Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1865-01-14

MosT of the papers say amen / to the
Presidents order relieving General But
Ter from command and ordering him to
Lowell. The New York Tribune is the
most conspicuous exception to this general
acquiesence. The Washington correspon-
dent of that paper makes the following
statement in reference to the order:
Presidents Order No. 1, "series of
1865" as the order relieving Ben. Butler
has been cnristened at the headquarters of
the Army of the Potomac, was probably
written at Fortress Monroe on the 7th of
January, in an interview between the Sec-
Rotary of War and Gen. Grant, although
previously agreed upon here. The Score.
tary arrived at the Fortress late on the
evening of the 9Th. The order is UNDER
stood here to have been served on the 9Th.
The newspaper dispatch, written at Gen.
GRANTS headquarters, announcing General
.Butler's removal, is dated on the 9Th. The
news of this act was brought here yester-
day forenoon by an officer direct from CITY
Point, and communicated to members of
Congress. One of these inquired of the
President, in the presence of the Assistant
Secretary of War yesterday afternoon, if
Gen. Butler had been removed. Each ex.
pressed surprise at his knowledge of the
fact, and inquired how he learned 1t, and
then begged him not to make it public, as
it was the desire and the intention to have
the news come from the Army of the Po-
tomac, and not from Washington. The
censor of the newspaper telegraphic dis.
patches was ordered to suppress the news
if put upon the wires for the Northern and
Western press, and this order was kept in
force throughout the ensuing day, Tues
day.
1t is known here that the withdrawal by
Gen. Butler of his troops from the attack
on Fort Fisher was the occasion and not
the cause Of the breach between General
Grant and Gen. Butler. The distinguished
civilian was long ago doomed. This is
confessed in the statements of the causes of
his removal prepared at Gen. Grants
in the form of dispatch to
one of the New York city papers. The &C.
tual outbreak was made over Gen. Buffers
withdrawal from his attack on Fisher,
Grant insisting angrily that it should have
been persisted in; Butler insisting that to
have done 80 would have been to cruelty
and uselessiy sacrifice brave men-thRt the
work was SO strong and 80 strongly gar
rlsoned and supported, as appeared on
Gen. WeitZel's Reconnaissance, that it was
impossible to have taken it with the ANAL
force that had been allowed him.
Opinions differ hare as TO the reRaons uf
tt1is removal. Grant is known TO DE 81
qnama. @e putB GeDerRls DID and he Nuts
them down. Els wEnr1 Ms law nm an mil
tHry affairs. But the 6aGlRuan sentiment df
ms haah4nartarB that aGan. BuflaFfs ar
RESTS, nm4u1annmsnits and pnrd4Ehmants Gf
ntbeB Rn1 trRitnrB hswB haan both aHlaxBl
Rnh BsnlEnR1gn and rhBt many GBaas Uf
glH1lmg I1Dns1dne have GHms % Light, and
n11h1Iy G5hsrB sre expected I'D Ee GsRRIEpuaf
by hIB su9euss1tIEs;5;" thus sud tine usEB,ut
atmdHr mBtdduRl ez9r Of aBtfiFfHCtfiln
az Une msumGm ut HIS Mans RB SsErEsss7,w Gf
Wau I'M Ehe rsuu4 5RuTzBs6an Gf Mn. LfuzIiI11t4
Ghbiusnr give RulFriCiauB bsre tins cine do a
sGtrsu1e uO Gs1 g urUu6lssGmsIY EARNEST md
IcaI out OF the Way and to- dIHpuHss of q
Dreaded polIhciau- The CgpperheafB of
Washington and Gs0rgsS0wm arB TubTIaut
over his removal
There Is something very contradictory
about the above statement a. the reader
will notice. The first paragraph states
that the order relieving General Butler had
been agreed upon at Washington before
Secretary Stanton left for Fortress Mou-
roe, while its last one clothes Grant with
the "supreme" power and consequently
throws upon him the whole responsibility
of the removal. II Grants "word ia Law
in all military matters" how came it that
Butler was continued in command after
Grant came to Washington last spring,
when even the Tribune and every body
agreed that 1t was his desire to place a
regular officer in command of the City
Point expedition, instead of Butler. Two
OF our best Generals, Gilmore and Smith.
we're subordinate to General Butler in that
expedition, and the consequence was that
they both differed with their commander
to such an extent as to seek relief from all
position under him, and did obtain such
relief. One of the shalloWest features of
the 1F'6"ns's statement is the seeming de-
sire to make it appear that the Presid sht is
simply used as cats paw by Gen. Grant.
and that hewas induced by the latter to put
Butler out of the way because of his mode
OF dealing With rebels. This is the first
time we have ever heard that General
Grant had any Partially or weakness
whatever for his country's enemies; aud
we certainly supposed that the President.
after having the blessings of Heaven so fire.
quently and so piously invoked on his head
by the Tribune itself, was above suspicion
in that respect. And further, it is gener.
orally understood that Gen. Grant, Of all
our Generals, is the least affected with
anything like military jealousy, and that
he ia always ready to bestoW praise where
praise has been earned. We have no doubt
that he was angry with Buffers failure at
Fort Fisher, just as he was with his failure
at City Point and just as he might have
been with his failure at Big Bethel. Both
Gen. Grant and Mr.. Lincoln have shown
themselves ready to give Gen. Butleraa