnson, along with other colleagues such as Robert B. Rhett, restrained his enthusiasm f o r Polk's p o l i c y and voted i n a moderate position on the scale,. As the Mexican War drew to a close, Johnson's and the party's enthusiastic support f o r the administration's war pol i c y re-turned. In company with Jefferson Davis, Robert B. Rhett, and Robert M. T. Hunter, Johnson voted with 91$ of the Democrats i n the House for a tenacious 19 pursuit of the war. The Compromise of I85O proved to be only a temporary respite from the sectional debate over•slavery. Primarily the work of old national p o l i t i c a l leaders, Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, the Compromise proposed: to admit C a l i f o r n i a without Congressional action on slavery; to organize the re-49 m i n i n g t e r r i t o r y secured from Mexico without provision for or against the admission of slavery; to abolish the slave trade i n the D i s t r i c t of Columbia; 20 and to enact a new and effective f u g i t i v e slave law. Johnson threw his weight for the Compromise, although some Southerners reacted v i o l e n t l y against i t . Sectionalists such as John C. Calhoun be-lieved that there was l i t t l e prospect that the North " w i l l come to our terms . . . disunion i s the only alternative." In a l l the debates and votes during the T h i r t y - F i r s t Congress comprising the sectional and compromise issues, Johnson voted for compromise and against sectional agitation. He refused to follow the lead of secessionists Calhoun, Rhett and Yancey. Johnson joined Sam Houston, Robert M. T. Hunter, and Thomas Bayly i n voting with 55$ of the Democrats and 63$ of the Southerners i n the House, i n sup-port of the Compromise as a settlement of the slavery question and a deter-rent against dissolution of the Union. Although Johnson favored compromise, he did not cease to defend the South and slavery. On the sectional issue i n I85O, he joined Sam Houston, Robert Toombs of Georgia, James Orr of South Carolina, and James Seddon i n voting with 92$ of the Southerners i n the House i n a defense of the South. During the Thirty-Second Congress (185I-I853), Johnson a l l i e d himself with Houston, Jefferson Davis, and John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, i n voting with 61% of the Democrats and „, 21 79yo of the Southerners i n the House.for non-agitation of sectional issues. With a majority of his party and section, Johnson had proved that, although he was a Democrat and Southerner, he was not a disunionist. Other national issues engaged the nation's attention during the 184-0's and I85O's, although the most pressing problem continued to be slavery. Since the l820's,.the t a r i f f , i n t e r n a l improvements, and land issues had been v i t a l questions. For a decade previous to Johnson's entrance into Congress i n 184-3, the Democratic and Whig parties had di f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y 50 over these questions. Johnson's opposition to a protective t a r i f f had been t r a d i t i o n a l l y vociferous (see Chapter One). During President Polk's administration, 22 he reit e r a t e d h is position. In the second session of the Twenty-Ninth Congress, Johnson c a l l e d for a low t a r i f f , along with Southern Democrats Howell Cobb, Robert M. T. Hunter, and James Seddon. A l l true Democrats 23 and Southerners should "go for the lowest rate of duty," Johnson argued. Opposition to a protective t a r i f f was accompanied by Johnson's vigorous a n t i i n t e r n a l improvement policy. The in t e r n a l improvements issue had been a t r a d i t i o n a l question of party d i v i s i o n . In general, the Democrats opposed increasing the Federal Government's powers through any such schemes; the Whigs claimed i t was a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the government to direct and execute i n t e r n a l improvements. During the T h i r t i e t h Congress the improve-ment-issue consisted of plans to improve r i v e r s and harbors and the issuance of r a i l r o a d grants. With colleagues Howell Cobb, Robert B. Rhett, and Alf r e d Iverson of Georgia, Johnson voted with 62$ of the Democrats i n the House against a l l proposed government sponsored improvement schemes. Although the sectional voting patterns that emerged as a re s u l t of the Compromise of 185O had destroyed party and sectional unity on the i n t e r n a l improvements issue, Johnson remained adamant against any improvement programs. During the T h i r t y - F i r s t Congress, votes on the i n t e r n a l improvement issue dealt with r a i l r o a d grants and charters. While he voted with only 49$ of the Demo-crats and 44$ of the Southerners i n the House, Andrew Johnson joined Jefferson Davis, Robert B. Rhett, and others i n condemning i n t e r n a l improve-24 ment plans. Land policy, along with t a r i f f and in t e r n a l improvement issues, was a fundamental problem of the expanding American nation. The emotional nature of p o l i t i c s i n the l840's and 1850's magnified the importance of the d i s -51 position of public lands. The Whigs wanted the public lands as a source of revenue and opposed the lowering of prices and the recognition of squatter•rights. The Democrats favored a l i b e r a l land policy: a policy i n i t i a l l y supported by many prominent Southern Democrats, before i t became stigmatized by the Wilmot Proviso and the exclusion of slavery from the 25 t e r r i t o r i e s . In the Twenty-Ninth, T h i r t y - F i r s t , and Thirty-Second Congresses, Andrew Johnson advocated a l i b e r a l land policy. With fellow countrymen Robert B. Rhett, James Seddon, and Howell Cobb, he voted with 76$ of the Democrats i n the House i n the Twenty-Ninth Congress for a l i b e r a l land p o l i c y . By I 8 5 O , the votes comprising the land issue dealt s p e c i f i c a l l y with land grants to war veterans and the Senate's price reduction land b i l l . Johnson doubted the wisdom of these measures and restrained his vigorous support. He voted i n moderate position on the scale with k2<fo of the Democrats and 52$ of the Southerners i n the House, including James Orr and James Seddon. During the Thirty-Second Congress, the land issue re-volved around Johnson's own Homestead b i l l , which proposed to give every head of a homeless family one hundred and s i x t y acres of land out of the public domain. Reverting to hi s previous l i b e r a l policy, Johnson naturally supported his own proposal. Yet he was counted with only 25$ of the Southerners and 36$ of the Democrats i n the House i n supporting a l i b e r a l land p o l i c y i n 1851. Although Johnson vigorously denied that his homestead plan was. tinctured with abolitionism and t i e d to the exclusion of slavery from the t e r r i t o r i e s , i t was apparent that by 1850 few Southern Democrats 26 supported a l i b e r a l land policy. Andrew Johnson's voting behavior was consistent throughout a decade of service i n Congress. On the c r u c i a l economic and p o l i t i c a l issues of the period, he behaved as a regular Southern Democrat, a l l i e d with such men as Jefferson Davis, Howell Cobb, and Robert B. Rhett. I f his- behavior as a p o l i t i c i a n can be c l a s s i f i e d as that of an outsider or maverick, then the same terms can be applied to Davis, Cobb, and Rhett, and others. I f these men were a l l outside the p o l i t i c a l structure, then such terms as outsider and maverick would be meaningless. Yet Andrew Johnson's voting record does not f u l l y delineate the public man, much less the private man. His relations to party and constituency, his p o l i t i c a l ideas, and his personality must also be examined. 53 NOTES FOR CHAPTER TWO 1 "Erie'L.' McKitrick, Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, I960), p. 87; David Donald, Lincoln Reconsidered, p. 139; Donald, "Why They Impeached Andrew Johnson/' American Heritage, V I I I (1956), 103; Benjamin P. Thomas and Harold M. Hyman, Stanton: The  L i f e and Times of Lincoln's Secretary of War, passim; Hyman, "Johnson Stanton and Grant: A Reconsideration of the Army's Role i n the Events Leading to the Impeachment," A.H.R., LXV (i960), 85-101. 2 See Introduction. 3 McKitrick, Andrew Johnson, pp. 85-91* 4 Although theories of personality development d i f f e r , most author-i t i e s on the subject agree that human beings are so complex, and the determinants of human a c t i v i t y so multiple, that they cannot be reduced to any single, o v e r a l l abstraction. See: Sigmund Freud, On C r e a t i v i t y and  the Unconscious, Papers on the Psychology of Art, Literature, Love, Religion (New York: Harper, 1958); Gordon W. Airport, Personality: A Psychological . Interpretation (New York: Henry Holt, 1937); Kurt Lewin, A Dynamic'Theory. of Personality, Selected Essays, translated by D. K. Adams and K. E. Zenar (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1935); Henry A. Murray, Explorations i n Person- a l i t y (New York: Oxford University Press, 1938); Raymond B. C a t t e l l , Personality: A Systematic Theoretical and Factual Study (New York: McGraw-H i l l , 1950); William McDougall, The Energies of Men: A Study of the  Fundamentals of Dynamic Psychology (New.York: Oxford, 1938). McKitrick makes another'faulty assumption revealed by psychological studies i n general: that because a man behaved abnormally i n 1866, he must have be-haved abnormally i n 1840 or I85O. 5 Lee Benson, "Research Problems i n American P o l i t i c a l H i s t o r i o -graphy," i n Mirra Kamarovshy, ed., Common Frontiers of the Social Sciences (Glencoe: University of I l l i n o i s Press, 1957)> PP* 113-183; Samuel P. Hays, "History as Human Behavior," Iowa Journal of History and P o l i t i c s , LVIII (i960), 193-206; Vern L. Bullough, "The Computers and the Historian--Some Tentative Beginnings," Computers and the Humanities, I (1967), 6l-64; Charles M. Dollar, "Innovation i n H i s t o r i c a l Approach: A Computer Approach," Computers and the Humanities, I I I (1969), 139-152. 6 Lee Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy: • New York as a  Test Case (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961); Charles G. S e l l e r s , J r . , "The Equilibrium Cycle i n Two Party P o l i t i c s , " Public Opinion  Quarterly, XXIX (1965), 16-38; Richard P. McCormick, "Suffrage Classes and Party Alignments: A Study i n Voter Behavior," M.V.H.R., XLVI (1959), 397-^ -10; David Donald, The P o l i t i c s of Reconstruction (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1965); Samuel P. Hays, "The So c i a l Analysis of American P o l i t i c a l History, 1880-1920," P o l i t i c a l Science Quarterly, LXXI (1965), 373-392. 7 Professor Silbey's conclusions were that sectionalism i n Congress did not appear i n 1846 or e a r l i e r as suggested by Avery Craven and others, but was not obvious u n t i l after the election of 1848, and not complete u n t i l 54 1852, This "book i s based on his doctoral dissertation,"Congressional Voting Behavior and.the Southern-Western Alliance ±84-1-1852," unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Iowa, 1963 (microfilm copy i n U.B.C. L i -brary). And independent study of similar scope by Thomas B. Alexander, Sectional Stress and Party Strength, A Study of R o l l - C a l l Voting Patterns  i n the House of Representatives, I836-I86O ( N a s h v i l l e : V a n d e r b i l t University Press, 1967), came to similar conclusions as Silbey did i n Shrine of Party, Congressional Voting Behavior 184-1-1852 (Pittsburg: University of Pittsburg Press, 1967). 8 See Tables 1-17, Appendix A.. An explanation of the scalogram and supplementary s t a t i s t i c s i s given. 9 For a detailed presentation of r o l l - c a l l analysis, see: Duncan Macrae, J r . , Dimensions of Congressional Voting: A S t a t i s t i c a l Study of  the House of Representatives i n the Eighty-First Congress (Berkeley: University of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1958); William 0. Aydellote, - "Voting Patterns i n the B r i t i s h House of Commons i n the 184-0' s," Comparative  Studies i n Society and History, V (±963), 134—163; Aydellote, "Quanti-f i c a t i o n i n History," A.H.R., LXXI (1966;, 803-825; William Riker, '-'A Method for Determining the Significance of R o l l Calls i n Voting Bodies," Legis l a t i v e Behavior: A Reader i n Theory and Research, ed., John C. Wahlke and H. Eulare (Glencoe:Free Press, 1959); Stuart Rice, Quantitative  Methods i n P o l i t i c s (New York: Knopf, 1959); Rice,'"The P o l i t i c a l Vote as a Frequency Di s t r i b u t i o n of Opinion," Journal of the American S t a t i s t i c a l  Association, I I (±964-), 60-65; C. H. Coombs, A Theory of Psychological  Scaling (Ann Arbor: Bobbs-Merrill, 1952). 10 For a background see: Glyndon.G. Van Deusen, The Jacksonian Era, 1828-184-8 (New York: Harper, 1959); Lee Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian  Democracy; George Rogers Taylor, The Transportation Revolution (New York: Holt, Rhinehart,'• Winston, 1951); Albert K. Weinberg, Manifest Destiny (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1951); Avery Craven, The Coming of the C i v i l  War (Chicago: University of Chicago, 194-2); Charles Syndor, The Growth of  Southern Sectionalism 1819-184-8 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 194-9); J o e l H. Silbey, Shrine of Party, p. 25. W i l l i e P. Mangum to James' W. Webb, July 30, 184-2, The Papers of W i l l i e P. .Mangum, ed., H. T. Shank, 5 vols. (Raleigh: North Carolina State Department of Archives and History, ±950-56), V, 4-70; Speech of William Preston of South Carolina, July 27, 184-1, Congressional Globe, 27th Cong., 1 sess., 255. 11 Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., App. 95-98; John Quincy Adams, Memoirs, Comprising Portions of His Diary from ±798 to 184-8, ed., Charles F. Adams (lif vols. Boston: Lippincott, ± 0 7 4 - 1 0 7 7 J , XII, 240; The Diary of John  Quincy Adams, ed., A l l a n Nevins (New York: Longmans, 1928), p. 565. The debate arose i n 184-4- when Joshua Giddings, with Adams's support, attempted to introduce an a b o l i t i o n i s t p e t i t i o n over the Gag Rule—the House's Twenty-First Rule prohibiting anti-slavery p e t i t i o n s . 12 Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., ±64-65, 287, 983; The Diary of James  K. Polk, ed., Milo Quaife (4- vols. Chicago: Chicago H i s t o r i c a l Society, 1910;, I, 14-0-14-1; Norman A. Graebner, Empire on the P a c i f i c (New York: Knopf, 1955), PP. 103-107; John H. Franklin, "The Southern Expansionists of 184-6," Journal" of Southern History, XXV'(±959), 323-330; C. W. Morrison, Democratic P o l i t i c s and Sectionalism: The Wilmot Proviso Controversy (Chapel H i l l : University of North Carolina, 1967), -passim: Craven. 55 C o m i n g ; o f t h e C i v i l W a r , p . 231; J o h n £. C a l h o u n t o L e v i s S . C o r y e l l , N o v e m b e r 7> 1846, " C o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f J o h n C . C a l h o u n , " e d . , J . F . J a m e s o n , A m e r i c a n H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n A n n u a l R e p o r t , 1890, I I , 779* 13 S e e T a b l e 3; A p p e n d i x A ; T a b l e 34, S i l b e y , " C o n g r e s s i o n a l V o t i n g , " p p . 496-97, 501; G l o b e , 29th C o n g . , 2 s e s s . , 120, 176, 386, 424; J o h n s o n t o D a v i d T . P a t t e r s o n , M a r c h 23, .1848, A n d r e v J o h n s o n P a p e r s , ' S e r i e s I . J o h n s o n a g r e e d v i t h C a l h o u n t h a t t h e s l a v e r y d e b a t e v o u l d d i v i d e t h e p a r t y . 14 N a t i o n a l P a r t y P l a t f o r m s 1840-1964, c o m p i l e d b y K . H . P o r t e r a n d D . B . J o h n s o n ( U r b a n a : U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s P r e s s , 1966), p.11. J o h n s o n a c t e d v i t h a m a j o r i t y o f h i s p a r t y a n d s e c t i o n b y n o t f o l l o w i n g t h e S o u t h e r n f i r e e a t e r s . N a s h v i l l e U n i o n , D e c e m b e r 7, 1847; G l o b e , 30th C o n g . , 1 s e s s . , 907, 964; J a m e s S e d d o n t o R . M . T . H u n t e r , J u n e 16, 1848, SThe C o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f R o b e r t M . T . H u n t e r , I826-I876," e d . , C H . A m b l e r , A . H . A . A n n u a l R e p o r t , 1916, I I , 91; J o h n C . C a l h o u n t o J a m e s Hammond , F e b r u a r y l4, 1849, H . V . J o h n s o n t o C a l h o u n , J u l y 20, 1849, " C o r r e s p o n d e n c e - o f C a l h o u n , " 762-63, 1195, II98; C h a r l e s M . W i l t s e , J o h n C . C a l h o u n , ' S e c t i o n a l i s t ( N e v Y o r k : R u s s e l l , 1951),, p p . 374, 404; G l o b e , 30th C o n g . , 2 s e s s . , 83; A n d r e v J o h n s o n t o B l a c k -s t o n M c D a n n e l , J a n u a r y 1, 1849, A n d r e v J o h n s o n P a p e r s , S e r i e s I . 15 - S e e T a b l e 9, A p p e n d i x A ; T a b l e 36, S i l b e y , " C o n g r e s s i o n a l V o t i n g , " p p . 505-506, 510; G l o b e , 31st C o n g . , 1 s e s s . , 33-34. 16 J o h n s o n t o E . G . E a s t m a n , M a y 27, 1849, J o h n s o n P a p e r s , 1, 509; S p e e c h a t E v a n s C r o s s r o a d s , M a y 26, 1849, i b i d . , 498; N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d  A m e r i c a n , O c t o b e r 31, 1856. 17 S p e e c h a t E v a n s C r o s s r o a d s , M a y 26, l849> J o h n s o n P a p e r s , 1, 498; A Mem«ir o f R o b e r t C . W i n t h r o p ( B o s t o n : L i t t l e , Brovn,-I897)., p . 103; G l o b e , 31st C o n g . , 1 s e s s . , 33-34, A p p . 669-673. S e e a l s o , J o h n H . M c H e n r y t o R . M . T . H u n t e r , F e b r u a r y 21, I85O, " C o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f H u n t e r , ^ C o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f H u n t e r , " p . 105. 18 G l o b e , 28th C o n g . , 2 s e s s . , 201-216, A p p . 17I; s e e T a b l e 1, A p p e n d i x A ; T a b l e 15, S i l b e y , " E o n g r e s s i o n a l V o t i n g , " p p . 420-423; T a b l e 2, A p p e n d i x A ; T a b l e 21, S i l b e y , i b i d . , p p . 441-442, 447. T h e c o n t e n t o f t h e e x p a n s i o n i s s u e c o v e r e d e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same q u e s t i o n s . G l o b e , 28th C o n g . , 2 s e s s . , A p p . 219-223; i b i d . , 29th C o n g . , 1 s e s s . , 288, 885, 2 s e s s . , 40. J o h n s o n c r i t i c -i z e d D e m o c r a t i c l e a d e r s s u c h a s T h o m a s H a r t B e n t o n f o r t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n . A n d r e v J o h n s o n t o D a v i d T . P a t t e r s o n , A p r i l l4, 1844, J o h n s o n P a p e r s , 1, 160, 163. 19 G l o b e , 29th C o n g . , 1 s e s s . , 275-276, 584, 667-669; T h o m a s H a r t B e n t o n , T h i r t y Y e a r s V i e v ( 2 v o l s . N e v Y o r k : A p p l e t o n , 1883)., I I , 674. S e e T a b l e 4, A p p e n d i x A ; S i l b e y , S h r i n e o f P a r t y , p . 77; T a b l e 25, S i l b e y , ' " C o n g r e s s i o n a l V o t i n g , " p p . 458-463; T a b l e 5, A p p e n d i x A ; T a b l e 27, S i l b e y , i b i d . , p p . 468-471; T a b l e 10, A p p e n d i x A ; T a b l e 29, S i l b e y , i b i d . , p p . 475-479. 20 T h e r e v e r e m a n y s u b s e q u e n t d e b a t e s a n d s u b t l e c h a n g e s , b u t t h i s r e m a i n e d t h e e s s e n c e o f t h e c o m p r o m i s e . S e e C r a v e n , ' C o m i n g o f t h e C i v i l W a r , p p . 250-271; H o l m a n H a m i l t o n , " T h e ' C a v e o f W i n d s ' a n d t h e C o m p r o m i s e o f 1850," J . S . H . ' , X I I I (1957), 331-353. 21 John C. Calhoun to James Hammond, February 16, 1850,-"Correspondence of Calhoun," "jQl; J.H. McHenry to Hunter, February 21 , I85O, "Correspondence K of Hunter," 105; Globe, 31st Cong., 1 sess., 555, App. 669-673; Nashville  Union, July 2 2 , I85O; Johnson to Patterson, A p r i l 5, I85O, Johnson Papers, 1, 533. See Table 14, Appendix A; Table 38, Silbey,- i b i d . , pp. 5±9-521; Table 15, Appendix A; Table 40,- S i l b e y , . i b i d . , pp. 527-529; Table 17, Appendix A; Table 44, Silbey, i b i d . , pp. 545-547; - Globe, 31st Cong., 2 sess., 12. 22 Calhoun to James Hammond, November 27, 1842,- "Correspondence of Calhoun," 520-521; National Party Platforms, pp. 2-14;. Nashville Union, March 30, iSkk; Globe, 29th Cong., 2 sess., 74, 518, 635-636. See Table 6, Appendix A; Table 17, Silbey, i b i d . , pp. 426-431;• Globe, 29th Cong., 2 sess., App. 160-163. . 23 Table 6, Appendix A; Table 17, Silbey, i b i d . , pp. 427-431; Table 7, Appendix A; Table 33, Silbey, i b i d . , pp. 490-495; Johnson to Nicholson, February 12, 1844, Johnson Papers, I, 148; Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., 1000-1013. Johnson proposed an amendment to tax c a p i t a l assets for revenue, presenting complete s t a t i s t i c a l data to show ten times the revenue c a p a b i l i t i e s . 24 Table 11, Appendix A; Table 32, i b i d . , pp. 487-489; Globe, 30th Cong., 1 sess., 800-802, 857; Table 13, Appendix A; Table 42, Silbey, i b i d . , pp. 538-539. Congressional voting during the 31st and 32nd Congresses revealed a basic change from the 2 8 t h and 29th Congresses: a sectional voting pattern had replaced a national voting party pattern. 25 National Party Platforms, pp. 2-8; Globe, 27th Cong., 1 sess., App. 3101. As early as 1840 Calhoun had favored a l i b e r a l public land policy. George Stephenson, P o l i t i c a l History of the Public Lands ,j Boston: Ginn, 1917), presents an excellent history of the subject. 26 Table 8, Appendix A. The Votes included reductions i n the prices of land and pre-emption r i g h t s . See also, Table 12,. Appendix'A;' Table 4l, Silbey, i b i d . , pp. 531-533; Table 169 Appendix A; Table 52, Silbey, i b i d . , PP- 573-577; Table 19, i b i d . , pp.-434-438. Jefferson Davis supported Johnson's Homestead b i l l . 57 CHAPTER THREE " I am an American" "A man should choose with careful eye the things to he remembered by" —Robert 0. Coffin Johnson made more than the average impression as a freshman member of Congress i n 1843• Ln his f i r s t speech he ably defended Andrew Jackson before the whole House. His second major appearance saw him attack Joshua Giddings and John Quincy Adams over the Gag Resolution. ' These i n i t i a l speeches suggest his self-confidence and aggressiveness. With the experience of eight years of state p o l i t i c s behind him, and an awareness of having made an impression on the House, Johnson participated i n the parliamentary maneuvres with enthusiasm, force and confidence. Johnson joined many young Democrats who came into the House and Senate, i n anticipation of the rewards of o f f i c e , yet Johnson, Jefferson Davis, and others, grew restless as the 1844 p r e s i d e n t i a l election approached. Martin Van Buren and the regular party leadership no longer appealed to these "Young Democrats." Johnson and his associates favored as the party's nominee, a.man l i k e Lewis Cass of Michigan, or John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, who believed: "Clayism and Jackson Van Burenism are worn out, and . . . a new order of things i s approaching." James K. Polk, a leading Van Buren supporter, heard that such young Democrats as Andrew Johnson and A. 0. P. Nicholson were "ready to s a c r i f i c e you" to prevent Van Buren from retaining the leadership. Johnson had confided to Nicholson: Gov Polk and his friends have over reached them Selves. . . . his r i s t l e s s ambition has very much operated against us i n Tennessee. . . . I f we cannot r i s e under the lead of Polk and Van Buren, I think we should hav the poore p r i v i l e g e of selecting some other leader. . . . 58 Polk appeared to be "playing both ends against the middle"; while publicly announcing his loyalty to Van Buren, Polk's managers made i t appear that he desired the vice-peesidential nomination under Van Buren. Even a friend of Polk's avised Andrew Jackson that this.strategy would "damn" Polk in the South. Andrew Johnson agreed, convinced that the Van Buren.capital had been exhausted. Johnson criticized the party leadership not as a maverick operating on the periphery of the party organization, but as a young dynamic leader who was tired of-the "old party hacks that have pined themSelves to the fortune of Mr Vanburen, and fear that under a new leader . . . they will be supplented. . . .' He was convinced that i t was time for him and others to receive a fair portion of patronage and power, as well as a leader who would firmly support the party's 2 established principles. Not until 1861 would dissaffection become rebellion for Andrew Johnson. He attended the Baltimore Convention as a Democratic delegate from Tennessee, cautiously favoring Lewis Cass, yet uncommitted to a l l candidates. A dark horse, James K. Polk, was nominated by the Convention, in a sense, repudiating the Van Buren leadership. Although Johnson favored Cass or John C. Calhoun, 3 he voted for Polk, convinced he was expressing the "will of the people." Johnson's rumored reluctance to support Polk's nomination had been marked by Polk and carried with bitterness into his presidency. On close examination, the conflict between Johnson and Polk, used as evidence by supporters of the McKitrick thesis as an indication of Johnson's radicalism, was actually Johnson's participation in a larger movement against Polk's leadership.^ The acquisition of Oregon up to 54^40' and the admission of Texas as a state were fundamental planks in Johnson's and the National Democratic party's platform. President Polk failed to mollify the jealousies and irritations 59 of various party leaders such as Johnson, by his compromise on these two 5 issues, as w e l l as his controversial use of the patronage. The c o n f l i c t between Johnson and Polk i n t e n s i f i e d during Polk's administ-r a t i o n . Polk records Johnson's alleged d i s l o y a l t y i n his diary on several occasions. On one v i s i t to the White House, i n company with John B l a i r and other advisers, Johnson confronted Polk. Johnson said that he had learned of Polk's concern over his behavior from Cave Johnson. Congressman Johnson que-r i e d the President as to the reasons. Polk re p l i e d that Johnson's course i n Congress had been contrary and d i s l o y a l to the administration. Johnson became very "agitated"; he professed to be a good Democrat but i n s i s t e d upon his r i g h t to act as an i n d i v i d u a l . Towards the end of his term, Polk v i v i d l y rec-orded Johnson's alleged d i s l o y a l t y : the young Tennessean had not been his personal f r i e n d since 1839- and "professing to be a Democrat, he has been p o l i t i c a l l y i f not personally h o s t i l e to me during my whole term." Polk rew-arded Johnson's behavior by stopping the flow of patronage into East Tennessee. Johnson expressed the attitude of many East Tennesseans i n c a l l i n g Polk's appointment policy, the "most damnable" made by any president. Polk no longer seemed himself; he had f a l l e n under the influence of the Van Buren "parasites." He seemed to be acting on the p r i n c i p l e of "hanging an old f r i e n d for the purpose of makeing two new ones;" Thoroughly perturbed by Polk's chastisement, Johnson claimed that he had "never betrayed a fri e n d or . . .was never g u i l t y 6" of the black s i n of i n g r a t i t u d e — I fear Mr Polk cannot say as much. . . '." Did Andrew Johnson's p o l i t i c a l behavior i n Congress substantiate James K. Polk's charge of disloyalty? An examination of Johnson's speeches and votes i n the House from 1844 to 1848 reveals that Johnson consistently supported Polk and his administration. During the Twenty-Eighth Congress, Johnson attacked Democrats Jacob Brinkeroff of Ohio, and Thomas Clingman of Worth Carolina, for t h e i r c r i t i c i s m 60 of Polk's war policies. Johnson asserted that the President had shown himself to be "a man of great moral courage," and was the "people's President." During the Twenty-Ninth Congress, in a speech on the admission of Oregon, Johnson criticized Democrat Thomas Bayly of Virginia for his censure of Polk's expans-ion policy. Johnson also defended the President's use of the veto. During the debate over the tariff and Oregon's admission, Johnson chastised Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois for criticizing Polk's appointment policy. On these and other occasions, Johnson acted not as a disloyal critic,.but as a loyal supporter of James K. Polk.^ Prior to his career as Congressman, Johnson had made singular efforts to advance Polk's career. He had spent time, money, and energy "to elivat him, and I suspect I received very l i t t l e thanks for i t . " Although Johnson had balked at the Van Buren leadership, he was never as obtuse as some of the other young leaders like A. 0. P. Nicholson and George W. Jones, who were viewed by Polk as "rabid." In contrast, Polk's advisers cautioned the President that Johnson's, opposition had always been moderate and he was always "inclined to do right." 