Transcripts For CSPAN3 Lectures In History Abraham Lincoln Andrew Johnson And The Constitution 20240714

Reconstruction to understand. That is the United States institution. Whether things historians have been asking for generations about the constitution and the civil war era, basic questions as to what degree did the constitution shape the civil war era . To what degree did make political actors do certain things . Constrained them or guide their actions . To what degree did the civil war shape the constitution . Some of this is very clear in the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments which directly changed the constitution but also different views of it. One of the things people have looked at, looking back at the u. S. Constitution during the civil war era is how different people have interacted with it. Had they followed it, tried to defend it, did the a bridge did they abridge it . It shapes how people think of president s during civil war era. It will we are looking up to the people we will look at today are Andrew Johnson and Abraham Lincoln and how they interacted with the constitution or how it shaped their thinking and how they affected the constitution in turn. Days, you can research them. What is the first thing we do . What . If you are going to do research these days, what do you do first . Go on the internet . Prof. Slap go to google. So preparing for this, the first thing i did was google Abraham Lincoln, constitution. This was the first result i got. U. S. News story revoking Civil Liberties, lincolns constitutional limits. This is often how people think about Abraham Lincoln and the constitution during the civil war. Suspended habeas corpus, infringements on Civil Liberties , playing fast and loose with the constitution. And it is not just if you google it. If you go through books about Abraham Lincoln and the constitution, many of them focus on those aspects. It is harder, there is not as many internet searches for Andrew Johnson as there are for Abraham Lincoln, amazingly enough. Rather than google it, i decided to get an idea of the representation of Andrew Johnson and the constitution. Lets go to the National Park service. Website ofm the Andrew Johnsons Historic Site in greenville, tennessee. Just a little ways from where we sit now. And they have decided the interpretation of Andrew Johnson is the constitution president. It sounds good, right . They even go on not just on the main site, but in some of their materials. Saved andon shall be the union preserved. Different than lincoln and his constitutional lemma, right . Dilemma, right . This is a closeup of the pamphlet. Johnson had a strict interpretation of the constitution, i believe in states rights. A belief in states rights. What awant to explain strict prostitution is is . Constitutionist is . No government, very lax on personal liberty but also very interferingrty, not with property, slavery or isf. Slap not interfering early on in the antebellum timeframe. Even more generally you talk about strict constitutions, does the constitution say you can do this . If it doesnt, you cant. The broad would be, will it stop me from doing it . Ok, i can do it. Here is the strict construction of the constitution going whether the law is what they are saying, how can johnson interpret it . Lincoln play fast and loose with the constitution ,ervades even until this day like historical interpretation. I propose we take a look not at one or two incidents but travel from the antebellum all the way through reconstruction, looking at Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson, what they said with the constitution, what they did with it. Knownk we will find i because i put this together, is at the end, Abraham Lincoln in many ways have a stricter construction of the constitution, has more reverence for the constitution and wants to preserve its original form in many ways more than Andrew Johnson. Johnson, hisew actions during reconstruction are often explained partly by the constitution, and trying to adhere to it but also for other reasons. Maybe not quite as noble as trying to save for preserve the constitution. Lets start with Abraham Lincoln. We are starting with Abraham Lincoln, i should also say lets start with understanding that i, like many historians, like Abraham Lincoln and think he is one of the greatest president s of the United States. I also dont like Andrew Johnson. He is one of the worst residence of the United States. President s of the United States. We should speak biases up front. For the next hour you will see why many revere lincoln and dont take kindly to Andrew Johnson. Understand lincoln and his background with the constitution, there is a couple things that informed his understanding of it. One was nationalism. Lincoln, from his earliest days, was a nationalist. Himont have writings from when he was six or seven years old, talking about nationalism. We can get some sense of this of how important nationalism was from a speech he gave. After being elected president on his trip washington, dc to be inaugurated. He told the crowd, may i be pardoned if i mention way back in my childhood, the earliest days of my being able to read i got hold of a small book, such a one as a few of the younger members have ever seen, weems life of washington. I remember all of the accounts given a battlefield and struggles for the liberties of the country. You have all been boys, you know how long these impressions last. This biography of washington, one of his earliest memories, and it sticks with him. It helps inform that sense of nationalism. Earlier, we talk about nationalism and the 1820s,um period in the 1830s and 1840s, one of the strongest symbols of nationalism at this time is something we have talked about before. The american system, it comes about after the