Comments on: Review: Impeached: The Trial of President Andrew Johnson and the Fight for Lincoln’s Legacy http://www.brettschulte.net/CWBlog/2009/06/15/review-impeached-the-trial-of-president-andrew-johnson-and-the-fight-for-lincolns-legacy/ Informed Amateurs Blog the American Civil War Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:41:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Naim Peress http://www.brettschulte.net/CWBlog/2009/06/15/review-impeached-the-trial-of-president-andrew-johnson-and-the-fight-for-lincolns-legacy/comment-page-1/#comment-4984 Naim Peress Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:13:47 +0000 http://www.brettschulte.net/CWBlog/?p=6532#comment-4984 The best history books are those that examine both sides and sympathize with both, where sympathy is possible. Clearly, Impeached is not one of those books. The best history books are those that examine both sides and sympathize with both, where sympathy is possible. Clearly, Impeached is not one of those books.

]]> By: David O. Stewart http://www.brettschulte.net/CWBlog/2009/06/15/review-impeached-the-trial-of-president-andrew-johnson-and-the-fight-for-lincolns-legacy/comment-page-1/#comment-4980 David O. Stewart Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:14:35 +0000 http://www.brettschulte.net/CWBlog/?p=6532#comment-4980 I posted the following response on Amazon.com, where this review first appeared: "I appreciate Mr. Durney's enthusiasm for history and the nice things he says about the book. His complaints about the sourcing are not, however, accurate. All of my conclusions about the corruption surrounding the Senate vote are based on original sources that are detailed in the endnotes -- the notes of Johnson's secretary (Col. Moore), the Impeachment committee investigation and transcripts of testimony before that committee that are in the Butler papers at the Library of Congress, the National Archives' records of that committee, and the contemporary investigation by the extraordinary reporter Henry V.N. Boynton and other journalists. Indeed, I relied on primary sources for the entire book. I sympathize with his frustration matching the endnotes to the statements in text; commercial publishers will not include footnotes in text so we are left with this format, which requires extra work by the reader. To reach a general audience with a commercial publisher, that's a compromise I have to accept. Finally, I think the book is quite clear that although the evidence is circumstantial and not complete, I reached the conclusion that senators' votes were purchased at the end of the impeachment trial. That approach, it seems to me, shows balance and judgment, not spin. Other historians have neglected most of this evidence, and it is my great privilege to share it with readers." David O. Stewart I posted the following response on Amazon.com, where this review first appeared: “I appreciate Mr. Durney’s enthusiasm for history and the nice things he says about the book. His complaints about the sourcing are not, however, accurate. All of my conclusions about the corruption surrounding the Senate vote are based on original sources that are detailed in the endnotes — the notes of Johnson’s secretary (Col. Moore), the Impeachment committee investigation and transcripts of testimony before that committee that are in the Butler papers at the Library of Congress, the National Archives’ records of that committee, and the contemporary investigation by the extraordinary reporter Henry V.N. Boynton and other journalists. Indeed, I relied on primary sources for the entire book. I sympathize with his frustration matching the endnotes to the statements in text; commercial publishers will not include footnotes in text so we are left with this format, which requires extra work by the reader. To reach a general audience with a commercial publisher, that’s a compromise I have to accept. Finally, I think the book is quite clear that although the evidence is circumstantial and not complete, I reached the conclusion that senators’ votes were purchased at the end of the impeachment trial. That approach, it seems to me, shows balance and judgment, not spin. Other historians have neglected most of this evidence, and it is my great privilege to share it with readers.”

David O. Stewart

]]>