8 The only instance of outright personal opposition to Polk's administration by Johnson was his refusal to support the proposed tax on tea and coffee. The common people were fighting the Mexican War, Johnson stipulated; i t was time to tax the wealthy to defray the expenses of fighting, for the war would benefit the wealthy the most. This was Johnson's only opposition, and in i t 9 he was joined by many Democrats in the House. Johnson ardently engaged in debate and repartee with many members of the House. Thomas Clingman, Thomas Bayly, Robert Winthrop, John Quincy Adams, and Joshua Giddings, as well as many others, felt Johnson's invective. In particular, he was quick to defend any slurs on the character of the people. During the Twenty-Ninth Congress, in a speech on the military leadership in the Mexican 61 War, Jefferson Davis made a casual comment about the inadequacy of commoners as military strategists. Johnson leaped to his feet to reply. Using historical precedents, he cited the great generals of the past who rose from humble origins, while he castigated the upper class as an "illegitimate, swaggering bastard scrub aristocracy." In an attempt to heal the breach, Davis apologized to Johnson i f any of his remarks were taken as a slur, as they were not intended to be, but Johnson was not quick to accept the apology, an incident that Davis 10 would remember with displeasure. The volatile and sensitive aspect of Johnson's.personality is well known; not so obvious, but just as important, was his appreciation of humor. During many debates in the House, Johnson recounted humorous stories and anecdotes, often breaking the House into laughter. On one occasion, during a speech on the acquisition of Mexican territories, he referred to the abortive attempt to conquer California by Commodore Stockton of the Navy. Here was a man, Johnson concluded, who was determined to become an "amphibious politician. In private, as well as in public, Johnson's appreciation of the humor in l ife's ! situations reflected facets of his character often ignored by investigators. The bitter debate over, the expansion issue resulted in personal hostilities breaching the dignity of the House of Representatives. Andrew Johnson described the outcome of one such confrontation, between Thomas Clingman of North Carolina and William L. Yancey of Alabama, a confrontation resulting in a duel. Yancey's f irst shot had struck the ground a few feet from Clingman, whereas Clingman's pistol had discharged at an angle of forty-five degrees into the air. When Yancey's ball struck the ground in front of Clingman, the North Carolinian was so shocked, Johnson observed, that "he not only made a copious discharge of 12 water, but . . . his short bread came from him in great profusion. . . . " Johnson privately appreciated the comedy of l i fe in another situation. In a private letter to an associate, he described William B. Carter, a Whig candidate 62 for Congress in 1845, remarking on his personal qualities and qualifications for office. Carter was reported to have been going "about with tobacco in his pockett, a bottle of whiskey in one hand, and his prick in the other—or in other words, that he was 'chewing, drinking & fucking his way to the Legislature'—this may be called cultivating a man's animal propensities i f 13 not his intellectual. . . ." There were many sides to Andrew Johnson; his was a complex character. To delineate the more obvious traits neglects that he was human. No man can be entirely vindictive and sombre. Johnson could be as ruthless and vitriolic as he was humorous and sensitive. The election of 1845 saw Johnson pitted against William G. "Parson" Brownlow, noted Tennessee preacher, politician, and editor of one of the most vituperative and partisan newspapers in the South. The contest developed into an intense personal confrontation. During the course of the campaign, Brownlow referred 14 to Johnson as an atheist, a coward, and a bastard. Johnson met Brownlow on his own ground, charging him with demagoguery. He warned Brownlow that if there was "to be a general tearing up of private and public character . . . henceforward . . . I am resolved . . . to defend my person and my character with my pen, my tongue and with my last dollar, and with the last drop of blood that courses through my veins." In retaliation to Brownlow's slander, Johnson often accused Brownlow of being an infidel and an abolitionist; Brownlow was 15 a "Vulgar hero . . . the greatest curse that ever befel this nation." These personal'confrontations continued through the hot months of July and August, but Johnson was confident of victory, noting that even some Whigs preferred him to Brownlow. The election results vindicated Johnson's confidence; 16 he won by a majority of 1,300 votes. Johnson believed at this time that his success was due to his identification with the people. "I am for the people—they know that I love and desire the 63 approbation of the freemen of the state," he assured his constituents. The victory of 1845, as others, had "sunk" a confidence into him which "will only cease to be cherished with my last breath." Loyalty to the people meant loyalty to the Democratic party, for the people constituted the ranks of the party organization. "I prefer the ascendancy of my party and principles to my own individual aggrandizement," Johnson assured the party. "I am in the hands of the democratic party, to be disposed of by them in that way . . . •17 best calculated to promote . . . the will of the democracy.' Although he had easily defeated Brownlow in 1845, Johnson almost faced political disaster two years later. In 1847, he was opposed for election by an able Whig, Oliver P. Temple, a younger version of Andrew Johnson. In addition to Temple's considerable oratorical and debating abilities, Johnson encountered some Democratic opposition in his district because of his rumored disloyalty to President Polk. Temple records that these Democrats "wanted  Johnson to beat me by just one vote"-—to suffer humiliation. Johnson did defeat Temple, although only by 300 votes. If anything, Johnson learned a l i t t l e humility and a healthy respect for his opponents from the 1847 contest. By the time Johnson returned to Washington, he had joined a Democratic movement to prevent President Polk's renomination in 1848. Johnson believed that the dissension in the ranks was due to Polk's inadequate patronage 19 policy, as much as the aimless debate over slavery. Although Polk appeared to declaim any intention of running again, "the l i t t l e man of the White House and his parasitical minions are moving heaven and earth to secure a second nomination." As the 1848 presidential election approached, Johnson had accurately observed that there was a decided movement away from Polk and to-20 wards a candidate who would guarantee Southern rights. Johnson argued that his personal choice since 1840, Lewis Cass, was one of the only men who could allay Southern fears over the slavery question. 64 Cass had given the first f u l l exposition of popular sovereignity in 1847, declaring Congress had no constituted power to regulate slavery in the territories. When Cass secured the 1848 nomination, Johnson proudly proclaimed that he had done everything "to defeat Mr Polk for once, in his low cunning." The Whig party had nominated military hero, Zachary Taylor, a candidate Johnson and many other Democrats believed had neither the experience nor the abilities for the Presidency. In Congress in 1847, Johnson supported John C. Calhoun's resolutions countering the Wilmot Proviso, and denying the power of Congress to restrict slavery from the territories. Johnson agreed with many of his Southern ass-22 ociates in arguing that Southern rights had been infringed upon long enough. After 1848, movements for sectional unity and national unity became evident. Moderate Senators proposed the Clayton Compromise to settle the slavery question: this proposal called for the erection of territorial gover-nments in Oregon, California, and New Mexico, and left the matter of slavery to the Supreme Court. Some Southerners wanted more absolute guarantees for Southern rights. These "Alabama Platform" dissidents, such as William L. Yancey, refused to support Cass in 1848, and warned of the disintegration of the Democratic party, and the rise of new parties. Robert B. Rhett proved to be prophetic, as the Free Soil party was created prior to the election of 23 1848, and the slavery question continued to divide the Democratic party. Throughout the Congressional campaign of 1849, Johnson took his stand on the slavery question, and garnered support for his Homestead b i l l . Speak-ing against Whig opponent Nathaniel Taylor, Johnson emphasized his loyalty to slavery. He wanted to assure the people that "defeat with a majority of my party holding to principles is far more preferable than success as a deserter.1 As one of the chief advisers to the Tennessee Democratic party organization, Johnson advised the party candidate for Governor, William Trousdale, to take 65 a stand for the Homestead. Trousdale did, and was elected by a comfortable majority, although the Whigs won most of the legislative seats. In his own campaign, Johnson pointed out that as an institution, slavery was "one of 25 the principal ingredients of our political and social system." Johnson defeated Taylor by a large majority and had shown himself to be not only a man of the people and the "people's man," but loyal to his party and to the South. After his triumphant return to Congress in 1849, Johnson became involved in a great crisis which would determine the permanency of the nation. The Gott resolution—a proposal to abolish the slave trade in the District of Columbia—almost ignited the fuse. Calhoun saw in the Gott resolution another opportunity to unite the South.against Northern aggression. He called a caucus of a l l Southern Congressmen and Senators to.consider action on the Gott resolut-ion. Only sixty-nine of one hundred and twenty-one Southern Representatives and Senators attended. Andrew Johnson joined the meeting, believing caution and sanity should prevail. Calhoun prepared an address listing the South's grievances, and threatened secession i f they were not redressed. Of the sixty-nine who attended, forty-eight signed this petition. Johnson joined Howell Cobb, Sam Houston, and Thomas Hart-Benton, in refusing to sign. Convinced that the grievances were just, Johnson could not condone any threat of secession— Southern rights could only be secured inside the Union. Johnson remained skeptical of this movement for Southern unity. In another attempt to counter the effects of the Compromise of 1850, Calhoun and his followers called the Nashville Convention to consider Southern action. The Convention, i f anything, attempted to establish the right of secession. As became evident during the secession crisis of 1861, Johnson could not advocate 27 this measure, convinced i t was both unconstitutional and unwise. The Convention disbanded some months later with.no concrete proposals for secession: as a 66 movement f o r Southern u n i t y i t had f a i l e d . As o f t e n as Johnson asserted h i s p o s i t i o n as a l o y a l p a r t y man, andca Southerner, he claimed the r i g h t of i n d i v i d u a l a c t i o n based upon h i s own p r i n c i p l e s . P o l i t i c a l ideas must be a r r i v e d at through p e r s o n a l c o n v i c t i o n , he i n s i s t e d . Opportunist that he was, Johnson was a l s o a man of i d e a l s . A Democrat by p o l i t i c a l a f f i l i a t i o n , and a Southerner and member of the working c l a s s e s by b i r t h , he possessed the q u a l i t i e s of a Jacksonian reformer. He was not the p r o f e s s i o n a l reformer such as Wendell P h i l l i p s , or the moral c r u s -ader such as W i l l i a m L. Ga r r i s o n . Johnson's r e f o r m i s t i d e a l s , although tempered by h i s l a c k of education, h i s humble o r i g i n s , and h i s crude p o l i t i c a l experiences, revealed o r i g i n a l i t y and f o r e s i g h t . Johnson r e a l i z e d that the people c o n s t i t u t e d the s o v e r e i g n i t y of the n a t i o n ; only the e l e c t o r a t e was the f i n a l a u t h o r i t y i n determining a Congress-man's a c t i o n s — p r o v i d i n g they d i d not c o n f l i c t w i t h the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e ' s moral e t h i c s . He asserted on s e v e r a l occasions h i s i n t e n t i o n to "act f o r himself . . . (and]did not admit the r i g h t of any i n d i v i d u a l to set him s e l f up as the super-v i s o r or censor of a l l who belonged to the democratic party. . . . " His choice of a c t i o n would n a t u r a l l y approximate the wishes of the people because 28. there was an i d e n t i t y of i n t e r e s t s . A Southern man " i n h i s a s s o c i a t i o n s and f e e l i n g s , " Andrew Johnson was a l s o an "American." Although the N a t i o n a l Homestead b i l l i s the most famous of h i s reform proposals, Johnson proposed other s i g n i f i c a n t measures as a Congressman. One important measure was h i s proposal to e f f e c t . a change i n the t a x a t i o n system. E a r l y i n 1844, he advocated a d i r e c t system of taxes, where the burden of t a x a t i o n would be l i f t e d from the poor. The unique fea t u r e of t h i s proposal was Johnson's v i s i o n a r y s t i p u l a t i o n that a tax be put on the c a p i t a l assets of the wealthy. Besides p r o v i d i n g a guaranteed source of revenue ten times that accumulated from the working people, Johnson added that 67 i t would be just because i t would result in "the greatest good to the greatest number." Although this reform.proposal received scant attention 29 in 1844, i t predated Wendell Phillips's similar proposal in the 1860's. Most of Andrew Johnson's reforms were designed to give the people greater participation in government and the economy of the nation. Among proposals in this direction, Johnson advocated: the rotation and equalization (among the states) of appointive federal offices, with a greater recruitment of farmers and artisans; a proposal to regulate Indian affairs in Oregon territory, with procedures of prosecution of whites who violated Indian rights; and a reform of the penitentiary system in the District of Columbia, to remove the competition of convict labor with free white labor. Johnson also called for amendments to the Constitution allowing for the popular election of the Pres-ident, the Vice-President, and United.States Senators, as well as short, fixed terms for Supreme Court Justices. This last proposal had received the approb-30 ation of Andrew Jackson and Thomas Hart Benton some years earlier. All of these reforms had one object in mind: to.enlarge the democratic process. "The permanency of a Democratic form of Government depends to a very great extent," Johnson emphasized, "upon the perfect equality of the citizens and the respectability of labor and the laborer, in a l l classes, and no dist-inction ought to be recognized in theory or practice in pure Democracy." So long as he had the breath to speak, he would "continue to act as their Q:he people's] humble advocate. Andrew Johnson can truly be called the "Father of the Homestead." Although he was neither the first nor the last to propose the idea, i t was primarily through his efforts that i t achieved public attention and Congressional approval. The Homestead b i l l was first introduced by Johnson on March 27, 1856, but did not become law until 1862. The Homestead called for the Federal Government to grant from the public lands one hundred and sixty acres of land to each head of a homeless American family. 68 The Homestead idea was neither new nor unique. As early as the 1790's there had been debate over whether the public lands should be sold at a fixed price or on a scale varying with the quality of the lands. In 1820 i t was suggested prices be graduated, not on the basis of land values, but on the length of time the land remained unsold. During the next decade, both Henry Clay and Thomas Hart Benton advanced limited Homestead schemes. Clay's prop-osal called for sale of the lands at a nominal price, the proceeds to be distributed among the states. John C. Calhoun also favored this plan. Benton proposed a scale of land values ranging from a minimum price of $1.25 an acre, with squatter rights recognized. The first proposal made to Congress to give 32 away the public lands was made in 1824, but this died in dormancy. When Johnson first introduced his Homestead b i l l in 1846, many Democrats of the Old South supported i t . President Polk favored the plan, as did Robert B. Rhett, James Seddon, William L. Yancey, Howell Cobb, R. M. T. Hunter, and Sam Houston. It was not until the Homestead became connected to the slavery extension issue that some Southerners withdrew their support. The Homestead idea had its appeal and support in the western areas orig-inally; Eastern groups supported i t much later. Three other homestead proposals— a l l from the Western states—were introduced after Johnson's. In a sense, Tennessee was as much Western as Southern in its geographic, political, and economic aspects. With diversified farming, a relatively small slave population, an an electorate sensitive to political change, Tennessee had reacted to changes in America in much the same way as Illinois or Ohio. Johnson's advocacy of the Homestead was a.response to this type of Southern-Western influence. Although some Eastern land reform groups later elicited his support, he did not associate himself with them. Johnson never hesitated to garner support from any quarter for his cause, however. By 1852, he had enlisted many prominent men in the country for the 69 Homestead. In the North, Joshua Giddings, George W. J u l i a n , and W i l l i a m H. Seward favored the plan. The Washington Union and the Washington Globe were 35 e n t h u s i a s t i c supporters, as was Horace Greeley's New York Tribune. The depth and all-encompassing v a r i e t y of p u b l i c support r e v e a l s Johnson's considerable t a l e n t s at r a l l y i n g men under h i s banner. Comparable a b i l i t i e s a t parliamentary maneuver matched Johnson's c a p a c i t y f o r s e curing p u b l i c support. The Homestead b i l l was introduced twice by Johnson during the Twenty-Ninth Congress, both times w i t h l i t t l e success. During the T h i r t i e t h Congress, i t was introduced three times but was not d e a l t w i t h by the House. F i n a l l y , i n the T h i r t y - F i r s t Congress, Johnson launched h i s shrewd p l a n of parliamentary i n f i g h t i n g . Johnson was chosen as the Chairman of the Committee on P u b l i c Expenditures, a s ' w e l l as a member of the Committee on A g r i c u l t u r e , by the new Speaker,.Howell Cobb. Johnson had voted f o r Cobb i n the contest f o r the speakership w i t h Robert Winthrop. When Johnson learned that the Committee on P u b l i c Lands d i d not favor h i s Homestead, he attempted to r e p o r t the b i l l to the House as Chairman of h i s own committee. When t h i s gambit was denied by the House, Johnson then moved that i t be r e f e r r e d to the Committee on A g r i c u l t u r e . This too was denied by the House. F i n a l l y , as a member of the Committee on A g r i c u l t u r e , Johnson moved to i n c l u d e the b i l l as pa r t of a broad proposal "to encourage a g r i c u l t u r e . " This t a c t i c r e c e i v e d support from Speaker Cobb, but the House table d i t i n t o dormancy. Resolute not to give up h i s Homestead b i l l , Johnson redoubled h i s e f f o r t s during the T h i r t y - F i r s t Congress' second s e s s i o n . S u c c e s s f u l l y p resenting the b i l l agaimn before the House, he then managed to p r i n t i t and presented i t i n 36 f i r s t reading before the Committee of the Whole. Lobbying f o r the support of Democrats and Whigs, Johnson pressed the measure forward throughout the T h i r t y -Second Congress, w i t h notables Robert Toombs, Alexander-Stephens, A. W. Venable, W i l l i a m Cobb, A. G. Brown, Sam Houston, and Stephen A. Douglas e n l i s t e d as 70 supporters. Submitting to sundry amendments, Johnson engaged i n any form of compromise to secure the passage of h i s b i l l . For example, an amendment to r e s t r i c t the Homestead's benefits to native born white c i t i z e n s became a permanent feature of the b i l l i n 1852. F i n a l l y , the f i r s t phase of Johnson's crusade for the Homestead ended: on May 12, 1852, the b i l l passed the House by a vote of 107 to 56. The second phase of t h i s crusade would begin when Johnson returned to Washington as a 37 Senator i n 1857. Andrew Johnson's Homestead b i l l was western i n o r i g i n and Jacksonian i n p r i n c i p l e . Expressing his independence of thought and action to the labor movement i n a speech i n New York, Johnson advised several labor leaders, "I hope you w i l l have your meeting gotten up as a' Homestead' gathering but not 38 connected with any of the isms of the day.1 The d i s p o s i t i o n of p u b l i c lands to the homeless envisioned by Johnson was a response to the currents of l i b e r a l thought and c a p i t a l i s t i c entrepreneurship—both r e s u l t s of the Jackson era. Infused i n these was Johnson's own sense of a divine reform—necessary for the advancement of democracy and C h r i s t i a n i t y . "The exclusion of the c i t i z e n s from the c u l t i v a t i o n of p u b l i c lands," Johnson theorized, "destroyed one of the elements of nat i o n a l prosperity. . . . the necessity for c u l t i v a t i o n of the earth was imposed on man by the law of h i s nature." In addition to producing "the most b e n e f i c i a l melioration i n the condition of man; putting an end to war and famine," the Homestead would create a new source of public revenue of m i l l i o n s of d o l l a r s w h i l e . i t increased the value of the land,"by giving the poor man a portion of the p u b l i c lands, you enable him to contribute to the expense of government." As often as he emphasized the Homestead to be a democratic reform, Johnson desired to be d i s t i n c t l y understood that he was"no agrarian, no l e v e l l -er. . . . His system was to elevate, not p u l l down. . . . He believed tftat t h i s scheme was connected to and l i e s at the very foundation of C h r i s t i a n i t y i t s e l f . . . . " 3 9 71 As a r e s u l t of the Homestead, Andrew Johnson's.stature.increased c o n s i d -e r a b l y i n Congress and throughout the n a t i o n . Various leaders were impressed by h i s s k i l l i n handling the i s s u e . Even one-time enemy and p o l i t i c a l r i v a l , A.V. Brown, honored "the head that conceived 'the Homestead,' the heart that i s capable of the a p p r e c i a t i o n of the poor man's worth Is e n t i t l e d to and rec e i v e s the homage of my poor esteem. The Nation, indeed a l l mankind, should y i e l d a g r a t e f u l t r i b u t e to that mind that almost unaided, has forced the cons-i d e r a t i o n of t h i s question upon the American C o n g r e s s . " ^ The New York Times had run a lenghty a r t i c l e on Johnson, w r i t t e n i n f l a t t e r i n g , y e t reasonably accurate terms: Though expressed i n uncouth philosophy, h i s views:are e a s i l y understood. . . . H e t h r u s t s h i s opponents through and through. . . . Woe to the l u c k l e s s wight who o f f e r s him a per-sonal i n d i g n i t y — f o r i f he has to wait two years f o r the  opportunity. . . . Mr. J . . . . pa r t s no b r i d l e upon h i s tongue; yet i s never g u i l t y of a personal d i s r e s p e c t to a f e l l o w member, or even to the opposite p a r t y . . . . h i s e f f o r t s are s l a s h i n g l y c r u s h i n g , f o r he chops to mince-meat and then grinds to powder, the men, measures and p r i n c i p l e s . . . . He takes, and maintains p o s i t i o n s at times, which I can hear no other men advocate without f e e l i n g m o r a l l y sure that the man i s speaking without the l e a s t regard to the e f f e c t of of h i s words upon h i s own prospects as a p u b l i c man. . . . Mr. Johnson i s , however, by no means a f f l i c t e d w i t h s o c i a l i s m . . . the l a s t man i n the House to s a n c t i o n the robbing of e i t h e r c l a s s i n s o c i e t y to.pension any other c l a s s . While some people b e l i e v e d that the Homestead p o r t i o n of Johnson's appeal was "immoveable" and "undefeatable," others r e f e r r e d to the Homestead as "humbug and Mr. J . as an i d l e dreamer. . . . denounced as a demagogue and the Homestead a miserable creature of h i s own f u t i l e fancy."^"'' The m a j o r i t y of the references to Johnson as a demagogue claimed he advocated the Homestead only as a t h e a t r i c a l t r i c k to gain votes. Johnson was aware,of the p o p u l a r i t y ,of the measure, yet h i s advocacy of the Homestead was a l s o born of a sense of c o n v i c t i o n . From the beginning; he confided to an a s s o c i a t e , he was determined to f i g h t f o r i t , " l e t i t terminate as i t may." I f he could see the Homestead become law,. " I s h a l l d i e happy." 72 Andrew Johnson had pursued.the measure with the crusading zeal of a reformer, yet he did so neither as a maverick to his party or section. In the winter of 1852, Johnson could look back.on his decade in Congress with considerable pride. Acting with his party and for his native state in the South, he had witnessed the passage of his Homestead b i l l , gained national popularity, and participated in the great crises of the 1840's and 1850's. As the presidential election of 1852 approached, Johnson grew restless. Congress had offered him a l l i t could for personal advancement and the amelioration of his people—at least for the time being. It was time to move on to greater things. Sam Houston and Lewis Cass were spoken of as Democratic candidates for President in 1852. James Buchanan's friends "were making . . . an effort to place him in the lead . . . but the opinion of many" was that he had no popularity with the people. Stephen A. Douglas, another hopeful candidate, was "a dead cock in the pit," Johnson was convinced. Houston or Cass seemed 43 to be the best choices of the party. As for the vice-presidential nomination, Johnson argued that a certain Tennessean of prominence would be a judicious choice. The Tennessean with 44 the greatest popularity and power at that time was Andrew Johnson. The Democ-ratic party chose neither Johnson nor any of the front running candidates. Dark horse Franklin Pierce was chosen for the presidential nomination, and William R. King of Alabama, as his running mate. With these men, the Democrats won the election of 1852. Johnson had supported Pierce at the Democratic convention, and although he did not secure the vice-presidential nomination himself, Johnson's position as one of the most powerful leaders in the party in Tennessee was enhanced. If the Vice-Presidency could not be secured, he would pursue another opportunity: the Governorship of Tennessee. The election of 1853 was approaching, he would 73 have to make a crucial decision. Andrew Johnson possessed depth and sensitivity; a man of principles, he was never a slave to them-—principles only tempered his belief in the perfectability of man. And in order to attain this perfection, there must be an order of things in the universe. As he advised his daughter Mary in a warm family letter in 1850: "there must be some government and subordination and those that will not submit to the regulations of the institution must suffer the penalty. . . . " Johnson revealed a great deal about himself and his ideals in this letter to his daughter. In the society of man, as in the family, love and respect for everyone was essential. Every man, no matter his station in l i f e , is finally responsible to himself and God for a l l his actions, he told Mary. She must, as a l l men must, sustain yourself as honorable and highminded—-be guilty of no low or vulgar acts or expressions even with your associates. . . . Let your bearing be dignified and chaste with your closest friend. . . . in making up your acquaintance among strangers, be careful who you make intimate friends—have but few i f any secret keepers or in other words have no secrets to keep. . . . The true policy is:to be friendly to a l l and•too friendly to none . . . command the love and respect of a l l . . . and the censure and i l l will of none. . . . 5^ A close examination of Johnson's Congressional career reveals that he was not an outsider, or maverick, but was a regular Democrat and a loyal Southerner. During his decade as a representative from Tennessee, he rarely operated on the periphery of the political power structure. In Washington, representing his people, he voted and argued with his party and his section on the great issues of the day..His drive for power dictated that his best chance for success lay in following party standards and appealing to Southern ideals. The political radical rarely broadens his base of public support; Johnson consistently did. The demagogue rarely follows his party and.its leaders; Johnson consistently did. With New Years' Eve, 1852, approaching, Andrew Johnson sat at his writing 74 desk, arranging some of his papers for a return.home in.March. In a letter to his son-in-law, he revealed thoughts of his extreme pride in his career, his ambition, and his desire to leave Congress and capture the Governor's chair in 1853. Johnson had served "friends, my principles, my party and my country faithfully, and conscientiously." He should have added that he had served Andrew Johnson with merit. Indeed, Johnson had been and would continue to be, no "six months man"—-he was enlisted for the duration of the war: for his people, his party, and the South, and for himself. For a l l of these, ambition was duty. Johnson was, as always, driven to climb the rungs of "Jacob's Ladder." 75 Botes for Chapter Three 1 Johnson to James K. Polk, February 20, 1843, Johnson Papers, 1, ll4; S e l l e r s , Polk, Continentalist, p. 10;. Polk, Diary, I I , 340, IV, 265; Cave Johnson to Polk, March 29, A p r i l 28, 30, 1844, "The P o l i t i c s Behind A Presid-e n t i a l Nomination As Shown i n Letters From Cave Johnson to James K. Polk," ed., C. L. Grant, Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XII (1953), 152-l8l; John C. Calhoun to R. M. T. Hunter, August 26, 1843,' "Correspondence of Calhoun'," 545; James A. Seddon to Hunter, A p r i l 1, "1843, Robert B. Rhett to Hunter, August 30, 1844, "Correspondence of Hunter," 63, 71-2 Gideon Pil l o w to James K. Polk, May 21, 22, 1844, "Letters of Gideon Pillo w to James K. Polk, 1844," ed., J. S. Reeves, A.H.R., XI (1905), 835-837; Cave Johnson to Polk, A p r i l 28, 1844, • "Johnson-Polk Letters," 168. Both Pi l l o w and Cave Johnson were maneuvring to get Polk the presi d e n t i a l nomination. See also, Andrew Johnson to A. 0. P. Nicholson, February 12, 1844, Johnson Papers, 1, 148-150; Robert Armstrong to Andrew Jackson, June 1, 1844, quoted i n S e l l e r s , Polk, Continentalist, p. 104; Andrew Johnson to David T. Patterson, May 13, 1844, Johnson to William Lowry, March 30, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I.. Van Buren would not support the annexation of Texas. Johnson to Patterson, February 27, 1844, Johnson Papers, 1, 154. 