Test bank for social psychology 10th editionby elliot aronson

Test Bank For Social Psychology 10th Editionby Elliot Aronson

Test Bank For Social Psychology 10th Editionby Elliot Aronson Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankmall.com/dow nload/test-bank-for-social-psychology-10th-editionby-elliot-aronson/

Visit TestBankMall.com to get complete for all chapters

Aronson, Wilson, Sommers: Social Psychology, 10th edition 179, 182, 183 176, 181 180

in Social Psychology Essay

196

198, 195

197

Learning Objective: 2.2 Compare the strengths and weaknesses of various research designs that social psychologists use.

Topic: Research Designs 2 Copyright © 2019, 2016, 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Aronson, Wilson, Sommers: Social Psychology, 10th edition

CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY: HOW SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGISTS DO RESEARCH Multiple Choice Choose the one alternative that best completes the statement or answers the question.

1.

Many social problems of interest to social psychologists can be studied . a. in children b. in animals c. scientifically d. anecdotally Answer: C Learning Objective: None Topic: Introduction Difficulty Level: Easy Skill Level: Remember the Facts APA Learning Objective: 1.1 Describe key concepts, principles, and overarching themes in psychology.

2.

After Lyla’s husband was injured in a car accident, she said, “I woke up with a bad feeling in my stomach—I knew something was off about that day.” Lyla is exhibiting . a. accessibility b. thought suppression c. counterfactual thinking d. the hindsight bias Answer: D Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Difficult Skill Level: Apply What You Know APA Learning Objective: 1.1 Describe key concepts, principles, and overarching themes in psychology.

3.

According to the authors of your text, the hindsight bias is _ . a. the tendency for people to exaggerate how much they could have predicted an outcome after knowing that it occurred b. the level of agreement between two or more people who independently observe and code a set of data c. a form of the observational method in which the researcher examines the accumulated documents of a culture d. the extent to which results of a study can be generalized to other situations and to other people Answer: A Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Easy Skill Level: Remember the Facts APA Learning Objective: 1.1 Describe key concepts, principles, and overarching themes in psychology.

4.

A hypothesis is most like a(n) . a. brilliant insight b. experiment c. theory Learning Objective: 2.2 Compare the strengths and weaknesses of various research designs that social d. hunch use. psychologists Topic: Research Designs 3 Copyright © 2019, 2016, 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Aronson, Wilson, Sommers: Social Psychology, 10th edition

Answer: D Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Easy Skill Level: Remember the Facts APA Learning Objective: 1.1 Describe key concepts, principles, and overarching themes in psychology.

5.

If a scientist believes that another person’s theory is wrong, the best approach for that scientist to take is to . a. write an essay explaining why the other theory is wrong b. ignore the other’s research because it is irrelevant to the scientist’s theory c. design a study making specific predictions to test the alternate explanation d. work in another country Answer: C Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Moderate Skill Level: Understand the Concepts APA Learning Objective: 1.3 Describe applications of psychology.

6.

In the 1950s, Leon Festinger arrived at a theory of attitude change that was at odds with the psychological “wisdom” of the day. The genesis of this theory—cognitive dissonance theory—demonstrates the author’s point that many ideas in social psychology are . a. best viewed as “common sense” b. the result of dissatisfaction with current theories c. based on researchers’ personal experiences d. applicable only to the current historical era Answer: B Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Moderate Skill Level: Understand the Concepts APA Learning Objective: 1.1 Describe key concepts, principles, and overarching themes in psychology.

7.

Dissonance research resulted from Festinger’s skepticism about the behaviorist approach. In recent years, new researchers have explored alternatives to dissonance explanations for social phenomena. These events illustrate . a. that behaviorist folk wisdom and dissonance folk wisdom are incorrect b. the influence of researchers’ personal experiences in shaping their research questions c. that old theories can inspire new research d. the shortcomings of science as a cumulative enterprise Answer: C Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Moderate Skill Level: Understand the Concepts APA Learning Objective: 1.1 Describe key concepts, principles, and overarching themes in psychology.

8.

The authors of your text discuss the idea that social psychology progresses through the process of theory refinement. Which of the following is the best summary of theory refinement? a. Theories are developed and debated by experts in the field. b. When hypotheses are proven, they become theories. c. Theories are developed, hypotheses are proposed and tested, and then theories are revised. d. Hypotheses are proposed and tested at least three times by different researchers before altering a Learning Objective: 2.2 Compare the strengths and weaknesses of various research designs that social theory. psychologists Answer: C use.

Topic: Research Designs 4 Copyright © 2019, 2016, 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Aronson, Wilson, Sommers: Social Psychology, 10th edition

Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Moderate Skill Level: Understand the Concepts APA Learning Objective: 1.3 Describe applications of psychology.

9.

When Jakim, a social psychologist, observes that a woman is more likely to open a door for a man than a woman, he may use this information to . a. prove hypotheses that were based on previous theory b. develop a hypothesis and design studies to test it c. engage in theoretical debates about human behavior d. get more doors opened for him Answer: B Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Moderate Skill Level: Understand the Concepts APA Learning Objective: 1.3 Describe applications of psychology.

10.

According to the authors of your text, when Bibb Latané and John Darley began to seriously consider why no one helped Kitty Genovese during her brutal attack, they hypothesized that the explanation was that . a. New Yorkers are all apathetic b. no one witnessed the attack c. witnesses knew they would not be reinforced for reporting the crime d. when many witness a crime, people assume someone else will call for help Answer: D Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Easy Skill Level: Remember the Facts APA Learning Objective: 1.1 Describe key concepts, principles, and overarching themes in psychology.

11.

Which of the following situations is LEAST likely to result in diffusion of responsibility? a. An entire neighborhood hears screams coming from the street. b. While attending a baseball game at the stadium, several people witness a woman punch a friend in the mouth. c. Several people observe two men fighting. d. Jim and Bob observe a young woman being abused in a parking lot.