war of 1812. Henry clay is one of the greatest proponents. It is the idea of using the federal government to help held infrastructure. Infrastructures. Rhodes, towns, ports, to help the economy throughout the country thrive and promote and commerce. It was the idea of protective tariffs to help industry grow in creating another National Bank to help finance the economy. Idea of anoned active federal government, but to promote wellbeing of everyone. Of course if you are going to talk about the federal government helping to build broad, you have to have a construction of the constitution are you know where does it say that restitution. Nowhere does it say the constitution the government can build these or have a federal bank. This was part of the debates between the whigs and democrats like Andrew Johnson and andrew jackson. Lincoln thought the constitution allowed this, the federal government, to do this. Because of this he was protective of the constitution. He did not think it needed to be changed to allow him internal improvements on the system. Theepeatedly throughout 1840s and 1850s talked about the perfection of the constitution and how much he revered it. Out to a speech representatives in 1848. He said i have already said no one who is satisfied with the expediency of making improvements needs to be much constitutionality. Making improvements, that is where he is talking about the american system. A fewh now to submit remarks on the general proposition of amending. As a general rule, we would much better let it alone. Shouldht of occasion tempt us. Better not to take the first step which could alter it. Better rather to have between ourselves to thinking of it as not alterable. It can scarcely be made better than it did, new provisions would make new difficulties, create increased appetite for further change. No sir, let it stand as it is. Hand but have never touched it, the men who made it have done their work and passed away. Who shall improve on what they did . Cannot be much clearer than that, can you . One thing we will come back to i am sureagain is, most of us, most people, sometimes Say Something and then change our minds or Say Something contradictory later. Somebody says something just once, maybe it does not mean what we think. If it is more so the case for politicians often, lets try to find a couple of examples of this. Later, lincoln, saying therowd, constitution must be maintained because it is the only space of liberty. Not to democrats alone do i make this appeal but to all who love these great and true principles. A decade later, different circumstances, he is once again saying dont touch the constitution. One of the questions about this bill, of course lincoln and republicans started in the 1850s, wanted to eventually end slavery. They were antislavery, wanting to it restricted with the goal of root eliminating. The question is, how could they argue as he is here saying it is democrats attacking the as we haven when talked about before, lincoln and republicans accept the constitution protect slavery . This,s where we come to one of the top historians of his generation. He said his history is what the present chooses to remember about the past. Lincoln and many republicans at the time selectively read history, to see the constitution as antislavery. This was not just lincoln. This was widespread throughout the north. But lincoln in particular focused on this with his reference of the constitution that in a particular interpretation of that constitution. To two of his heroes, henry clay, senator from kentucky, and thomas jefferson, from virginia, and looked at what they said about slavery. Both of them repeatedly wrote about the evils of slavery and the ways to eliminate slavery. Muchd not concentrate as that both of them were major slaveowners. Jefferson warning over 100 slaves, clay with over 50 during their lifetimes. They talked about it, they didnt push legislation through that would have limited or ended slavery. Taking what was useful from henry clay and jefferson, they are able to start looking at the United States and the constitution itself as guiding the nation towards ending slavery. Lincoln, in a speech in 1854, the theory of our government is everyone is created free and equal, said this declaration of independence are going back to jefferson. All men are free and equal. That is antislavery. The word slavery is not found in the constitution. The constitution did not affirm slavery, look to its ultimate extinction. They start with saying everyone is equal, everyone should be free. The constitution doesnt mention slavery. The founders were on a path to try to end it. From this interpretation, he takes as his understanding the constitution supports the american system, the individual end of slavery, that is the constitution that we can wants to protect. It as he is the conservative, he is the one preserving the constitution. This is before he becomes president. , what ision address the frame of government under which we live . The answer must be the constitution of the United States. And then he tells the crowd, also talking about democrats, he said but you say you are conservative. Eminently conservative and we are revolutionary or destructive or something. What is conservatism . Is it not adherence to the old and tried . We stick to identical policy on controversy which was adopted by our fathers who framed the government under which we live. He said while you with one thatd reject and spit on policy and insist on substituting something new. Drew. E laughing, what about . It to him. D of stuck kind of turned it back on them, saying they are the ones like spit on the old policy. I dont know, just very blunt, i guess. He is a good politician. Prof. Slap going back, saying look at the declaration of independence, look at the old