The Evening Post: A Century of JournalismNevins, Allan
History
The Evening Post: A Century of Journalism
Nevins, Allan
New York post
When President Johnson removed the Governor of Louisiana that
summer, the _Evening Post_ condemned his act as unconstitutional.
It was outraged by his dismissal of officeholders to influence the
Congressional elections of 1866. His “swing around the circle,” the
famous speaking tour to Chicago and back in the early fall of 1866, in
which he lost all sense of dignity, talked of hanging Thad Stevens,
and abused his opponents as “foul whelps of sin,” completely disgusted
the _Post_. “It is a melancholy reflection,” it said, “to those who
have found it their duty to support that policy [Johnson’s], that their
most damaging opponent is the President, and that he makes a judicious
course so hateful to the people that no argument is listened to....”
It marveled at his skill “to do the wrong thing at the wrong time, to
displease everybody, and to delay that which everybody would be glad to
have over.” Moreover, as news arrived of widespread outrages against
the negroes in the South, the _Post’s_ attitude toward that section
grew less gentle.
Ratify the Fourteenth Amendment, the _Evening Post_ urged the South in
the summer of 1866; it is the only way to hasten sane reconstruction.
When the Southerners, already denying the negroes their due place at
the polls and in the courts, deliberately rejected the amendment,
it was ready to give them a stiffer dose. In February, 1867, it
pronounced in favor of the great Reconstruction Act, which divided the
ten Southern States into five military districts, and undertook to
guarantee the negro’s rights by force. That is, the abuses perpetrated
made it swing toward the Congressional standpoint--just as general
Northern sentiment swung.
But when Congress determined to impeach President Johnson, the
protest of the _Evening Post_ was as instant as that of the _Times_ or
_Sun_. The principal charges were based upon the President’s alleged
violations of the Tenure of Office Act, which prohibited him from
dismissing civil officers without the consent of the Senate. When this
Act was passed in July, 1867, the _Post_ had called it a silly and
mischievous attempt to make the President as powerless as the Mayor of
New York, and had regarded it as unconstitutional. The early talk of
impeachment it rebuked as threatening “a Mexican madness.” Naturally,
then, when Johnson defied Congress by dismissing Secretary Stanton
without consulting the Senate, the editors took the view that his
intention was merely to bring the act before the courts, and that he
should not be impeached unless he persisted in further dismissals after
the Supreme Court had decided against him. They had already written
(Dec. 2) that the impeachment talk did not carry with it the public
sense of justice, without which it must recoil upon the heads of its
promoters, and that Congress had enough useful constructive work to do
to keep it busy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive