Jennifer Jones asked David O. Stewart:

Because I read Impeached directly following Team of Rivals, I thought I had a decent grasp on Seward. Why do you think he was so supportive of Johnson? I understand that he felt the South should be dealt with liberally, but I'm more than a little surprised he didn't feel the need to protect the Southern blacks and Unionists more. It makes me wonder if his assassination attempt impacted his actions somehow.

David O. Stewart You ask an excellent question! My editor asked it also. In fact, she put me in touch with Doris Kearns Goodwin to see if we could cook up a more satisfying explanation, and we agreed that it was tough to explain. This morning, prompted by your question, I looked at Walter Stahr's recent bio of Seward, which came out after IMPEACHED. He writes (p. 529): "Although Seward's relations with Johnson will always involve some mystery, the main reasons he supported the president are clear enough. . . . he agreed with Johnson that the southern states should be allowed to govern themselves, and to rejoin the union, without undue delay or onerous conditions. Seward was especially reluctant to desert a president under attack, and he saw impeachment as an improper and dangerous attack, . . . and be believed, perhaps immodestly, that he was the best secretary of state available to Johnson." Walter also notes that Seward lost his wife and daughter to illnesses during the Johnson administration -- truly, his sufferings were Job-like -- which made his official position that much more precious to him. And I think the terrible wounds Seward suffered in the assassination attempt (as you suggest) made him cling to work he found meaningful. By remaining in the Johnson administration, serving an unworthy president, Seward damaged his historical reputation. It's rather sad.

flag