Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1868-01-14

| execute civil process without certainty OF riot,
CONT mpla lated Ia have the members Of the con-
| vention arrested under process from the crimi-
BAL eonrt Of this district. Is the military 20
| interfere TO prevent process Of COURT
.ALBkRT EooRHIEs, It. Gor. Of Lc4isiaaa-
.ANDREw S. HEBRON, Aey Ges. Lolsisiasa.,
To which he sent the following reply:
"WAsHINGToE, Jnly .. 1896.
-SiR: The military will be expected to sus-
tain, not obstIuet OF interfere with the proceed
mgs Of the courts. despatch on the subject
OF convention was sent 10 Governor Wells this
morning "ANDREw JOHNSON.
sAIo,T, FoorAtes, Liest Goo. Of Lou,siono.r
Mr.. Stanton, m has testimony before the In
psaehment Committee, stated that the despatch
he re iyed from General Baird, a COPY Of
which was furnished TO the President, in
these words
HEApouARTKRs DEPARrNEsr OF Iours
lana, New Orleans, Louisiana, July -. 1866
Hon. E. N. .Staston, Secretary e5 War, Washing
toa, ID. C.: convention has been called, with
the sanction of Governor Wells, TO meet here
on Monday. The lieutenant governor and city
authorities think IL unlawful, and propou 10
break II up by arresfing the Delegates / have
gwen no orders on the subject, hut have
warned the parties that should not counte-
nance or permit such action without instrue-
tion TO that effect from the President. Please
instruct me at oxce by telegraph.
A. BAIRD, Bvt. Mai. Gen. Commanding
he despatch Of the President to Mr. yoor-
hies was shown to General Baird. He adj
miffed ATS authenticity. but d,cissed TO aei BE-
Ifthe proper ccnlSa~nce had existed between
the President and the SECRETARY of War. NJ
Stanton most certainly would have known the
policy Of the Executive with reference TO that
affair, and would, at once. have commands Gated
TO Mr.. johnson the di -patch of General Baird.
which. Of itself, necessitated instructions from
the President.
All attempts. directly or indirectly. by init.
nation or assertion, to make IL appear that
those words ssat once were interpolated INTO
that dispatch by the knowledge or AT the in
STA anft thop sAop
foundation. Mr.. Stantons testimony should
be conclusive. Independent of that by the
record Of the War Once, and by the original
despatch, II VIII appear those words We're con-
tanned in il. Ii is an unjust and unfounded
impnfafion sought TO be cast upon the Pres.
ident.
ence 10 the report of the majority, who,
animation, are as well satisfied a. himself that
those words were in the dispatch recorded
IN the War Onice, and as furnished to the Pres
ident.
But whether contained or not is wholly i'm
material 80 far as Mr. Stanton was concerned
quote from his testimony also the following
~. Have you recollection of a dispatch OF
General Baird, of New Orleans on the esth of
July, 1856! A. recollect that dispatch: can
not now recollect the date. Ii will appear in
the report Of the committee on the New Orleans
riot.
q. Referring to the dispatch Of the esth OF
July, by General Baird, i ask you whether
that dispatch, on its receipt. was communi-
catedl A. received that dispatch on sunday
forenoon. i examined il carefully, and con-
sidered the question presented. did not see
that could give any instructions different
from the line of action which General Baird
proposed, and made no answer 10 the dispatch.
q. see il is stated that this was received an
'O20 p. IN. Was that the hour at which il was
received by youl A. That is the date of it, re-
ception in the telegraph Office, Saturday night
received II on Sunday forenoon. at my resi-
dence. copy OF the dispatch was furnished
TO the President several days afterwards along
with all the other dispatches and communica-
tion on that subject, but il was not furn ished
by me- before that time suppose il may have
been ten or fifteen days afterwards.
O. The President himself being in CORE
spondence with those parties upon the same
subject would IL not have been proper TO have
advised him Of the reception of thar disparche
A. know nothing about his correspondence
and know nothing about any correspondence
except this one dispatch"
From this testimony it appears Mr. Stanton
received this despatch SUNDAY forenoon. .ser-
dmined az oorJaty, and sidered TIE question: pre-
whether the federal forces should aid and snn.
port a convention claiming power to change
he constitution of Louisiana or should suffer
ITS delegates 10 be arrested by the city anthori-
ties As an unlawful assemblage. He swears he
examined and cons','s red hhaf question:. and de-
cided 1t upon his own responsibility without
any consultation with the President
That fact alone was enough TO have sundered
his relations to the President There is no
member of this body, in my opinion, SO lost to
his own self-respect. that il placed in Mr.. John
sons position at that time. he would not have
removed him because he did not consult him
before making that decision. BY his silence in
not answering the despatch he approved Baird's
course He had no right to do so without tax
ing the instructions Of the President, who alone
was asked for or could give them.
Had the President seen that dispatch, who
can doubt that he would have directed th.
Secretary OF War to order General Baird 10
sustain the proceedings of the courts. and not
10 hinder them by preventing The execution Of
legal process And General Baird would have
had no excuse for allowing bloody riot TO rage
In his district for want of express orders from
the President Can any man suppose thar Mr.
stanton was so utterly ignorant of the Presi-
dents policy As not 10 know that by sustaining
by military force a convention assembling TO
revolutionize the government of a State which
the President regarded as a valid State govern
ment, he was thus thwartlng the President I'M
a vital point of his policy? He did know in
OF his ignorance was of itself a sufficient dis
qualification 10 his remaining in the Cabinet
Ii was upon the very point OF dispute be-
tween Congress and the President that this
revolutionary convention was about TO ASSEM-
BILE. To prove this, need only refer TO the
testimony Of Mr.. Cutler, one of the leaders OF
that convention. He SAYS:
3.9. Stale what il was the design OF the con-
vention TO do; what business did il expect 10
transact that day, if any The object of the
con invention. as ascertained by me previous 70
the meeting, in caucuses held in my law Office
was, first after organization and a quorum
$50 W hat was your expectation TO do that
day Our int nfion was TO go 10 business and
TO pass the constitutional amendment. grant
negro and colored suffrage, and disfranchiss
rebels. That is what We intended TO do
3sl. Did you expect to do that on TIA. :s0th OF
July Weintended TO do ii AS soon a. We got
organized.
3s2. What do you mean by organizing ?
Having quorum of the body.
3s3. And before thai time what did YOU ex-
pect to dol The only object was TO perfect the
organization.
34. Was il your purpose To aci before the or.
ganization WAS complete No. sir: il was not
our intention to act until we had a auorum.
The legal quorum consisted OF seyenty-six
members. which was a majority OF one hun
dred and hfty-the whole number
Whether the President was right or wrong i'm
his policy. though Mr.. Stanton was opposed 10
his policy, and favored the assent bling of this
convention TO overthrow il. the duty of Mr.
Staunton,- as Secretary of War, was all tn.
more imperative. because he differed with the
President 10 have consulted him npon the
question Of instructions 20 Gen. Baird about
that convention, more especially when a con-
hict between the civil and military authorities
was imminent. Had Mr. Stanton the right 10
decide il without consulting his chief He had |
every reason TO believe that the President wouId
feel the deepest interest in thar question. and
thefefore. az was altogether indefensible 10 |
withhold Ia a single hour. 18