3 Johnson to Robert B. Reynolds, September 3, 1843, Johnson Papers, 1, 121; Johnson to William Lowry, March 30, 1844, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Nashville Union, March 25, 1844. 4 Tricamo, "Tennessee P o l i t i c s 1845-1861." Tricamo was a graduate student of E r i c L. McKitrick's,.and his thesis was substantially influenced by his mentor. 5 Allan Nevins, Ordeal of the Union (2 vols. Boston: Charles Scribners, 1947), I, 6: Wiltse, Calhoun,' Se c t i o n a l i s t, pp. 178-I8I; National Party Platforms, p. 3; Globe, 29th Cong.., 2 sess., 286-289, App. 331-335' Here Johnson vigorously stated that the United States would drive the B r i t i s h Lion out "forever from t h i s continent"; Globe, 29th Cong., 2 sess., 1011-1013, 2 sess., 38-40; here he asserted that the United States should prosecute the Mexican War u n t i l "the enemy had become so disabled as to be incapable of doing further injury." See also 30th Cong., 1 sess., App. 853-856. 6 Polk, Diary, I I , 17-20, 35-4l,' TV, 265; Mrs. James K. Polk to James K. Polk, March 3, 1843, "Letters of Mrs. James K. Polk to Her Husband," ed., S. A. Wallace, Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XI (l962)> 283; Johnson to an Unident-i f i e d East Tennessean, July 21, 1846, Johnson Papers, I, 330; Johnson to Black-ston McDannel, July 22, 1846, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 7 Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., 954, 2 sess., 38-40, App. 86-90, I6O-I63; 30th Cong., 1 sess., App. 853- 856. Johnson consistently defended Polk's Mexican War policy. 8 Johnson to Polk, February 20, 1843, Johnson to Nicholson, February 12, 1844, Johnson Papers, 1, 114, 150; see also Pi l l o w to Polk, May 25, 1844, "Pillow-Polk Letters," 839; Cave Johnson to Polk, A p r i l 30, 1844, "Johnson-Polk Letters," 178. 9 Globe, 29th Cong., 2 sess., App. 160-163; The Washington Union, July 1, 1846, opposed the tax on tea and coffee claiming i t was the poor man's "only luxury"; S e l l e r s , Polk, Continentalist, p p . 10, 455. 76 10 Globe, 29th Cong.. 1 sess., 286-289, App. 331-335, 884-887. Jefferson Davis, The Rise and F a l l of the Confederate Government (2vols. New York: Appleton, 1881), I I , 703. 11 Globe, 29th Cong., 2 sess., 39; see also 32nd Cong., 1 sess.,.2491 for another s i m i l a r i n c i d e n t . 12 Johnson to Patterson, July 10, 1845, Johnson Papers, 1, 216-217. 13 Johnson to Blaekston McDannel, January ?, 1845, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 14 E. Merton Coulter, William G. Brownlow, Fighting Parson of the Southern  Highlands (Chapel H i l l : U niversity of North Carolina, 1937), p. 117. Through-out h i s l i f e , Brownlow's attacks bordered on personal slander, r e s u l t i n g on two occasions i n ph y s i c a l attacks i n f l i c t e d on Brownlow by the offended p a r t i e s . Jonesboro Whig, December 13, 1843. 15 Johnson to McDannel, A p r i l 19, 1845, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Johnson to the Freemen of the F i r s t Congressional D i s t r i c t of Tennessee, October 15, 1845, Johnson Papers, 1, 220-272. 16 Johnson to Polk, A p r i l 19, 1845, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Johnson to Patterson, July 10, 1845, Johnson Papers, I, 216-217. 17 Johnson to the Freemen. . . , October 15, 1845, Johnson to F i r s t D i s t -r i c t Democratic Committee, A p r i l 26, 1845, Johnson Papers, 1, 216, 256. See Lewis A. Froman, Congressmen and Their Constituents (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963), f o r an exposition of the factors that influence a Congressman's behavior. 18 O l i v e r P. Temple to William G. Brownlow, July 10, 1847, quoted i n Temple, Notable Men, p. 223; Johnson to McDannel, January 10, 1847, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 19 Johnson to A.O.P. Nicholson, February.12, 1844, Johnson to an-Unidenti-f i e d Tennessean, July 21, 1846, Johnson Papers, 1, 148, 330-331; Johnson to Blaekston McDannel, July 22, 1846, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., 286-289, 2 sess., App. 160-163; Francis P. B l a i r to James Buchanan, November 22, 1849, The Works of James Buchanan, ed., J. B. Moore, 12 vol s . (New York: Antiquarian, 1960), VIII, 365-366. 20 Johnson to McDannel, March 24, 1848, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; S. E. Benston to Nicholson, A p r i l 14, 1848, :"Some Tennessee L e t t e r s , 1844-1864," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, I I I (1944), 275-281; Polk, Diary, I, 369-371. Polk records Benton had reported that the President was "without a f r i e n d i n Congress." 21 Globe, 31st Cong., February 20, 1850, passim; Johnson to Nicholson, May 14, 1848, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Samuel Rhea to Johnson, September 7, 1848, Johnson Papers, 1, 461-462. 22 Globe, 29th Cong., 2 sess., 453. Under the leadership of William L. Yancey, the "Alabama Resolutions" passed the Alabama state Democratic convention i n 1848:—they repudiated the Missouri Compromise and threatened secession i f the Wilmot Proviso was passed. Nevins, Ordeal of the Union, I, 6. / / 23 Globe, 30th Cong., 1 sess., 545, App. 747. Many Southern state legislatures protested against the Proviso and sent resolutions to Congress. House Miscellaneous Documents # 58 (microprint copy, U.B.C. Library); see also, Charleston Mercury, January 12, 1847, quoted in Nashville Union, January 22, 1847; Issac Holmes to Howell Cobb, August 21, 1847, "Correspondence of Robert Toombs, Alexander Stephens and Howell Cobb," A.H.A. Annual Report, 1911, 88; John C. Calhoun to James Calhoun, July 9, 1848, "Calhoun Correspondence," 636, 759. Globe, 30th Cong., 2 sess., 950; Nashville Union, February 23, June 25, 1847. Democratic party cohesion declined sharply from the 29th to 30th Congress. Overall, in 1841, the party unity percentage was 88.4% on al l issues, by.1847, this had declined to 68% and was dropping rapidly. Silbey, Shrine of Party, p. 94. W.W. Harlee to John C. Calhoun, June 8, 1848, Louis T. Wigfall to Calhoun, June 10, 1848, "Correspondence of Calhoun," 439-440; Robert B. Rhett to Calhoun, September 8, 1847, ibid., 1133. 24 Johnson to John Stanberry, April 27, 1849, Andrew Johnson Papers, SeriesII. 25 Johnson to Patterson, May 9, 1849, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Speech al Evans Crossroads, May 26, 1849, Johnson to E. G. Eastman, May 27, 1849, Johnson Papers, 1, 498, 509; Johnson to Sam Milligan, June n.d., 1849, ibid., 510-511. 26 Wiltse, Calhoun, Sectionalist, p. 378; Richmond Enquirer, January 30, 1849, quoted in the Nashville Union, February 5, 1849. 27 Craven, Coming of the Civil War, pp. 245, 259-263; St. George L. Sioussat, "Tennessee, the Compromise of 1850 and the Nashville Convention," M.V.H.R., I (1914), 376-399; Nashville Union, March 5, 1851. 28 Globe, 28th Cong., 1 sess., 287, App. 332, 745. 29 Ibid., 29th Cong., 1 sess., 745, 1011-1013. See Robert D. Marcus, "Wendell Phillips and American Institutions," Journal of Southern History, LVI (1969), 41-58. 30 Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., 192-193; Congressional House Journal, 247-248 (microprint copy, U.B.C. Library); Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., 706-707, 755; House Journal, 747; Globe, 31st Cong., 2 sess., 627. See Herman V. Ames, "The Proposed Amendments to.the Constitution of the United States During the First Century of Its History," A.H.A. Annual Report, 1896, II, 90-91. 31 Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., 755, 30th Cong., 1 sess., 800-802. H. B. Pearson, scion of one of Massachusetts most distinguished families, expressed his approbation of Johnson's advocacy of democratic reform and equality, calling him a "maecenas from the state of the Cumberland mountains." Globe, 30th Cong., 1 sess., 801. 32 29th Cong., House Report #140, House Document # 29 A (microprint copy, U.B.C. Library). See also, Roy M. Robbins, Our Landed Heritage, A History of  the Public Domain (Princeton: Princeton University, 1954); Benjamin Hibbard, A History of the Public Land Policies (New York: MacMillan, 1939); St. George L. Sioussat, "Andrew Johnson and the Early Phases of the Homestead B i l l , " M.V.H.R., V (1918), 253-287; John B. Sanborn, "Some Political Aspects of Horned-stead Legislation," A.H.R., VI £1900), 19-37. 78 33 James D. Richardson, ed., The Messages and Papers of the Presidents (11 vols. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1909), V, 2236-2252; Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., 1077; see also Table 8, Appendix A; Table 19, Silbey, clCongressional Voting," pp. 434-438. 34 Globe, 29th Cong., 1 sess., 1069-1073. Hamer, Tennessee, I, 357. Robert Walker of Mississippi supported Johnson's Homestead in 1846. 35 John Marcellus to Johnson, August n.d., 1850, Johnson Papers, I, 572. Marcellus was a Cleveland labor leader during the 1850's. Johnson rec-eived a few votes for the presidential nomination at the Industrial Congresses of America, in 1852 in New York. New York - Tribune, May 28, 1852, June 9, 1852, quoted in Nashville Republican Banner, July 14, 1855. Edmund Burke to Johnson, September 12, 1850, Johnson Papers, 1, 588-590; Johnson to the Editor of the Washington Union (Thomas Ritchie), September 21, 1850, Johnson Papers, I, 590; Johnson to John C. Rives, May 10, 1851, Johnson to Horace Greeley, December 15, 1851, ibid., 590-591, 614-615, 631-632. Rives was the editor of the influ-ential Washington Globe; Greeley's Tribune was one of the most powerful news-papers in America at the time. . 36 Globe, 31st Cong., 1 sess., 408, 423, 448; House Journal, 590, 617, 630; Globe, 31st Cong., 2 sess., 22, 76, 95, 192, 204, 216, 278, 312, 327, 752; House Journal, 39, 70, 161, 178-179, 186, 200-203, 322. 37 Globe,,32nd Cong., 1 sess., 1349-1350; House.Journal, 696-706. Although the b i l l passed the House, i t did not pass the Senate, and was not introduced to the House again until 1854. 38 Johnson to E. G. Eastman, May 27, 1849, Johnson Papers, 1, 509; Johnson to Patterson, December 23, 1850, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; New York  Tribune, May 28, 1852, quoted in Nashville Republican Banner, July 14, 1855. 39 Globe, 31st Cong., 1 sess., 1449-1450, App. 950-952. Johnson claimed that any Democrat in the "proper sense" of the term must advocate not only the Homestead, but the interests.of the common working people. Johnson to Edmund Burke, August 31, 1850, Johnson Papers, 1, 587; Globe, 31st Cong., 2 sess., 312-313, 752. 40 Ibid., 32nd Cong., 1 sess., 439, 716; Jones, Life of Johnson, pp.42-43. The editor of the Washington Union, Thomas Ritchie, referred to Johnson as a noble philanthropist. 41 New York Sunday Times, n.d., quoted in Nashville Union, May 21, 1849. Johnson's speeches.for the Homestead in New York were received with enthusiasm. Nashville Republican Banner, July 14, 1855. The Washington  Union, September 22, 1850 also ran a favorable article on Johnson and the Homestead. Greeneville Spy, April 1, 8, 1852. 42 John Shields to Johnson, June 9, 1850, Johnson to E .G. Eastman, May 27, 1849, Johnson Papers, 1, 509. 553-:554: Greeneville Spy. April 1, 1852. 43 Johnson to Nicholson, December 13, 1851, Johnson Papers, I, 629^630; Johnson to Patterson, April 4, 1852, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. . 44 Greeneville Spy, May 20, 1852, endorsed Johnson for the vice-presidential nomination, as did other Tennessee newspapers. 79 45 Johnson to Mary Johnson, December 7, 1850, Johnson Papers, 1, 591-593. 46 Johnson to Patterson, December 30, 1852, Johnson to McDannel, January 1847, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 8o CHAPTER FOUR "UP 'JACOB'S LADDER'" "The rung of a ladder was never meant to rest upon hut only to hold a man's foot long enough to enable him to put the other somewhat higher" —Thomas H. Huxley The guilded carriage of Governor William B. Campbell arrived at a promin-ent Nashville hotel i n the autumn of l853« One of the coachmen entered the hotel and announced that the Governor had arrived to take Governor-elect Andrew Johnson to the inauguration ceremonies at the Capitol. Impressive i n his newest s e l f - t a i l o r e d s u i t , Johnson thanked Campbell for the honor of the escort, but p o l i t e l y and fi r m l y declined the i n v i t a t i o n , explaining: " t h i s day I w i l l walk the street with the peoplei" Thus began his Governship and continued his 1 climb up "Jacob's Ladder"--his climb to power. Andrew Johnson's election i n 1853 marked an important watershed i n his long and successful career. Not only would he become the f i r s t Democratic Governor to succeed himself i n o f f i c e for over t h i r t y years, Johnson would also become the dominant force i n Tennessee p o l i t i c s . From 1853 to 1865, he would wield the power i n the Democratic party i n the state, after Whig domination of Tennessee p o l i t i c s since 1834. This strength and endurance of leadership would augment his acquisition of national power, and mark the ascendency of the national Democratic party organization i n Tennessee. While i n Congress, Johnson was eyed for the candidacy of Governor of Tenn-essee. As early as 1849, prominent Democrats i n the state were enthusiastic about his prospects. "With a l l the masses i n Tennessee," wrote Landon C. Haynes to fellow Democrat A. 0. P. Nicholson, - " i t i s believed he could make a more stronger 81 race than any other Democrat spoken of. . . ." Johnson did not seriously consider running for the office.until after the state elections of 1851-1852. The.newly formed Whig Legislature, under the leadership of former opponent Brookins Campbell, and future opponent, Gustavus Henry, redistricted the Congressional districts. The district Johnson represented was dropped.and added to Whig.counties. This politician from Greeneville had proved himself a candidate who could not be defeated at the 3 polls in his home counties. Both parties began searching for their strongest available candidates in December, 1852. The incumbent Whig Governor, William B. Campbell, declined to run again; the Whigs then nominated Gustavus Henry, a descendant of Patrick Henry, and an orator of great fame. The Democrats called for a state convention at Nashville. County delegates presented and urged the claims of their favorite sons, but Andrew Johnson received the endorsement for first and second choice from more counties than a l l the other candidates combined. Some indicated that he would be the best choice because he was "a man of the people, and the 4 people's man." Johnson's ambition rarely could accept defeat.. "I wil not deny i t , for I have my ambition; but while I freely make the admission," Johnson wrote to a friend, "I have been determined not to let i t run me into excessive error." A shrewd politician, Johnson remained indecisive about accepting the nomination, afraid that i f he lost, the defeat would retard his rise in politics. In the diplomatic manner of the reluctant nominee's acceptance, Johnson announced that he was "no aspirant to a Seat in Congress or to be Governor of the State; but . . . after a fu l l consultation with my friends . . . I would be a candidate for either. . . ."5 The proceedings of the Democratic convention demonstrated Johnson's power and influence. He was nominated unanimously on a platform of his specifications. 82 One contemporary newspaper observed, "it.seems that Johnson is.strong enough to run a l l the Democrats out of the convention and could run Henry out of the State." A.0.P. Nicholson, who had considered running for Governor, confided to President Franklin Pierce that he would run "upon one contingency—if Col. Andrew Johnson whom I regarded as our strongest man, should decline the nominat-ion." A Democrat wrote Howell Cobb of Georgia: "our friend Andrew Johnson is the Democratic candidate for Governor . . . I doubt not he will make a bold, vigorous and energetic canvass. I hope he will succeed; I know he ought." The canvass against Gustavus Henry began in June 1853 and continued until the first week of August. Henry was a close associate of both John Bell and Henry Clay. His i n i t i a l strategy was to confuse and confound Johnson. Possessed with a quick wit and devastating oratorical abilities, Henry was known for his annihilation of political opponents in debate. Johnson had to defend his use of ruthless political tactics. In most of the debates, Henry attacked Johnson on his partisan leadership of the "Immortal Thirteen" in 1841^1842, charging that Johnson's actions had been illegal. The "Eagle Orator," as Henry was referred to, ridiculed Johnson's "White Basis" b i l l which provided for the repeal of the three-fifths Negro slave voting clause. Henry queried Johnson about his refusal to advocate this b i l l among his wealthy friends in West Tennessee. Johnson rebutted, affirming his adherence to Southern institutions, particularly slavery. He accused Henry of abolitionist tendencies, and denied that he had equivocated on the "White Basis" b i l l . Johnson did rest on precarious ground. In Knoxville, East Tennessee, the issue "involved a great principle which concerned the rights and interests of the masses," but in Memphis, 7 West Tennessee, his supporters denied i t was an issue at a l l . This issue revealed Johnson's flexibility of principle and his underlying drive for power and success above a l l . In East Tennessee, the common white population stood to gain representation because the slave population was almost negligible; in West 83 Tennessee, where the slave population was larger, Johnson feared he would annoy the larger,planters who had supported him.by .offering such a proposal. On one occasion in Columbia, Tennessee, Henry sought to embarrass Johnson as the advocate ,of the people. In Congress, Henry claimed, Johnson had voted against a resolution to.appropriate money for famine stricken Ireland. "How could any one be so inhuman, so heartless, as to cast such a vote?" Henry demand-ed. Johnson replied that he had "turned to . . . QiisJ fellow Congressmen and proposed to give fifty.dollars of our own funds . . . and when they declined the proposition . . .[of voluntary:contributions] pulled out fifty dollars.. . . which I donated to the cause." Johnson questioned Henry, "how much did you g give sir?". Henry had no reply, and the.debate, as others, was a Johnson success. Andrew Johnson impressed opponents and supporters with his campaign. Gustavus Henry credited Johnson for a superior campaign in a letter to.a friend: You have underestimated my opponent. I have never met so powerful a speaker as Andrew.Johnson • . .[he is] as smart a fellow as I have met for many a day . . . once or twice I supposed I had him trapped; for he was not able immediately to answer me; but the next day he would assail me with the very points I had used, and evince more knowledge of the subject.than I possessed. Whig opponents referred.to Johnson as a "fluent speaker," with the "faculty of impressing his hearers with a belief in his earnestness." The most prominent Democratic newspaper in the.state had described Johnson in glowing terms: "no man within the border of our state has more in his character and history to 9 challenge the wonder and respect of its citizens." The results of the election in August proved Johnson's dominancy over Henry. A record vote,was cast, reflecting public interest in the contest. Johnson received 63,413 votes, a majority of 2,250 over Henry. This was a gain for the Democratic party of almost 4,000. votes since the Presidential election of 1852, in which Pierce.lost Tennessee to the Whigs. In a county breakdown, Johnson had carried fifteen counties in East Tennessee; Henry thirteen. This gain of three counties for the Democrats since I852, revealed Johnson's popularity i n h i s home counties. Johnson's strength i n that area was con-siderable, although surprising, as East Tennessee was t r a d i t i o n a l l y a Whig stronghold. In Middle Tennessee, Henry carried thirteen counties; Johnson took; twenty, with a majority of 3>6l2 votes. T r a d i t i o n a l l y , t h i s area was a Democratic stronghold. The illuminating return came from West Tennessee, residence of the state's largest planters and slaveholders. Although Johnson won only seven counties to Henry's eleven, Henry's majority was only 827 votes. Henry was popular i n West Tennessee, yet i t i s apparent that Johnson's appeal and influence among the wealthy and p o l i t i c a l l y prominent was greater than 10 has been surmised. Many Whigs were b i t t e r . Governor Campbell wrote to his uncle after the election, claiming that a b o l i t i o n i s t sentiment i n East Tennessee had elected Johnson. Cryptic editor William G. Brownlow carried t h i s bitterness throughout Johnson's administrations. Once, while i n Nashville during Johnson's f i r s t term, Brownlow harangued a crowd, almost under the new Governor's window, decl-aring: " I therefore pronounce your Governor, here upon his own dunghill, an 11 unmitigated LIAR AND CALUMNATOR, AND A VILLAINOUS COWARD." Most Democrats were elated by Johnson's victory. Not only could many anticipate manifold p o l i t i c a l appointments, but some party men were eyeing • Johnson as a l i k e l y candidate for the 1856 p r e s i d e n t i a l nomination. Tennessee had not had i t s share of off i c e s on the national l e v e l since Polk's administrat-ion; with Johnson i n the White House the emoluments of o f f i c e would return. Prominent party members claimed Johnson had "gained a great triumph i n Tennessee a vi c t o r y "for the people." They regarded Johnson as the "most powerful and successful Democrat i n Tennessee since Andrew Jackson. Some contemporary sources proposed that Johnson had beaten not only the Whig i n the election, but also "a large part of the leaders of the democratic party." 85 This observation in Johnson's time, as well as subsequent subscription to the idea by later observers, assumes a dubious tenet: that political parties in the border states during the 1840's and 1850's were always united, and that the leadership was followed by a l l party members. This view of the nature of politics in Tennessee is both over-simplified and misleading. Tennessee contained the elements of a viable two party political system in the 1830's. The revolt against Jackson had not only created two parties of equal appeal to voters, but had established a factionalism within each party which continued until the Civil War. This factionalism was, in part, a response to the geographic divisions of the state, and, in part, a reflection of the national mood of growth and flux which no one party could hope to satisfy. In Tennessee, William G. Brownlow and Thomas A. R. Nelson grappled with John Bell for control of the Whig party throughout the 1840's and 1850'. Similarly, James K. Polk's loyal follower, Aaron V. Brown, attempted to wrest complete control of the Democratic party from rising young leaders, Andrew Johnson and A. 0. P. Nicholson. The shifting nature of factionalism dictated that no one man could retain complete unanimity in his party. Johnson had competed with A. V. Brown for the power in the party; during Polk's administration, Brown held the greater influence because of Polk's power; after Polk's departure from the White House, Brown's influence in the party waned as Johnson's grew. From 1848 to 1853, 14 Johnson's power in the Democratic party increased rapidly. The Governorship would only add to this power. Inauguration day proved to be an eventful one.. Refusing a carriage ride to the Capitol, Johnson walked the distance on the warm clear autumn day, in company with many people. As always, he dressed impeccably. Several thousand people attended to hear Governor Johnson's inaugural speech. It proved to be an important document, one of significance in understanding the character and philosophy of the man.''""' 86 Two-thirds of the address was a philosophic and intellectual discussion of man and society, and reveals the depth and flexibility of Johnson's ideas. The foundation of government, he believed, was comprised of the "interested and designing few, on the one hand, and the laboring many, on the other; polit-ical power has been vibrating as the pendulum, from the origin of man's condit-ion to the present . . . between the two." The Democratic party inherited the Jeffersonian ideals of the placement of sovereign power "in the mass of the people." The heavy and grave responsibility rested upon the Democratic party, Governor Johnson contended, "of recurring once more to first principles . . . to bring i t back to its republican simplicity. . . ." Here Johnson expressed the popular myth of the golden age of agrarian Republicanism engendered by the Jeffersonian ideas and carried into the Jackson era. Democracy, or man's capac-ity to govern himself, is a "principle that exists," he insisted. "That is inherent in the very nature of man . . . which enables him to determine between right and wrong, in a l l political affairs. . . . It is that which enables him to reason correctly, and to l i f t himself above a l l animal creation." Because man was a rational animal, Johnson suggested a universal principle: It is this principle that constitutes the intelligence of man; or in other words, i t is that in man which partakes most highly of the nature and character of Him in whose name he is made—which I term the Divinity of Man. And in proportion as this Divinity is enlarged the man becomes more and more capable of self-government. . . . What was the role of Andrew Johnson and the Democratic party in this watchmaker's universe? For Johnson, both roles were crucial in attaining the ideal democratic state: It is the business of the Democratic party to progress in the work of increasing this principle of Divinity, or Democracy. . . . I hold that the Democratic party proper, of the whole world, and especially of the United States, has undertaken the polit- ical redemption of man. . . . In the political world, i t corresponds to that of Christianity in the moral. Thus, Johnson contended that his actions and the behavior of his party must be. 87 towards the establishment of a Utopian state. Democracy and Christianity were going along, he explained, not in divergent, nor in parallels, but in converging lines—the one purifying and elevating man religiously, the other politically. . . . when finished, these two lines will have approximated each other. . . . at this point i t is that the Church Militant will give way and cease to exist, and the Church Triumphant begin; at the same point, Democracy progressive will give way and cease to exist, and Theocracy begin. What kind of a democracy was Johnson's? Was there a hierarchical structure? What was the position and role of the people? "The voice of the people is the voice of God," Johnson assured the masses. Democracy would form its structure prophetic of the Bible. Society would form a "Jacob's Ladder," up which a l l men "in proportion to their merits, may ascend, while i t extends to the humblest of a l l created beings here on earth below, i t reaches to God on high." Not only was Johnson's Utopia based on equality and the measure of human worth, but the measure of good works. In this, ambition was an.integral part of the att-ainment of salvation. Johnson's ideas were neither revolutionary nor radical: they were not the expressions of a political or social maverick as the McKitrick thesis would suggest. Johnson merely re-iterated ideas that had been some of the basic tenets of the Democratic party since the 1820's and would continue to be until the Civil War. The Democratic Review had offered views more than similar to Johnson's inaugural address, and the Review was one of the popular organs of the Democratic party in the Jacksonian era. The Review stipulated that democracy was founded on the macrocosmic and perfect self-government of the physical universe . . .[an example) being written in letters of light on. every page of the great Bible of Nature. It contains the idea of the fu l l and fearless faith in the providence of the Creator. . . . We are on the path toward that great result, to which mankind is to be guided down!the long vista of future years by the democratic principle—while walking hand in hand with the sister spirit of Christianity. 88 Even Andrew Johnson's successor to the Governorship, the wealthy and influential Isham G. Harris, embellished Johnson's expressions. In his inauguration speech of 1857, Harris asserted that God gave man the capacity to govern himself and 16 "supreme sovereignity rests with the people" as a divine right. It is probable that Johnson expressed his philosophy from a sense of conviction rather than only a calculation to.gain popularity. Although he belonged to no formal church, Johnson's belief in an egalitarian democratic society had been expressed in political campaigns for many years before and after 1853. As he was fond of reminding his constituents, "my religious creed „17 • first, my Democracy next; they are one and inseparably connected. Andrew Johnson's "City on the H i l l " was vastly different from that of the revivalist. He stated on many occasions that he was "for no established relig-ion—no Union of Church and State—but for their remaining separate and distinct." Rather, Johnson saw a Democracy in the fashion of a Thomas Moore's Utopia or a Plato's Republic. Believing in the innate.goodness of man and his perfectab-i l i t y , he envisaged the ideal state where men advanced according to their merits-—where a politician or a "philosopher-king" was chosen because of his natural abilities. Religion for Johnson was a pantheistic kind—without the need of a ritualistic formal organization. In this context, divinity permeated every man, and in the process of each man doing what he could do best in l i f e , 18 real democracy functioned and salvation was attained. Although the majority of the address dealt with Johnson's philosophic considerations of politics and society, the remainder of the speech stressed a concrete reform program. In general terms, he recommended a new system of internal improvements, various legal and economic reforms, a public education system, and a Homestead policy. This was a prelude to his impressive regular legislative message which followed in two months and specifically outlined the Johnson program. 