Answer: D Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science Difficulty Level: Difficult Skill Level: Apply What You Know APA Learning Objective: 1.1 Describe key concepts, principles, and overarching themes in psychology.

12.

The more people who witness an emergency, the less likely it is that witnesses will help. This is a phenomenon known as _. a. witness avoidance b. social loafing c. diffusion of responsibility d. social avoidance Answer: C Learning Objective: 2.1 Describe how researchers develop hypotheses and theories.

Learning Objective: 2.2 Compare the strengths and weaknesses of various research designs that social Topic: Social Psychology: An Empirical Science psychologists use.Easy Difficulty Level: Topic: Research Designs 5 Copyright © 2019, 2016, 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Another random document with no related content on Scribd:

TEXT OF THE RECONSTRUCTION MEASURES. 14th Constitutional Amendment.

Joint Resolution proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of both houses concurring,) That the following article be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which, when ratified by threefourths of said Legislatures, shall be valid as part of the Constitution, namely: [Here follows the 14th amendment. See Book IV.]

Reconstruction Act of Thirty-Ninth Congress.

An Act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel States.

Whereas no legal State governments or adequate protection for life or property now exists in the rebel States of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Florida, Texas, and Arkansas; and whereas it is necessary that peace and good order should be enforced in said States until loyal and republican State governments can be legally established: Therefore Be it enacted, &c., That said rebel States shall be divided into military districts and made subject to the military authority of the United States, as hereinafter prescribed, and for that purpose Virginia shall constitute the first district; North Carolina and South Carolina the second district; Georgia, Alabama, and Florida the third district; Mississippi and Arkansas the fourth district; and Louisiana and Texas the fifth district.

Sec. 2. That it shall be the duty of the President to assign to the command of each of said districts an officer of the army, not below the rank of brigadier-general, and to detail a sufficient military force to enable such officer to perform his duties and enforce his authority within the district to which he is assigned.

Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of each officer assigned as aforesaid to protect all persons in their rights of person and property, to suppress insurrection, disorder, and violence, and to punish, or cause to be punished, all disturbers of the public peace and criminals, and to this end he may allow local civil tribunals to take jurisdiction of and to try offenders, or, when in his judgment it may be necessary for the trial of offenders, he shall have power to organize military commissions or tribunals for that purpose; and all interference under color of State authority with the exercise of military authority under this act shall be null and void.

Sec. 4. That all persons put under military arrest by virtue of this act shall be tried without unnecessary delay, and no cruel or unusual punishment shall be inflicted; and no sentence of any military commission or tribunal hereby authorized, affecting the life or liberty of any person, shall be executed until it is approved by the officer in command of the district, and the laws and regulations for the government of the army shall not be affected by this act, except in so far as they conflict with its provisions: Provided, That no sentence of death under the provisions of this act shall be carried into effect without the approval of the President.

Sec. 5. That when the people of any one of said rebel States shall have formed a constitution of government in conformity with the Constitution of the United States in all respects, framed by a convention of delegates elected by the male citizens of said State twenty-one years old and upward, of whatever race, color, or previous condition, who have been resident in said State for one year previous to the day of such election, except such as may be disfranchised for participation in the rebellion, or for felony at common law, and when such constitution shall provide that the elective franchise shall be enjoyed by all such persons as have the qualifications herein stated for electors of delegates, and when such constitution shall be ratified by a majority of the persons voting on the question of ratification who are qualified as electors for delegates, and when such constitution shall have been submitted to Congress for examination and approval, and Congress shall have approved the same, and when said State, by a vote of its legislature elected under said constitution, shall have adopted the amendment to the Constitution of the United States, proposed by the Thirtyninth Congress, and known as article fourteen, and when said article shall have become a part of the Constitution of the United States, said State shall be declared entitled to representation in Congress, and Senators and Representatives shall be admitted therefrom on their taking the oaths prescribed by law, and then and thereafter the preceding sections of this act shall be inoperative in said State: Provided, That no person excluded from the privilege of holding office by said proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall be eligible to election as a member of the convention to frame a constitution for any of said rebel States, nor shall any such person vote for members of such convention.

Sec. 6. That until the people of said rebel States shall be by law admitted to representation in the Congress of the United States, any civil governments which may exist therein shall be deemed provisional only, and in all respects subject to the paramount authority of the United States at any time to abolish, modify, control, or supersede the same; and in all elections to any office under such provisional governments all persons shall be entitled to vote, and none others, who are entitled to vote under the provisions of the fifth section of this act; and no person shall be eligible to any office under any such provisional governments who would be disqualified from holding office under the provisions of the third article of said constitutional amendment.

Passed March 2, 1867.

Supplemental Reconstruction Act of Fortieth Congress.

An Act supplementary to an act entitled “An act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel States,” passed March second, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, and to facilitate restoration.

Be it enacted, &c., That before the first day of September, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, the commanding general in each district defined by an act entitled “An act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel States,” passed March second, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, shall cause a registration to be made of the male citizens of the United States, twenty-one years of age and upwards, resident in each county or parish in the State or States included in his district, which registration shall include only those persons who are qualified to vote for delegates by the act aforesaid, and who shall have taken and subscribed the following oath or affirmation: “I, ——, do solemnly swear, (or affirm,) in the presence of Almighty God, that I am a citizen of the State of ——; that I have resided in said State for —— months next preceding this day, and now reside in the county of ——, or the parish of ——, in said State, (as the case may be;) that I am twenty-one years old; that I have not been disfranchised for participation in any rebellion or civil war against the United States, nor for felony committed against the laws of any State or of the United States; that I have never been a member of any State legislature, nor held any executive or judicial office in any State and afterwards engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof; that I have never taken an oath as a member of Congress of the United States, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, and

afterwards engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof; that I will faithfully support the Constitution and obey the laws of the United States, and will, to the best of my ability, encourage others so to do, so help me God;” which oath or affirmation maybe administered by any registering officer.

