Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1867-08-28
Gen. Grant OH the Removal of Sec'y.
Stanton and Gen. Sheridan.

1t is now generally conceded that Gen.
Grant opposed the removal of Sec'y Stanton
and Gen Sheridan. Upon this point the
Washington correspondent of the New York
Tribune thus telegraphs that paper:
Your correspondent, who has for some days
known the character of the correspondence
between the President and Gen. Grant, rela-
tive to the suspension of Sec'y. Stanton and
the removal of Gen Sheridan, but enioined
nevertheless to make no mention of the mat
ter, because Mr.. johnson regarded it as not
intended by Gen. Grant for publication, is
now permitted to say simply that the Gen
erals letters are marked private, and tn ere
fore only does the President withhold the
matter from the press. In the first instance
it was not expected that the subject would
assume the form Of official correspondence
Just before the suspension of Stanton, Mr..
johnson had conversation on the subject
with Gen. Grant, and the latter, shortly
after leaving, sent letter to the President,
giving reasons why he thought the cOntem-
plated action had better be abandoned To
this no reply was made by Mr.. johnson
When the order for the removal of Sheridan
sent to Grant, note accompanied it, in
forming the latter that if he had any sug-
gestions To make Mr.. johnson would be glad
to hear them The purpose of this note was
to know whether probably some other sue
cessor for Sheridan might be named Gen
Grant replied by an argument against any
removal at all. To this the President an
swered somewhat at length. The character
of the correspondence on both sides was
energetic and firm, but courteous withal.
That this correspondent S statement is sub
stantially true is tolerably we'll established
by the fact that it is not officially contra
dicted. The friends and the opponents OF
Gen Grant are, however, drawing different
conclusions from this conduct of that official
His fricnds-or rather his Republican friends
claim that he issues these commands of the
President reluctantly, and only consents to
issue them at all because he is subordinate
officer, whose duty it is to obey the orders Of
his superior. The opponents of Gen. Grant
insist that, if he really and widely differed
from Mr.. johnson as to the best method of
reconstruction, he would not even allow him
self to be the unwilling instrument of an
official whose policy he thought hurtful to
the country. Which of these interpretations
of the Generals course may be in accordance
with the fact we don't pretend to say, but
the former one seems to find the most con-
firmation from Gen. Grants previous course.
Since the above was in type the letter
written by Gen. Grant to the President res
pecting the removal of General Sheridan has
been given to the public, and is as follows -:
HEADQUARTERS, ARMIES OF THE q. S.
WASHINGTON, Aug. II, 1867.
Has Ercellency AndrelU johnson, President of
the United States
SIR L am in receipt of your order of this
date directing the assignment of General G.
III. Thomas to the command of the 5th Mill
tary District, General Sheridan to the De-
partment of the Missouri, and General Han
cock to the Department of the Cumberland.
Also of your note of this date (enclosing
these instructions) saying before you issue
instructions to carry into effect the enclosed
order, would be pleased to hear any sug-
gestions you may deem necessary respecting
the assignments to which the order refers
l am pleased to avail myself of this invita-
ton to urge, earnestly urge, in the name of
a patriotic people, who have sacrificed hum
dreds of thousands of loyal lives, and thou
sands of millions of treasure to preserve
the integrity and union of this country, that
this order be not insisted upon. 1t is I'M
mistakably the expressed wish of the coun-
try that General Sheridan should not be re-