Andrew Johnson: First Annual Message to Congress

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

When Andrew Johnson delivered his First Annual Message to Congress on December 4, 1865, the nation was still reeling under the pressure of events. Johnson's predecessor, Abraham Lincoln, had been assassinated in April, just days after the Confederate army surrendered, bringing the Civil War largely to a close. The rebel states, though, had not yet been fully reabsorbed into the Union, and during the early months of his administration, Johnson was preoccupied with one task: reconstruction. Over time, attitudes about the Reconstruction period have undergone a marked shift. In the early part of the twentieth century, Reconstruction was viewed as sordid, a time when the Radical Republicans forced integration down the throats of the nation, particularly in the South. It was depicted as a time of corrupt state governments and of northern “carpetbaggers” (so called because they were seen as arriving, often by train, carrying luggage that looked as if it were made from carpeting material), who exploited the disarray of the postwar South for their own mercenary ends. Later historians, though, came to look on Reconstruction more favorably, as a time of attempted racial integration and reconciliation, a democratic experiment that perhaps did not fully succeed but was noble in its ends.

Thrown into Johnson's lap was the consuming issue of what to do with the rebellious South. By instinct, Johnson wanted to punish the South. Born literally in a log cabin, he had grown up distrusting and disliking the slave-owning plantation class, whom he regarded as effete aristocrats. But when the weight of decision making fell on him, he realized that restoration of the Union required a gentler hand. In May 1865 he issued a set of proclamations that ushered in what is called the period of Presidential Reconstruction (as opposed to the period of Congressional Reconstruction from 1867 to 1877). Among these proclamations was a pardon to former Confederates with the exception of the rebellion's leaders and the wealthy planters, who, he believed, had led otherwise innocent people into rebellion. Further, he appointed provisional governors in the states and developed plans for the creation of new state governments. He imposed only three requirements: that states outlaw slavery, repudiate any further secession efforts, and cancel the Confederate debt. Otherwise, he gave the states wide scope in conducting their own affairs.

Many northerners opposed the president's policies. They wanted revenge for Lincoln's assassination and for the war in general. They were dismayed to see the southern states elect former leaders of the Confederacy to their legislatures. They were particularly incensed by the slow pace of racial integration and the harsh “Black Codes”—legislation passed first in South Carolina and Mississippi and later in other southern states. These codes allowed freed slaves to rent land only in rural areas, effectively keeping them on plantations. They required freed slaves to sign yearlong labor contracts; any person who failed to fulfill the terms of the contract could be arrested for vagrancy. Blacks could apprentice their children only with the consent of their former owners. Penalties for violations of these codes were harsh. In this context, the Radical Republicans in Congress and even many moderate Republicans came to oppose Johnson's Reconstruction policies.

Johnson's First Annual Message, then, was in large measure a justification of his policies based on the concept of states' rights. In the first paragraph of this excerpt, he looks back to the framers of the Constitution and to the tension that existed even then between the “General Government”—that is, the federal government—and those who feared that the federal government would dominate the states; alternatively, there were fears that if the states retained too much independence, they could spin off from the Union. He notes, though, that the federal government's legitimate concerns are many and that if it meddled in the affairs of the states, it would collapse under the weight of too much to do. In the second paragraph, Johnson balances his support of states' rights with his desire to see the Union survive, arguing that a state does not have the right to “renounce its own place in the Union or to nullify the laws of the Union.” He goes on to say that the Confederacy's doctrine of the “sovereignty of the States” was a false one and points out that the Constitution makes federal doctrine “the supreme law of the land.”

Johnson then appeals to the language of the Declaration of Independence in arguing that the power of all governments, both state and federal, should be limited. The alternative is the tyranny that was historically exercised over individuals in such matters as religious beliefs. He then returns to a discussion of states and their role in the polity. He notes that the Declaration of Independence was adopted by the individual states, that the Constitution was ratified by the states, and that the Constitution can be amended only with the consent of the states. He summarizes the reciprocal relations between the Union and the states by saying, “The whole can not exist without the parts, nor the parts without the whole. So long as the Constitution of the United States endures, the States will endure. The destruction of the one is the destruction of the other; the preservation of the one is the preservation of the other.”

On the basis of this balancing of state and federal interests, Johnson explains and justifies his Reconstruction policies. The first question he faced as president was whether to install a military government in the South. Johnson rejected this alternative, arguing that such a military government was susceptible to corruption and, by hindering the free movement of people between North and South, would delay the achievement of harmony. He also argues that a military government would imply that somehow the states of the South had ceased to exist by rebellion. Johnson rejects this view by saying that secession was a “pretended” act that was “null and void” because a state cannot be guilty of treason any more than it can usurp the functions of the federal government, such as to make treaties. Rather, what the states did was abandon their proper functions. Johnson then argues that his policies—provisional governors; election of governors, state legislatures, and representatives to Congress; restoration of the postal service; the removal of federal blockades; and the reopening of courts—are designed to reenergize the states and their governments, hastening their restoration to the Union.

Johnson turns to the issue of presidential pardons. He knew that many people in the North objected to the pardoning of rebels and traitors. In his address, however, Johnson appeals to a spirit of reconciliation and argues that the rebels could reaffirm their allegiance to the United States only if they were pardoned. He notes, though, that pardon was contingent on “binding force of the laws of the United States and an unqualified acknowledgment of the great social change of condition in regard to slavery which has grown out of the war.” Accordingly, he says, he has invited the southern states to take part in the process of amending the Constitution to eliminate slavery. Johnson maintains that only by constitutionally ending slavery can the nation heal its wounds and put the bloody rebellion behind it. By participating in the task of amending the Constitution, the South can affirm its loyalty to the United States and thus help reunite the country.