Sec. 2. That after the completion of the registration hereby provided for in any State, at such time and places therein as the commanding general shall appoint and direct, of which at least thirty days’ public notice shall be given, an election shall be held of delegates to a convention for the purpose of establishing a constitution and civil government for such State loyal to the Union, said convention in each State, except Virginia, to consist of the same number of members as the most numerous branch of the State legislature of such State in the year eighteen hundred and sixty, to be apportioned among the several districts, counties, or parishes of such State by the commanding general, giving to each representation in the ratio of voters or registered as aforesaid, as nearly as may be. The convention in Virginia shall consist of the same number of members as represented the territory now constituting Virginia in the most numerous branch of the legislature of said State in the year eighteen hundred and sixty, to be appointed as aforesaid.

Sec. 3. That at said election the registered voters of each State shall vote for or against a convention to form a constitution therefor under this act. Those voting in favor of such a convention shall have written or printed on the ballots by which they vote for delegates, as aforesaid, the words “For a convention,” and those voting against such a convention shall have written or printed on such ballots the words “Against a convention.” The person appointed to superintend said election, and to make return of the votes given thereat, as herein provided, shall count and make return of the votes given for and against a convention; and the commanding general to whom the same shall have been returned shall ascertain and declare the total vote in each State for and against a convention. If a majority of the votes given on that question shall be for a convention, then such convention shall be held as hereinafter provided; but if a majority of said votes shall be against a convention, then no such convention shall be held under this act: Provided, That such convention shall not

be held unless a majority of all such registered voters shall have voted on the question of holding such convention.

Sec. 4. That the commanding general of each district shall appoint as many boards of registration as may be necessary, consisting of three loyal officers or persons, to make and complete the registration, superintend the election, and make return to him of the votes, lists of voters, and of the persons elected as delegates by a plurality of the votes cast at said election; and upon receiving said returns he shall open the same, ascertain the persons elected as delegates according to the returns of the officers who conducted said election, and make proclamation thereof; and if a majority of the votes given on that question shall be for a convention, the commanding general, within sixty days from the date of election, shall notify the delegates to assemble in convention, at a time and place to be mentioned in the notification, and said convention, when organized, shall proceed to frame a constitution and civil government according to the provisions of this act and the act to which it is supplementary; and when the same shall have been so framed, said constitution shall be submitted by the convention for ratification to the persons registered under the provisions of this act at an election to be conducted by the officers or persons appointed or to be appointed by the commanding general, as hereinbefore provided, and to be held after the expiration of thirty days from the date of notice thereof, to be given by said convention; and the returns thereof shall be made to the commanding general of the district.

Sec. 5. That if, according to said returns, the constitution shall be ratified by a majority of the votes of the registered electors qualified as herein specified, cast at said election, (at least one-half of all the registered voters voting upon the question of such ratification,) the president of the convention shall transmit a copy of the same, duly certified, to the President of the United States, who shall forthwith transmit the same to Congress, if then in session, and if not in session, then immediately upon its next assembling; and if it shall, moreover, appear to Congress that the election was one at which all the registered and qualified electors in the State had an opportunity to vote freely and without restraint, fear, or the influence of fraud; and if the Congress shall be satisfied that such constitution meets the approval of a majority of all the qualified electors in the State, and if

the said constitution shall be declared by Congress to be in conformity with the provisions of the act to which this is supplementary, and the other provisions of said act shall have been complied with, and the said constitution shall be approved by Congress, the State shall be declared entitled to representation, and Senators and Representatives shall be admitted therefrom as therein provided.

Sec. 6. That all elections in the States mentioned in the said “Act to provide for the more efficient government of the rebel States,” shall, during the operation of said act, be by ballot; and all officers making the said registration of voters and conducting said elections shall, before entering upon the discharge of their duties, take and subscribe the oath prescribed by the act approved July second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, entitled “An act to prescribe an oath of office:”[29] Provided, That if any person shall knowingly and falsely take and subscribe any oath in this act prescribed, such person so offending and being thereof duly convicted, shall be subject to the pains, penalties, and disabilities which by law are provided for the punishment of the crime of wilful and corrupt perjury.

Sec. 7. That all expenses incurred by the several commanding generals, or by virtue of any orders issued, or appointments made, by them, under or by virtue of this act, shall be paid out of any moneys in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.

Sec. 8. That the convention for each State shall prescribe the fees, salary, and compensation to be paid to all delegates and other officers and agents herein authorized or necessary to carry into effect the purposes of this act not herein otherwise provided for, and shall provide for the levy and collection of such taxes on the property in such State as may be necessary to pay the same.

Sec. 9. That the word article, in the sixth section of the act to which this is supplementary, shall be construed to mean section.

Passed March 23, 1867.

Votes of State Legislatures on the Fourteenth [30] Constitutional Amendment.

LOYAL STATES. Ratified—Twenty-one States.

Maine—Senate, January 16, 1867, yeas 31, nays 0; House, January 11, 1867, yeas 126, nays 12.

New Hampshire—Senate, July 6, 1866, yeas 9, nays 3; House, June 28, 1866, yeas 207, nays 112.

Vermont—Senate, October 23, 1866, yeas 28, nays 0; House, October 30, 1866, yeas 199, nays 11.

Massachusetts—Senate, March 20, 1867, yeas 27, nays 6; House, March 14, 1867, yeas 120, nays 20.

Rhode Island—Senate, February 5, 1867, yeas 26, nays 2; House, February 7, 1867, yeas 60, nays 9 Connecticut—Senate, June 25, 1866, yeas 11, nays 6; House, June 29, 1866, yeas 131, nays 92.

New York—Senate, January 3, 1867, yeas 23, nays 3; House, January 10, 1867, yeas 76, nays 40.

New Jersey—Senate, September 11, 1866, yeas 11, nays 10; House, September 11, 1866, yeas 34, nays 24.

Pennsylvania—Senate, January 17, 1867, yeas 20, nays 9; House, February 6, 1867, yeas 58, nays 29.

