Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1868-02-12
Gen, Grant and MIR. Johnson.

We print elsewhere the essential portions
or "a recent correspondence between Gen.
Grant and the President, growing out of the
action Of the Senate restoring Mr. Stanton
IN the War Office Grant 5 first letter to Mr..
johnson was rendered absolutely necessary
ly the Presidents course. Mr. johnson is
MT q reticent man. whatever oIner virtues
vices may adorn or disfgure his character,
and l.is organ, the National Inteltgencer, and
various organs in the bodily appearance of
newspaper reporters, have made public every
ni9ht and morning the utterance5, views,
opinions and purposes of Andrew johnson.
These mouth-pieces of the executive, as Gen.
Grant has had occasion to know, had by au
tioritv from the White House given as his
tory what was not true. They had, from
time to time, reported that the President had
said this or that to Gen. Grant, and that Gen.
Grant had responded so and so ; and Grant
knew these versions of interviews between
himself and the President were essentially
nntruthfui lie. therefore, in 50 important
It matter as the relation of the General Of the
armies TO the Executive and the Secretary of
War, wisely determined to have Mr.. johnson
pat himself npon paper, which would give
Gen. Grant secnritv against further misrep-
resentation But Mr.. johnson declined to
mt his order in writing until Gen. Grant
compelled him to, by refusing to obey any
verbal order, and he then couched the order
| in sneh terms AZ to leave the responsibility
upon Grant of refusing to recognize Stanton
/ Of he n
set for him. and responded substantially, as
1 he was in duty bound to respond, that until
the President denied Mr.. Stantons right to
net as Secretary of War, the General Of the
Army could not refuse to recognize all orders,
regularly issued from that Office, of binding
authority. In this Grant wac clearly right.
/ Ills duty as an officer subordinate to the
commander-in-ch chief does not require him to
violate any law of the land and lie can re-
! ply to any illegal order from Mr.. johnson
that his obligation to obey the law is supe-
rior to his duty of obedience to the President.
The question of veracity raised by Mr..
johnson has very little to do with the state
of affairs which this correspondence dis
closes and upon this question mcn will take
sides very much according to their political
and personal preferences. Few can doubt,
after reading Grants letter, that his version
Of the interview is absolutely truthful; and
the only foundation for Mr. Johnson's diff
/ ferent version is to be found in Grant s
statement that the President might have mis-
apprehended him as to the single question OF
subsequent interview previous to surrender
ing the War Department to Stanton. We
have not yet seen the statements which have
been made by Secretary, Seward, Wells,
Browning and McCullocI, and Postmaster
General Randall, but we presume the state
ments are mainly in regard to this talk OF
subsequent meeting and in respect to that
single point, it is by no means improbable
that both parties may be substantially cor
) rect, the President and his party stating II
as they understood it, and Grant stating 1t
as it in fact was. Grants straightforward
, honesty and simple truthfulness are not &c
be impeached by any assertions of Mr.. John
son, who is dishonest braggart, law
defying executive, renegade politician ano
scheming usurper.
But the correspondence shows, both py
: Grants statement and by the President ad-
missions, that Mr. johnson was planning 70
resist the enforcement of a law of the ianu
and was endeavoring TO make Gen. oraii' :,
party to that resistance. The tenure -
Office law is as much law for the Presioen'
as for any body else, yet Mr.. Johnso" a.