northwest which becomes the midwest today, which was written by thomas jefferson. You can find abolitionist origins or antislavery principles among the founding fathers. You can find proslavery elements, but lincoln is focusing on selectively reading the antislavery abolitionist sentiments and amplifying those in his understanding of the institution. He says that is what the constitution is protecting. From 1860. Artoon just before the president ial election. You can see Abraham Lincoln walking a tightrope with an africanamerican on his pull s and bouncing a the bouncing pole is the constitution. This was a tightrope he was walking, of how to be antislavery and want the eventual demise of slavery. While at the same time recognizing that to a large degree, the constitution protected the rights of states to have slaves, even if eventually he thought the constitution intended for the end of slavery. Here you can see the balance in lincolns approach to both slavery and the constitution. He was firmly antislavery, becoming more and more abolitionist, but early in the war, he faced a crisis. He faced many crises in the beginning of the war. One of these though was made by the union itself, one of his generals and political rival, john c fremont. Been a first nominee for the president s, for the republicans in 1856. No one expected him to win. He was just famous like campaigning. Fremont is the first republican nominee, then when the republicans take power, very will politically connected and he is appointed to command a military district in the west. Out there he decides to issue a proclamation on his own without consulting lincoln, freeing slaves of confederates. Keep in mind the timing of this. In 1861. Lincoln has worried about the border states, kentucky and missouri, that have slaves but have not left the union but keeping them in the union. He does not want to move too fast on slavery. This point it is not even it is not even in the wording. It is not part of the war yet officially. Lincoln asks him to rescind his proclamation. No. Ont says lincoln asks him again. Fremont says no. Finally lincoln removes fremont from command and revokes the proclamation. We talked about that balancing act with the constitution and slavery. There is also a political balancing act he has. On one hand he is trying to keep the border states in the union. He is trying to pacify and keep happy democrats and moderate, conservative republicans, but radical republicans, abolitionist are aghast at what he does undoing that proclamation. One of them is an old friend in , oh browning who wrote to lincoln complaining about what he had done regarding fremont. Back a lengthy letter explaining why he did it. At a fewake a look different sections of this letter because they are interesting for both understanding lincoln and the constitution, how he views his role as president and it puts later actions in interesting light. Midway through he says the same is true of slaves. If the general needs them, he can use them but when the need is not for him to fix their permanent future conditions, that must be settled according to the laws made by lawmakers and not military proclamations. The proclamation, the point in question is simply dictatorship. It assumes the general may do everything he pleases to compass the lands and free the slaves of loyal people as well as disloyal. Going the whole figure i doubt it will be more popular than that which has been done. The general issuing a command, proclamations freeing the slaves, taking over what should be civilian government, what lawmakers should do. Slaves you needed the for military purposes, ok, but you should not be making legislation. Set i cannot assume this reckless position nor allow take myo responsibility. You say it is the only means of saving the government. On the contrary it is in itself a surrender of the government. Can it he pretended it is any longer the government of the u. S. Or the constitution and laws when a general or president may make for permanent rule a property proclamation . If you are freeing slaves, slaves are property. By proclamation, you are taking away somebodys property. He goes on to say i dont say Congress Might not with impropriety pass a law on the point such as the general proclaimed. I might not say i am a as a member of Congress Vote for it. What i object to is i as President Shall expressly sees and exercise the permanent legislative functions of the government. Saying morally, he agrees with fremont. That is what he would like. If you was in congress, he might and probably would vote for such a measure. But that is not his position. That as friedman under commanderinchief, he cant do that because he is stepping in and taking over powers that belong to congress. Course a couple ways to look at this letter. One, we talked about how a big question originally what degree does the war years shape the constitution or the constitution shape the civil war . Lincoln was specifically stating that the constitution, at least his understanding of it, is shaping his actions. It limits what he can do. Also, no matter what he does later in the war i was reading all of this, what were you thinking about . Emancipation proclamation. I anticipated what you were going to say. It is about a year later lincoln the emancipation proclamation. In some ways doing exactly what. E said he should not do what fremont should not do. These are argued claimed by the pressure of the war. He had to. [indiscernible] was lap the question you are asking whether he thought it was the time to do it not time to do it with fremont . Yeah, because of the politics, there wouldtates, be even more repercussions then when he did it later in 1862. The nature of the war started changing by that point. Some of it you can say is expediency that politically, strategically, it was not the right thing to do in 1861, and by the end of 1862, suddenly that makes more sense to the war effort. And the political politics had changed. But in some aspect of it. Fremont esting to as soon as he issues the emancipation operation, lincoln starts pushing for the 13th amendment. Betweenthe difference the emancipation proclamation and the 13th amendment . The emancipation proclamation is a war effort and the other validates the constitution. Prof. Slap the 13th amendment is law. The lawmakers creating law. Part of the reason he goes rebelliontes were in but the 13th amendment was all states were prof. Slap but the 13th amendment freed slaves in places where there was rebellion. The institution of slavery and there are slaves and parts that had been conquered by the union. While it ends the institution of slavery. That is one big distinction. ,nother big distinction important for what we are talking about today, getting at the mind of lincoln is he is worried his emancipation proclamation is not constitutional. Could this be reversed . Trying to cement that in to place with legislation by congress, by the lawmakers, not by a general or a president acting as commander in chief. And thetions on lincoln constitution . Ok. Of passing the 13th amendment through congress, Abraham Lincoln is assassinated. He is replaced by Andrew Johnson. His Vice President. Before i talk about johnson, you are lucky because we have someone who works at the Andrew Johnson Historic Site. Would you like to give us a brief synopsis of johnsons background . Johnson was originally born in raleigh, North Carolina in the early 1820s, had actually grew up in North Carolina but his father died when he was very young. His mother raised him. During this time, she helped him with a apprenticeship tailor. With this he moved all around the state. He moved through South Carolina if you times, alabama, got exposed to the deep south in general. Came back and got another apprenticeship at another taylor. With the apprenticeship, another form of basically slavery by another means, they were entitled to every wish of that master until they were 18. Johnson decided to end up leaving raleigh with his mother and stepfather and found his way into greenville. Whenever that happened, he ended up buying his own tailor shop and ended up buying a house in rainville where he stayed at until 1857, then he bought a new house which is his actual homestead. One thing about johnson is he is a great political leader in east tennessee. Ast tennessee was really heavily politically active state. East tennessee was not a democratic stronghold but he turned it into a democratic stronghold because he was the epitome of a democrat. Andrew johnson, his hero was injured jackson. His other hero was thomas jefferson. So states rights, protection of slavery, another thing he is also known for and he is also a slave owner himself. Nine slaves . Prof. Slap 10 to 12. Johnson played up the apprenticeship, that he was treated as a slave. There was a difference in actuality. In his mind he conflated the two. That is one of the reasons why he taxed planters, the wealthy slaveowners who he sees looking down on the poor whites like him even when he becomes wealthy. He still identifies and sees himself as a poor white. That guides a lot of his philosophy. A lot of what he does in his life is that selfimage of being the poor hardscrabble white person pulling himself up. I talked about how he did not like planters. He viewed himself even before the war and certainly when secession started ripping the country apart, he was with the honest yeomen fighting the waseocracy, the words he using, the pampered, bloated, corrupted aristocracy. These are people with huge plantations from nashville, going to memphis and down the mississippi river. People who really did control much of the southern economy and politics, even though johnson was a United States senator, he still thought he was being looked down upon by these people. They were controlling the economy and everything in Southern Society for their benefit and hurting more whites poor whites like he had been and who he thought he was representing. And he does rather well for himself. Makes a lot of his money in property investment. Throughout the area, buying and selling different properties, owning 10, 11e slaves. Historians cant figure out how many he did own during his lifetime. It is a debated point. Lincoln whoam talked about his preference for leaving the constitution alone in the 1840s and 1850s, johnson, who is going to save the constitution and is the destitution president , repeatedly throughout life wanted to change the constitution, to amend it. And 1868 and multiple times did multiple proposals to amend the constitution. Right here is the difference between lincoln and johnson. Sees also interesting to what he is trying to change about it. He wants a direct lection of u. S. Senators, 12 year term on federal judges, eliminating electoral college. Very popular. Prof. Slap in many ways a populist at least in some ways. But in all of these things he is ,rying to say lets give power more political power to average americans. This, is also in doing one, these are major changes. Eliminating electoral college. Also doing direct election of u. S. Senators, what does that in effect mean . He wants the federal government to tell states how they should select their senators. Does that sound like states rights . College, people are discussing even it even to this day, based on the idea of the state coming together. If you get rid of the electoral college, just have a Popular National election, it is a limiting the influence of states. In many ways throughout his life, johnson at some times is a strict constructionist and wants to save the constitution and wants states