West Virginia—Senate, January 15, 1867, yeas 15, nays 3; House, January 16, 1867, yeas 43, nays 11.

Ohio—Senate, January 3, 1867, yeas 21, nays 12; House, January 4, 1867, yeas 54, nays 25.

Tennessee—Senate, July 11, 1866, yeas 15, nays 6; House, July 12, 1866, yeas 43, nays 11.

Indiana—Senate, January 16, 1867, yeas 29, nays 18; House, January 23, 1867, yeas —, nays —.

Illinois—Senate, January 10, 1867, yeas 17, nays 7; House, January 15, 1867, yeas 59, nays 25.

Michigan—Senate, —— 1867, yeas 25, nays 1; House, —— 1867, yeas 77, nays 15.

Missouri—Senate, January 5, 1867, yeas 26, nays 6; House, January 8, 1867, yeas 85, nays 34.

Minnesota—Senate, January 16, 1867, yeas 16, nays 5; House, January 15, 1867, yeas 40, nays 6.

Kansas—Senate, January 11, 1867, unanimously; House, January 10, 1867, yeas, 75, nays 7.

Wisconsin—Senate, January 23, 1867, yeas 22, nays 10; House, February 7, 1867, yeas 72, nays 12.

Oregon—[31]Senate, ——, 1866, yeas 13, nays 7; House, September 19, 1866, yeas 25, nays 22.

Nevada—[31]Senate, January 22, 1867, yeas 14, nays 2; House, January 11, 1867, yeas 34, nays 4.

Rejected—Three States.

Delaware—Senate, —— ——; House, February 7, 1867, yeas 6, nays 15.

Maryland—Senate, March 23, 1867, yeas 4, nays 13; House, March 23, 1867, yeas 12, nays 45.

Kentucky—Senate, January 8, 1867, yeas 7, nays 24; House, January 8, 1867, yeas 26, nays 62.

Not acted—Three States.

Iowa, California, Nebraska.

INSURRECTIONARY STATES. Rejected—Ten States.

Virginia—Senate, January 9, 1867, unanimously; House, January 9, 1867, 1 for amendment.

North Carolina—Senate, December 13, 1866, yeas 1, nays 44; House, December 13, 1866, yeas 10, nays 93.

South Carolina—Senate —— ——; House, December 20, 1866, yeas 1, nays 95.

Georgia—Senate, November 9, 1866, yeas 0, nays 36; House, November 9, 1866, yeas 2, nays 131.

Florida—Senate, December 3, 1866, yeas 0, nays 20; House, December 1, 1866, yeas 0, nays 49.

Alabama—Senate, December 7, 1866, yeas 2, nays 27; House, December 7, 1866, yeas 8, nays 69.

Mississippi—Senate, January 30, 1867, yeas 0, nays 27; House, January 25, 1867, yeas 0, nays 88.

Louisiana—Senate, February 5, 1867, unanimously; House, February 6, 1867, unanimously.

Texas—Senate, —— ——; House, October 13, 1866, yeas 5, nays 67.

Arkansas—Senate, December 15, 1866, yeas 1, nays 24; House, December 17, 1866, yeas 2, nays 68.

The passage of the 14th Amendment and of the Reconstruction Acts, was followed by Presidential proclamations dated August 20, 1866, declaring the insurrection at an end in Texas, and civil authority existing throughout the whole of the United States.

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1864.

The Republican National Convention met at Baltimore, June 7th, 1864, and renominated President Lincoln unanimously, save the vote of Missouri, which was cast for Gen. Grant. Hannibal Hamlin, the old Vice-President, was not renominated, because of a desire to give part

of the ticket to the Union men of the South, who pressed Senator Andrew Johnson of Tennessee. “Parson” Brownlow made a strong appeal in his behalf, and by his eloquence captured a majority of the Convention.

The Democratic National Convention met at Chicago, August 29th, 1864, and nominated General George B. McClellan, of New Jersey, for President, and George H. Pendleton, of Ohio, for Vice-President.

General McClellan was made available for the Democratic nomination through certain political letters which he had written on points of difference between himself and the Lincoln administration.

Two of these letters are sufficient to show his own and the views of the party which nominated him, in the canvass which followed:

Gen. McClellan’s Letters.

On Political Administration, July 7, 1862.

Headquarters Army of the Potomac, Camp near Harrison’s Landing, Va., July 7, 1862.

Mr. President:—You have been fully informed that the rebel army is in the front, with the purpose of overwhelming us by attacking our positions or reducing us by blocking our river communications. I cannot but regard our condition as critical, and I earnestly desire, in view of possible contingencies, to lay before your excellency, for your private consideration, my general views concerning the existing state of the rebellion, although they do not strictly relate to the situation of this army, or strictly come within the scope of my official duties.

These views amount to convictions, and are deeply impressed upon my mind and heart. Our cause must never be abandoned; it is the cause of free institutions and self-government. The Constitution and the Union must be preserved, whatever may be the cost in time, treasure, and blood. If secession is successful, other dissolutions are clearly to be seen in the future. Let neither military disaster, political faction, nor foreign war shake your settled purpose to enforce the equal operation of the laws of the United States upon the people of every State.

The time has come when the government must determine upon a civil and military policy, covering the whole ground of our national trouble.

The responsibility of determining, declaring, and supporting such civil and military policy, and of directing the whole course of national affairs in regard to the rebellion, must now be assumed and exercised by you, or our cause will be lost. The Constitution gives you power, even for the present terrible exigency.

This rebellion has assumed the character of a war; as such it should be regarded, and it should be conducted upon the highest principles known to Christian civilization. It should not be a war looking to the subjugation of the people of any State, in any event. It should not be at all a war upon population, but against armed forces and political organizations. Neither confiscation of property, political executions of persons, territorial organization of States, or forcible abolition of slavery, should be contemplated for a moment.

