ment there that he had the good fortune to meet and win an admirable woman, whom he married, and who was able and willing to aid him on the upward road to which his ambition even then aspired. She had a fair share of education accompanied by good judgment, and while he plied the needle she used such leisure as could be obtained from her household duties to read to him or converse with him upon topics that the book had suggested. At night she gave him lessons in writing and arithmetic, and while his fellow workmen were idling the time with their gossip and pipes, the future governor of Tennessee and President of the United States was quietly making good the losses that poverty had caused his youth, and making possible his future career. In the hope of improving his condition he removed to a town further west, but after an absence of a year returned to Greenville. The deeply rooted respect for the rights of the common people that was a part of his character soon made itself felt in opposition to the aristocracy based upon slavery that was all about him, and in aid of the white laborer who was as absolutely denied personal representation in local affairs as the black man himself. Addressing himself to his fellow workmen with eloquence and intensity of feeling, he so aroused them that they made a demand for their rights, and commenced a fight to obtain them. So successful was their action that in 1828 the young tailor, then in his twentieth year, was elected alderman, a position which he held for two years. In 1830 he was made mayor of Greenville, in which capacity he served for three years. He was a force in local and state affairs that could not be ignored, and his voice and hand were heard and felt in all the political movements of the time for many succeeding years. His course upward was sure. While mayor he was appointed a trustee of Rhea college, by the county court. In 1834 he successfully interested himself in the adoption of a new constitution for Tennessee, by which important rights were guaranteed to the people, the freedom of the press established, and other liberal measures adopted. His efforts in behalf of the laborer and poor man were so well appreciated that it was decided to advance him to a place where he could render greater and more effective service than had ́yet been possible, and in consequence of that desire he was, in 1835, elected a member of the house of representatives of the state, for the counties of Washington and Greene. He was one of the most active members of this body from the first, but was noted in particular for his opposition to that great and extravagant system of internal improvements which, at that period, came so near ruining some of the western and southern states. He denounced the various measures as impositions upon the people, tending to eventually defraud the state treasury and increase taxation. This pessimist view of the glories that were so open to the vision of the mass tended to make him unpopular for a time, and he failed of a reëlection in 1837. But the financial disasters of

that year, and the useless burdens that so many of the rosy dreams had left behind, justified him in the minds of his people, and in 1839 he was again elected to the assembly. The reputation he gained for sagacity and far-seeing statesmanship by this early fulfillment of his prophecies, gave him a power in the community that he held so long as he interested. himself in Tennessee affairs. In the great Presidential contest between Harrison and Van Buren in 1840, Mr. Johnson's power as a speaker recommended him as equal to the task of canvassing eastern Tennessee in support of the Democratic candidate. He served as Presidential elector at large, and met the leading speakers of the day with such courage and address that those who had placed their interests in his hands felt that their confidence had not been misplaced.

In 1841 Mr. Johnson took another step in his upward way, by an election to the state senate from Greene and Hawkins counties. He signalized this service by the introduction of several judicious measures for the internal improvement of the eastern part of the state. In 1843 he was nominated for congress in the first Tennessee district, against a United States Bank Democrat, who combined eloquence with influence and popularity. Johnson was elected, and took his seat in the National house of representatives in December, 1843. He continued to represent that district by successive reëlections for ten years. In briefly outlining his public labor during that period, it can be stated that he supported the bill refunding the fine imposed upon General Jackson, favored the annexation of Texas, and supported the war measures of Polk's administration. He was also a warm and untiring friend of the Homestead bill. His first speech in congress, or at least the first that attracted any degree of public attention, was the one in which he defended Jackson. He followed this by a reply to John Quincy Adams on the right to petition, and by an argument on the tariff, in which he declared it was "a departure from the principles of equity to tax the many for the benefit of the few, under the plea of protecting American labor." He declared that while congress was consulting the interests of the manufacturer, it had no right to forget or ignore those of the agriculturist, and that "protection operates beneficially to none, except those who can manufacture in large quantities, and vend their manufactured articles beyond the limits of the immediate manufacturing sphere." Those who may be surprised at his views must bear in mind that he had been reared in a region and represented a state in which free-trade was largely supported in those days, and protection was regarded as a measure advanced in the interests of New England and Pennsylvania, and against those of the entire south. In his speech adverse to the tariff law of 1842, Mr. Johnson said:

"These taxes, and almost numberless others, are imposed on us through an instrumentality of a tariff of duties on imported products

and merchandise. The whole amount paid, however, does not go into the treasury of the United States. The tariff of duties increase not only the price of imported articles, but of articles of a similar kind manufactured or produced within our own country; and while the government obtains revenue on imported articles, the favored manufacturer and producer obtains an equal revenue upon their fabrics and products. It is, in effect, a partnership with them and the government, to get money out of the people. The time has now arrived when the people, the laboring people of the country, must inquire into these things more minutely than they have heretofore; the expenses of the government must be reduced; the people must be relieved from their burdens; retrenchment and reform must be begun in good earnest. I, for one, though the humblest of the people's representatives, will be found voting against and speaking against this oppressive and nefarious system of plundering the great mass of the people, for the benefit of the few."