89 Reaction to Governor Johnson's "Jacob's Ladder" speech.was varied. KThe Nashville Union and American, leading Democratic newspaper, called the address "an able and p a t r i o t i c document," handled with "uncommon a b i l i t y . " The Nashville True Whig was not so complimentary: " a l l t h is absurd jargon about Federalism and democracy i s . . . 'stale, f l a t and unprofitable.'" When the Governor spoke of democracy as the d i v i n i t y of man, continued the Whig, i t would be "interesting to know how far he thinks the so called 'democratic' administrations i n t h i s country i n modern times, have successfully i l l u s t r a t e d t h i s . . . . " Public reaction flowed even beyond Tennessee's borders; the Western Democratic Review called the address "better than almost anything from Governor Johnson's pen.""^ Johnson devoted almost a l l his time for the next two months i n drafting his reform program. The proposals comprising the regular message of December, 1853 show Johnson as a l i b e r a l Jacksonian reformer and a Southerner. His l e g -i s l a t i v e program demonstrates his v i s i o n and wisdom as an executive. Unlike the abstract nature of his inaugural address, the reform proposals rarely lacked a dozen tables of s t a t i s t i c a l information to v e r i f y h is arguments. Div-ided into.sub-headings, the l e g i s l a t i v e message dealt with each topic s p e c i f i c -a l l y and thoroughly; these twelve topics covered areas from state finances to 20 the national Homestead. In general, Johnson's reform program aimed at putting Tennessee on a firm economic base, free from debt, and involving the c i t i z e n s equally i n the p r o f i t s of economic prosperity. Johnson's analysis of the finances of the state concl-uded that the state government was losing control over the economy and sinking rapidly into debt. To solve these problems, Johnson recommended a reorganization of the i n e f f i c i e n t turnpike road system to secure more revenue, gradual l i q u i d -ation of the Bank of Tennessee and i t s wildcat branches, the r e s t r i c t i o n of credit to prevent i n f l a t i o n , and the issuance of county and state corporation l o bonds to provide financial stability. Other democratic reforms completed Johnson's program. He called for a reform of the state penitentiary system—a system which had "failed in a l l the leading objects." Moral reformation of the inmates had failed, and a deficit of $100,000 had been incurred. Also, the system competed with the free white labor through the use of convict laborers. People were justified in demanding equality before the courts, Johnson insisted. He recommended to the Legislature a reorganization of the judiciary system, so that "law and equity can be admin-istered by the same court" to a l l citizens. Johnson proposed the popular elect-ion of the President, Vice-President, United States Senators, and short fixed terms for Supreme Court Justices, through amendments to the Constitution. Not 21 surprisingly, Johnson also recommended implementation of his Homestead plan. Governor Johnson's most far reaching and significant proposal was his plan to establish a state supported public school system. He knew only too well the value of an education, having lacked one himself, and he pleaded with the Legislature to enact a law to establish such a system: Education is a companion which no misfortune can suppress-— no clime destroy—no enemy alienate—no despotism enslave. At home, a friend; abroad, an introduction; in solitude, a solace; in society, an ornament. It lessens vice, i t guards virtue, i t gives at once a grace and government to genius. Without i t , what is man? A splendid slave! a reasoning savage! vacillating between the dignity of intelligence der-ived from God, and the degradation of brutal passions. In general, the legislative message was received by approbation by friends and enemies, supporters and opponents. The Democratic papers, in particular, 23 commended Johnson for his "sagacity and vision." Unfortunately for Johnson, the Legislature did not react with such enthusiasm. The Whig party had an overall majority of twelve in the Legislature, and united, could block any of the Governor's proposals. When the House and Senate proceeded on Johnson's outlined program i t was obvious from the outset that partisan politics would reign over the Governor's 91 first term. The Legislature could not agree.on one of several alternatives to stabilize Tennessee's financial problems, or on a systematic method of reforming the penitentiary system, or on regulation of the public roads network, and no action was taken on Johnson's recommendations for the Homestead or amendments to the Constituion regarding high offices. Positive legislative action was taken on only four of the twelve proposals in Johnson's program.^ Yet, an arithmetic evaluation of Johnson's success is misleading. Whigs and Democrats united on various proposals to institute reforms that few Democr-atic Governors with Democratic majorities had been able to achieve. In accordance with Johnson's suggestions, a halt was made upon careless appropriat-ions and the extension of credit. The high water mark of Johnson's Governorship was the enactment of a law establishing a publicly supported school system, the first such law in the history of the state. Andrew Johnson's advocacy of the measure earned him the t i t l e of the "Father of Public Education" in Tennessee text books. His earnest plea struck a responsive chord in the Legislature, for within two months of its introduction as a b i l l , i t was a law. Although other proposals in the program did not,, receive immediate, action, the Legislature debated long and furiously over such recommendations as the Homestead—^passing a resolution calling the measure "an unmistakeable harbinger of the incalculable 24 good." Andrew Johnson was the first Democratic Governor of Tennessee who devoted practically his entire time to matters pertaining to his office. He gave his personal attention to the administration of state affairs, and did not make any public political addresses during his first term. He frequently attended legislative sessions, and met with members of both parties for consultation. The harmony between the executive and legislative branches on some occasions was enthusiastically pointed out by Democratic newspapers: "rarely i f ever, has there been a more harmonious, session of the Legislature in this State, and 92 certainly never one which has transacted more important business." One Committee Chairman in the state senate believed that Johnson's role had been 25 "forcible, clear and appropriate." Indeed, Johnson's success in his first term extended into Isham G. Harris's term in 1857. Throughout his first term, Johnson became more and more the Governor of the people. His papers abound with letters and petitions from the people, a majority of which were marked across the back, in his hand, "Attended to." Governor Johnson was often found mingling with the people at outdoor barbecues and county fairs. His pride in his humble origins as well as his awareness of its political effects on his success undoubtedly were two motivations for his actions. In an exchange of letters and tokens with another prominent Democrat, Judge W. W. Pepper of Kentucky, Johnson succinctly expressed his sensitivity and pride over his humble origins and his desire to advocate the interests of the people. "I am a mechanic, a plebian mechanic, and not ashamed nor afraid to admit i t , " Johnson told Pepper, " a l l those who have been Farmers and Mechanics who have distinguished themselves from Adam and Tubal Cain down to the present time" offer an example to a l l those who look down upon the people. Johnson expressed his abhorence of an aristocracy as well. The history of the common people "would instruct and no doubt surprise a kindof pseudo upstart 26 aristocracy, who too infrequently infest our cities, towns and villages." Judge Pepper approved heartily of Johnson's sentiments. Pepper subscribed to the elevation of the common people, having once been a blacksmith himself. Governor Johnson was, in his eyes, "one of the champions of the great mechanical interest of the country." Accompanying the letter to the Governor, was a hand-tempered fire shovel, as a compliment both to Johnson and the laboring classes. Johnson was so impressed by the gift, he in turn tailored a suit coat for Pepper. 93 T h e man " w h o d o e s n o t d i s g r a c e h i s p r o f e s s i o n w i l l n e v e r b e d i s g r a c e d b y i t , " h e w r o t e t o P e p p e r , " t h e m o t t o o f e v e r y g e n u i n e r e p u b l i c a n i s i n d i v i d u a l m e r i t . . . . ' U p o n r e c e i v i n g t h e c o a t J o h n s o n h a d m a d e , P e p p e r r e p l i e d t h a t t h e c o a t a n d J o h n s o n 27 l e t t e r s w e r e " v a l u e d b y me i n f i n i t e l y a b o v e g o l d a n d s i l v e r . " P e p p e r , l i k e m a n y o t h e r s , h a d b e e n w o n o v e r b y J o h n s o n . He r e m a i n e d l o y a l t o J o h n s o n u n t i l d e a t h . A l t h o u g h J o h n s o n w a s o f t e n s e e n c o n v e r s i n g a n d w o r k i n g w i t h t h e p e o p l e , h e w a s a man w h o k e p t h i s own c o u n s e l a n d h a d f e w i n t i m a t e f r i e n d s . He d i d n o t s h u n t h e p l e a s u r e s o f h i g h s o c i e t y — o n o n e o c c a s i o n h e w a s k n o w n t o h a v e d e l i g h t e d s e v e r a l N a s h v i l l e l a d i e s b y h i s w i t a n d c h a r m — b u t h e p r e f e r r e d t h e c o m p a n y o f h i s f a m i l y , h i s f e w c l o s e f r i e n d s , a n d h i s a s s o c i a t e s . He f o u n d p l e a s u r e i n a d v i s i n g h i s f r i e n d s i n t h e i r a f f a i r s , y e t g a v e l i t t l e i n d i c a t i o n t h a t h e w o u l d a c c e p t o t h e r s ' a d v i c e . A l t h o u g h h e l i k e d t o u n b u r d e n h i s t r o u b l e s t o h i s f r i e n d s , J o h n s o n u s u a l l y r e q u i r e d a l i s t e n e r r a t h e r t h a n a n a d v i s o r . A s h e h a d c a u t i o n e d h i s d a u g h t e r M a r y , some y e a r s e a r l i e r , h e b e l i e v e d i t w a s b e s t t o k e e p o n e ' s own c o u n s e l , a n d b e a f r i e n d t o a l l y e t t o o c l o s e t o n o n e . I t i s t h i s t r a i t o f c h a r a c t e r t h a t t h e M c K i t r i c k t h e s i s u t i l i z e s a s p r o o f o f J o h n s o n ' s i n c o n s i s t e n c y o f b e h a v i o r . I n 1 8 6 5 , m a n y R a d i c a l R e p u b l i c a n s s u c h a s C h a r l e s S u m n e r , B e n j a m i n W a d e , a n d S a l m o n P . C h a s e w e r e c o n v i n c e d P r e s i d e n t J o h n s o n w o u l d a p p r o v e o f C o n g r e s s i o n a l R e c o n s t r u c t i o n : w h e n t h e y p r e s e n t e d t h e i r p l a n s t o h i m , J o h n s o n s a t i n s i l e n c e . When J o h n s o n s u b s e q u e n t l y c h o s e a d i f f e r e n t c o u r s e o f a c t i o n , t h e R a d i c a l s , a n d l a t e r , h i s t o r i a n s a c c u s e d h i m o f i n c o m p e t e n c y a n d t r e a s o n f o r h i s a p p a r e n t r e v e r s a l o f b e h a v i o r . B u t f o r A n d r e w 29 J o h n s o n - - a s G o v e r n o r o r P r e s i d e n t — s i l e n c e w a s n e i t h e r a p p r o v a l n o r d i s a p p r o v a l . O n c e h e h a d b e f r i e n d e d a m a n , A n d r e w J o h n s o n r e m a i n e d l o y a l t o h i m f o r l i f e . T h r o u g h o u t h i s c a r e e r , J o h n s o n e v i n c e d h i s f r i e n d s h i p a n d l o y a l t y t o S a m u e l M i l l i g a n a n d B l a e k s t o n M c D a n n e l . F r o m M a y o r o f G r e e n e v i l l e t o P r e s i d e n t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , J o h n s o n p l a c e d t h e s e men f i r s t o n h i s p a t r o n a g e l i s t . J o h n s o n , w h o k n e w how t o r e w a r d h i s s u p p o r t e r s , s p e n t a g o o d d e a l o f h i s t i m e d e a l i n g 94 w i t h t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p a t r o n a g e ; r a r e l y d i d h e p r o m i s e a f a v o r h e c o u l d n o t 3 0 b e s t o w . A l t h o u g h h e r e a l i z e d h i s r a p p o r t w i t h t h e p e o p l e a u g u r e d t r e m e n d o u s p o w e r f o r h i m , J o h n s o n a l s o r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p a t r o n a g e w a s a n i n t e g r a l p a r t o f s u c c e s s . 95 N o t e s f o r C h a p t e r F o u r 1 N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , O c t o b e r 1 8 , 1 8 5 3 . 2 L a n d o n C . H a y n e s t o A . O . P . N i c h o l s o n , M a r c h 2 4 , 1 8 4 9 , " S o m e T e n n e s s e e L e t t e r s , " 2 4 3 . 3 A n d r e w J o h n s o n t o D a v i d T . P a t t e r s o n , D e c e m b e r 3 0 , 1 8 5 2 , A n d r e w J o h n s o n P a p e r s , S e r i e s I . O l i v e r P . T e m p l e , E a s t T e n n e s s e e W h i g , a d m i t t e d t h i s a c t o f G e r r y m a n d e r i n g . T e m p l e , N o t a b l e M e n , p . 37 9 . 4 N a s h v i l l e T r u e W h i g , J a n u a r y 1 8 , 1 8 5 3 ; N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , A p r i l 2 8 , 2 9 , 1 8 5 3 . 5 J o h n s o n t o D a v i d T . . P a t t e r s o n , D e c e m b e r 3 0 , 1 8 5 2 , A n d r e w J o h n s o n P a p e r s , S e r i e s I . S e v e r a l f a c t o r s s e e m e d t o o p e r a t e a g a i n s t h i s s u c c e s s : n o t o n l y w o u l d t h e r e b e a W h i g m a j o r i t y i n t h e d i s t r i c t , b u t t h e A . V . B r o w n f a c t i o n o f t h e D e m o c r a t i c - p a r t y r e f u s e d t o s u p p o r t J o h n s o n ; a l s o , m a n y p e o p l e b e l i e v e d h e w a s t o o y o u n g a n d i n e x p e r i e n c e d . 6 N a s h v i l l e R e p u b l i c a n B a n n e r , A p r i l 2 9 , 1 8 5 3 ; A . O . P . N i c h o l s o n t o F r a n k l i n P i e r c e , A p r i l 1 2 , 1 8 5 3 , " S o m e T e n n e s s e e L e t t e r s , " 2 4 7 ; G e o r g e W. J o n e s t o H o w e l l C o b b , M a y 1 9 , 1 8 5 3 , " C o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f T o o m b s , S t e p h e n s a n d C o b b , " 3 2 8 . J o n e s o b s e r v e d t h a t J o h n s o n w o u l d h a v e t o o v e r c o m e t h e w e i g h t o f e x e c u t i v e a p p o i n t m e n t s w h i c h h a d n o t f a v o r e d J o h n s o n s u p p o r t e r s u n d e r t h e P o l k a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 7 N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , J u n e 4 , 1 0 , 1 8 5 3 ; N a s h v i l l e R e p u b l i c a n  B a n n e r , J u l y 1 3 , 2 3 , 1 8 5 5 ; T e m p l e , N o t a b l e M e n , p . 3 8 7 . 8 . N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , J u n e 2 3 , 1 8 5 3 . T y p i c a l l y , J o h n s o n c l a i m e d t h a t h e d i d n o t r u n u p o n t h e " m e r i t s o f G e n e r a l P i e r c e o r a n y b o d y e l s e " b u t o n h i s own m e r i t s , l b i d . , J u n e 3 , 1 8 5 3 . 9 l b i d . , A p r i l 2 5 , 2 8 , 1 8 5 3 ; G u s t a v u s A . H e n r y t o E . H . F o s t e r , M a y 1 4 , 1 8 5 3 , G u s t a v u s H e n r y P a p e r s ( S o u t h e r n H i s t o r i c a l C o l l e c t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h C a r o l i n a , m i c r o f i l m c o p y ) . 1 0 N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , A u g u s t 7 , 1 8 5 3 . W i n s t o n , S t r y k e r , a n d t h e R e v i s i o n i s t s i n g e n e r a l h a v e a l l i n d i c a t e d t h a t J o h n s o n w a s a n a r c h f o e o f t h e l a r g e s l a v e h o l d e r s o f W e s t T e n n e s s e e . 11 N a s h v i l l e T r u e W h i g , J u n e 4 , 1 8 5 3 ; W i l l i a m B . C a m p b e l l t o D a v i d C a m p b e l l , A u g u s t .10 , 1 8 5 3 , q u o t e d i n T r i c a m o , . " T e n n e s s e e P o l i t i c s 1 8 4 5 - 1 8 6 1 , " p . 2 2 1 ; E . M e r t o n C o u l t e r , W i l l i a m G . B r o w n l o w , p . 2 1 . 12 S . R . A n d e r s o n t o A . O . P . N i c h o l s o n , A u g u s t 1 6 , 1 8 5 3 , " S o m e T e n n e s s e e L e t t e r s , " 2 4 8 ; ' A . O . P . N i c h o l s o n t o J . G . G r e e n e , S e p t e m b e r 1 6 , 1 8 5 3 , A . O . P . N i c h o l s o n C o r r e s p o n d e n c e (New Y o r k H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , m i c r o f i l m c o p y ) ; N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , S e p t e m b e r 2 2 , 1 8 5 3 . 13 S . R . A n d e r s o n t o A . O . P . N i c h o l s o n , A u g u s t 1 6 , 1 8 5 3 , i b i d . T h e s e c o n -t e m p o r a r y o b s e r v a t i o n s may w e l l h a v e b e e n t h e b a s i s f o r t h e M c K i t r i c k i n t e r p r e -t a t i o n o f J o h n s o n a s a m a v e r i c k . 96 14 T r i c a m o , " T e n n e s s e e P o l i t i c s 1 8 4 5 - 1 8 6 1 , " p a s s i m ; E r i c L . L a c y , " S e c t i o n -a l i s m i n E a s t T e n n e s s e e 1 7 9 6 - 1 8 6 1 , " p a s s i m . 15 N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , O c t o b e r 1 8 , 1 8 5 3 ; W h i t e , M e s s a g e s o f t h e  G o v e r n o r s , I V , 6 2 6 . B o t h g i v e t h e e n t i r e t e x t o f t h e a d d r e s s : a l l e x c e r p t s a r e f r o m t h e s e s o u r c e s , 16 D e m o c r a t i c R e v i e w , O c t o b e r , 1 8 3 7 , q u o t e d i n C h a r l e s M . W i l t s e , e d . , E x p a n s i o n a n d R e f o r m (New Y o r k : F r e e P r e s s , 1 9 6 7 ) , p . 1 5 2 ; i n a u g u r a l s p e e c h o f I s h a m G . H a r r i s , N o v e m b e r 4 , 1 8 5 7 , i n W h i t e , M e s s a g e s o f t h e G o v e r n o r s , V , 2 8 . 17 A n d r e w J o h n s o n t o t h e F r e e m e n . . . , O c t o b e r 1 5 , 1 8 4 5 , J o h n s o n P a p e r s , I , 2 6 7 ; ' N a s h v i l l e T r u e W h i g , O c t o b e r 2 4 , 1 8 5 5 ; W h i t e , M e s s a g e s o f t h e G o v e r n o r s , I V , 6 3 1 - 3 3 . 18 J o h n s o n t o P a t t e r s o n , O c t o b e r 2 2 , 1 8 5 5 , A n d r e w J o h n s o n P a p e r s , S e r i e s I ; N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , M a y 3 , 1 8 5 5 . 19 N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , O c t o b e r 1 8 , 1 8 5 3 ; N a s h v i l l e T r u e W h i g , O c t o b e r 2 0 , 1 8 5 3 . 2 0 N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , D e c e m b e r 1 9 , 1 8 5 3 ; W h i t e , M e s s a g e s o f t h e  G o v e r n o r s , I V , 5 5 9 - 6 1 4 . 2 1 Some o f J o h n s o n ' s t w e l v e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s c a l l e d o n l y f o r a l e g i s l a t i v e r e s o l u t i o n t o b e p r e s e n t e d b e f o r e C o n g r e s s a s t h e w i l l o f t h e p e o p l e o f T e n n e s s e e , r a t h e r t h a n a n y s p e c i f i c l e g i s l a t i v e a c t . J o h n s o n a l s o r e c o m m e n d e d a b o l i s h i n g a t a x o n m e r c h a n t s a n d t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a u n i f o r m w e i g h t s a n d m e a s u r e s s y s t e m . 2 2 N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , D e c e m b e r 1 9 , 1 8 5 3 . 2 3 l b i d . , D e c e m b e r 2 3 , 1 8 5 3 ; N a s h v i l l e R e p u b l i c a n B a n n e r , J a n u a r y 2 , 1 8 5 4 ; N a s h v i l l e T r u e W h i g , D e c e m b e r 2 8 , 1 8 5 3 . 2 4 W h i t e , M e s s a g e s o f t h e G o v e r n o r s , I V , 5 6 1 - 5 8 7 . M a n y o f J o h n s o n p r o p o s e d r e f o r m s r e f l e c t e d p o p u l a r d e m a n d ; h u n d r e d s o f p e t i t i o n s a n d m e m o r i a l s b y t h e " m e c h a n i c s " o f t h e s t a t e h a d b e e n p r e s e n t e d t o t h e L e g i s l a t u r e c o m p l a i n i n g o f t h e c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h c o n v i c t l a b o r , p l e a d i n g f o r r e f o r m . 2 5 N a s h v i l l e U n i i o n a n d A m e r i c a n , M a r c h 7 , 1 8 5 4 . 2 6 S e e f o o t n o t e 6 , C h a p t e r O n e f o r my e x p l a n a t i o n o f J o h n s o n ' s u s e o f t h e * t e r m s " a r i s t o c r a c y " a n d " c o m m o n p e o p l e . " 27 W.W. P e p p e r t o A n d r e w J o h n s o n , J a n u a r y 2 5 , 1 8 5 4 , J o h n s o n t o P e p p e r , J u l y 1 7 , 1 8 5 4 , P e p p e r t o J o h n s o n , J u l y 1 9 , 1 8 5 4 , A n d r e w J o h n s o n P a p e r s , S e r i e s I . 2 8 A . 0 . . P . N i c h o l s o n t o G e o r g e W. J o n e s , A p r i l 1 2 , 1 8 5 4 , N i c h o l s o n C o r r e s -p o n d e n c e . 2 9 J o h n s o n t o P a t t e r s o n , F e b r u a r y 2 7 , 1 8 4 4 , J o h n s o n t o W i l l i a m L o w r y , M a r c h 3 0 , 1 8 4 4 , J o h n s o n P a p e r s , I , 1 5 4 , 1 5 7 ; J o h n S h e r m a n t o W . T . S h e r m a n , N o v e m b e r 1 0 , 1 8 6 5 , S h e r m a n L e t t e r s , C o r r e s p o n d e n c e B e t w e e n G e n e r a l a n d S e n a t o r  S h e r m a n F r o m 1837 t o 1 8 9 1 , e d . , R . S . T h o r n d i k e (New Y o r k : C h a r l e s S c r i b n e r s , 1 8 9 4 ) , p . 2 5 9 ; C o r r e s p o n d e n c e S p e e c h e s a n d P o l i t i c a l P a p e r s o f C a r l S c h u r z , e d . , F r e d e r i c B a n c r o f t (New Y o r k : G . P . P u t n a m , 1 9 1 3 , 2 v o l s . ) , I , 2 5 5 - 7 6 ; C h a r l e s S u m n e r 97 t o B e n j a m i n W a d e , A u g u s t 3 , 1 8 6 5 , S u m n e r t o S a l m o n P . C h a s e , J u l y 1 , 1 8 6 5 , q u o t e d i n M c K i t r i c k , A n d r e w J o h n s o n a n d R e c o n s t r u c t i o n , p . 6 4 . 3 0 J o h n s o n t o B l a c k s t o n M c D a n n e l , J a n u a r y 1 0 , 1 8 4 7 , M a r c h 2 4 , 1 8 4 8 , A n d r e w J o h n s o n P a p e r s , S e r i e s I ; J o h n s o n t o W i l l i a m L o w r y , M a r c h 3 0 , 1 8 4 4 , J o h n s o n P a p e r s , I , 1 5 7 . 98 CHAPTER FIVE "YOUR DESTINY IS MY DESTINY" "No man is an Island" —John Donne Suddenly, towards the end of his first term as Governor, there was a shift in Johnson's public image and political behavior. For over eighteen months he had been the dutiful Governor, promoting a public program of reform, befriending the people, rewarding supporters and friends—making himself agreeable to almost everyone. As he prepared to run again for Governor, Johnson was gathering forces and garnering public support for his presidential candidacy of 1856. With the people of Tennessee united in support, and with considerable management, he might be able to capture the nomination. If he could not, Johnson would s t i l l be in a favorable position for the 1860 nomination as Governor of Tennessee. As the end of his first term came to a close, Johnson once again vaulted onto the hustings and cajoled, threatened, and pleaded with the people in the manner he had cam-paigned for two decades.-'-Andrew Johnson's sudden vigorous political campaigning reflected some significant changes in the political and social structure of the nation by 1855. The downfall of the Whig party as a national political institution was due, in part, to the sectional controversy over slavery in the terri-tories.^ The Democrats had adapted to these changes, the Whig party had split and disintegrated. Two new parties were created in the aftermath— the Republican party and the American or Know-Nothing party. The American party based its appeal to voters on the rising prejudice against foreigners and Catholics. The Know-Nothing movement spread rapidly across America, 99 r e i n f o r c e d by the e f f e c t s of the p o l i t i c a l upheavals i n Europe i n 1848, and by the s l a v e r y con t roversy i n Amer ica . By 1852, the pa r ty had c r y s t a l l i z e d i n t o a s e c r e t oath-bound o r g a n i z a t i o n . Al though the charm of secrecy which enveloped the pa r ty accounted f o r some of the phenomenal Know-Nothing growth, o the r i n f l u e n c e s were impor tan t . O ld pa r ty l i n e s had been a l t e r e d . Many Whig-or ien ted v o t e r s , u n w i l l i n g to cas t t h e i r l o t w i t h e i t h e r p r o - s l a v e r y Democrats or a n t i - s l a v e r y Repub l i cans , sought and found refuge i n the Know-Nothing p a r t y . By mid-1854, Know-Nothing s t r eng th i n Tennessee was e v i d e n t . By June 1854, a Know-Nothing mayor and c i t y c o u n c i l had been e l e c t e d i n Memphis, and N a s h v i l l e e l e c t e d a Know-Nothing mayor i n September. The e l e c t o r a t e had responded q u i c k l y and p o s i t i v e l y to t h i s new p a r t y . An i n d i c a t i o n of the nature of the American pa r ty can be ob ta ined from numerous contemporary sources . One d i a r i s t recorded a Know-Nothing i n i t i a -t i o n meeting i n c r y p t i c terms: Before going i n a gentleman came i n t o the an t i - room w i t h a mask on h i s f a c e . . . . He had a b l a c k robe on , a sword by h i s s ide—and plumes i n h i s h a t . Those to be i n i t i a t e d were p l aced i n the proper p o s i t i o n w i t h t h e i r toes on a crack i n the f l o o r . . . . The candidates were then b l i n d -fo lded and r e q u i r e d to take three h i g h s teps over sharp swords—with i n j u n c t i o n s that i f any b lood was s p i l t — i t would be ominous of e v i l consequences . 3 The Know-Nothings entered the campaign f o r Governor of Tennessee, i n 1855, w i t h conf idence . Because of the sec re t na ture of the pa r ty they h e l d no conven t ion . Mered i th P . Gen t ry , wel l -known Whig, announced h i s unopposed candidacy f o r the Know-Nothing nomina t ion . Gentry had j o i n e d many ex-Whigs o f fame i n c l a i m i n g that the i n f l u x of f o r e igne r s and C a t h o l i c s had endangered the n a t i o n and tha t the American pa r ty was the on ly s o l u t i o n . Indeed, c o n -v e r t e d Know-Nothing and nephew of Andrew Jackson , Andrew J . Donelson , was repor ted to have charged tha t not on ly Andrew Johnson, but Henry Wise o f V i r g i n i a and J e f f e r s o n D a v i s , were i n open a l l i a n c e w i t h the Pope i n Rome, p l o t t i n g the overthrow of the government.^ 100 Again the r e l u c t a n t candidate, Johnson was, n e v e r t h e l e s s , determined to c o n t r o l the 1855 campaign as he had the 1853 contest. As i t was to most can-didates during t h i s p e r i o d , "the thought . . . of canvassing the State . . . tjjasj almost p a r a l y z i n g " to Johnson. He t o l d h i s advisers that he would con-s u l t h i s close f r i e n d s as to "when and where I would l i k e to have the conven-t i o n i n my power. . . ." The Democratic convention assembled i n N a s h v i l l e , March 27, 1855. During the next few weeks, the country o r g a n i z a t i o n s h e l d meetings, drew up r e s o l u t i o n s denouncing the Rnow-Nothings, and i n s t r u c t e d delegates. Johnson r e c e i v e d the endorsement of t h i r t y - s i x of the f o r t y counties which kept w r i t t e n records of t h e i r proceedings; the convention sub-sequently nominated him by acclamation. The p l a t f o r m was t a i l o r e d to Johnson's wishes. In a d d i t i o n to r e i t e r a t i o n of b a s i c Democratic p r i n c i p l e s , the p l a t -form s p e c i f i c a l l y denounced the Know-Nothing party f o r " i t s attempts to abridge the r i g h t s of conscience. . . . [ i t was]] dangerous to the p u b l i c l i b e r t y . " ~ * The fundamental i s s u e i n the 1855 contest was "Americanism". Johnson and Gentry met and agreed upon a schedule of s i x t y debates, commencing i n May 1855 and debating almost every day u n t i l the l a s t day i n J u l y , a p h y s i c a l undertaking, one contemporary observed, " c a l c u l a t e d to make most men r e c o i l from." The Know-Nothings centered t h e i r campaign around the appeal to r e t u r n to "American" l i f e and the defeat of f o r e i g n and C a t h o l i c i n f l u e n c e s . Johnson's s t r a t e g y was based upon a r e l e n t l e s s a t t a c k on the p r o s c r i p t i v e features of the Know-Nothing p a r t y . Two i s s u e s t h a t s i d e l i g h t e d the campaign were the Kansas-Nebraska controversy and the Temperance i s s u e . Johnson announced h i s support of the Kansas-Nebraska b i l l as a necessary compromise measure, but opposed p r o h i b i t i o n as a r e s t r i c t i o n of personal freedom: Gentry opposed the Kansas-Nebraska compromise and p r o h i b i t i o n . The atmosphere of the debate at Murfreesboro, on May 1, 1855, set the scene f o r the remainder of the campaign. The heat was oppressive f o r s p r i n g . Excitement over the debate surpassed the importance of any event i n the c i t y . 101 It was late afternoon when the city officials set up the speaker's podium and the chair-filled stage with its flag-draped railings. A crowd of 5,000 pressed close to hear Johnson and Gentry assail each other. The exchange lasted for over five hours. Gentry accused Johnson of abolitionism for proposing his "White Basis" b i l l and called him a demagogue for his emotional appeals to the people. Johnson in turn called Gentry a dis-unionist because he had opposed the Kansas-Nebraska b i l l as well as the Compro-mise of 1850. A Democratic newspaper recorded Johnson's vilification of the Know-Nothing party: The Devil, his Satanic Majesty, the Prince of Darkness, who presides over the secret conclave held in Pandemonium, make war upon one of the churches and thus far become allies of the Prince of Darkness. . . . All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience. . . . I intend to stand by them in the heat and the dust. . . . Gentry's reply to Johnson's opening attack was an able defense of his political record, but he refused to defend the American party with the vigor that Johnson had attacked i t ; Gentry claimed instead that he "came out as the candidate of the people of Tennessee."