What If Andrew Johnson Was Assassinated In 1865?

The assassination of Abraham Lincoln in 1865 was a tragic event that shook the nation. However, what would have happened if his successor, Andrew Johnson, had also been killed on that fateful night?

This is a question that historians have debated for years, and there are several possible scenarios that could have played out.

We will explore some of these scenarios and try to imagine what the United States would look like today if Andrew Johnson had been killed alongside Lincoln.

Behind The Man

First, it is important to understand who Andrew Johnson was and what his presidency represented. Andrew Johnson was born in 1808 in North Carolina, and he became the 17th President of the United States in 1865 after Lincoln’s assassination.

Johnson was a Democrat and a strong supporter of states' rights, but he also believed in the Union and opposed secession. During his presidency, Johnson worked to reconstruct the South and bring the Confederate states back into the Union.

However, he faced significant opposition from Republicans in Congress who believed he was too lenient on the former Confederacy.

Possible Scenarios

If Andrew Johnson had been killed alongside Lincoln, the first question that arises is who would have become the next President of the United States. The line of succession at that time would have made the Senate pro tempore, Lafayette S. Foster, the next in line for the presidency.

Foster was a Republican from Connecticut who had served in the Senate since 1855, and he was a strong supporter of the Union during the Civil War.

However, Foster was not a particularly charismatic or influential figure, and it is unlikely that he would have been able to unify the country in the way that Lincoln and Johnson did.

Another possibility is that the United States would have descended into chaos and anarchy. The assassination of two presidents in such a short period would have been a tremendous blow to the nation, and it is possible that some states would have attempted to secede again.

The Civil War had only ended a few months earlier, and tensions were still high between the North and the South. Without a strong leader to guide the country through the post-war period, it is possible that the United States could have fallen apart.

President Foster’s Version of Reconstruction

Assuming that Lafayette S. Foster became President, it is likely that he would have followed a similar course to Johnson in terms of reconstruction. Foster was a Republican and a strong supporter of the Union, but he was also a moderate who believed in compromise.

He likely would have sought to work with Southern leaders to bring the Confederate states back into the Union and would have been less confrontational than some of the more radical Republicans in Congress.

One of the major challenges that Foster would have faced as President is dealing with the ongoing issue of slavery. Although slavery had been abolished by the 13th Amendment in December 1865, many Southern states were still grappling with the legacy of slavery and racism.

It is likely that Foster would have supported efforts to extend civil rights to African Americans, but he would have faced significant opposition from Southern Democrats who were still deeply invested in the old social order.

Another possibility is that Foster would have faced significant opposition from Republicans in Congress who wanted a more radical approach to reconstruction. In particular, the Radical Republicans, led by Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner, were deeply critical of Johnson’s policies and wanted to take a harder line with the former Confederacy.

It is possible that they would have pushed Foster to adopt more radical policies, such as extending voting rights to African Americans or confiscating land from former slave owners.

Assuming that Foster was able to navigate these challenges and bring the country back together, it is likely that his presidency would have been relatively uneventful. Foster was not a particularly dynamic or charismatic figure, and he would not have been able to capture the public imagination in the way that Lincoln or Johnson did. However, he likely would have been a stabilizing force in a time of great turmoil and uncertainty. His moderate approach to reconstruction may have helped to ease tensions between the North and the South, and he may have been able to restore a sense of national unity that had been shattered by the Civil War.

It is also possible that Foster’s presidency would have been cut short by a challenger from within his own party. In the 1868 presidential election, the Republican Party nominated Ulysses S. Grant, a former Union general, as their candidate. Grant was a popular figure among Republicans, and he was seen as a strong leader who could continue the work of reconstruction.

Enter Ulysses S Grant

It is possible that some Republicans may have seen Foster as too weak or too moderate to lead the country and may have mounted a challenge to his nomination.

Assuming that Grant was elected as President in 1868, it is likely that his approach to reconstruction would have been more confrontational than Foster’s. Grant was a Republican, but he was also a pragmatist who was willing to use military force to achieve his goals.

He may have been more willing than Foster to use federal troops to enforce civil rights laws or to crack down on resistance from Southern Democrats.

However, Grant’s presidency was also marred by corruption and scandals, and it is possible that his confrontational approach to reconstruction may have only served to further inflame tensions between the North and the South.

It is possible that his presidency may have been even more contentious and divisive than Johnson’s, leading to further political instability and even violence.

A Rise Of A Different Party

Another possibility is that a different political party may have risen to power in the absence of Johnson and Grant. The Democratic Party, which had been decimated by the Civil War, may have been able to regroup and mount a serious challenge to the Republicans.

It is possible that a Democratic president may have taken a more conciliatory approach to reconstruction, seeking to appease Southern Democrats and ease tensions between the North and the South.

However, it is also possible that a Democratic president may have been more willing to compromise on civil rights issues and may have allowed for continued discrimination against African Americans. Without the strong leadership of Johnson and Grant, it is possible that the country may have been unable to achieve true racial equality, leading to continued strife and conflict.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the assassination of Andrew Johnson alongside Abraham Lincoln would have had a profound impact on the course of American history. The absence of Johnson may have led to a more moderate approach to reconstruction, which may have eased tensions between the North and the South.

However, it is also possible that it may have led to further political instability and violence. The presidency of Lafayette S. Foster may have been uneventful but stabilizing, while the presidency of Ulysses S. Grant may have been more confrontational and divisive.

Ultimately, it is impossible to know what would have happened if Johnson had been killed alongside Lincoln, but it is clear that his absence would have had a significant impact on the course of American history.