Grant Grant and Andrew Johnson

[Dave Wilma]

I'm reading Smith's Grant for the second time (one needs several passes at a complex topic) and was surprised to (re)learn of Grant's defense of the Constitution against President Andrew Johnson who was about to run off the rails. In 1866, Grant withdrew from a presidential speaking tour feigning illness when he could not abide the president's message (the South was loyal, the real traitors were the Radical Republicans). Johnson tried to have the general-in-chief shipped off to Mexico on a diplomatic mission. Sherman would become general-in-chief then secretary of war. Sherman would not cooperate and Grant refused to leave Washington.

Johnson asked his new attorney general for a legal opinion on the legitimacy of the new 39th Congress. It was rumored Johnson would recognize a new Congress that included ex-Confederates and friendly northern Democrats. Grant made it clear that the army would back the sitting Congress. Grant was worried about a coup and warned Sherman to secure arsenals in the South. Grant was so concerned about Johnson's antics he cancelled attendance at Orville Babcock's wedding.

At a cabinet meeting on October 23, 1866, Johnson had orders for Grant to go to Mexico. Grant said no and left the meeting. Two weeks before elections, Johnson wanted Grant to deploy troops to Maryland to support ****s moving on pro-Union forces in Baltimore (voter registration dispute). Grant donned civilian clothes to mediate the issues in Baltimore.

I continue to marvel at the transformation of the ex-captain and saddlery clerk to victorious general, to a major player in a constitutional crisis.

 

[unionblue]

I'm reading Smith's Grant for the second time (one needs several passes at a complex topic) and was surprised to (re)learn of Grant's defense of the Constitution against President Andrew Johnson who was about to run off the rails. In 1866, Grant withdrew from a presidential speaking tour feigning illness when he could not abide the president's message (the South was loyal, the real traitors were the Radical Republicans). Johnson tried to have the general-in-chief shipped off to Mexico on a diplomatic mission. Sherman would become general-in-chief then secretary of war. Sherman would not cooperate and Grant refused to leave Washington.

Johnson asked his new attorney general for a legal opinion on the legitimacy of the new 39th Congress. It was rumored Johnson would recognize a new Congress that included ex-Confederates and friendly northern Democrats. Grant made it clear that the army would back the sitting Congress. Grant was worried about a coup and warned Sherman to secure arsenals in the South. Grant was so concerned about Johnson's antics he cancelled attendance at Orville Babcock's wedding.

At a cabinet meeting on October 23, 1866, Johnson had orders for Grant to go to Mexico. Grant said no and left the meeting. Two weeks before elections, Johnson wanted Grant to deploy troops to Maryland to support ****s moving on pro-Union forces in Baltimore (voter registration dispute). Grant donned civilian clothes to mediate the issues in Baltimore.

I continue to marvel at the transformation of the ex-captain and saddlery clerk to victorious general, to a major player in a constitutional crisis.

Dave Wilma,

Wow!

Had no idea about this bit of history.

Thanks for posting this and letting me learn a bit more about the man.

Much appreciated.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[Dave Wilma]

Lots of what-if possibilities, Grant at the head of troops as a rump Congress attempts to meet. Johnson fires Grant and Sherman.

 

[KansasFreestater]

Dave, what a wonderfully written summary of that episode! Thank you for taking the time to write it and for sharing it here. Grant really was a great man.

 

[Bee]

I continue to marvel at the transformation of the ex-captain and saddlery clerk to victorious general, to a major player in a constitutional crisis.

To think -- with this incident in mind -- that Henry Brooks Adams wrote this about Grant in his book about a-man-waiting-for-his-ship-to-come-in written by a man-whose-ship-has-sailed (also known as The Education of Henry Adams)

He (ed.Grant) had no right to exist. He should have been extinct for ages. The idea that, as society grew older, it grew one-sided, upset evolution, and made of education a fraud. That, two thousand years after Alexander the Great and Julius Cæsar, a man like Grant should be called--and should actually and truly be--the highest product of the most advanced evolution, made evolution ludicrous. One must be as commonplace as Grant's own commonplaces to maintain such an absurdity. The progress of evolution from President Washington to President Grant, was alone evidence enough to upset Darwin. Ibid XVII. PRESIDENT GRANT (1869)​

 

[5fish]

This is the date of the event... in 1866

November 4-5
Ulysses S. Grant returned to Baltimore and negotiated an agreement to keep the peace during the election, which occurred the following day without incident.

Here is the Chronology of Grants life... link...

http://www.usgrantlibrary.org/about/chronology.asp

 

[5fish]

He (ed.Grant) had no right to exist. He should have been extinct for ages. The idea that, as society grew older, it grew one-sided, upset evolution, and made of education a fraud. That, two thousand years after Alexander the Great and Julius Cæsar, a man like Grant should be called--and should actually and truly be--the highest product of the most advanced evolution, made evolution ludicrous. One must be as commonplace as Grant's own commonplaces to maintain such an absurdity. The progress of evolution from President Washington to President Grant, was alone evidence enough to upset Darwin. Ibid XVII. PRESIDENT GRANT (1869)

I read about Henry Adams his dinner with Grant and Badeau at the White House. He did not care Pres. Grant after meeting him that one time...