rights. At other times though, he is like, lets rip up the institution and change them. Lets take away power at least in some ways from the states or tell states what to do. Course, johnson had been named Abraham Lincolns Vice President nominee in 1864 because he was a democrat so lincoln could run on a union party ticket. He could be a republican, johnson a democrat to try to attract broader political support. During the middle of the war. So the democrats could vote for Abraham Lincoln and say we are voting not for a republican but we are voting for a republican and a democrat who are going to prosecute this war fully. This would have dire repercussions when lincoln is assassinated. They are not from the same party, dont have the same philosophy. And this is seen within just several months of johnson taking power to becoming president. Many radical republicans initially thought johnson would work better with them than lincoln had. Lincoln pocket vetoed. Reconstruction, but he was turning to negotiate with them to try to figure out how to go forward. Johnson had been severe throughout the war against southern planters and the southern aristocracy and pushed to fight a hard war. At heart, this quote of his negroes, i amthe fighting their aristocratic masters. He was fighting to preserve the punish theossibly people he thought were responsible for the war. Out, carry onrry in reconstruction. So he was saying like slaveowners was the reason for the war, and prof. Slap not just slaveowners. From johnsons perspective, the people most responsible for the war were the wealthy planters, people with 20, 30, 40, 100 slaves, outside influence. Did you have a question . Struggle that we talked about earlier with fremonts proposal of who is going, what is the role of the president , what is the role of congress . Lincoln had taken a great deal of power as president during the war. Congress and lincoln had fought over that periodically. In the fremont case he is saying, i dont have the power constitutionally to do the things i want to do. Congress needs to do it. That is why when he takes a step in the emancipation proclamation he is still pushing the 13th amendment to have congress, the lawmakers decide. Deathss after lincolns decides to try to dictate reconstruction policy. They think it is their role. Decide how the nation is supposed to be reconstructed. They start passing various pieces of legislation. One of the first ones is the Freedmens Bureau bill. An extension of the Freedmens Bureau. The idea was to create an agency that was going to help africanamericans adjust to freedom. Provide money for schools, provide people who can negotiate between her slaves and slaveowners, for them to work together. Helpobs, to be able to resettle them on millions of acres of land. Johnson vetoes it. This came as a shock to many of the republicans. The author of the Freedmens Bureau bill was a moderate. The definition of a moderate republican. He specifically has written the bill try to keep it as conservative as possible to bring on more conservative republicans to support it and so johnson would sign it. Got,s surprised that it that it was vetoed along with many other republicans. Republicans had to go back to rewrite the bill, make it even more conservative so we could get enough votes to override johnsons veto. It into limiting the effectiveness of the Freedmens Bureau. This set a pattern going on into the 1866. One of those patterns is johnsons interaction with congress and vetoes. Some of you may notice formatting, this comes from the old faithful wikipedia. I dont suggest you always trust them. Good sources of information. They are useful for getting charts and graphs. Vetoes frommmary of George Washington through Andrew Johnson. Here is the number of vetoes, the total number of all vetoes and the number of vetoes overridden. What do you notice . Johnson is double the next man. 29. Prof. Slap johnson is equal of even the next two. He is more than the next two. Most of them are overridden. Prof. Slap most of johnsons get overwritten. It is constitutional for the president to veto congressional legislation. But johnson is acting in a way no previous president had done in thegard to that power constitution. He is acting in a rather radical, revolutionary way compared to all previous president s. What he does is consistently vetoing congressional attempts at reconstruction. First the Freedmens Bureau bill, civil rights bill, trying to guarantee civil rights for African Americans and other , ande in the United States eventually congress decides it needs to be more aggressive in reconstruction. Article 4,urn to is section 4 of the institution. United states shall guarantee a republican form of government. Reverend this. We will be coming back to this language. Lots of different people use it for different purposes during the civil war. It means the federal government, is the federal governments responsibility to make sure every state, tennessee, massachusetts or california, has a republican form of government, not oligarchy, not despotism, but republican form of government. Charles sumner, senator from massachusetts, said that clause in section of the constitution was a sleeping giant. Never until this recent war awakened but now comes forward with a giants power. There is no cause like it. There is no other clause which gives congress the supreme power over the states. He thinks it is something Andrew Johnson would hate, talking about using this clause of the constitution to give power to the federal government over the states. The way congress decides to use it. Congress uses that clause to pass an 1867 military reconstruction act, divide the former confederacy into five Different Military districts, put generals in charge and said the government, civilian government put in place under