The United States Constitution provides for the impeachment of the President for “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Article II, Section 4) but nowhere defines them. It was based upon this arcane phrase that the House of Representatives voted by a majority to impeach (essentially, to indict) the seventeenth president of the United States, Andrew Johnson. It was now up to the United States Senate to garner the required two-thirds majority to convict him, the penalty for which was removal from office.
At the outset, it should be stated that Johnson was impeached because his views as a southern Democrat (although one who had favored preservation of the Union) differed sharply from those of the Radical Republicans, who held a majority in both houses of Congress. Johnson wished to continue the policies of his deceased predecessor, Abraham Lincoln, who wished to readmit the former Confederate States to the Union on terms that would preserve their dignity and foster reunification. The Radical Republicans, led by Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania and Benjamin Butler and Charles Sumner of Massachusetts, wished to hold the former Confederate States as fiefdoms under continued military rule, without participation of the representatives of those states in the legislative process. The majority even took the extra-Constitutional step of refusing to seat the elected representatives of those states. The Radical Republicans’ idea of Reconstruction was really one of repression and retaliation (Impeachment).
Further, although a powerful orator, Johnson was poorly educated, literate only later in life, considered boorish in manners and abrasive and undiplomatic. The fact that he was a principled individual and regarded highly enough by Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, to be his running mate in the 1864 election, although a Democrat, in an attempt to solidify the attempt to reunify the nation that Lincoln knew was soon coming, meant little to the vindictive Radical Republican majority. Lincoln’s exhortation for “malice toward none, with charity for all” in his second inaugural address on March 4, 1865, a mere six weeks before his assassination, seemed long forgotten (About President Johnson).
Time after time, Johnson vetoed legislation passed by Congress. Sometimes Congress was able to override his veto by the required two-thirds majority, but often failed to do so. The two-thirds majority was tenuous. There was only one way to insure their legislation to hold the South in thrall would be passed: removal of Johnson from office. The only legal means available was impeachment, for which provision was made in Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution. The President, among other high officials, could be impeached for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. Nowhere were the other high crimes and misdemeanors defined. Congress saw its opportunity in Johnson’s perceived violations of three pieces of legislation Johnson’s veto of which they had overridden. One was the Military Reconstruction Act, which divided the South into five districts under military rule, The second was the Commander of the Army Act, which provided that the president’s orders had to be transmitted through the General of The Army, at that time General Ulysses S. Grant, rather than given directly to the military governors of the southern districts. The third and most important was the Tenure of Office Act of 1867, which provided that the president needed the Senate’s approval to remove a high official, such as a cabinet member, from office (Stephens).
The Military Reconstruction Act and the Commander of the Army Act were of questionable constitutionality, as they seemed to interfere with the president’s constitutional role of Commander in Chief of the armed forces. Similarly, the Tenure of Office Act appeared to interfere with the president’ executive function of appointing cabinet members. Together, these acts ran counter to the doctrine of separation of powers.
Congress saw its chance when Johnson removed Secretary of War Edwin Stanton and replaced him with Ulysses Grant without the consent of the Senate. The Senate overrode Johnson’s actions and reinstalled Stanton. So farcical was the situation that when Johnson again attempted to remove him from office on February 21, 1868, Stanton barricaded himself in his office. What was overlooked was that Stanton had been appointed by Lincoln and that Johnson was under no obligation to retain him at all, even under the Tenure of Office Act (About President Johnson).
On February 24, 1868, the House of Representatives voted to impeach Johnson. This is akin to an indictment. The Articles of Impeachment were delivered to the Senate, where Johnson would be tried. If convicted by a two-thirds majority, he would be removed from office. Of the eleven Articles of Impeachment, the first eight centered on the removal of Stanton from office. The ninth alleged violations of the Army Appropriations Act, the tenth was essentially for “libel of Congress” and the eleventh a reiteration of the first ten (Kennedy).
Congress tried every means possible to assure itself of a two-thirds majority (at that time, 36 out of 54 votes). Bribery by the Republicans was charged. Last minute attempts to admit states to the Union, such as Nebraska and Colorado, that would appoint pro-Radical Republican senators, failed. It was certain the twelve Democrats would vote for acquittal. Thirty-five Republican votes for conviction were assured. Six Republican votes were certain to be cast for acquittal. The lone uncertain vote was that of Edmund Ross, a freshman senator from Kansas who held office only because of the suicide of his predecessor, Jim Lane. Ross refused to reveal his position ahead of time. On the day of the vote, May 16, 1868, on whether to convict on the omnibus Article 11, Ross voted “not guilty”. It became clear that conviction on the other ten articles would be impossible. Johnson was acquitted by one vote. Ross (and the other six Republicans who voted to acquit) had committed political suicide but had saved the presidency (Kennedy).
In more rational times, the disagreement between the Executive and Legislative branches over the constitutionality of the Tenure of Office Act and the other disputed laws would have been resolved by the United States Supreme Court. This never occurred. Aside from the vagueness of the phrase “high Crimes and Misdemeanors”, there was no evidence that Johnson did anything but challenge the constitutionality of vindictive and destructive legislation. Ironically, Congress repealed the Tenure of Office Act some twenty years later. The impeachment occurred merely because Johnson and Congress could not agree. Johnson and the integrity of the presidency narrowly escaped conviction at a trial that never should have been held.
Works Cited
Anonymous. “The Impeachment of Andrew Johnson.” The American Experience. Web.
7 Mar. 2012.
Anonymous. “About President Johnson.” The History Place. Web. 7 Mar. 2012.
Kennedy, John F. “The Impeachment Trial of President Andrew Johnson.” Teaching
American History. Web. 7 Mar. 2012.
Stephens, Thaddeus. “Impeachment Speech of Thaddeus Stevens.” Furman University.
Web. 7 Mar. 2012.
U.S. Constitution. Art. II, Sec. 4.