In prosecuting the war, all private property and unarmed persons should be strictly protected, subject only to the necessity of military operations; all private property taken for military use should be paid or receipted for; pillage and waste should be treated as high crimes; all unnecessary trespass sternly prohibited, and offensive demeanor by the military towards citizens promptly rebuked. Military arrests should not be tolerated, except in places where active hostilities exist; and oaths, not required by enactments, constitutionally made, should be neither demanded nor received.

Military government should be confined to the preservation of public order and the protection of political right. Military power should not be allowed to interfere with the relations of servitude, either by supporting or impairing the authority of the master, except for repressing disorder, as in other cases. Slaves, contraband under the act of Congress, seeking military protection, should receive it.

The right of the government to appropriate permanently to its own service claims to slave labor should be asserted, and the right of the owner to compensation therefor should be recognized. This principle might be extended, upon grounds of military necessity and security, to all the slaves of a particular State, thus working manumission in such State; and in Missouri, perhaps in Western Virginia also, and possibly even in Maryland, the expediency of such a measure is only a question of time. A system of policy thus constitutional, and pervaded by the influences of Christianity and freedom, would receive the support of almost all truly loyal men, would deeply impress the rebel masses and all foreign nations, and it might be humbly hoped that it would commend itself to the favor of the Almighty.

Unless the principles governing the future conduct of our struggle shall be made known and approved, the effort to obtain requisite

forces will be almost hopeless. A declaration of radical views, especially upon slavery, will rapidly disintegrate our present armies.

The policy of the government must be supported by concentrations of military power. The national forces should not be dispersed in expeditions, posts of occupation, and numerous armies, but should be mainly collected into masses, and brought to bear upon the armies of the Confederate States. Those armies thoroughly defeated, the political structure which they support would soon cease to exist.

In carrying out any system of policy which you may form, you will require a commander-in-chief of the army, one who possesses your confidence, understands your views, and who is competent to execute your orders by directing the military forces of the nation to the accomplishment of the objects by you proposed. I do not ask that place for myself. I am willing to serve you in such position as you may assign me, and I will do so as faithfully as ever subordinate served superior.

I may be on the brink of eternity; and as I hope forgiveness from my Maker, I have written this letter with sincerity towards you and from love for my country.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, George B. McClellan, Major-General Commanding.

His Excellency A. Lincoln, President.

IN FAVOR OF the ELECTION OF GEORGE W. WOODWARD AS GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA. Orange, New Jersey, October 12, 1863.

Dear Sir:—My attention has been called to an article in the Philadelphia Press, asserting that I had written to the managers of a Democratic meeting at Allentown, disapproving the objects of the meeting, and that if I voted or spoke it would be in favor of Governor Curtin, and I am informed that similar assertions have been made throughout the State.

It has been my earnest endeavor heretofore to avoid participation in party politics. I had determined to adhere to this course, but it is obvious that I cannot longer maintain silence under such misrepresentations. I therefore request you to deny that I have written any such letter, or entertained any such views as those attributed to me in the Philadelphia Press, and I desire to state clearly and distinctly, that having some days ago had a full conversation with Judge Woodward, I find that our views agree, and I regard his election as Governor of Pennsylvania called for by the interests of the nation.

I understand Judge Woodward to be in favor of the prosecution of the war with all the means at the command of the loyal States, until the military power of the rebellion is destroyed. I understand him to be of the opinion that while the war is urged with all possible decision and energy, the policy directing it should be in consonance with the principles of humanity and civilization, working no injury to private rights and property not demanded by military necessity and recognized by military law among civilized nations.

And, finally, I understand him to agree with me in the opinion that the sole great objects of this war are the restoration of the unity of the nation, the preservation of the Constitution, and the supremacy of the laws of the country. Believing our opinions entirely agree upon these points, I would, were it in my power, give to Judge Woodward my voice and vote.

I am, very respectfully, yours, George B. McClellan.

Hon. Charles J. Biddle.

The views of Mr. Lincoln were well known; they were felt in the general conduct of the war. The Republicans adopted as one of their maxims the words of their candidate, “that it was dangerous to swap horses while crossing a stream.” The campaign was exciting, and was watched by both armies with interest and anxiety. In this election, by virtue of an act of Congress, the soldiers in the field were permitted to vote, and a large majority of every branch of the service sustained the Administration, though two years before General McClellan had

been the idol of the Army of the Potomac. Lincoln and Johnson received 212 electoral votes, against 21 for McClellan and Pendleton.

Lincoln’s Second Administration.

In President Lincoln’s second inaugural address, delivered on the 4th of March, 1865, he spoke the following words, since oft quoted as typical of the kindly disposition of the man believed by his party to be the greatest President since Washington: “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the Nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and orphans—to do all which may achieve a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

Lincoln could well afford to show that generosity which never comes more properly than from the hands of the victor. His policy was about to end in a great triumph. In less than five weeks later on General Lee had surrendered the main army of the South to General Grant at Appomattox, on terms at once magnanimous and so briefly stated that they won the admiration of both armies, for the rebels had been permitted to retain their horses and side arms, and to go at once to their homes, not to be disturbed by United States authority so long as they observed their paroles and the laws in force where they resided. Lee’s surrender was rapidly followed by that of all Southern troops.

Next came a grave political work—the actual reconstruction of the States lately in rebellion. This work gave renewed freshness to the leading political issues incident to the war, and likewise gave rise to new issues. It was claimed at once that Lincoln had a reconstruction policy of his own, because of his anxiety for the prompt admission of Louisiana and Arkansas, but it had certainly never taken definite shape, nor was there time to get such a policy in shape, between the surrender of Lee and his own assassination. On the night of the 15th of April, six days after the surrender, J. Wilkes Booth shot him while sitting in a box in Ford’s theatre. The nation stood appalled at the

deed. No man was ever more sincerely mourned in all sections and by all classes. The Southern leaders thought that this rash act had lost to them a life which had never been harsh, and while firm, was ever generous. The North had looked upon him as “Father Abraham,” and all who viewed the result of the shooting from sectional or partisan standpoints, thought his policy of “keeping with the people,” would have shielded every proper interest. No public man ever felt less “pride of opinion” than Lincoln, and we do believe, had he lived, that he would have shaped events, as he did during the war, to the best interests of the victors, but without unnecessary agitation or harshness. All attempts of writers to evolve from his proclamation a reconstruction policy, applicable to peace, have been vain and impotent. He had none which would not have changed with changing circumstances. A “policy” in an executive office is too often but another name for executive egotism, and Lincoln was almost absolutely free from that weakness.