Andrew Johnson was not republican. The way they were treating unionists,ricans and it meant to be states were not republican and there needed to be federal control until they could establish those republican arms of government. Surprisinglyd, not , the military reconstruction bill. This isfelt according to the Andrew Johnson site, felt this was an unconstitutional extension of federal power into areas of state jurisdiction that would lead to despotism. Congress issage to i submit to congress whether this measure is not in its holy character, character scope and object without president s. Ence and without authority to the constitution. Domestic violence was envisioned when the government was framed. The means were provided for in the constitution. Finally the constitution also permits the rest of the citizen without judicial warrant, founded on probable cause. This bill authorizes an arrest without warrant a military commander. His complaint here is he is vetoing and some of his reasons why, there is no precedent for this. There is no precedent for this military and federal occupation and civilian governments. Authorizes arrest without warrant at the pleasure of a military commander. He says this is why hes doing it. This is the problem when you have a long paper record. As a politician. Ife a look at what he said you years earlier in 1862 in nashville. He said such a lamentable crisis am of the government of the United States could not be unmindful to its constitutional opposition to guarantee every state a republican form of government. Congress is of what facing basing their actions on, and he is arguing against, he is using the same justification as congress, republican form of government clause. Obligation which every state has a direct and immediate interest in, having observed towards every other state and for which i know action can anyone be insult absolved. This is one of the fundamental constitutions every part of the country is bound from which it no park and escape. Heres where irony comes in. The obligation is to discharge. I have been appointed by the state authorities as military governor the time being. The person think there is no precedence for creating military districts was five years earlier military governor of tennessee. Emergency, was an during wartime. Of course he is going to restore civilian government as quickly as possible. How long do you think it took Andrew Johnson for there to be civilian government . To replace military governor in the state of tennessee . Six months. 12 months . He was actually about 2. 5 years. Even as he was running for Vice President , he was still military governor of tennessee. Precedence. Was some , i willd, if he didnt say he did not like the rest. , check for a few different times. Maybe just said this once . Union mend it in 1863 of both sections of the country, whose next ask you to carry out the institution. I dont demand it for them as a privilege but as of right, that the traders shall be put down. The United States shall, not may, guarantee the states, guarantee to every state republican arm of government. He is coming back to the same constitutional Laws Congress was using to justify the construction act. Call on the supervisors here, demand in the name of the constitution as it is, protection and support of a guaranteed form of government for the men of the south. This is a position he is stating publicly. He also says mr. Lincoln came into power like an honest man and loving my country. I determined to sustain them. If he called for he has been announced as you super and desperate. If he had not called on you when your country was in peril, the same armies raised and the revolution gone on, what government would you have today . Would it not have been despotism . You have complain of the wrong he has done, arrests, habeas corpus, military commanders arresting civilians. He said if i have any complaint to make it is that president lincoln did not do more to crush the rebellion. He says it is not that Abraham Lincoln was using the military to make arrest or suspending habeas corpus but not making more arrests. Was not suspending habeas corpus more. And here is the person who is the defender of the constitution. Which gets even a little harder in 1866, zach is laughing because this is the Andrew Johnson Historic Site. This is one of their major images especially for the movie. You have seen this again later today. A speech in washington, Andrew Johnson said i know it was said by some during the rebellion a constitution had been rolled up as a piece of parchment and laid away at a time of war, edition. From a greatimes necessity of the case, or great emergency, we must do unconstitutional things to preserve the constitution itself. Do they have that quote at the national Historic Site . This starts getting up the question of johnson, if he is resisting reconstruction, the efforts of congress, but there is times he is going to say we need to have rest, to guarantee republican form of government in every state. What is driving him . Constitutional principles or Something Else . Keep in mind also we talk about why president s precedent he said he rejected it earlier and that he is recognizing once again the North Carolina here has a right to have a republican form of government and it is the power of the United States to maintain that. . Mentioned what is guiding him he seems to be bouncing around constitutionally. There are times he wants to preserve, other times he doesnt care as much. There is times he wants arrest and other times he says it is horrible. Times were he says there is no precedent for having military governors when he was a military governor himself five years earlier. I would suggest one of the things that drives him and drives his views on the constitution or how he interprets the