^ Each man was permitted a rejoinder. Gentry very adroitly pointed out Johnson's political inconsistencies, his ruthless campaign tactics, and his disloyalty to his own party, but again, would not defend the Know-Nothings against Johnson's attacks. Johnson intensified his abuse of the American party: "SHOW ME THE DIMENSIONS OF A KNOW-NOTHING, AND I WILL SHOW YOU A HUGE REPTILE, UPON WHOSE NECK THE FOOT OF EVERY HONEST MAN OUGHT TO BE PLACED."8 The campaign became a bitter and controversial one. It revealed some of Johnson's strengths and weaknesses. Evident to a l l was that few men could match him on the stump. Evident also was his courage to face a new and powerful poli-tical party and to attack i t in its own strongholds. East Tennessee, a tradi-tional Whig area, became a hot-bed for the American party, yet Johnson launched some of his most vicious attacks there. His courage, at times, became obstinacy, 102 a blind pernacity, a determination to win at a l l costs. Even the threat of physical injury did not deter Johnson from his condemnation of the opposition. Violence was an integral part of Southern l i f e in the ante-bellum period. During the campaign of 1855, one observer commented only casually of a poli-tical meeting which witnessed a fatal argument between Democrats and Know-Nothings. The argument resulted in an altercation, in which "three men were shot in the square". Johnson brushed with death many times during his career. He was familiar with threats against his l i f e . During his first term, placards were posted in Nashville by his enemies, warning Johnson that he would be shot on sight. Friends eager to protect Johnson offered a personal bodyguard. The Governor refused defiantly: " i f I am to be shot at, I want no man to be in the way of the bullet." During the campaign of 1855, Johnson had been informed that he would be shot i f he attempted to speak before a large pro-Know-Nothing crowd. He faced his audience, his hand on his pistol, and invited the assassin to do his work. Silence greeted his invitation, and after a long pause, he began his speech. Characteristic of his obstinacy, he warned critics that he would con-tinue to attack the proscriptive Know-Nothing party " i f i t blows the Democratic party to hel l . " 9 His ruthlessness, as well as his courage, aided his ambition. Cunning and shrewd, Johnson had the flexibility to adapt to any political situation and ca-pitalize on i t . Near the end of the 1855 canvass, Gentry became i l l . Johnson agreed to cease further speaking engagements, and was publicly praised for his dignified gesture. At Gentry's request, Oliver P. Temple accompanied Johnson to the various cities and towns scheduled for the remaining debates, to explain the cancellation. With shrewdness and sufficient vagueness to avoid criticism, Johnson would begin his explanation by saying: "I am not allowed by agreement with my competitor to make a speech. If I were allowed to do so, I would say," and he would go over the grounds in general terms of his proposed speech. Thus, 103 while agreeing to end the electioneering, he effectively continued the cam-paign. 1 0 By the first week in August, election results were being forecasted. Al-though the Whig-Know-Nothing newspapers claimed Gentry had triumphed over Johnson, Democrats believed Johnson's attacks on the American party would take their t o l l . The Know-Nothing party organ, the Nashville Daily Gazette, referred to Johnson as "shrewd, cunning . . . ambitious, and i f he could, would be tyran-nical . . . [he is] known demagogism . . . a bold, determined dictator." The Nashville Republic Banner, another Know-Nothing paper, charged that Johnson was in a l l i a n c e with the Industrial Congress of America, and, along with Gerrit Smith of New York and Governor I.P. Walker of Wisconsin, advocated "the aboli-tion of slavery." The Banner called Governor Johnson a "mobocrat . . . a Cataline fu l l of treason and hate against the rich . . . Robespierre was as bad, but he used chaste language. . . ." Another American party supporter, the Nashville True Whig, was more tempered in its evaluation of Johnson and Gentry: "the half-hearted defense of i t [the American party] by Gentry . . . £madej its friends despondent. . . . On the other hand, Johnson's daring assaults had fil l e d his friends with the highest courage and enthusiasm. . . ." I l Democratic papers were as partisan in their support of Johnson. The Knoxville Standard claimed that Gentry was humiliated by his opponent, and the Nashville Union and American was lavish in its praise of Johnson's efforts. Democrats throughout the state complimented Johnson; even competitor A.V. Brown gave Johnson-credit for a superior campaign. The excitement and importance of the Johnson-Gentry conflict had reached beyond Tennessee's borders, attracting national publicity. The Ohio Democratic Herald viewed the contest with praise 1 9 for Johnson. By early August, speculation had ended. Andrew Johnson had received 67,499 votes to Gentry's 65,343, a majority of 2,167. In comparison with 1853, Johnson had gained Strength in Middle and West Tennessee, but lost votes in East Tennessee. 1 0 4 He h a d d e f e a t e d G e n t r y b y 4 , 7 4 6 v o t e s i n M i d d l e T e n n e s s e e , t h e D e m o c r a t i c s t r o n g -h o l d . T h i s r e p r e s e n t e d a g a i n o f 1 , 2 0 0 v o t e s f o r J o h n s o n s i n c e 1 8 5 3 . T h e s u r p r i s i n g r e t u r n came f r o m E a s t T e n n e s s e e w h e r e J o h n s o n l o s t t h e s e c o u n t i e s b y 1 , 5 0 0 v o t e s , a l o s s o f 1 , 0 0 0 s i n c e 1 8 5 3 . H i s t o r i a n s a n d b i o g r a p h e r s h a v e p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h i s r e p r e s e n t e d a d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h J o h n s o n ' s l e a d e r s h i p i n E a s t T e n n e s s e e , t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l l y , t h a t a r e a h a d b e e n a J o h n s o n s t r o n g h o l d . T h i s v i e w i s b o t h o v e r s i m p l i f i e d a n d m i s l e a d i n g . J o h n s o n ' s s t r e n g t h i n E a s t T e n n e s s e e w a s l i m i t e d t o t h o s e c o u n t i e s h e h a d t r a d i t i o n a l l y r e p r e s e n t e d a n d w h i c h h a d v o t e d D e m o c r a t i c . T h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e E a s t T e n n e s s e e c o u n t i e s h a d b e e n W h i g o r i e n t e d s i n c e 1 8 3 4 a n d v o t e d K n o w - N o t h i n g i n 1 8 5 5 . S i m i l a r l y , h i s t o r i a n s a n d b i o g r a p h e r s h a v e i n s i s t e d t h a t J o h n s o n ' s s t r e n g t h w a s w i t h t h e common p e o p l e o n l y , t h a t f e w l a r g e p l a n t e r s a n d s l a v e o w n e r s s u p p o r t e d h i m . Y e t t h e e l e c t i o n r e t u r n s f r o m W e s t T e n n e s s e e , a p l a n t e r s t r o n g h o l d , b e l i e s t h i s v i e w . G e n t r y w o n t h e W e s t T e n n e s s e e c o u n t i e s b y o n l y t w o h u n d r e d v o t e s , a v o t e w h i c h r e p r e s e n t e d a g a i n f o r J o h n s o n o f 5 0 0 v o t e s s i n c e 1 8 5 3 . J o h n s o n ' s i n f l u e n c e among t h e p o w e r f u l 13 w a s m o r e m a n i f e s t t h a n h a s b e e n a p p a r e n t . T h e r e s u l t s o f t h e e l e c t i o n o f 1 8 5 5 w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t f o r A n d r e w J o h n s o n a n d t h e D e m o c r a t i c p a r t y . H e w a s t h e f i r s t D e m o c r a t i c G o v e r n o r t o s u c c e e d h i m -s e l f i n o f f i c e f o r o v e r t w o d e c a d e s . T h e v i c t o r y w a s p r o b a b l y / t h e r e s u l t o f a c o m b i n a t i o n o f i n f l u e n c e s . T h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e W h i g p a r t y h a d d e c l i n e d s h a r p l y , a n d p r o m p t e d t h e D e m o c r a t s t o g r e a t e r u n i t y a n d d e t e r m i n a t i o n t o s e c u r e t h e ' s t a t e f o r t h e p a r t y a f t e r a l o n g W h i g d o m i n a t i o n . J o h n s o n ' s s u c c e s s s o u n d e d t h e d e a t h k n o l l f o r t h e K n o w - N o t h i n g p a r t y a s a n e f f e c t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n i n T e n n e s s e e . I n t h e p r o c e s s , A n d r e w J o h n s o n h a d g a i n e d t h e n a t i o n a l a t t e n t i o n h e n e e d e d f o r a d v a n c e m e n t t o g r e a t e r h e i g h t s . R e a c t i o n t o J o h n s o n ' s v i c t o r y w a s i m m e d i a t e . M a n y l e a d i n g W h i g s i n T e n n e s s e e a n d i n o t h e r S o u t h e r n s t a t e s b e l i e v e d J o h n s o n w a s a f i r e - e a t i n g " d i s u n i o n i s t . " T h e K n o x v i l l e W h i g r i d i c u l e d ' t h e , G o v e r n o r ' s v i c t o r y , c l a i m i n g h e w a s " i n l e a g u e w i t h t h e P o p e a t R o m e . " T h e R i c h m o n d E n q u i r e r a s s e r t e d t h a t J o h n s o n ' s s u c c e s s 105 w a s d i r e c t r e s u l t o f t h e w o r k o f f o r e i g n e r s . D e m o c r a t i c n e w s p a p e r s w e r e a s l a v i s h i n t h e i r p r a i s e a s W h i g - K n o w - N o t h i n g p a p e r s w e r e c r i t i c a l i n t h e i r d i s -a p p r o v a l . T h e M e m p h i s E a g l e a n d E n q u i r e r b e l i e v e d t h a t " P r o g r e s s i v e s ! 1 h a d e l e c t e d J o h n s o n ; t h e N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n p r o c l a i m e d : " n e v e r w a s t h e r e a b a t t l e f o u g h t m o r e p u r e l y o f p r i n c i p l e . " N o r t h e r n e r s t o o k n o t i c e o f J o h n s o n . T h e New Y o r k F r e e m a n ' s J o u r n a l a t t r i b u t e d J o h n s o n ' s r e - e l e c t i o n t o t h e s u p p o r t o f " g o o d A m e r i c a n s t o c k . " D e m o c r a t s t h r o u g h o u t T e n n e s s e e c l o s e d r a n k s a n d b a c k e d J o h n s o n . He w a s t h e s t r o n g e s t l e a d e r o f t h e D e m o c r a c y i n t h e s t a t e a f t e r h i s v i c t o r y ; h e h a d r e c e i v e d r e c o g n i t i o n f r o m v a r i o u s n a t i o n a l l e a d e r s . H o w e l l C o b b a n d F r a n k l i n P i e r c e n o t e d w i t h a p p r o v a l J o h n s o n ' s r i s e t o p o w e r , a n d e x p r e s s e d c o n f i d e n c e i n h i s a b i l i t y a s a p a r t y l e a d e r . ' ' ' " ' G o v e r n o r J o h n s o n ' s v i c t o r y w a s a s i g n a l f o r D e m o c r a t i c c e l e b r a t i o n . A D e m o c r a t i c n e w s p a p e r r e c o r d s t h a t g r e a t m a s s m e e t i n g s w e r e h e l d i n t o w n s a n d v i l l a g e s , s p e c i a l d a y s w e r e s e t a s i d e f o r j u b i l e e s , t o r c h l i g h t p r o c e s s i o n s , a n d g i a n t b a r b e c u e s . T h o u s a n d s a t t e n d e d t h e c e l e b r a t i o n s , m a n y o f w h i c h d e m a n d e d t h e G o v e r n o r ' s p r e s e n c e a s a s p e a k e r , a r e q u e s t t h a t J o h n s o n f u l f i l l e d a m i a b l y a n d e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y f o r s e v e r a l w e e k s . ^ I n O c t o b e r 1 8 5 5 , h a v i n g b e e n i n a u g u r a t e d t h e f i r s t G o v e r n o r i n t h e new S t a t e C a p i t o l i n N a s h v i l l e , J o h n s o n d e l i v e r e d a b r i e f a d d r e s s . I n c o n t e n t a n d i m p o r t , i t r e - i t e r a t e d t h e i d e a s o f t h e 1 8 5 3 a d d r e s s . He b e l i e v e d i n 1 8 5 5 , a s i n 1 8 5 3 , t h a t a b a s i c p r o g r a m o f r e f o r m t o e l e v a t e t h e p e o p l e o f T e n n e s s e e m u s t b e c o m p l e t e d H i s e n t i r e e f f o r t s a s G o v e r n o r w o u l d b e a i m e d a t t h e e l e v a t i o n o f t h e c i t i z e n s o f T e n n e s s e e . I t w a s w i t h t h e m t h a t " g e n u i n e C h r i s t i a n i t y a n d D e m o c r a c y " o r i g i n a t e d . J o h n s o n b e l i e v e d t h a t a n a r i s t o c r a c y o f " v i r t u e a n d i n t e l l i g e n c e , t a l e n t a n d g e n u i n e l e a r n i n g , h o n e s t i n d u s t r y , e c o n o m y a n d r e a l m e r i t , " c o m b i n e d w i t h a l o v e f o r m a n k i n d , h a d a n i m p o r t a n t p l a c e i n s o c i e t y . G o v e r n o r J o h n s o n c o n c l u d e d h i s a d d r e s s w i t h a n e m o t i o n a l a p p e a l t o t h e p e o p l e : " t h e p e o p l e h a v e n e v e r d e s e r t e d m e , a n d G o d b e i n g w i l l i n g , I w i l l n e v e r d e s e r t t h e m . " T h e G o v e r n o r ' s r e g u l a r l e g i s l a t i v e m e s s a g e f o l l o w e d o n e w e e k l a t e r . ^ I t w a s a l m o s t a d u p l i c a t e o f t h e l e g i s l a t i v e m e s s a g e o f 1 8 5 3 . 106 F e w o f J o h n s o n ' s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s w e r e p a s s e d b y t h e T e n n e s s e e L e g i s l a t u r e ; t h a t b o d y s e e m e d d e t e r m i n e d t o b l o c k h i s e v e r y m o v e . P a r t i s a n p o l i t i c s l a y b e h i n d t h i s o p p o s i t i o n . A s i n 1 8 5 3 , t h e D e m o c r a t s w e r e i n t h e m i n o r i t y i n t h e L e g i s l a t u r e ; t h e s t a t e s e n a t e o r g a n i z e d w i t h e l e v e n D e m o c r a t s a n d f o u r t e e n W h i g -K n o w - N o t h i n g s , t h e H o u s e w i t h t h i r t y - f o u r D e m o c r a t s a n d t h i r t y - s i x W h i g - K n o w -N o t h i n g s . T h e K n o w - N o t h i n g s i n p a r t i c u l a r w a n t e d t o r e v e n g e t h e v i c i o u s c a m p a i g n J o h n s o n h a d w a g e d a g a i n s t t h e m . T h e l e g i s l a t u r e r e p e a t e d l y r e f u s e d t o c o n f i r m t h e n o m i n a t i o n s m a d e b y J o h n s o n f o r t h e v a r i o u s b o a r d s a n d o t h e r h i g h o f f i c i a l s . I n a d d i t i o n , s e v e r a l b i l l s w e r e i n t r o d u c e d i n a n a t t e m p t t o r e m o v e t h e G o v e r n o r ' s a p p o i n t i v e p o w e r . J o h n s o n ' s f i r m r e a c t i o n t o t h i s m a n e u v r e , c l a i m i n g i t w a s u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , f o r e s h a d o w e d h i s s t a n d o n C o n g r e s s ' a t t e m p t t o i m p e a c h h i m f o r r e m o v i n g S e c r e t a r y o f War S t a n t o n , i n 1 8 6 8 . Some r e s o l u t i o n s w e r e p a s s e d i n t h e L e g i s -l a t u r e c r i t i c i z i n g J o h n s o n ' s p r o g r a m . R e f e r r i n g t o h i s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n f o r a m e n d -m e n t s t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , t h e s t a t e s e n a t e a d o p t e d a r e s o l u t i o n c a l l i n g t h e p r o -p o s a l " u n w i s e , i n e x p e d i e n t , a n d d a n g e r o u s t o o u r l i b e r t y , " a n d i f a d o p t e d w o u l d o p e n t h e d o o r f o r o t h e r c h a n g e s , a n d w o u l d b e r e g a r d e d " a s t h e w o r k o f d e m a g o g u e s a n d f a n a t i c s . " ' ' " 8 i P a r t i s a n o p p o s i t i o n a n d p e r s o n a l r e v e n g e w e r e r e v e a l e d b y b i t t e r d e b a t e , p a r t i c u l a r l y o v e r w h e t h e r o r n o t t o a d j o u r n f o r t h e T h a n k s g i v i n g h o l i d a y w i t h a p r a y e r . T h e W h i g s a n d K n o w - N o t h i n g s a s s a i l e d t h e D e m o c r a t s a n d p a r t i c u l a r l y A n d r e w J o h n s o n f o r t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n t o sufch a p r a y e r , c l a i m i n g t h a t J o h n s o n h a d p r o v e d h i m s e l f a b e l i e v e r i n a t h e o c r a c y — p o i n t i n g t o h i s " J a c o b ' s L a d d e r " s p e e c h . O n e K n o w - N o t h i n g i n t r o d u c e d a r e s o l u t i o n t o a u t h o r i z e a m e m b e r o f t h e L e g i s l a t u r e t o " c r a c k h i m ^ J o h n s o n ] o n t h e h e a d w i t h a r o u n d o f J a c o b ' s L a d d e r , " i f J o h n s o n d i d n o t d i s c h a r g e h i s d u t i e s o f o f f i c e i n a n " a p p r o p r i a t e m a n n e r . " I n t h e f a c e o f t h e s e a t t a c k s , D e m o c r a t s l e a p e d t o t h e i r f e e t i n d e f e n c e o f t h e i r l e a d e r , b u t t h e y l a c k e d t h e m a j o r i t y t o v o t e t h e s e r e s o l u t i o n s d o w n . M o s t D e m o c r a t s i n t h e L e g i s l a t u r e , a g r e e d w i t h o n e m e m b e r , w h o b e l i e v e d t h a t J o h n s o n 1 Q w a s d i s c h a r g i n g h i s d u t i e s w i t h d i g n i t y a n d c o m p e t e n c e . y 107 D e s p i t e t h e i n t r a n s i g e n c e o f t h e o p p o s i t i o n , some c o n s t r u c t i v e l e g i s l a t i o n w a s e n a c t e d . T h e A g r i c u l t u r a l B u r e a u w a s e x p a n d e d , a n d p r o g r e s s w a s made i n i n t r o d u c i n g s c i e n t i f i c m e t h o d s i n f a r m i n g . J o h n s o n h e a r t i l y a p p r o v e d o f a n d c o o r d i n a t e d t h e s e m e a s u r e s . T h e p u b l i c s c h o o l p r o g r a m w a s e x p a n d e d , w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n o f t h e s t a t e N o r m a l S c h o o l . A l s o , f i v e h u n d r e d a c r e s o f A n d r e w J a c k s o n ' s " H e r m i t a g e " w a s p u r c h a s e d o n J o h n s o n ' s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n , a n d o f f e r e d t o t h e F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t i n r e t u r n f o r t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a W e s t e r n M i l i t a r y A c a d e m y l i k e 2 0 W e s t P o i n t , o n s t a t e l a n d n e a r N a s h v i l l e . A l t h o u g h t h e m a j o r i t y o f A n d r e w J o h n s o n ' s r e f o r m p r o g r a m d u r i n g h i s t w o t e r m s m e t o b s t r u c t i o n a n d d e f e a t , t h e m e a s u r e o f h i s s u c c e s s d i d n o t e n d w i t h h i s t e r m o f o f f i c e i n 1 8 5 7 . I s h a m G . H a r r i s , h i s s u c c e s s o r , c o n t i n u e d t h e J o h n s o n p r o g r a m . O n e e l e m e n t o f d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n s u c c e s s a n d f a i l u r e b e t w e e n t h e t w o men w a s t h a t H a r r i s h a d a D e m o c r a t i c m a j o r i t y i n t h e L e g i s l a t u r e , J o h n s o n d i d n o t . U n d e r H a r r i s , a l m o s t a l l o f J o h n s o n ' s p r o p o s a l s m e t w i t h f a v o r -21 a b l e l e g i s l a t i v e a c t i o n . I r o n i c a l l y , J o h n s o n ' s p r o g r a m o f r e f o r m w a s s u c c e s s f u l a f t e r h e w a s G o v e r n o r . F o r A n d r e w J o h n s o n , 1 8 5 5 w a s s p e n t i n p l a n n i n g a n d p r e p a r i n g f o r t h e p r e s i -d e n t i a l n o m i n a t i o n s o f 1 8 5 6 . He w o u l d a t t e m p t t o s e c u r e t h e n o m i n a t i o n a n d a d v a n c e t o t h e h i g h e s t o f f i c e i n t h e l a n d . H i s a m b i t i o n s f o r h i g h o f f i c e h a d b e e n e v i d e n t f o r some y e a r s . A s e a r l y a s 1 8 5 2 , w h i l e s t i l l a C o n g r e s s m a n , J o h n s o n h a d p l a n n e d t o c a p t u r e t h e v i c e - p r e s i d e n t i a l n o m i n a t i o n . He h a d r e c e i v e d t h e s u p p o r t o f some p r o m i n e n t D e m o c r a t s a n d n e w s p a p e r s i n T e n n e s s e e f o r t h e n o m i -n a t i o n ; p r e s i d e n t i a l a s p i r a n t J a m e s B u c h a n a n f e l t J o h n s o n ' s a m b i t i o u s p r e s e n c e , f o r w h e n J o h n s o n d i d n o t r e c e i v e t h e n o m i n a t i o n a t t h e D e m o c r a t i c c o n v e n t i o n " h i s l o o k s a n d e x p r e s s i o n s m a n i f e s t e d h i s d i s a p p o i n t m e n t . " B y 1 8 5 6 , J o h n s o n b e l i e v e d t h a t h i s p o p u l a r i t y a n d p o w e r w e r e s u f f i c i e n t t o c a p t u r e t h e p r e s i d e n t i a l 2 2 n o m i n a t i o n . O n l y o c c u p y i n g t h e W h i t e H o u s e w o u l d s a t i s f y h i s a m b i t i o n . E v e n t s m o v e d q u i c k l y i n T e n n e s s e e , t o w a r d w h a t J o h n s o n h o p e d w o u l d b e h i s s u c c e s s . T h e D e m o c r a t i c s t a t e c o n v e n t i o n m e t o n J a n u a r y 8 , 1 8 5 6 , t o a p p o i n t 108 delegates to the N a t i o n a l Convention. By i n v i t a t i o n , Johnson was present to d e l i v e r a short address on the issues of the day. He v i g o r o u s l y defended the South and i t s i n s t i t u t i o n s . "Slavery e x i s t s , " he s a i d , " i t i s b l a c k i n the South and White i n the North, and i t w i l l continue to e x i s t . " At the end of the proceed-ings, the s t a t e convention came out e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y f o r Johnson as i t s p r e s i -d e n t i a l candidate. I t passed a r e s o l u t i o n p r a i s i n g President F r a n k l i n P i e r c e f o r h i s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and proclaimed that Andrew Johnson "as a statesman and p a t r i o t , has no su p e r i o r ; that he i s our f i r s t preference, and we would d e l i g h t 23 to honor him with the highest o f f i c e i n the g i f t of the American people." By October 1855, Johnson's p o p u l a r i t y was r i s i n g . There had been consider-able support among many Democrats i n the Tennessee L e g i s l a t u r e f a v o r i n g Johnson's nomination. Several country delegations came out i n favor of him. Moving s e c r e t l y , yet f o r c e f u l l y , he b u i l t up an o r g a n i z a t i o n to advance h i s i n t e r e s t s . And advance them i t d i d , at every opportunity. One observer of the s t a t e convention wrote: "we had considerable excitement occasioned by the over zealous f r i e n d s of Andrew Johnson who des i r e d t o force the convention to recommend him for the Presidency to the N a t i o n a l Convention." Another Democrat confided to A.O.P. Nicholson p r i o r to the N a t i o n a l Convention, " I have no doubt that the Tennessee a s p i r a n t t o the White House w i l l use every means t o prevent the appointment of P i e r c e delegates. „24 * • • • Andrew Johnson faced f a i l u r e at the C i n c i n n a t i convention; James Buchanan of Pennsylvania captured the nomination. Johnson kept h i s disappointment to hi m s e l f . In p r i v a t e , however, he had h i s misgivings about Buchanan" Mr. Buchanan w i t h h i s antecedents i s harder to defend than any one of the candidates." A good par t of t h i s fear was a r e s u l t of Johnson's f r u s t r a t e d ambitions, yet part of h i s c r i t i c i s m of Buchanan as a candidate r e f l e c t e d some p u b l i c discontent of the choice. Although Johnson was apprehensive of Buchanan's success, he b e l i e v e d 25 the platform, c o n s i s t i n g p r i m a r i l y of a defense of s l a v e r y , was a "sound one." Regardless of h i s personal disappointment and h i s general fears about Buchanan, Johnson campaigned v i g o r o u s l y f o r him throughout Tennessee, convinced that "we must 1 0 9 2 6 d o t h e b e s t we c a n w i t h h i m . " A l t h o u g h J o h n s o n o f t e n v o c a l i z e d h i s d i s c o n t e n t w i t h p a r t y l e a d e r s h i p , h e d i d n o t a c t a s t h e p o l i t i c a l o u t s i d e r o r m a v e r i c k . Y e t , h i s a c t i o n s w e r e n o t e n t i r e l y s e l f l e s s . J o h n s o n r e a l i z e d h i s l o y a l t y w o u l d b e n o t i c e d b y t h e p a r t y a n d h i s c h a n c e f o r t h e P r e s i d e n c y m i g h t come a g a i n i n 1 8 6 0 . A t o n e o f t h e g r e a t o u t d o o r p o l i t i c a l m e e t i n g s i n N a s h v i l l e , i n J u l y 1 8 5 6 , G o v e r n o r J o h n s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e " K e y - n o t e " a d d r e s s . T h o u s a n d s o f p e o p l e a t t e n d e d , J o h n s o n ' s o r a t o r y w a s s u p e r b . H i s t h r e e h o u r s p e e c h l e f t s u c h a n i m p r e s s i o n o n t h e p e o p l e t h a t t h o u s a n d s o f c o p i e s o f h i s a d d r e s s w e r e o r d e r e d p r i n t e d a n d d i s t r i b u t e d . C o m p l i m e n t a r y l e t t e r s w e r e w r i t t e n t o t h e n e w s p a p e r s : M r . E d i t o r : S c o r e s o f A m e r i c a n s a s y o u k n o w , t h r o n g e d t o B r o a d S t r e e t t o h e a r t h e G o v e r n o r o n t h e q u e s t i o n s o f t h e d a y . S o p l e a s e d a r e t h e y w i t h t h e G o v e r n o r ' s s p e e c h , t h a t a v a s t m u l t i -t u d e o f t h e m d e s i r e t o h a v e a r e p e t i t i o n o f i t . A l l o w u s t h e n , M r . E d i t o r , t h r o u g h y o u r c o l u m n s t o r e q u e s t G o v e r n o r J o h n s o n t o r e p e a t t h e s p e e c h a t a n e a r l y d a y . We p r o m i s e h i m a b i g c r o w d a n d t h e m o s t r e s p e c t f u l a t t e n t i o n . N u m e r o u s A m e r i c a n s . A l t h o u g h J o h n s o n ' s o r a t o r y h a d s u r p a s s e d a l l p r e v i o u s e f f o r t s , t h e c o n t e n t o f h i s a d d r e s s w a s n o t n e w . He a s s e r t e d i d e a s t h a t h e h a d e x p r e s s e d o n m a n y p r e v i o u s o c c a s i o n s a s a S o u t h e r n D e m o c r a t . W h i l e h e i n d i c a t e d t h a t h e w o u l d e v a l u a t e t h e p r o s p e c t i v e c a n d i d a t e s f o r t h e e l e c t i o n w i t h t h e p e o p l e , i t w a s s o o n o b v i o u s t h a t t h e R e p u b l i c a n a n d K n o w - N o t h i n g c a n d i d a t e s w e r e t o r e c e i v e J o h n s o n ' s t y p i c a l v i t u p e r a t i o n . T h e G o v e r n o r p r o d u c e d l e t t e r s , w h i c h h e w a v e d b e f o r e t h e c r o w d w i t h h i s f i s t , t o e s t a b l i s h t h e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t M i l l a r d F i l l m o r e , t h e K n o w - N o t h i n g c a n d i d a t e , a n d J o h n C . F r e e m o n t , t h e R e p u b l i c a n c a n d i d a t e , w e r e b o t h a v o w e d a b o l i t i o n i s t s . On t h e o t h e r h a n d , J o h n s o n c l a i m e d , J a m e s B u c h a n a n w a s a t r i e d a n d t r u e D e m o c r a t o f t h i r t y - t w o y e a r s , a n a t i o n a l i s t a n d n o t a s e c t i o n -27 a l i s t , a n d a n a r d e n t d e f e n d e r t o t h e S o u t h a n d s l a v e r y . How s h o u l d t h e p e o p l e o f t h e S o u t h a c t i n t h e a p p r o a c h i n g e l e c t i o n ? " M y own o p i n i o n i s t h a t t h e S o u t h h a s b e e n e n g a g e d i n c o m p r o m i s e s , a s t h e y a r e t e r m e d , l o n g e n o u g h , " J o h n s o n a n s w e r e d , " w e h a v e b e e n e n g a g e d i n o n e c o m p r o m i s e a n d t h e n a n o t h e r . . . u n t i l o u r r i g h t s h a v e a l l b e e n c o m p r o m i s e d a w a y . " T h e o n l y w a y 110 to guarantee Southern rights was to vote for Buchanan. As to his allegiances, Johnson claimed, "I am for the South standing firmly and united. . . . I am not alarmist, but I speak what I think. This Union shall be preserved. Our Southern institutions depend upon the continuance of the Union and upon non-interference. . . [with slavery]. Your destiny is my destiny, and Tennessee's 28 destiny is with the South, and the South must be united." These were the words of a loyal Southern Democrat, not those of a maverick. Johnson made many such speeches across the state, and even in other states. On one occasion he was invited to debate with John J . Crittenden, but for unknown reasons, he refused. In a l l his speeches, Johnson cautioned the people not to follow the rash Southern fire eaters like Yancey and Rhett, yet he denounced Northern aggression against slavery. Some observers believed that Johnson was at his greatest oratorical and popular heights, and Buchanan's success in 2 9 Tennessee was a direct result of Andrew Johnson's efforts. After the campaign, Johnson sat back with calm satisfaction. On a brief respite from the role of Governor, he relaxed in his comfortable home in Greeneville. One fa l l evening, as was his habit, he walked casually in the half acre of treed and cultivated pasture behind the house with his wife Eliza, his youngest son, and his two youngest daughters. His few domestic slaves worked in an atmosphere of relaxation. Later, Johnson returned to his study, and wrote letters to friends and associates, a task he took with pleasure and enthu-siasm. Johnson's conceit and pride in his accomplishments are revealed in a letter to his son-in-law, David T. Patterson. Johnson boasted that although he had not obtained the presidential nomination, he rationalized that his popularity was at his greatest height, and augured promise for the future. In another revealing letter, Johnson assured his oldest son Robert, and in a sense assured himself, that his strength among the members of the party was s t i l l considerable, as his speeches in the campaign had given "general satisfaction to the democrats every-where I have been.""