The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-02-12

relieve yourself from obedience to The orders
of the President, who is made, by the constl-
tuition, Commander-in-Ch OF the army and
navy. and is. therefore, the official superior as
as we'll of the general of the army as OF the
Secretary of War The following is the Pres
ident's letter to the Secretaries who were
nresent at the conversation on the l4th Janu-
ary:
This mornings Chronicle contains the cor
resnondence between the President ind Grant,
reported from the War department. in answer
to call from the House. He calls attenuon
10 the correspondence, especially that part re-
lating to the conversation between Grant ana !.
the President, and requests statement VI
what was said on that occasion.
Secretary Welles says, my recollection OF the
conversation corresponds with your statement
of It in your letter of January 81. The three
points specified in that letter, giving your re-
collection of the conversation, are correctly
stated. 49,, ,s =. =.
Secretary McCulloch says: 81 cannot under
take to state the precise language used, but
have no hesitation in saying that your account
of the conversation, as given in your letter 10
General ut of the S1st ult, substantially
and in all important particulars aecords with
my recollection Of it,"
Secretary Randall says: "I have read care
fully the correspondence in question, and par
t;cnlarly the letter Of the President to Cen
eral Grant, dated the Slst. The following ex=
tract from that letter is, according to my re-
collection, o. correct statement OF the converse
tion that took place between the President ana
General Grant at the Cabinet meeting OF tne
14tb January" Randall then quotes the Presi-
dents version.
Secretary Stewards letter is quite lcng, CAV
inr q detailed account Of his impressions Oh
what occurred, quoting the substance OF Whal
the President said. Mr.. Seward says: u dld
NOT understand Grant as denying nor as ex-
plcitly admitting these statements in the form
and full extent to which you made them. his
admission Of them was rather indirect ana
circumstantial, though did not understand
it to be IN evasive one."
After further details Seward continues:
Certainly, General Grant did not at any tlme'
in Tho cabinet meeting, insist thnt he had, IN
the Saturdays conversation, either distinctly
or finally advised you Of his determination TO
retire from The charge Of the War Depart
ment otherwise than under your own suhse'
ouent direction; he acquesced in your state
ment that the Saturdays conversation ended
with on expectation that there would be SUD-
seouent conference on the subject, which he,
as we'll as yourself, supposed could reasonably
tako place on Monday. General Grant I'D
mitted that it was his expectation or purpose
to call on you on Monday. General Grant
assigned reasons for not calling.
seward's letter caused shouts OF alternate
derision and incredulity from the Republicans
as bis cautious narrative proceeded.
Secretary Browning's letter was quite long,
and mainly repetition
Grant has already written reply, opening
90 follows: sI have the honor tc acknowledge
the receipt of your communication OF the lotn
inst. accompanied by statements OF i've caoi-
net officers Of their recollection OF what oc-
curred in the cabinet meeting On the 14th OF
January. Without admitting anything con-
tanned in these statements, whore they dner
from everything heretofore stated by me-
propose to notice only that portion OF your
communication wherein am charged with IN
subordination." Grant then proceeds to argue
the point at some length.