student at heious points is how interprets the cut to tuition at various constitution at various points is for the White Supremacy. Dont know how more explicit you can get. Prof. Slap we will say because he is pretty explicit on this. In 1860 61 of the biggest debates is africanamerican suffrage nationally but also specifically in washington, dc because that was a place the federal government controlled. Congress wanted and the republicans wanted to give them the right to vote. They could not do it without passing a constitutional amendment, but they could do it in washington, dc. A group of abolitionists led by Frederick Douglass met with Andrew Johnson, trying to talk about getting suffrage broadly throughout the nations has also in washington, dc. Frederick douglas thought the meeting had gone fairly well. The delegation left and afterward, just after they left, johnson was reported by a couple of the people at the meeting to have said this about Frederick Douglass. Blank thoughtns a they had me in a trap. I know that blank douglas. He is like any other blank and would sooner cut a white mans throat then not. Explicit, right . Maybe it is a one off . Back Congress Voted to get the americans the right to vote in to give africanamericans the right to vote in 1866. Johnson vetoes it. He explains his words, he said entirely disregarding the wishes of the people of the district of columbia, congress deemed it expedient to pass the measure. It becomes the duty of the executive standing between legislation of the one and the will of the other to determine whether he should approve a bill and eight complacence on the folks of the nation a law against which the people for whom it is to apply solemnly and with unanimity protested. Or whether he should return it with his objections and hope on reconsideration congress, acting as representative of the seat of government, would regulate the willful question. They seem best interested in their conditions. Say local white people in washington, dc dont want African Americans voting. Congress should be responsive to them. It is his job to step in because congress is not listening to local concerns. This sounds fairly reasonable, right . Rembert johnson himself says, national Historic Site says he believes in strict constitution. Article one, section eight,egislative hours of congress among them, to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such district, meaning what becomes the district of columbia. If you are a strict constructionist, who has the power to legislate for washington, dc . Congress. Doesnt say they are representing people there. It is nothing the president should be involved in this process. It is saying congress have that power it is explicit. Rule does nothat english our policies as a nation, but there is a limit which requires of some classes it unsuitable for probation and preparation. To give it indiscriminately to a forclass, wholly unprepared previous habits and opportunities to perform the trust which it demands, is to degraded, and destroyed its power. For it may be safely assumed that no political truth is that popularished suffrage must end in its structure destruction. What is he saying here . Saying that if you allow everybody to vote and you give them this privilege indiscriminately, that you are going to destroy the republic. Here, you are giving this new ands not prepared to vote will destroy things and the government. Of course, who is he referring to in that class . He is referring to africanamericans. Course ishere, of that who is his hero . Right. And andrew jackson, what is he best known for . , but alsoemacy universal white male suffrage. In the space of just a few startedany states opening up the ability to vote to all wightman. Philosophy, he believes all white mentioned about him and they made that change rather suddenly. Africanamerican men, they are not prepared for it. And you can see here more clearly his explanation, that it is White Supremacy guiding his interpretation. 1865, he tells senators that ,hite men must manage the south the same year he told the governor and that this was a country by wightman, and by god, so long as i am president , it will be a government for wightman. White men. Words, and wesh really should not say those things, i said he said those. Hings about himself that he wrote to congress this subjugation of new go down as a be worse than military despotism. He said it would be worse to give africanamericans the right to vote. That is worse than what he considers military despotism. Hans has written the best biography to date, hes of the opposition was not purely based on constitutional scruples, it also reflected his deeply felt racial prejudices. And throughout the first couple years of his presidency, johnson vetoed over two dozen pieces of legislation. He took many steps to try and obstruct laws passed by congress and tried to regularly interfere with the military, congress, and civilian agencies trying to implement reconstruction. The present was consciously trying to nullify congressional legislation through the power of executive implementation. So where lincoln is very conscious of cautious and tried to step into the balance of what should be congresss role, regulates from not through veto, but appointments and other means, try to subvert what congress is doing. The congressman said that if the house and Senate Passed a bill over the visa of, it becomes a law until repealed by the same authority. The president of United States has but one duty, to obey, and no consideration will defend protected in any degree you the is johnson was not implementing some of these Laws Congress passed because he thought they were unconstitutional. But where in the constitution does it say that is his role to determine the constitutionality of law . Head. E just