New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1863-02-26
TIzG TsMEs ON DzsPATCMEs.

The Times of yesterday, in reply TO our a..
sertion of the day before that " dispatches have
been sen, ffoia the State Department which
the presIden. never saw till they were pointed
out to him in the printed volume" says:
Now beg TuE TBrBuSR 20 understand that we have
the d.in, aud uueqavoca su,hOr:y Of bo those gentle
es for ssyiuy thai since Pre,ieu Lincoln into Office
lie Secretary o: ssts la. any American MIME
ter abrod any foreign Miner at Washington any die
patch that me,y and exclusively formal and schni
cal Ia rs character without hasMg fra unlimited tito hS
PspdBf rho has ehr read 70 hiGsoJ or heard read.
5;e seHf and this incudes, 1t ia scarcely necessary
10 add whole between Mr. Seward and
Mr Daj ton. We trus. THz TRIBUNE vii find thi' denial
sufficiently explicit sOd from sufficiently good authority v
b. couclesive."
Certainly, as far MS it goes; but it is only
saving that TIE Times has the authority OF
bota the President and the Secretary Of State
for asserting that all the dispatches sen. from
the State Department were first submitted TO
the President, and read by or to him, except
those which were not We submit whether
tbs is q denial Of our assertion How much
does this statement Of "merely and exclusively
formal and technical in character" covert IL
was hardly worth while, it seems to us. to
Laradc the authority Of the President and his
chief Secretary for a statement which is viz.
tually an acknowledgment Of our assertion.
There may, however, be o wide difference
of opinion az to what may properly come under
this con, enent phrase of "merely and exclusively
formal and technical" II was not to dis
patches Of thst character that we referred, aud
we tcel constrained 70 cay. inasmuch as 1n
Times has brought up the topic for discussion.
auj persists in its first charge OF ignorance
acans. Us, that the dispatches NO referred to
as having been sent without the coguizsuce Of
the President, were neither formal nor techBi-
cal, but tlat they involved the assertion Of
vital prime pies in the condnct of the war.
We do not question the veraci,y of The Times
or rs informant, whoever he may be, as to
the assumed denial of the President and
Secretary of state, for that is so phrased il
to be really no denial whatever. But we re-
peat the assertion which The Illness impeach.
ment Of US called forth-that dispatches have
been sent from the State Department of which
the President knew nothing till they were
pointed out to him in the printed volume.
The cause of the sensitiveness of Ths 1onss
is very apparent. The sending of dispatches
by Secretary for Foreign Affairs, without
first submitting them to tao President or tho
Sovereign, as the case may be, is, We are in.
clined TO believe, no uausuaI thing when they
are merely formal and technical. That such
bad been the custom in our Department Of
State would be statement neither worth
making nor denying. SO much confidence il
implied by the head Of the Government in the
Chief OF that Department that it 10 taken fox
granted that ho would issue 40 dispatches of
more important character without submitting
them. The essential point is, whether this
has been DONE and the implied confidence
disregarded. The Times in making haste
to enter plea of not guilty before any IN
dictmcnt was presented, evnces determine
ton to ward off a charge which it feared
might be made. In compelling us, in our own
Justification, to assert the truth in regard to the
sending of dispatches, that journal fixes upon
the Secretary of State responsibility which
might otherwise not have been made public.
That officer would have had more reason to DO
grateful for its silence than it's defense.