^ In t h e e l e c t i o n of 1 8 5 6 , Johnson had s h r e w d l y e s t i m a t e d t h e D e m o c r a t i c s t r e n g t h in t h e s t a t e . Buchanan had won t h e e l e c t i o n and had c a r r i e d T e n n e s s e e in t h e f i r s t D e m o c r a t i c v i c t o r y in t h e s t a t e s i n c e 1 8 3 2 . Johnson p r e d i c t e d B u c h a n a n ' s m a j o r i t y w o u l d be 7 , 0 0 0 to 8 , 0 0 0 v o t e s in T e n n e s s e e . When e l e c t i o n 31 r e s u l t s were g i v e n , B u c h a n a n s m a j o r i t y was 7 , 5 0 0 . On t h e w h o l e , Johnson was p l e a s e d w i t h Buchanan's and t h e p a r t y ' s v i c t o r y , b u t he c a u t i o n e d f r i e n d s t h a t Buchanan's c o u r s e of a c t i o n must be w i s e . In a l e t t e r to h i s i n t i m a t e f r i e n d , Sam M i l l i g a n , Johnson c l a i m e d t h a t t h e p e o p l e " h a v e shown t h e i r c a p a c i t y f o r s e l f - g o v e r n m e n t more c o n c l u s i v e l y in t h i s e l e c t -i o n t h a n a t any o t h e r t i m e " ; it was a t r i u m p h of " p r i n c i p l e o v e r f a c t i o n and s e c t -i o n a l i s m . " If B u c h a n a n was n o t f o r c e f u l in h i s l e a d e r s h i p , c a t a s t r o p h i c r e s u l t s w o u l d e n s u e : "The r e c e n t development of t h e i r Q a b o l i t i o n i s t 'sj s t r e n g t h w i l l o n l y c a u s e them to r e d o u b l e t h e i r e n e r g i e s and to come up to t h e n e x t c o n t e s t w i t h more a r d o r and d e t e r m i n a t i o n to e l e c t a s e c t i o n a l a b o l i t i o n c a n d i d a t e . . . w h i c h w i l l be t a n t a m o u n t to a d i s o l u t i o n of t h e U n i o n . " Johnson had h i s p r i v a t e f e a r s : 32 "I f e a r t h e q u e s t i o n is n o t ended and what it is to end in God o n l y k n o w s . " As B u c h a n a n p r e p a r e d to t a k e o f f i c e as P r e s i d e n t , Andrew Johnson p r e p a r e d to l e a v e h i s o f f i c e as G o v e r n o r . He had d e c i d e d n o t to r u n a g a i n f o r G o v e r n o r of T e n n e s s e e ; he b e l i e v e d h i s a m b i t i o n s and t h e i n t e r e s t s of t h e p e o p l e w o u l d be b e t t e r s e r v e d if he c o u l d s e c u r e a s e a t in t h e S e n a t e . G o v e r n o r Johnson r e m a i n e d d e v o t e d to h i s j o b as G o v e r n o r to t h e l a s t d a y . He t r a v e l l e d to W a s h i n g t o n in January 1 8 5 7 , to p r e s s t h e c l a i m s of h i s p r o p o s e d W e s t e r n M i l i t a r y Academy^ W h i l e r e t u r n i n g ^ f r o m t h e W h i t e House , Johnson met w i t h a n e a r l y f a t a l a c c i d e n t . The t r a i n on w h i c h he was t r a v e l l i n g l e f t t h e t r a c k n e a r C h a t t a n o o g a and r o l l e d down a s i x t y f o o t embankment . H i s r i g h t arm was s e v e r e l y b r o k e n and h i s f a c e c o n s i d e r a b l y b r u i s e d . T h i s i n j u r y g r e a t l y i m p a i r e d h i s h e a l t h d u r i n g t h e n e x t few months and k e p t h i m f r o m p l u n g i n g w h o l e - h e a r t e d l y i n t o p o l i t i c s , as was h i s h a b i t . T h e r e was c o n s i d e r a b l e a l a r m among f r i e n d s and s u p p o r t e r s o v e r h i s h e a l t h . Many l e t t e r s were w r i t t e n 112 t o R o b e r t J o h n s o n , i n q u i r i n g o f h i s f a t h e r ' s c o n d i t i o n , a n d t h e n e w s p a p e r s o f t h e d a y r e c e i v e d h u n d r e d s o f s o l i c i t o u s m e s s a g e s w h i c h a t t e s t e d t o J o h n s o n ' s p o p u l a r i t y . One s u c h l e t t e r summed u p t h e f e e l i n g : " s i n c e t h e d a y s o f J a c k s o n n o p u b l i c man h a s s t o o d s o h i g h i n t h e a f f e c t i o n s o f t h e D e m o c r a t s a s A n d r e w 3 4 J o h n s o n . He i s t h e man o f t h e t i m e s a n d t h e f r i e n d o f t h e p e o p l e . " G o v e r n o r J o h n s o n r e c u p e r a t e d f r o m h i s a c c i d e n t i n h i s home i n G r e e n e v i l l e , b u t h e d i d n o t w i t h d r a w c o m p l e t e l y f r o m p o l i t i c s . M a n e u v e r i n g f r o m a f a r , J o h n s o n k e p t i n c o n s t a n t c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h f r i e n d s a n d a s s o c i a t e s . He w a n t e d t o m a k e s u r e t h a t h i s p e r s o n a l c h o i c e f o r G o v e r n o r , I s h a m G . H a r r i s , w o u l d s u c c e e d h i m . J o h n s o n men c o n s o l i d a t e d s u p p o r t f o r H a r r i s a t t h e n o m i n a t i n g c o n v e n t i o n , w h i c h n o t o n l y p a s s e d r e s o l u t i o n s e x p r e s s i n g i t s " g r a t i t u d e t o A n d r e w J o h n s o n f o r h i s a b l e a n d s u c c e s s f u l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , " b u t a l s o u n a n i m o u s l y 35 n o m i n a t e d H a r r i s . T h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n H a r r i s , a w e a l t h y a n d i n f l u e n t i a l W e s t T e n n e s s e e a n , a n d J o h n s o n , a h u m b l e a r t i s a n f r o m E a s t T e n n e s s e e , r e v e a l s some i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s o f J o h n s o n ' s own p o l i t i c a l p o w e r a s w e l l a s p o l i t i c a l e v e n t s i n T e n n e s s e e f r o m 1857 t o 1 8 6 1 . J o h n s o n ' s b i o g r a p h e r s a n d o t h e r h i s t o r i a n s h a v e a s s e r t e d t h a t J o h n s o n w a s v e h e m e n t l y o p p o s e d t o t h e s l a v o c r a c y o f t h e s t a t e , a n d t h a t p r o m i n e n t c i t i z e n s o f W e s t T e n n e s s e e w e r e n o t e n a m o u r e d w i t h t h e G o v e r n o r . H a r r i s r e p r e s e n t e d t h e l a r g e p l a n t e r s i n t h e W e s t e r n p a r t o f t h e s t a t e , a s w e l l a s t h e u l t r a - S o u t h e r n v i e w p o i n t . Y e t , i t h a s b e e n s h o w n t h a t W e s t T e n n e s s e e n o t o n l y v o t e d f o r A n d r e w J o h n s o n , b u t t h a t l a t e r J o h n s o n p r o m o t e d a n d a l l i e d w i t h o n e o f i t s m o s t p r o m i n e n t 3 6 l e a d e r s - - I s h a m G . H a r r i s . T h r o u g h o u t t h e g u b e r n a t o r i a l c a m p a i g n o f 1 8 5 7 , J o h n s o n a d v i s e d a n d a i d e d H a r r i s . I t w a s n o c o i n c i d e n c e t h a t i n t h e c a m p a i g n H a n d s a s s a i l e d t h e K n o w -N o t h i n g s a n d t h e i r c a n d i d a t e , R o b e r t H a t t o n , i n a s t y l e m o r e t h a n r e m i n i s c e n t o f J o h n s o n ' s . I n c o n s t a n t c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h H a r r i s , J o h n s o n q u i e t e d f e a r s o f m a n y D e m o c r a t s a b o u t H a r r i s , b e l i e v i n g t h a t h i s p r o s p e c t i v e s u c c e s s o r " w i l l come o u t w i t h f l y i n g c o l o r s , r e d e e m i n g h i m s e l f , a n d i n c r e a s i n g t h e d e m o c r a t i c m a j o r i t y . 1 1 3 W h e n h e w a s a b l e , J o h n s o n d e l i v e r e d a f e w s p e e c h e s i n W e s t T e n n e s s e e f o r H a r r i s -s p e e c h e s w h i c h w e r e r e c e i v e d e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y i n t h a t a r e a , a n d w h i c h a i d e d 37 H a r r i s t o a l a r g e e x t e n t . E v e n w h e n H a r r i s b e c a m e G o v e r n o r , t h e r e w a s a c l o s e r a p p o r t b e t w e e n h i m a n d J o h n s o n . D u r i n g t h e c u r r e n c y c r i s i s o f 1 8 5 7 - 1 8 5 8 , G o v e r n o r H a r r i s r e q u e s t e d h i s " f r i e n d " J o h n s o n t o come t o T e n n e s s e e t o a d v i s e h i m a n d t h e p a r t y " a s t o t h e p r e c i s e a n d p r a c t i c a l i s s u e w h i c h s h a l l b e p r e s e n t e d b y t h e D e m o c r a t i c p a r t y o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f c u r r e n c y i n t h e n e x t c a n v a s s . " S i m i l a r l y , p r i o r t o t h e c o n t e s t 3 8 o f 1 8 5 9 , H a r r i s a g a i n r e q u e s t e d a d v i c e f r o m J o h n s o n o n c a m p a i g n s t r a t e g y . T h e r e w a s a c o n t i n u i t y o f p o l i t i c a l p o w e r b e t w e e n H a r r i s a n d J o h n s o n t h a t h a d b e e n n e g l e c t e d b y s t u d e n t s o f t h e p e r i o d . H a r r i s c o n t i n u e d J o h n s o n ' s l e g i s -l a t i v e p r o g r a m a s w e l l a s p r a c t i c i n g a p o w e r f u l i n f l u e n c e o v e r L e g i s l a t u r e a n d p a r t y . A n o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t a s p e c t o f t h i s c l o s e t i e b e t w e e n t h e t w o men i s J o h n s o n ' s p o s i t i o n w i t h r e g a r d t o p a r t y a n d s e c t i o n . I f J o h n s o n h a d b e e n a m a v e r i c k , h e w o u l d n o t h a v e c h o s e n t o a l l y h i m s e l f w i t h a n u l t r a - S o u t h e r n l e a d e r . S i g n i f i c a n t l y , J o h n s o n ' s l o y a l t y t o p a r t y a n d t o t h e S o u t h h a d p a r a d o x i c a l a n d i r o n i c c o n s e q u e n c e s . F r o m h i s G o v e r n o r ' s c h a i r H a r r i s w a g e d a b a t t l e a g a i n s t t h e N o r t h . J o h n s o n a n d H a r r i s j o i n e d f o r c e s i n c a m p a i g n i n g f o r t h e S o u t h e r n D e m o c r a t i c n o m i n e e , J o h n C . B r e c k i n r i d g e , i n 1 8 6 0 . Y e t , i n a c r u c i a l p e r i o d o f a f e w m o n t h s i n 1 8 6 1 , J o h n s o n w o u l d b e c o m e t h e L i n c o l n - U n i o n i s t l e a d e r , o f T e n n e s s e e w h i l e H a r r i s t o o k s t e p s t o m o v e T e n n e s s e e i n t o t h e C o n f e d e r a c y . O n l y t h e n w o u l d J o h n s o n t u r n a g a i n s t h i s p a r t y a n d d e f e n d t h e p e o p l e o f E a s t T e n n e s s e e . P o l i t i c a l o p p o r t u n i s m a s m u c h a s l o y a l t y t o h i s c o n s t i t u e n t s w o u l d t h e n a p p e a r t o b e a d r i v i n g m o t i v a t i o n . A s c h i e f e x e c u t i v e o f T e n n e s s e e , A n d r e w J o h n s o n e x e r c i s e d h i s d u t i e s w i t h e n e r g y , t a c t , a n d w i s d o m . H e a l s o r e v e a l e d h i s r u t h l e s s n e s s i n p o l i t i c a l w a r f a r e . U n d e r l y i n g h i s l o y a l t y t o p a r t y a n d h i s u n e r r i n g ' l e a d e r s h i p , r e g a r d l e s s o f h i s m e t h o d s , l a y J o h n s o n ' s d r i v e t o a c q u i r e p o w e r . J o h n s o n w a s k n o w n a s a l o y a l p a r t y man t o h i s f r i e n d s a n d a s s o c i a t e s , y e t h e w a s h i s own m a n . 114 From Governor to Senator, Johnson l e t i t be known that he was a Southerner f i r s t and l a s t . His executive program through two terms of o f f i c e r e f l e c t e d his adherence to h i s party's p r i n c i p l e s , and a responsiveness to the voice of the people. Johnson advocated h i s program of reform with force, competence and v i s i o n . The inaugural of Isham G. Harris and Andrew Johnson's v a l e d i c t o r y address were attended by a large concourse of c i t i z e n s . Johnson's address was b r i e f and humble. "I can give no other or higher guarantee for my future course, touching the common weal, than my past l i f e , " he assured the c i t i z e n s . He passed h i s o f f i c e on to Harris with "pleasure and f u l l confidence" i n h i s 39 "respected and worthy successor." Once the Tennessee Assembly of 1857 had been organized, the e l e c t i o n of a successor to James C. Jones's expiring Senatorial seat was the item of great-est concern to a l l Democrats, e s p e c i a l l y to Andrew Johnson. But the s t r a i n of two successive terms as Governor, of campaigning for Pierce and Buchanan and H a r r i s , of maintaining Democratic s o l i d a r i t y , of h i s injured arm and d e c l i n i n g health, took some to the drive out of Johnson. At forty-nine, although he 40 desired a Senate seat, he was t i r e d . Events would not leave Andrew Johnson in i l l - h e a l t h . He had yet to embark upon the greatest part of his long career., Health would return to t h i s determined and r e s i l i a n t man. Ambition would once again propel him on to greater conquests. The Democracy of the South needed a man of the people and a Southerner who would defend them. . The Democratic party of Tennessee would i n s i s t on his leadership. There was no c o n f l i c t in the "mind of the democratic people"--he must once again climb "Jacob's Ladder." 4 1 115 Notes for Chapter Five 1 Greeneville Democrat, May 20, 1852; William Flinn to James Buchanan, April 15, 1865, The Works of James Buchanan, XI, 381; Johnson to D.T. Patterson, February 17, 1855, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 2 For a discussion of the demise of the Whig paKtysee: Arthur C. Cole, The Whig Party in the South. For an examination of the Know-Nothing party in the South, see: William D. Overdyke, The Know-Nothing Party in the South (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 1950); see also Sister Mary De Lourdes, Political Nativism in Tennessee to 1860 (Washington: Catholic University of America, 1938). 3 Randal W. McGavock, Pen and Sword, The Life and Journals of Randal  W. McGavock, ed., H. Gower and J. Allan (Nashville: Tennessee Historical Commission, 1959), November 27, 1855, diary entry, p. 340. 4 Knoxville Whig, November 3, 1855; Nashville Republican Banner, Nov-ember 4, 1855. Gentry was an opponent of Johnson's of long-standing. A member of the Tennessee Legislature from 1835 to 1839 he sat across the aisle from Johnson in the House. Gentry went on to serve twelve years in Congress and established himself as a leading Whig orator in Congress. Loyal to the prin-ciples of Henry Clay and a close associate of John Bell, he was a reluctant but ambitious Know-Nothing. 5 Johnson to David T. Patterson, February 17, 1855, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. The campaigns were conducted through the hottest and most humid days of summer, for almost two months. Nashville Union and American, March 8, 1855, McGavock, Pen and Sword, March 27, 1855, p. 321. 6 McGavock, Pen and Sword, March 27, 1855, p. 323; Nashville Daily  Gazette, April 28, 1855, quoted in Nashville Union and American, May 3, 1855. 7 Nashville Union and American, May 3, 1855; Nashville Daily Gazette, May 3, 1855, quoted in White, Messages of the Governors, IV, 626. 8 Nashville True Whig, May 15, 1855. 9 McGavock, Pen and Sword, June 2, 1855, p. 332; Nashville Union and  American, July 12, 1855; Greeneville Sun, February 23, 1911; Temple, Notable  Men, p. 328. 10 Temple, Notable Men, p. 321; Nashville Republican Banner, July 26, 1855. 11 Nashville Daily Gazette, May 3, 1855 quoted in White, Messages of the  Governors, IV, 626; KnoXville Whig, May 5, 1855; Nashville Republican Banner, July 10, October 10, 1855. 12 Knoxville Standard, May 16, 1855, quoted in Nashville Union and Ameri- can, May 22, 1855; McGavock, Pen and Sword, May 1, 1855, p. 327. Johnson was supported by.such Democrats as A.O.P. Nicholson, Cave Johnson, Amos Kendall, the Blair family, Felix Zollicoffer, George W. Jones, and James K. Polk's brother, William H. Polk. 116 13 White, Messages of the Governors, TV, 627-28. East Tennessee's traditional Whig allegiances account for its pro-Union sentiment and loyalty to the Constitutional-Union party in 1861. 14 William B. Campbell to David Campbell, February 24, March 27, 1855, quoted in Tricamo, "Tennessee Politics," p. 139; Knoxville Whig, August 11, 1855; Richmond Enquirer, August '27, 1855, quoted in Lourdes, Nativism in  Tennessee, p. 113; Memphis Eagle and Enquirer, September 21, 1855; Nashville  Union and Ame r i can, September 9, 1855; New York Freeman's Journal, September 8, 1855, quoted in Lourdes, Nativism in Tennessee, p. 113. 15 Howell Cobb to George W. Jones, October 25, 1855, Franklin Pierce to A.O.P. Nicholson, December 2, 1855, Nicholson Correspondence; Louis T. Wigfall to Johnson, June 8, 1855, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 16 Nashville Union and American, August 22, 1855. 17 Nashville True Whig, October 24, 1855; White, Messages of the Gover- nors, IV, 631-33, 633-59. 18 Nashville Union and American, December 6, 1855; White, Messages of  the Governors, IV, 661. 19 Nashville Union and American, November 22, 1855. 20 Ibid. , January 12, 26, 1856. 21 White, Messages of the Governors, V, 26-372. 22 Greeneville Democrat, May 20, 1852; William Flinn to James Buchanan, April 15, 1865, Works of James Buchanan, XI, 381; Johnson to Patterson, February 17, 1855, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 23 Nashville Union and American. March 5, 8, 1856; Nashville True Whig, March 10, 1856. 24 McG&vock, Pen and Sword, November 15, 1855, p. 345; S.R. Anderson to A.O.P. Nicholson, November 21, 1855, "Some Tennessee Letters," p. 246, Nashville Union and American, December 6, 8, 11, 1855. 25 Johnson to William Lowry, June 26, 1856, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. Johnson confided to Nicholson, "Buchanan's nomination is a matter of profound astonishment. . . .He is the slowest man . . . my last choice and harder to defend, and fewer elements of popularity. . . ." Johnson to Nicholson, June 27, 1856, "Some.Tennessee Letters," 250. Johnson would have preferred John C. Breckinridge as the nominee. 26 Johnson to William Lowry, June 26, 1856, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 27 Nashville Republican Banner, July 28, 1856; Nashville Union and  American, August 11, 15, 1856. 28 Ibid. 117 29 Johnson to Robert Johnson, September 19, 1856, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I: McGavock, Pen and Sword, July 4, 1856, p. 373; Nashville Union and  American, December 12, 1856. On one occasion, Johnson addressed a crowd of 45,000. 30 Johnson to Patterson, September 19, 1856, Johnson to Robert Johnson, September 19, 1856, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 31 Johnson to Robert Johnson, September 19, 1856, ibid., Nashville True  Whig, November 10, 1856. 32 Johnson to Samuel Milligan, November 23, 1856, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 33 Nashville Union and American, January 1, 1857. Johnson had expressed his desire for a Senate seat as early as October 1856. Johnson to Sam Milligan, November 23, 1856, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series'.I. 34 McGavock, Pen and Sword, February 3, 1857, p. 394; Robert Johnson to Sam Milligan, February 27, 1857, D.T. Patterson to Robert Johnson, February 24, 1857, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Nashville Union and American, March 5, 1857; Nashville True Whig, March 10, 1857; Nashville Republican Banner, March 14, 1857. Johnson's injury affected his handwriting for many years afterward, much to this observers' chagrin. 35 Robert Johnson to Sam Milligan, February '27, 1857, Andrew Johnson to Robert Johnson, MarctB 18, 1857, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I; Nashville  Union arid American, April 17, 1857. 36 For biographical data on Harris see: Dictionary of American Biography ed., Allen Johnson and Dumas Malone ( 11 vols. New York: Charles Scribners, 1964), IV, 310-11. See Winston, Stryker, and the other revisionists for the assertion that Johnson was an arch-foes of the large planters of West Tennessee. 37 Johnson to Robert Johnson, July 18, 1857, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I: Nashville Republican Banner, July 22, 1857. 38 Isham G. Harris to Johnson, September 7, 1858, July 7, 1859, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I: McGavock, Pen and Sword, September 28, 1857, p. 433 describes the hysteria over the financial panic. Nashville True Whig, November 8, 1857. 39 Nashville Union and American, November 7,-1857. 40 Johnson to William Lowry, July 17, 1857, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 41 Nashville Union and American, August 28, 1857. 118 CONCLUSIONS Examination of Andrew Johnson's early p o l i t i c a l career has revealed that he was an ambitious Jacksonian Democrat and a Southerner; not a p o l i -t i c a l outsider and maverick. Johnson did not act i n a vacuum. The f a c t i o n a l nature of p o l i t i c s during the 184-0's and iSjpO's made i t appear that certain p o l i t i c i a n s functioned on the "outside" of the p o l i t i c a l system. In fact, most men belonged to a par t i c u l a r group or faction. No one faction could control the national, state, and l o c a l power structures. Thus, with the alternations of o f f i c e following elections, not only did opposing p o l i t i c a l parties alternate the o f f i c e of government, hut factions within each party ebbed and flowed through the t i d e of patronage. The " i n s " became the "outs" and the apparent "outs" became the power brokers. The Jacksonian era had ushered i n the spoils system just as surely as i t had democratic government. The measure of a p o l i t i c i a n ' s success during t h i s period of f l u x was his a b i l i t y to remain i n power for a long period of time, and to exercise some continuing influence over the party organization. Andrew Johnson was returned to o f f i c e for twenty-nine years (except for one defeat as a sophomore state representative). Throughout this'span, he s i g n i f i c a n t l y aggrandized his power and prestige i n the state and national party organizations. Johnson's puissance led him from the Governorship of Tennessee to the Senate, and ultimately, to the Presidency. In the process, he became one of the most powerful men i n the Union, and a consul of the people--a position that would be threatened only after his confrontation with the Radical Republicans i n 1866. As a state p o l i t i c i a n , ambition overrode other motivations i n Johnson's climb to power. The period 1828 to 184-3 was a formative period for Johnson's 119 p o l i t i c a l behavior. His i n d i s t i n c t p o l i t i c a l allegiances, demagogic appeals to the people, and ruthless p o l i t i c a l practices, combined with his determination to represent the people's interests and advocate democratic reform, were being molded and united into a p o l i t i c a l credo and philo-sophy of action. By 1843, Johnson's drive for power entailed more than the obvious. His ambition was both inwardly and outwardly directed. Johnson believed he could never achieve success for himself i f he did not have the confidence of the people, and conversely, he rea l i z e d that his popularity and success would increase i f he promoted the people's interests. ' As a Congressman, Johnson spoke and acted as a l o y a l Democrat and an ardent Southerner. He was as vehement i n defending- slavery and the South as were Jefferson Davis, • William.L. Yancey, and Robert B. Rhett. On the c r u c i a l issues of the l84o's and l850's, Johnson r a r e l y behaved as a p o l i -t i c a l maverick. As Governor of Tennessee, Johnson introduced a Jacksonian program of democratic reform, which provided benefits for the people of his state and aided his acquisition of power. In the process of b a t t l i n g the Whig and Know-Nothing parties on the stump and i n the Legislature, he demon-strated his strength of purpose, his democratic ideals, his ruthless t a c t i c s , and his capacity to expand his p o l i t i c a l fortunes. That driving force, ambition, best explains Andrew Johnson's behavior. Although he was a Jacksonian because i t was often expedient, Johnson was also a devoted representative of the people. Ambition for himself and for the-~£eople, became inseparable. An opportunist, Johnson was also a man of p r i n c i p l e . Power, continuity, and consistency: These words accurately describe Andrew Johnson's p o l i t i c a l behavior during h i s early career. Add to these the ideals of a Jacksonian reformer, and a sense of destiny, and Johnson becomes more understandable. 120 Johnson possessed acute s e n s i t i v i t y to p o l i t i c a l change and public opinion. He almost alvays knew when and how to take action, and how to gage his popularity. As he confided to a close friend about p o l i t i c a l o f f i c e , he would prefer "changing position . . . move upward and onward and not to pause any place u n t i l the people become t i r e d and r e s t l e s s ; i t i s better to get out of t h e i r way a l i t t l e too soon than to be i n t h e i r way a l i t t l e too long." 1 Johnson to Sam M i l l i g a n , December 10, 1856, Andrew Johnson Papers, Series I. 121 SELECTIVE BIBLIOGRAPHY I. PRIMARY SOURCES A. Manuscript Collections Bragg, Thomas, Diary, 1861-1862. Southern Historical Collection, University of North Carolina (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Dromgoole, Edward, Papers, 1800-1848. Southern Historical Collection, University of North Carolina (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Gaston, William, Papers, 1791-1850. Southern Historical Collection, University of North Carolina (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Grant, Ulysses S., Papers, 1844-1922. Library of Congress (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Henry, Gustavus, Papers, 1809-1888. Southern Historical Collection, University of North Carolina. Johnson, Andrew, Papers, 1814-1900. Library of Congress (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Laughlin, Samuel H., Diary, 1840-1844. Tennessee State Library and Archives, University of Tennessee. Lincoln, Abraham, Papers, 1833-1869. Library of Congress (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Nicholson, Alfred O.P., Correspondence, 1838-1872. New York Historical Society (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Outlaw, David, Papers, 1847-1855. Southern Historical Collection, University of North Carolina (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Pierce, Franklin, Papers, 1820-1869. Library of Congress (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Taylor, Zachary, Papers, 1817-1856. Library of Congress (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). B. Federal Government Printed Publications U.S. Congress, Congressional Publications, Including House and Senate Journal, Reports, and Documents. Library of Congress (microprint copy, U.B.C. Library). 122 U.S. Congressional Globe. 1842-1862. Library of Congress, (microfilm copy U.B.C. Library). U.S. Library of Congress, The Messages and Papers of the Presidents, (ed.). James Richardson. 10 vols. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1910-1915. U.S. War Department, War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official  Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. 128 vols. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1880-1901. C. Published Letters, Diaries and Speeches Adams, Henry, Letters of Henry Adams 1858-1861. Edited by W.C. Ford. London: Constable, 1938. Adams, John Quincy, The Diary of John Quincy Adams. Edited by Allan Nevins. New York: Longmans, 1928. Bell, John, "Letters of John Bell to William B. Campbell 1839-1857", edited by St. George L. Sioussat, Tennessee Historical Magazine., I l l (1917), 226-237. Birney, James G., Letters of James G. Birney 1831-1857. Edited by Dwight L. Dumond. 2 vols. New York: Appleton, 1938. Brown, Aaron V., "Letters from Aaron V. Brown to Alfred O.P. Nicholson 1844-1850", edited by Joseph H. Parks, Tennessee Historical Quarterly, III (1944), 170-186 Browning, Orville Hickman, The Diary of Orville Hickman Browning. Edited by T.C. Pease and J.G. Randall. Springfield: Illinois State Historical Society, 1925. Boorstin, Daniel, (ed.), An American Primer. New York: Mentor, 1968. Buchanan, James, The Works of James Buchanan. Edited by John Bassett Moore. 12 vols. New York: Antiquarian, 1960. Calhoun, John C, "Correspondence of John C. Calhoun," edited by J.F. Jameson, American Historical Association Annual Report, 1890, II. Chase, Salmon P., "Some Letters of Salmon P. Chase 1848-1865", edited by A.A. Nunns, American Historical Review, XXXIV (1938), 335-350. Clay, Henry, The Works of Henry Clay. Edited by Calvin Colfcon. 7 vols. New York: Henry Clay, 1907. Davis, Jefferson, Jefferson Davis: Private Letters, 1823-1889. Edited by Hudson Strode. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1966. Douglas, Stephen A., The Letters of Stephen A. Douglas. Edited by Robert AI Johannsen. Urbana: University of Illinois, 1961. 123 Henry, Marse, Marse Henry An Autobiography. Edited by Henry Watterson. 2 v o l s . New York: G.H. Doran, 1919. Hunter, Robert M.T., "The Correspondence of Robert M.T. Hunter, 1826-1876", edited by CH. Ambler, American H i s t o r i c a l Association Annual Report, ' 1916, I I . Jackson, Andrew, Correspondence of Andrew Jackson. Edited by John Bassett. 7 v o l s . Washington: Carnegie I n s t i t u t e , 1926-1935. Johnson, Andrew, L i f e , Speeches and Services of Andrew Johnson Seventeenth  President of the United States. P h i l a d e l p h i a : T.B. Pitman, 1865 . Speeches of Andrew Johnson President of the United States with A Biographical Introduction. Edited by Frank Moore. Boston: L i t t le , Brown, 1865. . "The Pension O f f i c e to Congressman Andrew Johnson: A L i s t 1843-1853," edited by LeRoy P. Graf and Ralph W. Haskins, East Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Society P u b l i c a t i o n s , #38 (1966), 97-108, 196-207. . "Andrew Johnson on the Dignity of Labor," edited by Dan M. Robison, Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XXIII (1964), 80-85. . The Papers of Andrew Johnson. Edited by LeRoy P. Graf and Ralph W. Haskins. 1 v o l . to date. Knoxville: University of Tennessee, 1967. Johnson, Cave, "The P o l i t i c s Behind A P r e s i d e n t i a l Nomination As Shown i n Letters From Cave Johnson to James K. Polk," edited by C L . Grant, Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XII (1953), 152-181. Johnson, Herschel V., "From the Autobiography of Herschel V. Johnson 1856-1867," edited by Percy S. Flippen, American H i s t o r i c a l Review, XXX (1925), 311-336. Laughlin, Samuel H., "Diaries of Samuel H. Laughlin, 1840, 1843," edited by St. George L. Sioussat, Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Magazine, II (1916), 43-85. Lin c o l n , Abraham, The Collected Works of Abraham L i n c o l n . Edited by Roy P. Basler. 9 v o l s . New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1953-1955. Lowell, James R., Works of James Rus s e l l Lowell. 10 v o l s . Boston: L i t t l e , Brown, 1893. McGavock, Randal W., Pen and Sword, The L i f e and Journals of Randal W. McGavock. Edited by H. Gower and J . A l l a n . N a s h v i l l e : Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Commission, 1959. Mangum, W i l l i e P., The Papers of W i l l i e P. Mangum. Edited by H.T. Shank. 5 v o l s . Raleigh: North Carolina State Department of Archives and History, 1950-1956. Pierce, F r a n k l i n , "Some Papers of Fra n k l i n Pierce, 1852-1862," edited by C S . Whitthorn, American H i s t o r i c a l Review, X (1904), 350-370. 1 2 4 P i l l o w , G i d e o n , " L e t t e r s o f G i d e o n P i l l o w t o J a m e s K . P o l k , 1 8 4 4 , " e d i t e d b y J . S . R e e v e s , A m e r i c a n H i s t o r i c a l R e v i e w , X I ( 1 9 0 5 ) , 8 3 5 - 8 4 7 . P o l k , J a m e s K . , T h e D i a r y o f J a m e s K . P o l k . E d i t e d b y M i l o Q u a i f e . 4 v o l s . C h i c a g o : C h i c a g o H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , 1 9 1 0 . . " L e t t e r s o f J a m e s K . P o l k t o C a v e J o h n s o n 1 8 3 3 - 1 8 4 8 , " T e n n e s s e e H i s t o r i c a l M a g a z i n e , I ( 1 9 1 5 ) , 2 1 2 - 2 3 8 . . " L e t t e r s f r o m J a m e s K . P o l k t o S a m u e l H . L a u g h l i n , 1 8 3 5 - 1 8 4 4 , " e d i t e d b y L . S . G r e e n e , E a s t T e n n e s s e e H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y P u b l i c a t i o n s , #18 ( 1 9 4 6 ) , 1 4 7 - 1 6 7 . . " L e t t e r s f r o m J a m e s K . P o l k t o A . O . P . N i c h o l s o n , 1 8 3 5 - 1 8 4 9 , " e d i t e d b y J o s e p h H . P a r k s , T e n n e s s e e H i s t o r i c a l Q u a r t e r l y , I I I ( 1 9 4 4 ) , 6 7 - 8 0 . " L e t t e r s o f M r s . J a m e s K . P o l k t o H e r H u s b a n d , " e d i t e d b y S a r a h H . W a l l a c e , T e n n e s s e e H i s t o r i c a l Q u a r t e r l y , X I ( 1 9 6 2 ) , 2 8 2 - 2 8 8 . R a m s e y , J . G . M . , D r . J . G . M . R a m s e y : A u t o b i o g r a p h y a n d L e t t e r s . E d i t e d b y W i l l i a m B . H e s s e l t i n e . N a s h v i l l e : T e n n e s s e e H i s t o r i c a l C o m m i s s i o n , 1 9 5 4 . S c h u r z , C a r l , C o r r e s p o n d e n c e , S p e e c h e s a n d P o l i t i c a l P a p e r s o f C a r l S c h u r z . E d i t e d b y F r e d e r i c B a n c r o f t . 