movingstarvoices.org – The period of Reconstruction following the American Civil War was one of the most challenging in U.S. history, as the nation sought to rebuild itself and reconcile the deep divisions caused by the conflict. At the heart of this struggle was the question of how to treat the defeated South, and more specifically, how to handle the Confederate leaders who had led the rebellion against the Union. Andrew Johnson, who became president after the assassination of Abraham Lincoln in April 1865, believed in the principle of forgiveness and leniency toward former Confederate leaders. His decision to pardon many of them, allowing them to return to positions of power in the post-war South, remains one of the most controversial aspects of his presidency.
Johnson’s amnesty program was seen by many as an effort to restore the South to its pre-war political and social order, without providing adequate safeguards for the newly freed African Americans. His actions, particularly his pardoning of high-ranking Confederate officials and wealthy landowners, were deeply polarizing and played a significant role in the subsequent political battles over Reconstruction.
In this article, we will explore Andrew Johnson’s policy of pardoning Confederate leaders, its political motivations, the impact on the South, the backlash it provoked, and the long-term consequences for American society and race relations.
Andrew Johnson’s Background and Views on Reconstruction
A Southern Unionist with a Complex Vision
Andrew Johnson was born into poverty in North Carolina in 1808, and his early life was marked by hardship and limited education. He rose to political prominence in Tennessee, where he became a passionate advocate for Unionism during the Civil War. Johnson was a staunch opponent of secession and was one of the few Southern politicians who remained loyal to the Union when the South seceded in 1861. His loyalty to the Union led to his appointment as Military Governor of Tennessee during the war.
Despite his Southern roots, Johnson was fiercely dedicated to the idea of preserving the Union and opposing the Confederacy. This loyalty to the Union was the cornerstone of his political identity, and it informed his approach to the South after the Civil War. After Lincoln’s assassination, Johnson inherited a nation that was shattered by war and seeking a path toward healing and reconciliation.
Johnson’s approach to Reconstruction, however, was shaped by his belief in states’ rights and his commitment to a quick restoration of the Union without punishment for the South. He believed that the Southern states had never fully left the Union, and as such, he viewed their reintegration as a matter of repairing a broken union rather than punishing the defeated Confederacy.
The Pardoning of Confederate Leaders
Upon assuming the presidency, Johnson’s lenient approach to Reconstruction was made clear by his Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction in May 1865. In this proclamation, Johnson offered a general pardon to most white Southerners, including many Confederate leaders, who were willing to take an oath of loyalty to the Union. The only exceptions were high-ranking Confederate officials and those with property worth more than $20,000. These individuals were deemed unworthy of pardon and would have to apply directly to the president for clemency.
The broad amnesty provided by Johnson was seen as a gesture of forgiveness and an attempt to facilitate the South’s swift return to the Union. Johnson’s policy was designed to allow Southern states to reorganize and elect new governments without the threat of significant penalties. In theory, it was meant to promote peace, heal old wounds, and restore normalcy to the nation.
However, Johnson’s generous pardons were quickly put into practice, and the effects were far-reaching. Former Confederates, many of whom had led the rebellion against the Union, were able to regain positions of power in Southern governments. Former Confederate generals, politicians, and wealthy plantation owners were able to return to their former positions and even to Congress. The rapid return of these individuals to political power alarmed many in the North and sparked heated debates over the proper way to handle the defeated South.
The Political Motivation Behind the Pardons
Johnson’s Desire for National Healing
Johnson’s decision to pardon Confederate leaders was motivated in part by his belief that the country needed to heal quickly. His vision for Reconstruction centered on the idea that a lenient approach, which emphasized forgiveness rather than punishment, would help reunite the nation. He argued that the Confederacy had been an illegal rebellion, but that it was not necessary to punish those who had participated in the war in order to rebuild the country.
For Johnson, the primary goal was to restore the Union as quickly as possible, with as little disruption to the Southern way of life as necessary. He believed that extending pardons would facilitate a smooth transition by encouraging Southerners to take an oath of loyalty and reaffirm their allegiance to the Union. In his view, the Southern states would willingly reintegrate into the Union without the need for harsh penalties.
Political Calculations
Johnson’s approach also had political calculations. By granting amnesty to many Southern leaders, he sought to maintain the loyalty of Southern Unionists and the Democratic Party in the post-war era. He hoped to rebuild the political establishment in the South by encouraging former Confederates to return to power and influence. In doing so, he sought to minimize the role of the Radical Republicans, a faction in Congress that wanted to take a much harder stance on the South and its treatment of African Americans.