 

[matthew mckeon]

To think -- with this incident in mind -- that Henry Brooks Adams wrote this about Grant in his book about a-man-waiting-for-his-ship-to-come-in written by a man-whose-ship-has-sailed (also known as The Education of Henry Adams)

He (ed.Grant) had no right to exist. He should have been extinct for ages. The idea that, as society grew older, it grew one-sided, upset evolution, and made of education a fraud. That, two- thousand years after Alexander the Great and Julius Cæsar, a man like Grant should be called--and should actually and truly be--the highest product of the most advanced evolution, made evolution ludicrous. One must be as commonplace as Grant's own commonplaces to maintain such an absurdity. The progress of evolution from President Washington to President Grant, was alone evidence enough to upset Darwin. Ibid XVII. PRESIDENT GRANT (1869)​

Bee, that's funny: did you think of that yourself? "man-whose-ship-has-sailed..."

 

[Yankeedave]

You would think Grant and Johnson would have gotten along better as they were both notorious drunks.

 

[Bee]

Bee, that's funny: did you think of that yourself? "man-whose-ship-has-sailed..."

Yessir: My professor about fell off his chair when I stuck that quote in my analysis of The Education of Henry Adams!

 

[Bee]

You would think Grant and Johnson would have gotten along better as they were both notorious drunks.

This topic has been explored and discussed in many articles and books about Grant (I have not read up on Johnson) There are documented incidents of drinking, and there are many more unproven lies and rumors that have exaggerated the otherwise sporadic incidents into an all-out fabrication. Grant's unremarkable foundation renders much negative embellishment, due to the jealousy of his more equipped, yet not nearly as accomplished, detractors of the day.

 

[Aussie Billy Sherman]

I don't think Grant was a drunk. Sounds more like a binge drinker.

 

[Bee]

I don't think Grant was a drunk. Sounds more like a binge drinker.

It was also suspected that he had a very low tolerance to alcohol: one drink would be like two or three for someone else. It is an actual chemical intolerance to the components of alcohol.

 

[KansasFreestater]

This topic has been explored and discussed in many articles and books about Grant (I have not read up on Johnson) There are documented incidents of drinking, and there are many more unproven lies and rumors that have exaggerated the otherwise sporadic incidents into an all-out fabrication. Grant's unremarkable foundation renders much negative embellishment, due to the jealousy of his more equipped, yet not nearly as accomplished, detractors of the day.

Isn't it interesting that yet another original post that points out something great that Grant did gets quickly sidetracked onto the old "Grant was a drunk" trope? I am really, really hoping that Ron Chernow's book about Grant will be as big a hit as his book about Hamilton.... and maybe, if it inspires a similar pop phenomenon, will finally, finally correct the misperceptions and redeem Grant in the public mind.

 

[Dave Wilma]

It was also suspected that he had a very low tolerance to alcohol: one drink would be like two or three for someone else. It is an actual chemical intolerance to the components of alcohol.

Grant's low tolerance for alcohol has been established by his own admissions. The term "drunk" needs clarification. Recovering alcoholics call themselves drunks even when they have been sober for some time. At no time was he impaired as a colonel or general.

 

[huskerblitz]

Grant's low tolerance for alcohol has been established by his own admissions. The term "drunk" needs clarification. Recovering alcoholics call themselves drunks even when they have been sober for some time.

Completely agree. He was a drunk...but everyone is at their own personal levels.

 

[matthew mckeon]

I would love this thread to return to Grant and Johnson and steer away from the bottle FOR ONCE. If you feel its an important issue that needs another thread, by all means start one.

Posted as moderator.

 

[John Hartwell]

To think -- with this incident in mind -- that Henry Brooks Adams wrote this about Grant in his book about a-man-waiting-for-his-ship-to-come-in written by a man-whose-ship-has-sailed (also known as The Education of Henry Adams)

He (ed.Grant) had no right to exist. He should have been extinct for ages. The idea that, as society grew older, it grew one-sided, upset evolution, and made of education a fraud. That, two thousand years after Alexander the Great and Julius Cæsar, a man like Grant should be called--and should actually and truly be--the highest product of the most advanced evolution, made evolution ludicrous. One must be as commonplace as Grant's own commonplaces to maintain such an absurdity. The progress of evolution from President Washington to President Grant, was alone evidence enough to upset Darwin. Ibid XVII. PRESIDENT GRANT (1869)​

I like the phrase "as commonplace as Grant's own commonplaces" -- an eloquent counterpoint to Adams' own perception of himself. Grant the Commonplace vs Adams the Elite. No history from the bottom up for Henry (the late Barbara Tuchman scorned him as "dishonest" in most everything he wrote).

As to the OP. Our nation's debt to this "commonplace" man is enormous.

Years ago I read somewhere that Johnson tried to raise something of a personal militia, outside the regular army, to enforce his will over Congress, he asked Sherman to head it up, but Uncle Billy shot him down, and warned him not to try it again. Does anyone know anything about that?

 

[Hunter]

I would love this thread to return to Grant and Johnson and steer away from the bottle FOR ONCE. If you feel its an important issue that needs another thread, by all means start one.

Posted as moderator.

The topics of Johnson, Grant, and their relationship are probably the most complex and misunderstood in American history. At the time, politics shrouded the truth, and since the 1950's, historians have assessed them using modern standards of morality. It will probably take a non-academic historian to separate the wheat from the chaff and give us an accurate picture of the men and their era. Meanwhile, it is easier to focus on exaggerations of their character issues.

 

[Bee]

I am really, really hoping that Ron Chernow's book about Grant will be as big a hit as his book about Hamilton.... and maybe, if it inspires a similar pop phenomenon, will finally, finally correct the misperceptions and redeem Grant in the public mind.

You and I both, my friend. One can only hope, two is cause for optimism