On the morning of Mr. Lincoln’s death, indeed within the same hour (and very properly so under the circumstances), the VicePresident Andrew Johnson was inaugurated as President. The excitement was painfully high, and the new President, in speeches, interviews and proclamations if possible added to it. From evidence in the Bureau of Military Justice he thought the assassination of Lincoln, and the attempted assassination of Secretary Seward had been procured by Jefferson Davis, Clement C. Clay, Jacob Thompson, Geo. N. Saunders, Beverly Tucker, Wm. C. Cleary, and “other rebels and traitors harbored in Canada.” The evidence, however, fully drawn out in the trial of the co-conspirators of J. Wilkes Booth, showed that the scheme was hair-brained, and from no responsible political source. The proclamation, however, gave keenness to the search for the fugitive Davis, and he was soon captured while making his way through Georgia to the Florida coast with the intention of escaping from the country. He was imprisoned in Fortress Monroe, and an indictment for treason was found against him, but he remained a close prisoner for nearly two years, until times when political policies had been changed or modified. Horace Greeley was one of his bondsmen. By this time there was grave doubt whether he could be legally convicted,[32] “now that the charge of inciting Wilkes Booth’s crime had been tacitly abandoned. Mr. Webster (in his Bunker Hill oration) had only given clearer

expression to the American doctrine, that, after a revolt has levied a regular army, and fought therewith a pitched battle, its champions, even though utterly defeated, cannot be tried and convicted as traitors. This may be an extreme statement; but surely a rebellion which has for years maintained great armies, levied taxes and conscriptions, negotiated loans, fought scores of sanguinary battles with alternate successes and reverses, and exchanged tens of thousands of prisoners of war, can hardly fail to have achieved thereby the position and the rights of a lawful belligerent.” This view, as then presented by Greeley, was accepted by President Johnson, who from intemperate denunciation had become the friend of his old friends in the South. Greeley’s view was not generally accepted by the North, though most of the leading men of both parties hoped the responsibility of a trial would be avoided by the escape and flight of the prisoner. But he was confident by this time, and sought a trial.

He was never tried, and the best reason for the fact is given in Judge Underwood’s testimony before a Congressional Committee (and the Judge was a Republican) “that no conviction was possible, except by packing a jury.”

Andrew Johnson.

On the 29th of April, 1865, President Johnson issued a proclamation removing all restrictions upon internal, domestic and coastwise and commercial intercourse in all Southern States east of the Mississippi; the blockade was removed May 22, and on May 29 a proclamation of amnesty was issued, with fourteen classes excepted therefrom, and the requirement of an “iron-clad oath” from those accepting its provisions. Proclamations rapidly followed in shaping the lately rebellious States to the conditions of peace and restoration to the Union. These States were required to hold conventions, repeal secession ordinances, accept the abolition of slavery, repudiate Southern war debts, provide for Congressional representation, and elect new State Officers and Legislatures. The several constitutional amendments were of course to be ratified by the vote of the people.

These conditions were eventually all complied with, some of the States being more tardy than others. The irreconcilables charged upon the Military officers, the Freedmen’s Bureau, and the stern application of the reconstruction acts, these results, and many of them showed a political hostility which, after the election of the new Legislatures, took shape in what were in the North at the time denounced as “THE BLACK CODES.” These were passed by all of the eleven States in the rebellion. The codes varied in severity, according to the views of the Legislatures, and for a time they seriously interfered with the recognition of the States, the Republicans charging that the design was to restore slavery under new forms. In South Carolina Gen’l Sickles issued military orders, as late as January 17, 1866, against the enforcement of such laws.

To assure the rights, of the freedmen the 14th amendment of the Constitution was passed by Congress, June 18th, 1866. President Johnson opposed it, refused to sign, but said he would submit it to the several States. This was done, and it was accepted by the required three-fourths, January 28th, 1868. This had the effect to do away with many of the “black codes,” and the States which desired readmission to the Union had to finally give them up. Since reconstruction, and the political ousting of what were called the “carpet-bag governments,” some of the States, notably Georgia, has passed class laws, which treat colored criminals differently from white, under what are now known as the “conduct laws.” Terms of sentence are served out, in any part of the State, under the control of public and private contractors, and “vagrants” are subjected to sentences which it is believed would be less extended under a system of confinement.

Johnson’s Policy.

While President Johnson’s policy did not materially check reconstruction, it encouraged Southern politicians to political effort, and with their well known tact they were not long in gaining the ascendancy in nearly every State. This ascendancy excited the fears and jealousies of the North, and the Republicans announced as their object and platform “that all the results of the war” should be secured before Southern reconstruction and representation in Congress should be completed. On this they were almost solidly united in Congress, but Horace Greeley trained an independent sentiment which favored complete amnesty to the South. President Johnson sought to utilize this sentiment, and to divide the Republican party through his policy, which now looked to the same ends. He had said to a delegation introduced by Gov. Oliver P. Morton, April 21, 1865: “Your slavery is dead, but I did not murder it. As Macbeth said to Banquo’s bloody ghost: ‘Never shake thy gory locks at me; Thou canst not say I did it.’

“Slavery is dead, and you must pardon me if I do not mourn over its dead body; you can bury it out of sight. In restoring the State, leave out that disturbing and dangerous element, and use only those parts of the machinery which will move in harmony.