Additionally, Johnson’s leniency was intended to shore up his own political power. By taking a conciliatory stance toward the South, Johnson hoped to maintain the support of Southern Democrats and avoid alienating key political figures in the region. His goal was to find common ground with the South and avoid the bitter divisions that many feared would arise from a punitive Reconstruction policy.
The Black Codes and the Return of Confederate Leadership
The Rise of the Black Codes
One of the most immediate and troubling consequences of Johnson’s pardon policy was the resurgence of the Black Codes in the South. These laws, which were passed by Southern states after their reintegration into the Union, severely restricted the rights and freedoms of African Americans. The Black Codes were designed to maintain white supremacy and limit the social and economic mobility of newly freed slaves.
Many former Confederate leaders who returned to power in Southern state governments quickly enacted these discriminatory laws. The Black Codes sought to control the labor force of African Americans, forcing them into labor contracts that often resembled the conditions of slavery. They were restricted from owning land, testifying in court, and enjoying basic civil rights. The Black Codes made it clear that the South was determined to maintain its racial hierarchy, and the situation for African Americans in the post-war South remained dire.
Johnson, however, did little to challenge the Black Codes. Despite protests from African American leaders and the growing alarm of Northern Republicans, Johnson maintained that the Southern states had a right to govern themselves. He did not take the necessary steps to stop the spread of these oppressive laws. His inaction fueled growing discontent in the North and set the stage for a political showdown with the Radical Republicans.
The Radical Republican Response
The Radical Republicans in Congress, who had been pushing for a more stringent and transformative approach to Reconstruction, were alarmed by the pardoning of former Confederates and the establishment of the Black Codes. They believed that Johnson’s policies were failing to address the deep-rooted issues of racial inequality and political power in the South. The Radicals called for a much stronger federal role in Reconstruction, including the protection of African Americans’ civil rights.
In response to Johnson’s leniency, the Radicals pushed for the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which granted citizenship to African Americans and sought to overturn the Black Codes. Johnson vetoed the bill, arguing that it gave too much power to the federal government and infringed upon states’ rights. His veto was overridden by Congress, signaling the beginning of an intense struggle between the president and Congress over the direction of Reconstruction.
The Legacy of Johnson’s Pardons
Political and Social Consequences
Johnson’s policy of pardoning Confederate leaders and granting amnesty to many former rebels had profound consequences for the Reconstruction process. By allowing former Confederates to return to power, Johnson effectively ensured that the South would resist efforts to secure civil rights for African Americans. The reemergence of the old Southern political class, emboldened by their restored power, stifled any attempts at meaningful change in the post-war South.
The South’s political landscape quickly became dominated by former Confederate leaders, many of whom worked to preserve the region’s racial hierarchy. Despite the legal abolition of slavery, African Americans in the South found themselves trapped in a system of exploitation and disenfranchisement. This system would eventually give rise to the Jim Crow laws that would govern the South for decades.
Johnson’s failure to adequately address these issues, and his unwillingness to challenge the South’s discriminatory practices, significantly weakened the Reconstruction effort. His policy of forgiveness ultimately failed to achieve the racial and political reconciliation that the nation needed.
Enduring Controversy
Today, Andrew Johnson’s decision to pardon Confederate leaders and his lenient approach to Reconstruction remain deeply controversial. While Johnson may have believed that his actions were necessary for national healing, his policies left the South largely unchanged, with the old power structures firmly in place. The failure to protect the rights of African Americans, and the resurgence of white supremacy in the South, would have lasting consequences for the United States, delaying the progress of civil rights by nearly a century.
In retrospect, many historians view Johnson’s presidency as a pivotal moment in American history—one in which the ideals of reconciliation and forgiveness clashed with the need for justice and equality. His approach to Reconstruction left the nation divided and set the stage for the long and painful struggle for civil rights in the South.
Conclusion
Andrew Johnson’s decision to pardon Confederate leaders and his lenient approach to Reconstruction remain among the most controversial aspects of his presidency. While Johnson sought to promote national healing through forgiveness, his policies ultimately allowed the South to return to its old ways, with former Confederate leaders reasserting their dominance. The consequences of his actions—particularly the rise of the Black Codes and the disenfranchisement of African Americans—were deeply damaging to the cause of civil rights and left a legacy of racial injustice that would persist for generations.
As the nation looks back on this tumultuous period, Johnson’s legacy serves as a reminder of the complex and often painful choices faced by leaders in times of crisis. The politics of forgiveness may have seemed a noble goal, but in the case of Andrew Johnson, it ultimately proved insufficient in addressing the deep divisions that had torn the country apart.