shaking your right. Three, the, section President Shall take care of the law be executed take care the law be executed. And he was not doing that. That is why congress eventually impeaches Andrew Johnson. It is only through a back channel negotiations that johnson agrees he will stop interfering with congresss efforts to pass legislation and make sure it is actually enforced that he is not removed from office. Because fars is from defending the constitution were being the president he was a president who ran the most afoul of it. Of not see himself as an executive, the constitution says , and trying to dictate the laws and the course of the government , rather than allowing congress to do its job. Now, we saw this earlier when we talked about republicans, selectively reading and interpreting the constitution. Well, the same thing happens. Ontinually even today, we are deciding how will remember the past and what ways does it serve us. We have seen this before, defender of the constitution is a sign of his right away a sign we recognize right away. 1860s. From the , he has theon here u. S. Constitution in his hand, seems to be a good image, right . He is putting it back, not following it. We will see. It is how we choose to remember things and why you should always study on your own and do more research. Surprised when i was looking for images and saw this contemporary cartoon but realized that this had been cropped. This is the one that actually ran in the 1860s. A little boy with persistent handling above his capacity, and this was the disastrous result. Cropping it here, defender of the constitution, take a look at the whole cartoon. It is a very different impression of what people thought of johnson. Thought that he was a defender, but that he did not understand the competition. Constitution. Abilitywas above his and he was acting in unconstitutional ways. This is different than people often viewed lincoln. Generations,ouple it is Andrew Johnson, defender of the constitution and how people have chosen to defend him. With lincoln, if you do read popular history, while he may be a great president , had issues with the constitution, of vegas corpus and thes like. If you look at their actions throughout their political lives, lincoln is the one who is a defender of the constitution, who does not want to amend it, who is being forced to do things , likesnt want to do forcing free much to repeal his proclamation it is Andrew Johnson who says he is a strict constructionist but is often doing things the constitution explicitly says he should not be executing the laws passed by congress. Hopefully, you have seen today of johnsonrmal trail and lincoln portrayal of johnson and lincoln should be flipped a bit. Not just when we are thinking about the civil war era, but thinking about history in general trying to continue exploring, not just taking what we see in Historic Sites or what you happen to classroom. Always question it. Look for something more. Thank you for being a good class today, i will see you next thursday. You can watch lectures in history every weekend on American History tv. Take you inside College Classrooms to learn about topics ranging from the American Revolution to 9 11. At 8 p. M. At midnight eastern on cspan3. Reagan is an intellectual. He is comfortable with ideas. He understands the power of ideas. And with that kind of intellectual foundation, a political leader can do all kinds of marvelous things. Author and historian lee edwards will be our guest in depth, sunday from noon to 2 p. M. He is the author of a collection of biographies. Conversation with your phone calls, tweets, and facebook conversations. Indepth with lee edwards. And our coverage of the National Book festival on book tv on cspan2. This weekend, author john about nixons early life and career and how they influenced his presidency and what ultimately led to his downfall. Here is a preview. How could such a flawed man accomplished so much . If you think about his story, it was amazing. He comes back for more in 1946 and nobody knows his names effort a few of the burgers back in orange county, who decided this young servicemen as the sacrificial goat against back,term about he comes they dont know him, Los Angeles Times have no idea who he is, and he wins that race. Within years, he is president of the United States. An astonishing, meteoric rise. He is running for president. He was smart, he was shrewd he had that great ability to recognize the grievance in his audience, see it in himself, and then make that connection. It might not have been the same thing, but that feeling of resentment. When he did focus his mind on what he calls his structure of peace, and he used to do this, he would hold up his hand and say the United States, russia, china, japan, thats the structure of peace. So he did have vision, amazing resilience. Almost dumped from the ticket by eisenhower, he loses to kennedy, thes the 62 election, makes greatest political comeback ever gets elected by 500,000 votes. He then goes on and wins one of the greatest landslides ever. Watergate n and in watergate and reaches some kind of uneasy peace with himself, a enough that people give him credit as a statesman. There was just no holding him down, he does have that amazing great grit. Learn more about Richard Nixons life sunday. You are watching American History tv, only on cspan3. This is about the ghost army of world war ii. 1996, soclassified in not a lot of people know about it. My grandfather was a part of it, and it is a combination of just getting to know my Family History and telling the story about these men who never got recognized that i just really wanted to do. What is a ghost army . The ghost army was a deceptive unit that used decoys ands, fake radio messages, sounds of tanks and activity to fool the germans