Idaho semi-weekly world. (Idaho City, Boise County, Idaho Territory) 1867-1868, 1868-03-14
,gelti Mktkly M}nrla,
An AN E''-IINTERviaWs1iTH s0LD THAD.'

New York World gives the following
account Of an interview he had with
Old Thad. Stevens just after his effort
to have johnson impeached during last
month had been defeated The cores
pondent says
After the rush Of members and poll
ticians into Mr.. Stevens room at the
Capitol had ceased, and very soon after
the defeated "great commoner' had
been borne in his chair from the Capitol
to his. home the writer of these dispatch
es, who. had also been witness exam
ined in the presence of Mr.. Stevens,
called upon him. He was received IN
a chamber where Mr.. Stevens, the dy-
ing leader of once powerful but now
fallen national party, leaned back in an
easy chair alone, looking almost utter
" exhausted. Nevertheless his well
come was cordial, and his expressed re-
gret that Mr.. Stevens might not feel
himself strong enough to converse upon
the subject in view, was alleviated at
once by Mr.. Stevens's outspoken frank
ness. Nt&
aPll say this" proceeded Mr.. Stevens,
"not particularly for publication. And
vet" he continued, 81 don't object to
your publishing anything | say. I'll say
this, that the whole question of I'M
parchment lies almost in nutshell.
As to the first part Of the Grant and
johnson correspondence, (Johnson's let
ters chiefly allude toy, | consider that
there is enough evidence to impeach a
dozen men. The main point is, was the
President guilty or not guilty OF vlo-
lation of the Tenure-ofO Office actY He
is explicit enough himself on this sub
iect. Although, he states in one place
that he did. not remove Stanton and put
Grant in with. any reference to the
Tenurc-of0f act, but upon the au-
thority granted him by the Constitution,
what is to be said in his defence for his
requiring Grant, as they both agree In
all their letters, TO arrange with him
(Johnson) to keep Stanton out OF office
against the will of the Senate? The
Senate had confirmed the Tenurc-ofOf-
fee law. What right had President
to deny, defy, or seek to disobey, or
circumvent that law? Damn it, don't
both the President and General Grant
subscribe to this. vital fact, that Grant
had at least considered, and that john
son had insisted upon, the proposition
that Grant should help johnson to keep
Stanton out of Office anyway, notwith-
standing the Tenure-of-Ofice act? If
this direct attempt of the President to
violate law made by the Congress OF
the United States doesn't render him
liable to be impeached, what does"
81 am, as you see. Mr.. Stevens, only
respectful listener"
"Well, then. there's the whole thing,
it's as simple as day. What the devil
do care about the question of veracity,
as they call it, between Johnson and
Grant? nothing to do with the
law. Both of them may call'each 9th
or liars if they want to, perhaps they
both do lie a little, or let US say, equivo-
cate, though Tie President certainly has
the aoeigM Of evidence on. has side. But
johnson being right or Grant being
wrong, it makes no difference. 1f'thcy
want to settle the question between
them, they may both go out in my back
yard and settle it alone Of course /
haze slightloIjection to hauing that area
soiled by either ofthepl, but 4 wouldn't
object, if they would only fix it so that
we should haze no more talk. What
Lam after is, that the law of these Unit
ed States, as made by; the Congress Of
these United States, .shallbe obeyed by
the President as well as,by all.men be-
side. There was plenty of evidence
God knows. to convict Johnson last
year. Ifseall nonsense and folly to'ar.
guc against. the sclfeEident proposition
that there is more than plenty ofevi
dence now ,sf 4
IL. suppose, Mr.. Stevens, that you
may have been a, little disappointed al
my testimony" 80 p.
80, not. at al. THAT was right
enough. : I've told, YOU. already that the
question between johnson and'Gfant
has nothing to do with my. idea of inn
peachment They may fight that ont