2 v o l s . New Y o r k : G . P . P u t n a m , 1 9 1 3 S t e p h e n s , A l e x a n d e r H . , A l e x a n d e r H . S t e p h e n s , I n P u b l i c a n d P r i v a t e L e t t e r s a n d S p e e c h e s . E d i t e d b y H e n r y C l e v e l a n d . P h i l a d e l p h i a : N a t i o n a l , 1 8 6 6 . S t r o n g , G e o r g e T e m p l e t o n . D i a r y o f G e o r g e T e m p l e t o n S t r o n g . E d i t e d b y A l l a n N e v i n s . 4 v o l s . New Y o r k : M a c M i l l a n , 1 9 5 2 . S u m n e r , C h a r l e s , T h e W o r k s o f C h a r l e s S u m n e r . 1 5 v o l s . B o s t o n : L e e a n d S h e p h e r d , 1 8 7 0 - 1 8 8 3 . " S o m e T e n n e s s e e L e t t e r s , 1 8 4 4 - 1 8 6 4 , " T e n n e s s e e H i s t o r i c a l M a g a z i n e , I I I ( 1 9 1 4 ) , 2 7 5 - 1 8 1 . " S o m e T e n n e s s e e L e t t e r s D u r i n g t h e P o l k A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , " e d i t e d b y J o s e p h H . P a r k s , T e n n e s s e e H i s t o r i c a l Q u a r t e r l y , I I I ( 1 9 4 4 ) , 2 7 5 - 1 8 1 , 3 5 2 - 3 6 2 . T o o m b s , R o b e r t , " C o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f R o b e r t T o o m b s , A l e x a n d e r S t e p h e n s a n d H o w e l l C o b b , " e d i t e d b y U . B . P h i l l i p s , A m e r i c a n H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n A n n u a l R e p o r t , 1 9 1 1 , I I . W e b s t e r , D a n i e l , P r i v a t e C o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f D a n i e l W e b s t e r . E d i t e d b y F l e t c h e r W e b s t e r . 2 v o l s . B o s t o n : L i t t l e , B r o w n , 1 8 5 7 . W e l l e s , G i d e o n , T h e D i a r y o f G i d e o n W e l l e s . E d i t e d b y H o w a r d K . B e a l e . 3 v o l s . New Y o r k : W.W. N o r t o n , 1 9 6 0 . W h i t e , R o b e r t W. ( e d . ) , M e s s a g e s o f t h e G o v e r n o r s o f T e n n e s s e e . 7 v o l s . N a s h v i l l e : T e n n e s s e e H i s t o r i c a l C o m m i s s i o n , 1 9 5 2 -W i l t s e , C h a r l e s M . ( e d . ) , E x p a n s i o n a n d R e f o r m 1 8 1 5 - 1 8 5 0 . New Y o r k : F r e e P r e s s , 1 9 6 7 . 1 2 5 D . M e m o i r s a n d R e m i n i s c e n c e s A d a m s , J o h n Q u i n c y , M e m o i r s , C o m p r i s i n g . P o r t i o n s o f H i s D i a r y f r o m 1 7 9 8 t o  1 8 4 8 . E d i t e d b y C h a r l e s F . A d a m s . 1 2 v o l s . B o s t o n : L i p p i n c o t t , 1 8 7 4 - 1 8 7 7 . B a t t l e s a n d L e a d e r s o f t h e C i v i l W a r . E d i t e d b y R o b e r t U . J o h n s o n a n d C l a r e n c e C . B u e l . 4 v o l s . New Y o r k : C e n t u r y , 1 8 8 7 - 1 8 8 9 . B e n t o n , T h o m a s H a r t , T h i r t y Y e a r s V i e w . 2 v o l s . New Y o r k : A p p l e t o n , 1 8 8 3 . B l a i n e , J a m e s G . , T w e n t y Y e a r s o f C o n g r e s s : F r o m L i n c o l n t o G a r f i e l d . 2 v o l s . N o r w i c h : H e n r y B e l l , 1 8 8 4 . C r o o k , W i l l i a m H . , " A n d r e w J o h n s o n i n t h e W h i t e H o u s e . " C e n t u r y , L X X V I ( 1 9 0 8 ) , 6 5 3 - 6 6 9 , 8 6 3 - 8 7 7 . D a n a , C h a r l e s A . , R e c o l l e c t i o n s o f t h e C i v i l W a r . New Y o r k : A p p l e t o n , 1 9 0 9 . D a v i s , J e f f e r s o n , T h e R i s e a n d F a l l o f t h e C o n f e d e r a t e G o v e r n m e n t . 2 v o l s . New Y o r k : A p p l e t o n , 1 8 8 1 . G r e e l e y , H o r a c e , R e c o l l e c t i o n s o f a B u s y L i f e . New Y o r k : J . B . F o r d , 1 8 6 8 . M c C u l l o c h , H u g h , M e n a n d M e a s u r e s o f H a l f a C e n t u r y . New Y o r k : C h a r l e s S c r i b n e r s , 1 8 8 8 . S c o t t , W i n f i e l d , T h e M e m o i r s o f L i e u t e n a n t - G e n e r a l S c o t t . 2 v o l s . New Y o r k : S h e l d o n , 1 8 6 4 . S h e r m a n , J o h n , J o h n S h e r m a n ' s R e c o l l e c t i o n s o f F o r t y Y e a r s i n t h e H o u s e , S e n a t e a n d C a b i n e t . 2 v o l s . C h i c a g o : W e r n e r , 1 8 9 5 . S t e p h e n s , A l e x a n d e r , A C o n s t i t u t i o n a l V i e w o f t h e L a t e W a r B e t w e e n t h e S t a t e s . P h i l a d e l p h i a : Z u g l e r , M c C u r d y , 1 8 6 8 . . R e c o l l e c t i o n s . New Y o r k : D o u b l e d a y , 1 9 1 0 . T a y l o r , R i c h a r d , D e s t r u c t i o n a n d R e c o n s t r u c t i o n . E d i t e d b y C h a r l e s P . R o l a n d . W a l t h a m : B l a i s d e l l , 1 9 6 8 . T e m p l e , O l i v e r P . , N o t a b l e M e n o f T e n n e s s e e 1 8 3 3 - 1 8 7 5 , T h e i r T i m e a n d T h e i r  C o n t e m p o r a r i e s . New Y o r k : C o s m o p o l i t a n , 1 9 1 2 . T r u m a n , B e n j a m i n C , " A n e c d o t e s o f A n d r e w J o h n s o n , " C e n t u r y , L X X X V ( 1 9 1 3 ) , 4 3 5 - 4 4 0 T u r n e r , H a r l o t S . , " R e c o l l e c t i o n s o f . A n d r e w J o h n s o n , " H a r p e r ' s , C X X ( 1 9 1 1 ) , 1 6 8 - 1 7 6 . W e l l e s , G i d e o n , " L i n c o l n a n d J o h n s o n , " G a l a x y , X I I I ( 1 8 7 2 ) , 6 5 9 - 7 0 3 W i n t h r o p , R o b e r t C , A M e m o i r o f R o b e r t C . W i n t h r o p . B o s t o n : L i t t l e B r o w n 1 8 9 7 . W i l s o n , H e n r y , H i s t o r y o f t h e R i s e a n d F a l l o f t h e S l a v e P o w e r i n A m e r i c a . 3 v o l s . B o s t o n : J . R . O s g o o d , 1 8 7 7 . 1 2 6 E . N e w s p a p e r s a n d S e r i a l P u b l i c a t i o n s A m e r i c a n P e r i o d i c a l S e r i e s . 1 8 0 0 - 1 8 5 0 . L i b r a r y o f C o n g r e s s ( m i c r o f i l m c o p y , U . B . C . L i b r a r y ) . A t l a n t i c M o n t h l y . 1 8 5 7 - 1 8 8 0 C e n t u r y M a g a z i n e ( a l s o r e f e r r e d t o a s S c r i b h e r ' s ) . 1 8 7 1 - 1 9 2 3 . C h a r l e s t o n C o u r i e r . 1 8 5 2 - 1 8 7 3 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , U . B . C . L i b r a r y ) . E d g e f i e l d A d v e r t i s e r . 1 8 5 6 - 1 8 6 8 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , U . B . C . L i b r a r y ) . E a s t T e n n e s s e e M i s c e l l a n y . 1 8 5 2 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . G r e e n e v i l l e D e m o c r a t . 1 8 5 2 - 1 8 6 0 ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . G r e e n e v i l l e S p y . 1 8 5 0 - 1 8 5 9 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . G r e e n e v i l l e S u n . 1 8 2 0 - 1 8 4 5 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . H a r p e r ' s M o n t h l y . 1 8 5 0 - 1 8 8 0 . J o n e s b o r o W h i g , 1 8 4 0 - 1 8 4 9 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . K n o x v i l l e W h i g . 1 8 4 4 - 1 8 5 8 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . M e m p h i s D a i l y E a g l e . 1 8 4 5 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . M e m p h i s E a g l e a n d E n q u i r e r . 1 8 5 2 - 1 8 5 6 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . N a s h v i l l e R e p u b l i c a n B a n n e r . 1 8 4 5 - 1 8 6 0 ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . N a s h v i l l e U n i o n ( i n 1 8 5 2 t h e N a s h v i l l e U n i o n a n d A m e r i c a n ) . 1 8 4 0 - 1 8 6 0 ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . N a s h v i l l e W h i g ( a l s o r e f e r r e d t o a s N a s h v i l l e T r u e W h i g ) . 1 8 4 5 - 1 8 5 7 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , T e n n e s s e e S t a t e L i b r a r y a n d A r c h i v e s ) . New O r l e a n s P i c a y u n e . 1 8 5 7 - 1 8 6 6 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , U . B . C . L i b r a r y ) . New Y o r k H e r a l d . 1 8 5 8 - 1 8 6 5 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , U . B . C . L i b r a r y ) . New Y o r k T i m e s M a g a z i n e . 1 9 6 2 ( C o p y i n a u t h o r ' s p o s s e s s i o n ) . R i c h m o n d D a i l y D i s p a t c h . 1 8 5 8 - 1 8 6 6 . ( M i c r o f i l m c o p y , U . B . C . L i b r a r y ) . S o u t h e r n E d i t o r i a l s o n S e c e s s i o n . E d i t e d b y D w i g h t L . D u m o n d . G l o u c e s t e r : P e t e r S m i t h , 1 9 6 4 . 127 II. SECONDARY WORKS A. General Histories and Reference Works Beard, Charles and Mary, The Rise of American Civilization. 2 vols. New York: MacMillan, 1937. Channing, Edward, History of the United States. New York: MacMillan, 1904. Dictionary of American Biography. Edited by Allen Johnson and Dumas Malone. 11 vols. New York: Charles Scribners, 1964. Garrett, William R., and Goodpasture, A.V., History of Tennessee, Its People  And Its Institutions. Nashville: Brandon County, 1900. Hamer, Phillip, Tennessee, A History 1673-1932. 4 vols. New York: American Historical Society, 1933. McMaster, John B., A History of the People of the United States Since the  Civil War. New York: Appleton, 1927 Morison, Samuel and Commager, Henry S., The Growth of the American Republic. New York: Oxford University, 1930 Morison, SAmuel, Oxford History of the American People. New York: Oxford University, 1927. Moore, John T. and Foster, A.P., Tennessee The Volunteer State 1769-1923. 4 vols. Nashville: S.J. Clarke, 1923. Oberholtzer, E.P., A History of the United States Since the Civil War. 5 vols. New York: MacMillan, 1926. Porter, K.H. , and Johnson, D.B. , (compiled)", National Party Platforms 1840-1964. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1966. Randall, James G., The Civil War and Reconstruction. Boston: D.C. Heath, 1937. Randall, James G., and Donald, David, The Civil War and Reconstruction. 2nd revised ed. Boston: D.C. Heath, 1961. Rhodes, James Ford, History of the United States From the Compromise of 1850. 9 vols. New York: MacMillan, 1900-1928. B. Unpublished Material Hart, Charles D., "Congressmen and the Expansion of Slavery into the Territories: A Study in Attitudes 1846-1861". Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, 1965 (microfilm copy in author's possession). Lacy, Eric L., "Sectionalism in East Tennessee, 1796-1861". Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Georgia, 1963 (microfilm copy in author's possession). 128 Silbey, Joel H., "Congressional Voting Behavior and the Southern-Western Alliance 1841-1852." Unpublished. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Iowa, 1963 (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). Tricamo, John E., "Tennessee Politics 1845-1861." Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Columbia University, 1965 (microfilm copy in author's possession). Wilson, Major C, "An Analysis of the Ideas of Liberty an Union as Used by Members of Congress and the Presidents From 1828 to 1861." Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Kansas, 1964 (microfilm copy, U.B.C. Library). C. Monographs Abernathy, Thomas B., From Frontier to Plantation in Tennessee. A Study in  Frontier Democracy. Chapel H i l l : University of North Carolina, 1932. Alexander, Thomas B., Political Reconstruction in Tennessee. Nashville: Vanderbilt University, 1950. . Thomas A.R. Nelson of East Tennessee. Nashville: Tennessee Historical Commission, 1956. . Sectional Stress and Party Strength, A Study of Roll-Call Voting Patterns in the House of Representatives, 1836-1860. Nashville: Vanderbilt University, 1967. Allen, James S., Reconstruction: The Battle for Democracy. New York: International, 1937. Allport, Gordon W., Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. New York: Henry Holt, 1937 Auer, J.J., Antislavery and Disunion 1858-1861, Studies in the Rhetoric of  Compromise and Conflict. New York: Harper, 1963. Bailey, Thomas A., Presidential Greatness, The Image of the Man From George . Washington to the Present. New York: Appleton, Century, 1966. Beale, Howard K., The Critical Year: A Study of Andrew Johnson and  Reconstruction. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1930 Benson, Lee. The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy: New York As A Test Case. Princeton, Princeton University, 1961. Binkley, Wilfred E., The Man in the White House. New York: Harper, 1964. Bowers, Claude G., The Tragic Era: The Revolution After Lincoln. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1930 Brock, W.R., An American Crisis, Congress and Reconstruction 1865-1867. London: MaeMillan, 1963. Brooks, N.C., A Complete History of the Mexican War. Philadelphia: Grigg, Elliot, 1849. 129 Burgess, John W., Reconstruction and the Constitution 1866-1876. New York: Charles Scribners, 1902 Campbell, Mary E., The Attitude of Tennesseans Toward the Union 1847-1861. New York: Vintage, 1961. Capers, Gerald M., Stephen A. Douglas Defender of the Union. Boston: Little, Brown, 1959. Carmen, H.J., and Luthin, R.H., Lincoln and the Patronage. New York: Columbia University, 1943. Cattell, Raymond B., Personality: A Systematic Theoretical and Factual Study. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950. Chitwood, O.P. John Tyler, Champion of the Old South. New York: Russell, Russell, 1939. Clark, Blanche H., The Tennessee Yeoman 1840-1860. Nashville: Vanderbilt University, 1942. Cole, Arthur C., The Whig Party in the South. Washington: American Historical Association, 1913. . The Irrepresible Conflict 1850-1865. New York: MaeMillan, 1834. Coombs, CH., A Theory of Pyschological Scaling. Indiannapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1952. Coulter, E. Merton, William G. Brownlow, Fighting Parson of the Southern Highlands. Chapel H i l l : University of North Carolina, 1937. . The South During Reconstruction 1865-1877. (Volume VIII of A History of the South, ed., W.H. Stephenson and E. Merton Coulter). Baton Rouge: Lousiana State University, 1947. Cox, John H., and LaWahda, Politics, Principle and Prejudice, 1865-1866. New York: Free Press, 1963. Craven, Avery, The Coming of the Civil War. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1942. Crotty, W.J., Freman, D.M., and Gatlin, D.S., (eds.), Political Parties and  Political Behavior. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1966. Current, Richard N., Old Thad Stevens, A Story of Ambition. Madison: University of Wisconsin, 1942. De Witt, David M.., The Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson. New York: MaeMillan, 1903. Donald, David Lincoln Reconsidered. New York: Vintage, 1956. . Charles Sumner and the Coming of the Civil War. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1960. . The Politics of Reconstruction. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 1965. 1 3 0 D u B o s e , J . W . , T h e L i f e a n d T i m e s o f W i l l i a m L o w n d e s Y a n c e y . B i r m i n g h a m : R o b e r t s , 1 8 9 2 . D u n n i n g , W i l l i a m A . , E s s a y s o n t h e C i v i l W a r a n d R e c o n s t r u c t i o n . New Y o r k : M a c M i l l a n , 1 8 9 7 . . R e c o n s t r u c t i o n , P o l i t i c a l a n d E c o n o m i c 1 8 6 5 - 1 8 7 7 . New Y o r k : H a r p e r , 1 9 0 7 . E a t o n , C l e m e n t , H e n r y C l a y a n d t h e A r t o f A m e r i c a n P o l i t i c s . B o s t o n : L i t t l e , B r o w n , 1 9 5 7 . . T h e F r e e d o m - o f - T h o u g h t S t r u g g l e i n t h e O l d S o u t h . New Y o r k : H a r p e r , 1 9 6 4 . E k r i c h , A r t h u r A . , T h e A m e r i c a n D e m o c r a t i c T r a d i t i o n . New Y o r k : M a c M i l l a n , 1 9 6 3 . F e r t i g , J a m e s W.., T h e S e c e s s i o n a n d R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f T e n n e s s e e . C h i c a g o : U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o , 1 8 9 8 . F i l l e r , L o u i s , T h e C r u s a d e A g a i n s t S l a v e r y 1 8 3 0 - 1 8 6 0 . New Y o r k : H a r p e r , 1 9 6 0 . F l e m i n g , W a l t e r L . , T h e S e q u e l o f A p p o m a t o x . New H a v e n : Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 1 9 . F r a n k l i n , J o h n H . , R e c o n s t r u c t i o n A f t e r t h e C i v i l W a r . B o s t o n : D . C . H e a t h , 1 9 6 1 . F r e u d , S i g m u n d , On C r e a t i v i t y a n d t h e U n c o n s c i o u s , P a p e r s o n t h e P s y c h o l o g y  o f A r t , L i t e r a t u r e , L o v e , R e l i g i o n . New Y o r k : H a r p e r , 1 9 5 8 . F r o m a n , L e w i s A . , C o n g r e s s m e n a n d T h e i r C o n s t i t u e n t s . C h i c a g o : R a n d , M c N a l l y , 1 9 6 3 . G a b r i e l , R a l p h H . , T h e C o u r s e o f A m e r i c a n D e m o c r a t i c T h o u g h t . 2 d e d . New Y o r k : R o n a l d , 1 9 5 6 . G r a e b n e r , N o r m a n A . , E m p i r e o n t h e P a c i f i c . New Y o r k : A l f r e d K n o p f , 1 9 5 5 . G r a n t h a m , D e w e y , J r . , T h e D e m o c r a t i c S o u t h . A t h e n s : U n i v e r s i t y o f G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1 9 6 3 . H a l l , C l i f t o n R . , A n d r e w J o h n s o n , M i l i t a r y G o v e r n o r o f T e n n e s s e e . P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 1 6 . H a m i l t o n , H o l m a n , Z a c h a r y T a y l o r , S o l d i e r i n t h e W h i t e H o u s e . New Y o r k : B o b b s - M e r r i l l , 1 9 5 1 . H a m m o n d , B r a y , B a n k s a n d P o l i t i c s i n A m e r i c a n F r o m t h e R e v o l u t i o n t o t h e C i v i l  W a r . P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 5 7 . H e n r y , R o b e r t S . , T h e S t o r y o f R e c o n s t r u c t i o n . I n d i a n n a p o l i s : B o b b s - M e r r i l l , 1 9 3 8 . H e s s e l t i n e , W i l l i a m B . , L i n c o l n a n d t h e W a r G o v e r n o r s . New Y o r k : A l f r e d K n o p f , 1 9 4 8 . 1 3 1 H i b b a r d , B e n j a m i n , A H i s t o r y o f P u b l i c L a n d P o l i c i e s . New Y o r k : M a c M i l l a n , 1 9 3 9 . H y m a n , H a r o l d M . , ( e d . ) , New F r o n t i e r s o f t h e A m e r i c a n R e c o n s t r u c t i o n . U r b a n a : U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s , 1 9 6 6 . J a m e s , M a r q u i s , T h e R a v e n : A B i o g r a p h y o f Sam H o u s t o n . New Y o r k : G r o s s e t a n d D u n l a p , 1 9 2 9 . J o n e s , J a m e s S . , T h e L i f e o f A n d r e w J o h n s o n . G r e e n e v i l l e : E a s t T e n n e s s e e P u b l i s h i n g C o m p a n y , 1 9 0 1 . K a m a r o v s k y , M i r r a , ( e d . ) , Common F r o n t i e r s o f t h e S o c i a l S c i e n c e s . G l e n c o e : U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s , 1 9 5 7 . K i r w a n , A l b e r t D . , J o h n J . C r i t t e n d e n : T h e S t r u g g l e f o r t h e U n i o n . L e x i n g t o n : U n i v e r s i t y o f K e n t u c k y , 1 9 6 2 . K l e i n , P h i l i p S . , P r e s i d e n t J a m e s B u c h a n a n : A B i o g r a p h y . U n i v e r s i t y P a r k : P e n n s y l v a n i a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 6 2 . K o r n g o l d , R a l p h , T h a d d e u s S t e v e n s . New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t , B r a c e , 1 9 5 5 . L o m a s k , M i l t o n , A n d r e w J o h n s o n : P r e s i d e n t o n T r i a l . New Y o r k : F a r r a r , S t r a u s s , a n d C u d a h y , 1 9 6 0 . L e w i n , K u r t , A D y n a m i c T h e o r y o f P e r s o n a l i t y . T r a n s l a t e d b y D . K . A d a m s a n d K . E . Z e n a r . New Y o r k : M c G r a w - H i l l , 1 9 3 5 . L o u r d e s , S i s t e r Mary d e , P o l i t i c a l N a t i v i s m i n T e n n e s s e e t o 1 8 6 0 . W a s h i n g t o n : C a t h o l i c U n i v e r s i t y o f A m e r i c a , 1 9 3 8 . M c C o r m a c , E u g e n e I . , J a m e s K . P o l k , A P o l i t i c a l B i o g r a p h y . B e r k e l e y : U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , 1 9 2 2 . M c D o u g a l l , W i l l i a m , T h e E n e r g i e s o f M e n : A S t u d y o f t h e F u n d a m e n t a l s o f D y n a m i c  P s y c h o l o g y . New Y o r k : O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 3 8 . M c K i t r i c k , E r i c L . , A n d r e w J o h n s o n a n d R e c o n s t r u c t i o n . C h i c a g o : U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o , 1 9 6 0 . M a c r a e , D u n c a n , J r . , D i m e n s i o n s o f C o n g r e s s i o n a l V o t i n g : A S t a t i s t i c a l S t u d y  o f t h e H o u s e o f R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s i n t h e E i g h t y - F i r s t C o n g r e s s . B e r k e l e y : U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s , 1 9 5 8 . M a y h e w , D a v i d R . , P a r t y L o y a l t y A m o n g C o n g r e s s m e n . C a m b r i d g e : H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y , 1 9 6 6 . M i l l e r , D o u g l a s T . , J a c k s o n i a n A r i s t o c r a c y : C l a s s a n d D e m o c r a c y i n New Y o r k ,  1 8 3 0 - 1 8 6 0 . New Y o r k : O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y , L 9 6 7 . M i l t o n , G e o r g e F o r t , T h e A g e o f H a t e : ' A n d r e w J o h n s o n a n d t h e R a d i c a l s . New Y o r k : A r c h o n , 1 9 6 5 . M o r r i s o n , C . W . , D e m o c r a t i c P o l i t i c s a n d S e c t i o n a l i s m : T h e W i l m o t P r o v i s o C o n t r o v e r s y . C h a p e l H i l l : U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h C a r o l i n a , 1 9 6 7 . 132 Murray, Henry. A., Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University, 1938. Nevins, Allan, Ordeal of the Union. 2 vols. Boston: Charles Scribners, 1947. Overdyke, William D., The Know-Nothing Party in the South. Baton Rouge: Lousiana State University, 1950. Owsley, Frank, Plain Folk of the Old South. New York: Putnams, 1959. Parks, Joseph H., John Bell of Tennessee. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 1950. Patrick, Rembert W., The Reconstruction of the Nation. New York: Oxford University, 1967. Patton, James W., Unionism and Reconstruction in Tennessee 1860-1869. Chapel H i l l : University©f North Carolina, 1934. Peterson, Svend, (ed.), A Statistical History of the American Presidential  Elections. New York: Frederick Unger, 1963. Phillips, Ulrich B. , Life and Labor in the Old South.. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 1929. . American Negro Slavery. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 1966. Remini, Robert V., Martin Van Buren and the Making of the Democratic Party. New York: Columbia University, L959. Rice, Stuart, Quantitative Methods in Politics, New York: Alfred Knopf, 1959. Robbins, Roy M., Our Landed Heritage: The Public Domain, 1776-1936. Princeton: Princeton University, 1943. Rose, Willie Lee, Rehearsal for Reconstruction: The Port Royal Experiment. New York: Vintage, 1967. Roseboom, Eugene H., A History, of Presidential-Elections. New York: MaeMillan 1964. Rossiter, Clinton, The American Presidency. New York: Mentor, 1960 Royall, Margaret S., Andrew Johnson—Presidential Scapegoat: A Biographical  Re-evaluation. New York: Collier, 1956. Savage, John S., The Life and Public Services of Andrew Johnson. New York: Darby and Miller, 1866 Schlesinger, Arthur M., Paths to the Present. New York: MaeMillan, 1948. Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr., The Age of Jackson. Boston: Little, Brown, 1945. Schouler, James, History of the Reconstruction Period 1865-1877. New York: Cooperative Publication Society, 1913. 133 Sharkey, Robert P., Money, Class and Party: An Economic Study in Civil War  and Reconstruction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1959. Silbey, Joel H., The Shrine of Party, Congressional Voting Behavior 1841-1852. Pittsburg: University of Pittsburg, 1967. Sellers, Charles G., Jacksonian Democracy. Washington: American Historical Association, 1958. Sellers, Charles G., Jr., James K. Polk, Jacksonian 1795-1843. Princeton: Princeton University, 1957. . James K. Polk, Continentalist 1843-1846. Princeton: Princeton University, 1966. Stampp, Kenneth, The Peculiar Institution. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1956. . The Era of Reconstruction, 1865-1877. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1965. Stephenson, George, Political History of the Public Lands. Boston: Ginn, 1917. Stouffer, Samuel A., et al., The American Soldier. Cincinnati: Ohio State University, 1949. Stryker, Lloyd P., Andrew Johnson: A Study in Courage. New York: MacMillan, 1929. Sydnor, Charles, The Growth of Southern Sectionalism 1819-1848. (Volume V of A History of the South, eds., W.H. Stephenson and E. Merton Coulter). Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 1949. . American Revolutionaries in the Making: Political Practices in Washing ton's Virginia. New York: Collier, 1962. Tappan, George L., Andrew Johnson—Not Guilty. New York: Comet, 1954. Taylor, George R., The Transportation Revolution. New York: Holt, Rhinehart, Winston, 1951. Thomas, Benjamin P., and Hyman, Harold M., Stanton: The Life and Times of  Lincoln's Secretary of War. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1962. Thompson, William Y., Robert Toombs of Georgia. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University, 1966. Turner, John, Party and Constituency. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1951. Tyler, Alice Felt, Freedom's Ferment. New York: Harper, 1962. Van Dusen, Glyndon G., The Jacksonian Era 1828-1848. New York: Harper, 1959. . William Henry Seward. New York: Oxford University, 1967. Wahlke, John C, and Eulare, H., (eds.) Legislative Behavior: A Reader in  Theory and Research. Glencoe: Free Press, 1959. 134 Weinberg, Albert K., Manifest Destiny. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1951. Williamson, Chilton, American Suffrage From Property to Democracy 1760-1860. Princeton: Princeton University, 1960. Wiltse, Charles M., John C. Calhoun, Sectionalist . New York: Russell and Russell, L951. . The Jeffersonian Tradition i n American Democracy. New York: H i l l and Wang, L960. Winston, Robert, Andrew Johnson, Plebftian. and P a t r i o t . New York: Henry Holt, 1928. Wise, Barton H., The L i f e of Henry A. Wise of V i r g i n i a , 1806-1876. New York: MaeMillan, 1879. C. A r t i c l e s i n Periodicals Alexander, Thomas B., "The Presidential Election of 1840 i n Tennessee," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, I (1942), 21-43. . "Strange Bedfellows: The Interlocking Carerrs of T.A.R. Nelson, Andrew Johnson, and W.G. (Parson) Brownlow," East Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Society Publications, #24 (1952), 69-81 Ames, Herman V., "The Proposed Amendments to the Constitution of the United States During the F i r s t Century of Its History," American H i s t o r i c a l Association Annual Report, 1896, I I . Andrews, R.M., "Johnson's Plan of Restoration i n Relation to That of Lincoln", Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Magazine, Series 2, I I (1931), 165-181 Aydellote, William 0., "Voting Patterns i n the B r i t i s h House of Commons i n the 1840's," Comparative Studies i n Society and History, V (1963), 134-163. . "Quantification i n History," American H i s t o r i c a l Review, LXXI (1966), 803-825. Belknap, George, "A Method for Analyzing L e g i s l a t i v e Behavior," Midwest .'So:: Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, I I (1958), 377-402. Benson, Lee, "Research Problems i n American P o l i t i c a l Historiography," Common  Frontiers of the Social Sciences. Edited by Mirra Kamarovsky. Glencoe: University of I l l i n o i s , ( 1 9 5 7 ) , pp. 113-183. Bergeron, Paul H., "The Election of 1843: A Whig Triumph i n Tennessee," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XXII (1963), 123-136. Berwanger, Eugene W., "Western Prejudice and the Extension of Slavery," C i v i l War History, XI (1966), 197-212. Bestor, Arthur, "State Sovereignity and Slavery: A Reinterpretation of Proslavery Constitutional Doctrine 1846-1860," Journal of I l l i n o i s State  H i s t o r i c a l Society, LIV (1961), 117-180. 135 B i l l i n g t o n , Ray A l l e n , "The Know-Nothing Uproar," American Heritage, X (1959), 58-61 Bullough, Vern L., "The Computers and the Historian—Some Tentative Beginnings," Computers and the Humanities. I (1967), 61-64. Campbell, Mary R., "Tennessee and the Union," East Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Society Publications, #10 (1938), 71-90. . "Tennessee's Congressional Delegation i n the Sectional C r i s i s of 1859-1860," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XIX (1960), 348-371. Carmen,HJ., and Luthin, R.H., "Some Aspects of the Know-Nothing Movement Reconsidered," South A t l a n t i c Quarterly, XXXIX (1940), 213-234. Coben, Stanley, "Northeastern Business and Radical Reconstruction: A Re-examination," M i s s i s s i p p i Valley H i s t o r i c a l Review, XLVI (1959), 67-90. Cox, John H., and LaWanda, "Andrew Johnson and His Ghost Writers: An Analysis of the Freedman's Bureau and C i v i l Rights Veto Messages," M i s s i s s i p p i  Valley H i s t o r i c a l Review, XLVI (1961), 460-471. Curry, Roy W.., Harness A. Seddon, A. Southern Prototype," V i r g i n i a Magazine of  History and Biography, LXIII (1955), 123-150. Dollar, Charles M. , "Innovation i n H i s t o r i c a l Approach: A Computer Approach," Computers and the Humanities. I l l (1969)', 139-152. Donald, David, "Why They Impeached Andrew Johnson," American Heritage, VIII (1956), 98-106. Dunning, William A., "More Light on Andrew Johnson," American H i s t o r i c a l Review, XI (1906), 572-589. Eaton, Clement, "Henry A. Wise and the V i r g i n i a Fireaters of 1856," Mi s s i s s i p p i  Valley H i s t o r i c a l Review, XXI (1935), 495-512. Franklin, John H., "The Southern Expansionists of 1846." Journal of Southern  History, XXV (1959), 323^330. Graebner, Norman A., "James K. Polk: A Study i n Federal Patronage," M i s s i s s i p p i  Valley H i s t o r i c a l Review, XXXVIII (1953), 613-632. Graf, LeRoy P., "Andrew Johnson and the Coming of the War," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l  Quarterly, XIX (1960), 208-221 Grant, C.L., "The Public Career of Cave Johnson," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l  Quarterly, X (1951), 195-223. Hamilton, Holman, "Democratic Senate Leadership and the Compromise of 1850," Mi s s i s s i p p i Valley H i s t o r i c a l Review, XLI (1954), 403-418. . "The 'Cave of Winds' and the Compromise of 1850" Journal of Southern History, XIII (1957), 331-353. 