Fayette County herald. [volume] (Washington [Washington Court House], Fayette County, O. [Ohio]) 1860-1???, 1868-02-20

with the General, you had adyerted
to the understanding thus had, and
that General Grant expressed his
concurrence in it; that at some con-
versation which had been previous
ly held, General Grant said he still
adhered to the same construction of
the law, but said ifhe should change
his opinion he would give season
able notice of it, so that you could
in any case, be placed in the same
position in regard to the War De
partment that you were before Gen
eral Grant held it.
l did not understand General
Grant as denying nor explicitly ad-
mitting these statements in the form
and to the full extent to which you
made them. His admission of them
was rather indirect and circumstan-
tial, though l did not understand it
to be an evasive one. He said that
reasoning from what occurred in the
case of the police in Maryland,
which he regarded as a parallel one,
he was of opinion, and so assured |
you, that it would be his right and
duty, under your instructions, to
hold the War Office, after the Sen
ater the Senate should disapprove
Of Mr.. Stanton's suspension, until
the question should be decided by
the Court; that he remained until
very recently Of that opinion, and
that, on the Saturday before the
Cabinet meeting, o conversation
was held between yourself and him
in which the subject was generally
discussed General Grants state
ment was that in that conversation
he had stated to you the legal diff
culties which might arise, involving
fine and Imprisonment under the
Civil Tenure Bill, and that he did
not care to subject himself to those
penalties that you replied to this
remark that you regarded the Civil
Tenure Bill as unconstitutional, and
did not think its penalties were to
be feared, or that you would yolun-
tarily assume them; and you insist
ed that General Grant should either
retain the office until relieved by
yourself, according to what you
claimed was the original understand
ing between yourself and him, or by
seasonable notice of a change Of
purpose on his part, put you in the
same situation which you would be t
in if he adhered. You claimed that 5
General Grant finally said in that !
Saturdays conversation, that you s
understood his views, and his pro- t
ceedings thereafter would be con 4
sisten with what had been under s
stood. i
General Grant did not controvert h
nor can | say that he admitted this
last statement. Certainly, General b.
Grant did not at any time in the i
Cabinet meeting insist that he had i
in the Saturdays conversation, Ell Z
ther distinctly or finally advised you Al
Of his determination to retire from a. a.
.he charge Of the War Department
otherwise than under your own sub
,equent direction lie acquiesced
n your statement that the Satur- :
lays conversation ended with an G
expectation that there would be sub
jequent conference on the subject,
which he, as well as yourself, sup
posed could reasonably take place
IN Monday.
You then alluded to the fact that
General Grant did not call upon you
1n Monday as you had expected
rom that conversation. General f
Grant admitted that it was his ex ir
)ectation or purpose to call upon II
you on Monday. General Grant @
assigns reasons for this omission; o
ne says he was in conference with Il
General Sherman; that there were pl
many little matters to be attended tc
20. He had conversed upon the -,
natter Of the incumbency of the ~
War Department with General y
Sherman would call upon Monday. d
Ny own mind suggested a further o,
explanation, but do not remember q,
whether it was mentioned or not,
namely; 1t was not supposed by "
General Grant on Monday, that the
Senate would decide the question &C
o promptly as to anticipate further 81
between yourself and -, -
lin if delayed that day. General " "
irant made another explanation, I'll
hat he was engaged on Sunday tr
Nth General Sherman, and think
lso on Monday, in regard to the
Var Department. with hope, tho
e,diN Rot$&AAitA in an effort to
r6cure an amicabe settlement of SC
he affair of Mr.. Stanton, and still pc
oped it would be brought about, al
have the honor to be with great an
nspect, your obedient servant
WIN. II, SEWARD, Vi
GENERAL GRANTS REPLY. Wv
The accompanying letter from m
ieneral Grant, received since the 10
to the House Of Rep tn
,sentatlves of my communications be
{ this date, is submitted to the =,
louise as part Of the correspondence w
aferrcd to in the resolution of the We
och, inst. ANDREW JOHNSON. stl
HEADQu ARTERs ARMY OF THE Y 8. mr.
WASHINGTON, Feb. II, 1868, r
} His Excellency, Andrew johnson, Pres-
dent Of the united states;
Sm-Ihavc the honorto acknowl- VI
Ice the recent of your communi. TO