Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1865-05-30
SHERnAN AND SrArroN.

On the fourth page Of to-day's paper will be
found an article which We copy from the
Washington Chronicle. written, IL Is said, By
Senator SHKRxAS. brother Of the Generals,
explaining the controversy between SHERMAN
and STANTON. and severely censuring the ac
ton of the latter. While the Secretary of
War has exhibited great ability and energy in
the standardization Of his department. and at
mos, trying and critical period-a crisis rbich
required qualities OF the highest order-yet
throughout bis official career, in bis conduct
toward those who necessarily came in contact with
hin, be bn been as oVerbsaribg and imperious
as an autecrat. lie attempted 10 snub SnER-
MAY, but iha. gallant officer turned upon him
with q spirit and holiness that excites not only
the sympathy but the approval Of the country
The Cincinnati Gazette OF yesterday en-
deavors to place General SHERMAN in a false
position By charging him with disrespect to his
superior officers, and thus encouraging insubor-
dination. Ii says:
The Secretary Of War is the representative
OF the Presdsns in the conduct Of the war Office
He has authority. except as the vicegerent of
the Executive. Therefore, bis acts are the acts
Of the President He has no military rank in
himself, but in the direction of affairs he
acts as the delegate Of the Commander in Chief.
and represents his rank, and power, Insubordi-
nation to the deliberate course OF the Executive,
delivered through the Secretary OF War. is 10
subordnaton to the Commander in Chief To-
cults offered to him on account Of the course Of
the Executive, promulgated through him are
insults offered TO the Commander in Chief To
"dare" and defy him on account Of the policy
of the Government expressed officially through
him, is to dare and DEFY the Commander in
Chief
Public declarations Of contempt by military
officers for the acts of civil officers, flung out on
account Of the course Of the Executive deli vered
through the Secretary Of War, are contempluous
to the President, and il a military subordinate
assume that mere non-combatants. no matter
how high their civil rank or ststion. are incapa-
bic of having any direction Of the affairs or ssues
fwar, he incapacitates the President his Com
mander in Chief, and makes the General in the
field the sole srbiter of the issues OF the and
Of the fate and institutions Of the country"
General SHERMAN has never objected to the
action Of the President in refusing to ratify or
approve his irst arrangement with JOHNSTON In
the written agreement between them he
pressly disavowed the right or authority to make
il binding upon the Government, aud arms
tice vas sgreed upon for q sufficient length OF
time to give the civil authorities the opportunity
to act upon it. lie in no wise assumed to be 1.-The
sole arbiter of the issues of the war and of the
fate and institutions of the country" Far
otherwise He assumed no responsibility OF the
kind. but deferred the whole question to the
Executive, the Constitutional Commander in
Chief. Neither did be make any issue in that
regard with the Secretary of War. Never would
q word of complaint been heard from General
SHERMAN if Mr. STANTON had manifested, 10
communicating the termination of the Presi-
dent, that courtesy. respect and confidence which
his eminent position and gallant services entitled
him to. The Secretary of War also withheld
from the country the official dispatches and
letters of General SHERMAN, the publication of
which the latter regarded as due to him to vim
dictate his motives and explain his reasons for
entering into the conditional arrangem ent
with JOHNSTON. And would il not have been
strictly just 20 have given General SHERMAN
every opportunity to set himself right be
fore the country. instead of casting doubts upon
"a
the gallant services OF General SHERMAN be
stricken down without a bearing especially
when his defense in the hands of the Sscre-
tary of War; The country would have vindi-
Gated General SHERMAN fully if he bad not made
q personsl issue With the Secretary of War and
perhaps it would have been better if he had LETT
il to time. which generally makes all things even.
Blu, this is apology for the effort of the Gazette
to fasten upon General SIBERIAN "insubordina-
ton to the deliberate course OF the Executive" on
account of his personal differences with the Sec
Rotary Of WARRIOR il cannot be shown that he
expressed any dissatisfaction with the President
for refusing to approve bis cartel with joan
sroS.
The Dem0cracy-lts work.