“But in calling a convention to restore the State, who shall restore and re-establish it? Shall the man who gave his influence and his means to destroy the Government? Is he to participate in the great work of reorganization? Shall he who brought this misery upon the State be permitted to control its destinies? If this be so, then all this precious blood of our brave soldiers and officers so freely poured out will have been wantonly spilled. All the glorious victories won by our noble armies will go for nought, and all the battle-fields which have

been sown with dead heroes during the rebellion will have been made memorable in vain.”

In a speech at Washington, Feb. 22nd, 1866, Johnson said: “The Government has stretched forth its strong arm, and with its physical power it has put down treason in the field. That is, the section of country that arrayed itself against the Government has been conquered by the force of the Government itself. Now, what had we said to those people? We said, ‘No compromise; we can settle this question with the South in eight and forty hours.’

“I have said it again and again, and I repeat it now, ‘disband your armies, acknowledge the supremacy of the Constitution of the United States, give obedience to the law, and the whole question is settled.’

“What has been done since? Their armies have been disbanded.

They come now to meet us in a spirit of magnanimity and say, ‘We were mistaken; we made the effort to carry out the doctrine of secession and dissolve this Union, and having traced this thing to its logical and physical results, we now acknowledge the flag of our country, and promise obedience to the Constitution and the supremacy of the law.’

“I say, then, when you comply with the Constitution, when you yield to the law, when you acknowledge allegiance to the Government—I say let the door of the Union be opened, and the relation be restored to those that had erred and had strayed from the fold of our fathers.”

It is not partisanship to say that Johnson’s views had undergone a change. He did not admit this in his speeches, but the fact was accepted in all sections, and the leaders of parties took position accordingly—nearly all of the Republicans against him, nearly all of the Democrats for him. So radical had this difference become that he vetoed nearly all of the political bills passed by the Republicans from 1866 until the end of his administration, but such was the Republican preponderance in both Houses of Congress that they passed them over his head by the necessary two-thirds vote. He vetoed the several Freedmen’s Bureau Bills, the Civil Rights Bill, that for the admission of Nebraska and Colorado, the Bill to permit Colored Suffrage in the District of Columbia, one of the Reconstruction Bills, and finally made a direct issue with the powers

of Congress by his veto of the Civil Tenure Bill, March 2, 1867, the substance of which is shown in the third section, as follows: Sec. 3. That the President shall have power to fill all vacancies which may happen during the recess of the Senate, by reason of death or resignation, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session thereafter. And if no appointment, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall be made to such office so vacant or temporarily filled as aforesaid during such next session of the Senate, such office shall remain in abeyance without any salary, fees, or emoluments attached thereto, until the same shall be filled by appointment thereto, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and during such time all the powers and duties belonging to such office shall be exercised by such other officer as may by law exercise such powers and duties in case of a vacancy in such office.

The bill originally passed the Senate by 22 to 10—all of the nays Democrats save Van Winkle and Willey. It passed the House by 112 to 41—all of the yeas Republicans; all of the nays Democrats save Hawkins, Latham and Whaley. The Senate passed it over the veto by 35 to 11—a strict party vote; the House by 138 to 40—a strict party vote, except Latham (Rep.) who voted nay.

The refusal of the President to enforce this act, and his attempted removal of Secretary Stanton from the Cabinet when against the wish of the Senate, led to the effort to impeach him. Stanton resisted the President, and General Grant took an active part in sustaining the War Secretary. He in fact publicly advised him to “stick,” and his attitude showed that in the great political battle which must follow, they would surely have the support of the army and its great commander.

Impeachment Trial of Andrew Johnson.

[33]

The events which led to the impeachment of President Johnson, may be briefly stated as follows: On the 21st of February, 1868, the President issued an order to Mr. Stanton, removing him from office as Secretary of War, and another to General Lorenzo Thomas, Adjutant-General of the Army, appointing him Secretary of War ad interim, directing the one to surrender and the other to receive, all the books, papers, and public property belonging to the War Department. As these orders fill an important place in the history of the impeachment, we give them here. The order to Mr. Stanton reads: “By virtue of the power and authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States, you are hereby removed from office as Secretary for the Department of War, and your functions as such will terminate upon the receipt of this communication. You will transfer to Brevet Major-General Lorenzo Thomas, Adjutant-General of the Army, who has this day been authorized and empowered to act as Secretary of War ad interim, all records, books, papers, and other public property now in your custody and charge.”

The order to General Thomas reads: “The Hon. Edwin M. Stanton having been this day removed from office as Secretary for the Department of War, you are hereby authorized and empowered to act as Secretary of War ad interim, and will immediately enter upon the discharge of the duties pertaining to that office. Mr. Stanton has been instructed to transfer to you all the records, books, and other public property now in his custody and charge.”

These orders having been officially communicated to the Senate, that body, after an earnest debate, passed the following resolution:

“Resolved, by the Senate of the United States, That under the Constitution and laws of the United States the President has no power to remove the Secretary of War and designate any other officer to perform the duties of that office.”

The President, upon the 24th, sent a message to the Senate, arguing at length that not only under the Constitution, but also under the laws as now existing, he had the right of removing Mr. Stanton and appointing another to fill his place. The point of his argument is: That by a special proviso in the Tenure-of-Office Bill the various Secretaries of Departments “shall hold their offices respectively for and during the term of the President by whom they may have been appointed, and for one month thereafter, subject to removal by and with the advice of the Senate.” The President affirms that Mr. Stanton was appointed not by him, but by his predecessor, Mr. Lincoln, and held office only by the sufferance, not the appointment, of the present Executive; and that therefore his tenure is, by the express reading of the law excepted from the general provision, that every person duly appointed to office, “by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,” etc., shall be “entitled to hold office until a successor shall have been in like manner appointed and duly qualified, except as herein otherwise provided.” The essential point of the President’s argument, therefore, is that, as Mr. Stanton was not appointed by him, he had, under the Tenure-of-Office Bill, the right at any time to remove him; the same right which his own successor would have, no matter whether the incumbent had, by sufferance, not by appointment of the existing Executive, held the office for weeks or even years. “If,” says the President, “my successor would have the power to remove Mr. Stanton, after permitting him to remain a period of two weeks, because he was not appointed by him, I who have tolerated Mr. Stanton for more than two years, certainly have the same right to remove him, upon the same ground, namely that he was not appointed by me but by my predecessor.”