At the second session of the Twenty-eighth congress, Mr. Johnson cooperated with friends of Texan annexation, and made a speech in its favor. In the Twenty-ninth congress he earnestly supported the raising of men and money for the prosecution of the war with Mexico. In a speech made in the house in 1847, he took occasion to severely rebuke the large party then in congress who were denouncing the war as "unconstitutional, unholy and damnable." In that speech he made this telling point:

people and Christian

"If the war is in violation of the Constitution, it cannot be repaired by widening the breach. If it is damnable, it can never be made honorable. If it is unholy, it can never be made righteous. There is but one true position to take upon this question in sound morals. If the Nation is wrong and has inflicted injury on Mexico, as an honorable Nation we are bound to withdraw our troops and indemnify Mexico for all the injury we have done. If this war is such an one as it is represented to be, what an awful end for our officers and soldiers who have fallen in such a contest! He that has the proper standard of morals set up in his mind must be horror-struck at the very contemplation. Conviction forces itself upon my mind that this war was just or it never could have been crowned with such unparalleled success. Our country must have been in the right, or the God of battles would sometimes have been against us. Mexico must have been in the wrong-she is a doomed nation! The red right arm of an angry God has been suspended over her, and the AngloSaxon race has been selected as the rod of her retribution!"

.

In 1848 Mr. Johnson made a speech upon the veto power, which showed considerable historical research, and becomes of unusual interest to the student of history from the fact that its maker afterwards occupied the Presidential chair.

How long Mr. Johnson might have remained in congress is, of course, impossible to tell, had affairs in Tennessee been allowed to remain in statu quo. But even in those days, as in modern times, state legislatures knew how to change the district lines in order to break the political fortunes of those whom the party in legislative control did not wish to see in congress. Mr. Johnson's district was so changed that his election was made impossible, and he was therefore compelled to relinquish the seat he had held so long. But the people made his cause their own, and in 1853 he was elected governor of Tennessee over Gustavus A. Henry, one of the ablest Whigs in the state. His administration of home affairs was marked by no special event, but was of such character as to receive the endorsement of his party, which renominated him in 1855. His opponent was M. P. Gentry, who represented both the Whigs and "Knownothings" of Tennessee. Upon this contest, in which he was reëlected, Mr. Johnson himself made these comments in after years:

"I canvassed the state from the mountains of Johnson county to the Chickasaw bluffs in Shelby county. I was in nearly every county in the state, and well do I recollect the exciting events that took place during that canvass. I had a competitor who was eloquent, who was with me on every stump in the state. One of the leading issues in that canvass was the Kansas-Nebraska bill. I pressed my competitor upon it before every audience, and there were scarcely ever such turn-outs in the state as during that canvass. It was one of the main issues between him and me. I pressed him upon it in every speech I made in the state, and he uniformly declined to take ground. He was afraid to take ground against it or for it, as was then believed, for fear it would injure him in the canvass.

The ground upon which Mr. Gentry wished the battle to be fought, and upon which it practically was fought, was that of Americanism. It was confidently expected by the members of that party that they would carry the state, and that they did not is but another proof of Andrew Johnson's strong hold upon the people of Tennessee. When this second gubernatorial term was drawing to a close, he was given the highest honor within the gift of that people by an almost unanimous election to the United States senate, in which body he took his seat in December, 1857. One of the first measures to which he turned his attention was the Homestead bill, which he earnestly supported from first to last, and was one of the chief instruments by which it became a law. He made a bold stand for retrenchment in the public service, and attacked extravagance wherever he believed it existed in the management of government affairs, and opposed the building of a railroad to the Pacific, doubting if government had such power, and having little faith in the need of such a road.

Before proceeding further with Senator Johnson's public services, it will be necessary to glance at his attitude toward slavery, and understand some

thing of his views thereon.

That he was a southern man, often elected to office by southern votes, is sufficient to prove that he was no outspoken foe to the system; while his love for equality and his course toward the colored people in after years, would also indicate that it never possessed his warmest affection or deepest faith. A writer who undoubtedly reflected Mr. Johnson's personal views explained his position after the war in the following words:

"On the slavery question Senator Johnson held to the dogmas as then received by the party with which he generally acted; but it was not an institution superior to all others, or on which he would sacrifice the integrity of the Republic. While never regarding the institution as permanent, he, as a southern-born man, has uniformly sustained it. In his own words, he then believed that slavery had its foundation and would find its perpetuity alone in the Union, and the Union its continuance .n a non-interference with it. A review of his political life abundantly demonstrates his recognition of it as an existing institution. But while this is true, the support he yielded to it was not such as at all times to meet the approval of ultra and extreme southern men. More than once his independent action was exposed to their censure, and to the charge of entertaining anti-slavery sentiments. . . . He pursued the even tenor of his ways and thoughts, and did not permit himself to be forced into extreme views which he could not conscientiously hold, on the one hand, or into the expression of passionately self-destructive antagonism on the other. He could not accept their views, and would not part with his own. Hence he took the institution of slavery as it stood. It was so interwoven with all the political and social interests of the south, where he resided, that so long as it remained subservient to the Constitution and laws of the country, he continued to yield it his countenance and tolerant support; but when it attempted to rise above the authority of the government itself, and waged war against the Nation, he promptly took his stand by the government as paramount authority, and as the only hope for the perpetuity of free institutions and the attainment of a higher civilization."

This undoubtedly is a fair estimate of his position; but in the search for further light we can use the words of Mr. Johnson himself. In a speech delivered during his congressional canvass of 1849 he said:

"The institution of slavery was introduced into this country by our forefathers, anterior to the existence of our present form of government, and recognized by the Constitution of the United States and made a part of the basis of representation. It has become so closely connected with the operations of the government and the commerce of the whole country that it may now be considered as one of the ingredients of our political and social system. And again in 1850: "In conclusion I will only say as relates to this negro question, that I trust and hope in God's name—and I hope there