Difference Between Reconstruction And Congressional Reconstruction

496 Words 2 Pages
The main difference between presidential Reconstruction and Congressional Reconstruction was that presidential Reconstruction was much more lenient toward the South. Because the “Radical Republicans” in Congress did not like this, they overrode President Johnson’s wishes and implemented a harsher variety of Reconstruction.
Before he died, President Lincoln had been eager to bring the states that had seceded back into the Union. He felt that it was important to heal the wounds from the war and wanted to be easy on the South. Therefore, he proposed a plan that allowed the states to reenter the Union as long as 10% of the people who had voted in the 1860 election swore an oath of allegiance to the US. After Lincoln died, President Andrew Johnson implemented a very similar plan.
However, the Radical Republicans were not satisfied. They were particularly angry because the South instituted the “black codes” that treated the freed slaves harshly. The Radical Republicans felt that the South had not learned
…show more content…
Presidential Reconstruction was run by the president. The president who at the time was Abraham Lincoln made it up. When he died Johnson took over the plan. Congress lost hope in him so they tried to impeach him. They also in turn took over and named there plan Congressional reconstruction. Therefore Congress made Congressional Reconstruction and the president made presidential reconstruction.
The presidential reconstruction supported the 10% rule, while the congressional reconstruction rejected the rule; instead they supported the "forfeited-rights theory" which states that as long as the southerners rebelled against the union; they had forfeited their rights under the U.S. constitution. Also, the presidential rule was very lenient towards the southerners. Also, offered some form of amnesty to southerners who would take oath of

Related Documents