136 Haskins, Ralph W., "Andrew Johnson and the Preservation of the Union," East Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Society Publications, #33 (1961), 43-60. Hays, Samuel P., "History as Human Behavior," Iowa Journal of History and  P o l i t i c s , LVIII (1960), 193-206. . "The Social Analysis of American History, 1880-1920," P o l i t i c a l Science Quarterly, LXXI (1965), 373-392. Hays, Wil l a r d , "Andrew Johnson's Reputation," East Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Society Publications, #31 (1959), 1-31. Henry, J.M., "Summary of Tennessee Representation i n Congress 1845-1861," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, X (1951), 140-148. Hyman, Harold M., "Johnson, Stanton, and Grant: A Reconsideration of the Army's Role i n the Events Leading to the Impeachment," American  H i s t o r i c a l Review, LXVI (1960), 85-101. Kolchin, Peter, "The Business Press and Reconstruction," Journal of Southern  History', XXXII (1967), 195-206. McCormick, Richard P., "Suffrage Classes and Party Alignments: A Study i n Voter Behavior," M i s s i s s i p p i Valley H i s t o r i c a l Review, XLVI (1959), 397-460. . "New Perspectives i n Jacksonian P o l i t i c s , " American H i s t o r i c a l Review, LXV (1959), 288-301. Marcu, Robert D., "Wendell P h i l l i p s and American I n s t i t u t i o n s , " Journal of  Southern History, LVI (1969), 41-58. Meyers, Marvin, "The Jacksonian Persuasion," American Quarterly. V (1953), 3-15. Mooney, Chase C , "Some I n s t i t u t i o n a l Aspects of Slavery In Tennessee," Tennessee  H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, I (1942), 195-228. Moore, Powell, "The Revolt Against Jackson i n Tennessee, 1835-1836," Journal  of Southern History, I I (1936), 335-3591. . "James K. Polk and the 'Immortal Thirteen" 1, East Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Society Publications, #11, (1939), 20-33. Moore, Wilbert E., and Williams, R.M., " S t r a t i f i c a t i o n i n the Ante-bellum South," American Sociological Review, VII (1942), 343-351. Newberry, Farrar, "The Nashville Convention and Southern Sentiment of 1850," South A t l a n t i c Quarterly, XI (1912), 259-273. Owsley, Frank and Harriet, "The Economic Structure of Rural Tennessee, 1850-1860," Journal of Southern History, VIII (1942), 161-182. Parks, Joseph H., "John B e l l and the Compromise of 1850," Journal of Southern  History, IX (1943), 328-356. "The Tennessee Whigs and the Kansas-Nebraska B i l l , " Journal of Southern History, X (1944), 308-330. 137 Perkins, Howard C., "A Neglected Phase of the Movement for Southern Unity, 1847-1852", Journal of Southern History, XII (1946) , 153-203. Persinger, Clark E., "The 'Bargain of 1844' as the Origin of the Wilmot Pro-vis o , " American H i s t o r i c a l Association Annual Report, 1911, I , 187-197. P h i f e r , Greg, "Andrew Johnson Takes A Trip," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XI (1952), 3-23. . "Andrew Johnson Argues A Case," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Qyarterly, XI (1952), 148-171. . . "Andrew Johnson Delivers His Argument," Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XI (1952), 212-234. - "Andrew Johnson Loses His Ba t t l e , " Tennessee H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly, XI (1952), 291-328. Rice, Stuart, "The P o l i t i c a l Vote As A Frequency Distribution of Opinion," Journal of the American S t a t i s t i c a l Association, I I (1964), 70-85. Riker, William, "A Method for Determining the Significance of R o l l - C a l l s i n Voting Bodies," Legi s l a t i v e Behavior: A Reader i n Theory and Research. Edited by John C. Wahlke and H. Eulare. Glencoe: Free Press, 1959, pp. 76-118. Russell, Robert, "The Issues i n the Congressional Struggle Over the Kansas-Nebraska B i l l , 1854," Journal of Southern History, XXIX (1963), 187-210. Schouler, James, "President Johnson's Papers," Massachussetts H i s t o r i c a l Society Proceedings, Series 2, XX (1907,), 425-438. Sefton, James E., "The Impeachment of Andrew Johnson: A Century of Writing," Civil War History. XIV (1968), 120-147. S e l l e r s , Charles G., J r . , "The Equilibrium Cycle i n Two Party P o l i t i c s , " Public Opinion Quarterly. XXIX (1965), 16-38. Sheiler, R.J., "The Development of Unionism i n East Tennessee 1860-1866," Journal of Negro History, XXIX (1944), 166-201. Sioussat, St. George L., "Some Phases of Tennessee P o l i t i c s i n the Jackson Period," American H i s t o r i c a l Review, XIV (1908), 51-69. "Tennessee and National P o l i t i c a l Parties 1850-1860," American H i s t o r i c a l Association Annual Report, 1914, I, 245-260. . "Andrew Johnson and the Early Phases of the Homestead B i l l , " M i s s i s s i p p i Valley H i s t o r i c a l Review, V (1918), 253-287. Unger, Irwin, "Business Men and Specie Resumption," P o l i t i c a l Science Quarterly, LXXIV (1959) , 46-70. Venable, A.L., "William L. Yancey's Transition from Unionism to State Rights," 7 .r.qournal of Southern History, X (1944), 331-342. 138 Wagstaff, Thomas, "The Arm-in-Arm Convention," Civil War History, XIV (1968), 101-119. Washburn, C.B., "Some Aspects of the 1844 Presidential Campaign in Tennessee," Tennessee Historical Quarterly IV (1945), 58-74. Williams, T. Harry, "Andrew Johnson as a Member of the Committee on the Conduct of the War," East Tennessee Historical Society Publications, #12 (1940), 71-83. 139 APPENDIX A R o l l - c a l l voting i s p a r t i c u l a r l y useful, since there, as contrasted to debates, most congressmen irrevocably commit themselves on an issue. However, an analysis of a l i m i t e d number of r o l l - c a l l votes d i s t o r t s our knowledge of Congressional behavior. Selective analysis may determine whether or not Andrew Johnson was for or against slavery on one vote, but doesn't answer how much for and how much against. The maneuvring over a b i l l or issue i s as important as the f i n a l vote. In recent years several methods of analyzing voting responses were developed to reveal people's 1 attitudes towards par t i c u l a r subjects. A Guttman ScaTogram i s one method of determining i n d i v i d u a l or group attitudes toward a particular subject. Central to t h i s concept applied to Congressional voting i s the assumption that the i n d i v i d u a l congressman i s usually quite consistent i n his voting behavior, and that p o l i t i c a l parties do have id e o l o g i c a l differences. When, for example, the slavery issue was presented before Congress, that problem passes through several stages before the f i n a l vote. Solutions are pro-posed, debated, and discussed. Through the successive phases of t h i s process, the i n d i v i d u a l member places himself r e l a t i v e to the other members. In order to determine how much Andrew Johnson was pro-slavery, or anti-bank, a scale of attitudes must be constructed. The Guttman Scalo-gram shows how each Congressman voted compared to Johnson, along a scale of attitudes ranging from most i n favor of, to most against, the issue. The l i m i t s of t h i s type of scale i s obvious: i t i s a mechanical device f o r ordering certain types of material but i t does not answer why a p a r t i c u l a r pattern occured. That question must be answered by the h i s t o r i a n using other s k i l l s . 2 The method of constructing the scalogram can be summarized b r i e f l y . 140 This i s f i r s t done by ascertaining the i n d i v i d u a l Congressman's votes on a l l of the amendments to and versions of the type of l e g i s l a t i o n under con-sideration- -on the.slavery issue,.for example. ' The r e s u l t w i l l be a summary chart of a great deal of crude data--referred to as a "preliminary universe of content." This "universe" i s a continuum ranging from positive to negative, on the set of issues--graphically, from l e f t to r i g h t . The aim of the scaling procedure i s to locate the Congressman along t h i s single 3 dimension or continuum. Thus, the single dimension on the slavery issue would range from extremely pro-slavery to extremely anti-slavery. On the assumption that t h i s continuum e x i s t s , the investigator concludes that every Congressman's response w i l l f a l l within the dimension's l i m i t s . Each r o l l -c a l l recorded must then be c l a s s i f i e d , indicating either a "positive" or "negative" vote. In t h i s context, a "negative" vote could be either a "yea" k or a "nay." The response pattern of each man on a set of items can be ascertained by combining his responses on i n d i v i d u a l items, deriving from t h i s his c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as "positive" or negative" on each item, and then determining his group c l a s s i f i c a t i o n by u t i l i z i n g computer techniques. By continuing t h i s process for a l l Congressmen on a l l votes, i n one "universe," a scale i s determined. The tables used i n t h i s appendix are a compilation of scales used by Silbey. Andrew Johnson's voting response and scale position are given i n a l l important issues during his decade' as Congressman (Figure 2, a l l tables). His voting position can be referred to his standing to the group voting response and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , on any pa r t i c u l a r issue (Figure 1, a l l tables). Also, there i s a description of each i n d i v i d u a l vote comprising an issue, so that Johnson's vote i n a microcosm can be seen (Figure 3, a l l t a b l e s ) . I have checked a number of votes used by Silbey i n determining his 141 scales, and found them to he accurate. This random sample, of course, assumes the accuracy of a l l the scales, but time and resources did not permit a complete v e r i f i c a t i o n . 142 TABLE 1* EXPANSION ISSUE: TWENTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS 1843-1845 Figure 1 Expansion Issue, Party and Sectional Division, House Scale Type Democrats South No. fo No. <$> Pro-Expansion (0-3 ) 93 75-6 51 64.6 Moderate (4-6 ) 20 16.3 « 10 12.6 Anti-Expansion (7-10) 10J 8.1 18 22.8 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 3 12345678910 12345678910 X XXXXXX X X X Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay to.table motion ending debate on Texas. 2 Nay to table motion that Oregon i s ours up to 54 40'. 3 Nay on amendment to Oregon B i l l that we w i l l have due regard for B r i t i s h r i g h t s . 4 Aye to end debate on Oregon t e r r i t o r i a l b i l l . 5 Nay to table motion to end Texas debate. 6 Aye on motion to print 15,000 extra copies of Tyler's Texas message. 7 Aye on re f e r r i n g j o i n t annesation resolution to Committee of the whole. 8 Nay on suspending rules to permit Whig motion that there be no? annexation of Texas. 9 Aye on passage of Oregon t e r r i t o r i a l b i l l . 10 Aye on passage of b i l l admitting F l o r i d a and Iowa as states. * See Footnote 5 143 TABLE 2* EXPANSION ISSUE: TWENTY-NINTH CONGRESS 184.5-1847 Figure 1 Expansion Issue: Party Division, House Scale Type Democrats No. % Pro-Expansion (0-3 ) Moderate ( 4 - 8 ) Anti-Expansion (9-13) 97 77 .6 23 18.4 • 5 4 . 0 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 0 123456789IOIII213 XOXX X XX X X X X I23456789IOIII213 X X Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay on agreeing to peaceful notice to England on Oregon. 2 Nay to table motion to end Oregon notice debate. 3 Nay to recede from m i l i t a n t declaration of Oregon notice. 4 Aye to i n s i s t on same. 5 Aye to pass m i l i t a n t Oregon notice. 6 Aye to pass b i l l to protect U.S. s e t t l e r s i n Oregon. 7 Aye to end Oregon debate. 8 Aye to table Massachusetts memorial against admission of Texas. 9 Aye on Texas admission resolution. 10 Nay to table same. 11 Aye to pass m i l i t a n t Oregon notice again. 12 Aye to engross same. 13 . Aye to pass same i n Committee of the Whole. * See Footnote 6 144 TABLE 3* SLAVERY- ISSUE: TWENTY-NINTH CONGRESS 1845-1847 . Figure 1 Slavery-Extension- Issue—Sectional -Division, House Scale Type 'South No. fo Pro-Slavery (0-2) 86 97-7 Moderate (3-7) - Anti-Slavery (7-8) 2 2.3 Andrew Figure 2 Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score ..Anti-Slavery 1 12345678 xxxxxxx 12345678 X Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. 'Description 1 Nay on passag e of Oregon T e r r i t o r i a l B i l l . 2 Aye to amend Oregon B i l l to say slavery i s excluded there because i t i s north of 36°30'. 3 Aye to table $3 m i l l i o n b i l l containing WiLmot Proviso. 4 Nay on adding Wilmot Proviso to War Appropriation B i l l . 5 Nay. on adding Proviso to $3 m i l l i o n b i l l . 6 Nay on passage of $3 m i l l i o n b i l l . 7 Nay on tab l i n g War b i l l without Proviso. 8 Aye on passage of War b i l l without Proviso. * See Footnote 7 145 TABLE 4* WAR ISSUE: TWMTY-NINTH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION 1845-1846 Figure 1 War Issue: 1st Session, Party Division, House Scale Type Democrats No. % Pro-War (O-l) 61 45.2 Moderate (2-4) 71 52.6 Anti-War (5-6), 3 2.2 Andrew Johnson' Figure 2 s Voting Position on Scale Score .Anti-War 0 123456 xxxxxx 123456 Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description war. 2 Nay on motion to table same h i l l . 3 Aye on engrossing same b i l l . k Aye on passage of supplemental War b i l l to raise more troops, etc. 5 Aye on amendment to F i r s t War b i l l to give President $10 m i l l i o n to prosecute war begun by Mexico. 6 Aye on passage of f i r s t War b i l l . * See Footnote 8 146 TABLE 5* WAR ISSUE: TWENTY-NINTH CONGRESS, 2ND SESSION 1846-1847 Figure 1 War Issue: 2nd Session, Party Division, House Scale Type Democrats No. % Pro-War (0-3 ) 123 87.2 Moderate (4-7 ) 16 11.3 Anti-War (8-11) 2 1.5 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 6 1234567891011 1234567891011 XX XXX XX X XXX Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Aye on amendment to appoint a Lt.-General of the Army. 2 Nay oh motion to terminate war immediately and not carry i t on for conquest. 3 Nay on amendment to Texas post route b i l l that nothing in b i l l accepts boundaries with Mexico. 4 Nay on amendment to limit 10 Regiment b i l l . 5 Nay on receding from General-in-Chief b i l l . 6 Aye on giving the President power to appoint a General-in-Chief. 7 Nay on amendment to army appropriations that money does not sanction a war of conquest. 8 Nay on suspending rules to receive resolution against our acquiring territory as a result of the war. 9 Nay on suspending rules to receive resolution to end war. 10 Aye on passage of 10 Regiment b i l l . 11 Aye on passage of substitute for 10 Regiment b i l l . * See Footnote 9 147 TABLE 6* TARIFF ISSUE: TWENTY-NINTH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION 1845-1846 Figure 1 Tariff Issue, Party Division, House Scale Type Democrats No. % Low Tariff (0-2) 91 : 67.4 Moderate (3-5) 21 15.6 High Tariff (6-7) 23 17.0 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 3 1234567 1234567 xxxx oxx Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay on tabling resolution to end tariff debate. 2 Nay on amendment placing salt on free l i s t . 3 Nay on similar amendment. 4 Nay on similar amendment. 5 Nay on amendment repealing bounties on cod fishing. 6 Nay on tabling tariff b i l l . 7 Nay on tabling tariff b i l l from Senate. * See Footnote 10 148 TABLE 7* TARIFF ISSUE: TWENTY-NINTH CONGRESS 2ND SESSION, HOUSE 1846-1847 Figure 1 T a r i f f Issue: Scale Type Low T a r i f f Moderate High T a r i f f Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 1 1234567 1234567 XX XXX X X Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay on passage of resolution that i t i s inexpedient to lay duties on tea and coffee. 2 Aye on tabling same motion. 3 Nay on receiving resolution inquiring on what a r t i c l e s can duties be raised. 4 Nay on adding 10% War duties on manufactured goods. 5 Nay on tabling resolution to end debate on Treasury Note b i l l . 6 Nay on suspending rules to receive resolution to revive T a r i f f of 1842. 7 Aye on passage of Treasury Loan b i l l . * See Footnote 11 (0-2) (3-5) (6-7) TABLE 8* LAND ISSUE: TWENTY-NINTH CONGRESS 1845-1847 Figure 1 Land Issue: Party D i v i s i o n , House Scale Type Democrats No. % Lib e r a l (0-2) 88 76.5 Moderate (3-5) 3 2.6 Conservative (6-7) 24 20.9 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 0 1234567 1234567 xxxxxx Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Aye on reading Graduation b i l l t h i r d time. Nay on tabling Graduation b i l l . Aye on amendment to graduation b i l l to reduce price of land on market for a long period, and to s e l l i t to actual s e t t l e r s only. Aye on passage of Graduation b i l l . Aye to reconsider vote to reduce price of land and grant pre-emption rights. Aye on passage of reduced price amendment. Aye on passage of more conservative reduced-price amendment. * See Footnote 12 150 TABLE 9* SLAVERY ISSUE: THIRTIETH CONGRESS 1847-1849 Figure 1 Slavery Extension Issue - Sectional D i v i s i o n , Party D i v i s i o n , House Scale Type Democrats South % No. % Pro-Slavery (0--3 ) 63.5 86 100 Moderate (4--8 ) 8.4 -Anti-Slavery (9-,12) 28.1 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 1 123456789101112 123456789101112 xxxxxxxx X X X X Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay on passage of Oregon t e r r i t o r i a l b i l l . 2 Aye to suspend rules to introduce a Fugitive Slave b i l l . 3 Aye to table resolution that anti-slavery provisions be included i n C a l i f o r n i a and New Mexico b i l l s . 4 Aye to table Gott resolution to end slave trade i n Washington. 5 Nay to suspend rules to introduce b i l l repealing a l l acts maintaining slavery i n D i s t r i c t of Columbia. 6 Aye to table Gidding's anti-slavery resolutions. 7 Aye to table Gott resolution. 8 Nay to table Clayton compromise b i l l . 9 Aye to table resolution against slavery i n Mexican Cession. 10 Aye to table b i l l to have referendum i n Washington on ending slave trade. 11 Nay to table motion to consider Gott resolution. 12 Aye to table several resolutions i n regard to slavery. * See Footnote 13 151 TABLE 10* WAR ISSUE: THIRTIETH CONGRESS 1847-1849 Figure 1 War Issue: Party Division, House Scale Type Democrats No. % Pro-War (0-3 ) 91 91.0 Moderate (4-7 ) 6 6.0 Anti-War (8-11) 3 3.0 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 2 1234567891011 1234567891011 XXXXXOX X X XX Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay on resolution asking Polk for information on Santa Anna's return to Mexico. 2 Nay on asking Polk for copy of Mexican peace treaty and his instructions to the peace commissioners. 3 Nay to suspend rules to receive resolution inquiring into Scott's removal. 4 Aye on referring to regiment b i l l to Committee of the Whole. 5 Nay on amendment declaring Polk began War. 6 Nay on tabling motion asserting that our troops should not retreat to a defensive line. 7 Aye on motion to suspend rules and take up 10 regiment b i l l . 8 Aye on motion to end debate on war loan b i l l . 9 Aye on suspending rules to receive a resolution of thanks to various Democratic generals. 10 Nay on resolution to withdraw troops to Rio Grande. 11 Aye on passage of Loan b i l l . * See Footnote 14 152 TABLE 11* IMPROVEMENTS ISSUE: THIRTIETH CONGRESS 1847-1849 Figure 1 Improvement Issue: Party Division, House Scale Type Democrats No. % Pro-Improvement (0-2 ) 27 25 2 Moderate (3-6 ) 13 12 2 Anti-Improvement (7-10) 67 62 6 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 9 12345678910 12345678910 X X XXXXXXX X Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 2 3 4 5 6. 7 8 9 10 Nay to table Missouri railroad grant. Nay on motion to strike $50,000 appropriation for Savannah River from Civil and Diplomatic Appropriations b i l l . Nay on tabling favorable report on Rivers and Harbors improvement from Commerce committee. Aye on resolution from same committee that Congress should use its powers to improve rivers and harbors. Aye on suspending rules to allow rivers and harbors b i l l . to be read a third time. Aye on passage of same b i l l . Aye on printing memorial of Chicago Convention. Nay on tabling resolution that Congress has the right to improve rivers and harbors. Aye on same resolution. Aye on similar resolution. * See Footnote 15 153 TABLE 12* LAND ISSUE: THIRTY-FIRST CONGRESS 1849-1851 Figure 1 Land Issue: Party and Sectional Divisions, House Scale Type Democrats South No. % No. % L i b e r a l (0-1) 41 44.6 15 23 8 Moderate (2-3) 39 42.4 32 50 8 Conservative (4-5) 12 13.0 16 25 .4 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 2 12345 12345 XXX xo Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Aye on motion to close debate on Bounty Land b i l l . 2 Aye on similar motion. 3 Aye on motion to take up.Land b i l l from Senate. 4 Aye to suspend rules to take up Land b i l l . 5 Aye on passage of Bounty Land b i l l . * See Footnote 16 154 TABLE 13* IMPROVEMENT ISSUE: THIRTY-FIRST CONGRESS 1849-1851 Figure 1 Improvement Issue: Party and Sectional Divisions, House Scale Type Democrats No. % South No. % Pro-Imp. (0-2) 47 45.6 34 44.2 Moderate (3-6) 5 4.9 9 1116 Anti-Imp. (7-9) . 51 49.5 34 44.2 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 9 123456789 123456789 X XXXXX XXX Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay to table Missouri r a i l r o a d grant. 2 Nay to send Alabama ra i l r o a d grant to Committee. 3 Nay to table St. Joseph-Hannibal r a i l r o a d grant. 4 Aye to table reconsideration of I l l i n o i s - C e n t r a l r a i l r o a d grant. 5 Nay to table I l l i n o i s - C e n t r a l b i l l . 6 Nay to table Alabama rai l r o a d grant. 7 Aye on passage of I l l i n o i s - C e n t r a l b i l l . 8 Aye on passage of Lighthouse b i l l . 9 Aye to bring the same b i l l from Committee. * See Footnote 17 155 TABLE 14* SECTIONAL ISSUE: THIRTY-FIRST CONGRESS 1849-1851 Figure 1 Sectional Issue: Sectional D i v i s i o n , House Scale Type South No. % Pro-North (0-4 ) , Moderate (5-9) 6 7.5 Pro-South (10-13) 75 92.5 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 12 12345678910111213 12345678910111213 X X XXXXXOXOXX X Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Aye on tabling Fugitive Slave b i l l . 2 Nay on tabling appeal from speaker's r u l i n g i n favor of considering dividing C a l i f o r n i a . 3 Nay on reading Fugitive Slave b i l l t h i r d time. 4 Nay on passage of same. 5 Aye on motion to i n s t r u c t select Committee to prohibit slavery i n Mexican Cession. 6 Nay on reconsidering vote defeating motion to create t e r r i -tories and protecting slavery therein. 7 Nay on creating New Mexico t e r r i t o r y without mentioning slavery. > 8 Nay on amendment to Slave Trade b i l l outlawing slave en-ticement to escape. 9 Aye on passage of b i l l outlawing slave trade i n Washington. 10 Nay on making C a l i f o r n i a boundary 36°30'. 11 Nay on making Constitutional compromises re: slavery a p p l i -cable i n New Mexico. 12 Nay to create t e r r i t o r y of South C a l i f o r n i a . 13 Aye on passage of C a l i f o r n i a b i l l . * See Footnote 18 156 T A B L E . 1 5 * COMPROMISE ISSUE: THIRTY-FIRST CONGRESS 1849-1851 Figure 1 Compromise Issue: Sectional and Party Division, House Scale Type Democrats South No. % No. % Pro-Compromise (0-4 ) 55 55 51 63.0 Moderate (5-7 ) 15 15 7 8.6 Anti-Compromise (8-13) 30 30 23 28.4 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 0 12345678910111213 12345678910111213 xxxxxxxxx X X X X Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Aye on reading the Texas boundary b i l l the third time. 2 Aye on passage of Utah territorial b i l l . 3 Aye on third reading of Texas b i l l with New Mexico and Colorado territories included in i t . 4 Aye on reconsidering vote sending Texas b i l l to committee. 5 Aye on adding Utah and Colorado b i l l s to Texas b i l l . 6 Aye on reading Texas b i l l with amendments third time. 7 Aye to reconsider vote against.reading Texas b i l l a third time. 8 Aye on upholding Speaker's decision to include New Mexico and Colorado in Texas b i l l . 9 Nay on tabling Texas b i l l . 10 Aye on resolving that Howell Cobb is elected Speaker. 11 Aye on tabling appeal against Speaker's ruling to bring up Texas b i l l . 12 Nay on rejecting Texas boundary b i l l . 13 Nay on tabling same b i l l including New Mexico and Colorado territories in i t . * See Footnote 19 15/ TABLE 16* SECTIONAL ISSUE: THIRTY-SECOND CONGRESS 1851-1853 Figure 1 Sectional Issue: Party and Sectional Division, House Scale Type Democrats South No. % N No. % Pro-Agitation (0-1) 35 33.0 16 13.7 Moderate (3-5) 6 5.8 5 6.8 Anti-Agitation (6-7) 65 61.2 58 79.5 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score Sectional Agitation... .Non-Sectional Agitation 7 1234567 1234567 xxxxxxx Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay on motion that a l l people should abide by the Fugitive Slave Law. 2 Nay to put question on motion that there should be adherence to the Compromise measures and no further agitation. 3 Nay to receive motion to recognize the compromises in the Constitution and abide by them. 4 Nay on motion declaring Compromise measures of 1850 a permanent settlement of slavery question. 5 Aye to table motion that there should be no further agitation. 6 Aye on the same motion. 7 Aye that House adjourn (while discussing anti-agitation motion). * See Footnote 20 158 TABLE 17* LAND ISSUE: THIRTY-SECOND CONGRESS 1851-1853 Figure 1 Land Issue: Party and Sectional Divisions, House Scale Type Democrats No. % South No. % Li b e r a l (0-2) 39 36.5 18 25.3 Moderate (3-5) 29 27.0 20 28.2 Conservative (6-7) 39 36.5 33 46.5 Figure 2 Andrew Johnson's Voting Position on Scale Score 0 1234567 1234567 xxxxxxx Figure 3 Key to Scale Issue No. Description 1 Nay to s t r i k e out a l l parts of land warrant b i l l except f i r s t section. 2 Aye to agree to Conference version of same b i l l . 3 Nay to adjourn rather than discuss Homestead b i l l . 4 Aye on restoring homestead clauses to Homestead b i l l . 5 Aye on passage of Homestead b i l l . 6 Aye on restoring most clauses of Homestead b i l l . 7 Nay on tabling Homestead b i l l . * See Footnote 21 159 Notes to Appendix A 1 Samuel A. Stouffer, et a l , The American Soldier (Cincinnati: Ohio State University, 1949), Chapter IV, "Measurement and Prediction"; George Belknap, "A Method for Analyzing L e g i s l a t i v e Behavior," Midwest Journal of  P o l i t i c a l Science, I I (1958) , 377-402; J. Turner, Party and Constituency (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1951)• 2 Duncan Macrae, Dimensions of Congressional Voting, passim. 3 Ibid. , passim. 4 For example: a "positive" position on a slavery scale would be an aggressive anti-slavery position. I f there were a t o t a l of three votes, one could be "yea" for the abo l i t i o n of slavery, "nay" for the prohibition of anti-slavery petitions i n Congress, and "yea" to resolve that Congress has authority to l e g i s l a t e on the matter. 5 Figure 1: Table 4.13, Silbey, Shrine of Party, p. 61; Figure 2: Table 15, Silbey, "Congressional Voting," p. 422; Figure 3: i b i d . , 423. 6 Figure 1: Table 5.5, Silbey, Shrine of Party, p. 74 (cited hereafter as S. P.); Figure 2: Table 21, Silbey, "Congressional Voting," p. 441 (here-after cited as "C.V."; Figure 3: i b i d . , 447. 7 Figure 1: Table 6.9, Silbey,. S .P., p. 90; Figure 2:. Table 34, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 501; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 497. 8 Figure 1: Table .5.11, Silbey, S.P.. , p. 90; Figure 2: Table 25, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 458; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 463. 9 Figure 1: Table 6.1, Silbey, S.P., p. 86; Figure 2: Table 27, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 469; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 471. 10 Figure 1: Table 5.1, Silbey, S.P.., p. 71; Figure 2: Table 17, Silbey, "CV.," p. 428; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 431. 11 Figure 1: Table 5.1, Silbey, S.P., p. 71; Figure 2: Table 33, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 441; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 431. 12 Figure 1: Table 5.2, Silbey, S.P., p. 72; Figure 2: Table 19, "CV. ," p. 434; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 438. 13 Figure 1: Tables 6.11 and 6.17, Silbey, S.P. , pp. 92, 96; Figure 2: Table 36 4 Silbey, "CV. ," p. 506; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 510. 14 Figure 1: Table 6.2,. Silbey, S.P., p. 86; Figure 2: Table 29, Silbey, "CV.," p. 475; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 479. 15 Figure 1: Table 6.8, Silbey, S.P. , p. 88; Figure 2: Table 32, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 417; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 489. 160 16 Figure 1: Tables 8.11 and 8.12, Silbey, S.P. , p. 115; Figure 2: Table 41, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 531; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 533. 17 Figure 1: Tables 8.15, and 8.16, Silbey, S.P. , p. 116; Figure 2: Table 42,. Silbey, "CV. ," p. 538; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 539. 18 Figure 1: Table 8.4, Silbey, S.P. , p. I l l ; Figure 2: Table 38, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 517; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 519. 19 Figure 1: Tables 8.8 and 8.9, Silbey, S.P., p. 113; Figure 2: Table 40, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 522; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 527. 20 Figure 1: Tables 9.1 and 9.2, Silbey, S.P., p. 124; Figure 2: Table 44, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 545; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 546. 21 Figure 1: Table 9.16, Silbey, S.P. , p. 132; Figure 2: Table 52, Silbey, "C.V.," p. 573; Figure 3: i b i d . , p. 577. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0104393/manifest

Comment

Related Items