In the meantime General Thomas presented himself at the War Department and demanded to be placed in the position to which he had been assigned by the President. Mr. Stanton refused to surrender his post, and ordered General Thomas to proceed to the apartment which belonged to him as Adjutant-General. This order was not obeyed, and so the two claimants to the Secretaryship of War

held their ground. A sort of legal by-play then ensued. Mr. Stanton entered a formal complaint before Judge Carter, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, charging that General Thomas had illegally exercised and attempted to exercise the duties of Secretary of War; and had threatened to “forcibly remove the complainant from the buildings and apartments of the Secretary of War in the War Department, and forcibly take possession and control thereof under his pretended appointment by the President of the United States as Secretary of War ad interim;” and praying that he might be arrested and held to answer this charge. General Thomas was accordingly arrested, and held to bail in the sum of $15,000 to appear before the court on the 24th. Appearing on that day he was discharged from custody and bail; whereupon he entered an action against Mr. Stanton for false imprisonment, laying his damages at $150,000.

On the 22d of February the House Committee on Reconstruction, through its Chairman, Mr. Stevens, presented a brief report, merely stating the fact of the attempted removal by the President of Mr. Stanton, and closing as follows: “Upon the evidence collected by the Committee, which is hereafter presented, and in virtue of the powers with which they have been invested by the House, they are of the opinion that Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, should be impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors. They, therefore, recommend to the House the adoption of the following resolution: “Resolved, That Andrew Johnson, President of the United States be impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors.”

After earnest debate, the question on the resolution was adopted, on the 24th, by a vote of 126 to 47. A committee of two members— Stevens and Bingham—were to notify the Senate of the action of the House; and another committee of seven—Boutwell, Stevens, Bingham, Wilson, Logan, Julian, and Ward—to prepare the articles of impeachment. On the 25th (February) Mr. Stevens thus announced to the Senate the action which had been taken by the House: “In obedience to the order of the House of Representatives we have appeared before you, and in the name of the House of Representatives and of all the people of the United States, we do

impeach Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors in office. And we further inform the Senate that the House of Representatives will in due time exhibit particular articles of impeachment against him, to make good the same; and in their name we demand that the Senate take due order for the appearance of the said Andrew Johnson to answer to the said impeachment.”

The Senate thereupon, by a unanimous vote, resolved that this message from the House should be referred to a select Committee of Seven, to be appointed by the chair, to consider the same and report thereon. The Committee subsequently made a report laying down the rules of procedure to be observed on the trial.

On the 29th of February the Committee of the House appointed for that purpose presented the articles of impeachment which they had drawn up. These, with slight modification, were accepted on the 2d of March. They comprise nine articles, eight of which are based upon the action of the President in ordering the removal of Mr. Stanton, and the appointment of General Thomas as Secretary of War. The general title to the impeachment is: “Articles exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States, in the name of themselves and all the people of the United States, against Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, as maintenance and support of their impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors in office.”

Each of the articles commences with a preamble to the effect that the President, “unmindful of the high duties of his office, of his oath of office, and of the requirements of the Constitution that he should take care that the laws be faithfully executed, did unlawfully and in violation of the laws and Constitution of the United States, perform the several acts specified in the articles respectively;” closing with the declaration: “Whereby the said Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, did then and there commit and was guilty of a high misdemeanor in office.” The phraseology is somewhat varied. In some cases the offense is designated as a “misdemeanor,” in others as a “crime.” The whole closes thus: “And the House of Representatives, by protestation, saving to themselves the liberty of exhibiting at any time hereafter any further articles or other accusation or impeachment against the said Andrew

Johnson, President of the United States, and also of replying to his answers which he shall make to the articles herein preferred against him, and of offering proof to the same and every part thereof, and to all and every other article, accusation, or impeachment which shall be exhibited by them as the case shall require, do demand that the said Andrew Johnson may be put to answer the high crimes and misdemeanors in office herein charged against him, and that such proceedings, examinations, trials, and judgments may be thereupon had and given as may be agreeable to law and justice.”

The following is a summary in brief of the points in the articles of impeachment, legal and technical phraseology being omitted: Article 1. Unlawfully ordering the removal of Mr. Stanton as Secretary of War, in violation of the provisions of the Tenure-ofOffice Act.—Article 2. Unlawfully appointing General Lorenzo Thomas as Secretary of War ad interim.—Article 3 is substantially the same as Article 2, with the addition that there was at the time of the appointment of General Thomas no vacancy in the office of Secretary of War.—Article 4 charges the President with “conspiring with one Lorenzo Thomas and other persons, to the House of Representatives unknown,” to prevent, by intimidation and threats, Mr. Stanton, the legally-appointed Secretary of War, from holding that office.—Article 5 charges the President with conspiring with General Thomas and others to hinder the execution of the Tenure-ofOffice Act; and, in pursuance of this conspiracy, attempting to prevent Mr. Stanton from acting as Secretary of War.—Article 6 charges that the President conspired with General Thomas and others to take forcible possession of the War Department.—Article 7 repeats the charge, in other terms, that the President conspired with General Thomas and others to hinder the execution of the Tenure-ofOffice Act, and to prevent Mr. Stanton from executing the office of Secretary of War.—Article 8 again charges the President with conspiring with General Thomas and others to take possession of the property in the War Department.—Article 9 charges that the President called before him General Emory, who was in command of the forces in the Department of Washington, and declared to him that a law, passed on the 30th of June, 1867, directing that “all orders and instructions relating to military operations, issued by the President or Secretary of War, shall be issued through the General of