The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1868-02-12

done 50 with mental reservation 70 Illustrate
ton.
In the esseemsof some persons such a course
y allo wable; bat you cannot stand even upon
FnAt questonafle ground. The history OF your
cpnnection with 4his transaction, as written by
yourself placesfyou in different predlcament
md shows that you not only concealed your
design from the President, but induced him TO
suppose that you would carry out his purpose
10 keep Mr.. Stanton out OF Office by retaining
ii yourself after an attempted restoration by
the Senate, SO as to require Mr.. Stanton TO es-
tablish his rights by judicial decision.
l now give that part of this history as writ
ten by yourself in your letter of the 2Sth ul-
timo:
"Some time after assumed the duties of
Secretary of War ad Interim, the President
asked me my views as to the course Mr.. Stan
ton would have to pursue, in case the Sena.e
should not concur in the suspension, TO OBTAIN
possession Of this office. My reply was IN suo,
stance, that Mr.. Stanton would have 70 appear
to the courts TO reinstate him, il,ussra.ins NY
opinion by citing the ground nsu .anen ia
the case of the Baltimore Ponce ooin'uis0'o"-
er5.' .1s5t51l.
Now at that time, as you admit in your let
ter of the ed inst you held the Office for the
very object of defeating an appeal to the
courts. In that letter you say that in accept
ing the office one motive was to prevent the
President from appointing some other person
who would retain possession, and thus make
judicial proceedings necessary. You know
the President was unwilling to trust the Office |
with any one, who would not by holding it |
compel Mr.. stanton to resort to the courts. |
You perfectly understood that in this inter- |
view, some time after You accepted the office, |
the President, not content with your silence, |
desired an expression of your views and You |
answered him that Mr. Stanton would have |
to appeal to the courts If the President had |
repoSed confidence lbefore he know your views) |
and that confidence had been violated, it might |
have been said he made mistake. But VIC |
lation of confidence reposed after that CONVEX |
sation was no mistake Of his nor of yours 1t |
is the fact only that needs be stated, that at |
the date of the conversation you did not in |
tend to bold the Office with the purpose of |
forcing Mr.. Stanton into court, bat did hold |
1t then and had accepted it TO prevent that |
course from being carried out. In other |
words you said to the President, THAT is the |
proper course" and you said to yourself, u
have accepted this Office and now hold it TO de-
feat that course
The excuse you make in a subsequent para
graph of that letter of the 28th ult., that after
wards you changed your views as to what
would be proper course, has nothing to do
with the point under consideration. The point
Is that before you changed your views YOU
had secretly determined to do the very thing
which at last you did, to surrender the Office
to MIR. Stanton You may have changed your
views as to the law, but you certainly did not
change your views as to the course you had
will only notice one more statement in
your letter of the Sd inst, that the perform
ance of the promises which it is alleged were
made by you would have involved you in the
resistance of law. know of no statute that
would have been violated had you in carrying |
out your promises in good faith and rendered
your resignation when You concluded MOTTO be
made party in any legal proceedings
You add, II am in measure confirmed in
the conclusion by your recent orders directing
me to disobey orders from the Secretary of
War, my superior and your subordinate, with
out having cOuntermanded his authority to
issue the orders am to disobey." On the oath
ultimo you addressed a note to the President
requesting in writing an order given to you
verbally i've days before, to disregard orders
from MIR. Stanton as Secretary of War until |
you knew from the President himself that
they were his orders. On the 18th, in compli-
ance with your request did give you instruc-
tons In writing not to obey any order from
the War Department assumed to be issued by |
the Erection of the President unless such
order is known by the General commanding
the armies of the United States to have been
authorized by the President. There are some
orders which Secretary of War may issue
without the authority of the President; there
are others which he issues simply as the agent |
Of 9th the President, and which gurport to be by
the President Is responsible, and he should,
therefore, know and understand what they are
before giving such directions.
Mr.. stanton states in his letter of the 4th
inst, which accompanies the published CORES
pondence, that be has had no correspondence
with the President since the 18th OF August
last, and he further says that since he resumed
the duties of his Office he has continued to dis
charge them without any personal or written
communication with the President; and he |
adds, mo orders have been issued from this De- |
partnent in the name of the President to my |
knowledge, and have received no orders from |
him 1t now seems that Mr. Stanton now dis
charges the duties of the War Department |
without any reference to the President and /
without using his name. My order to you had
only reference to orders assumed to be issued |
by the President 1t would appear from Mr..
Satnton's letter that you have received no such
orders from him. In your note to the Presi-
dent OF the 30th ult In which you acknowl-
edge the receipt of the written order of the
18th, you say that you have been informed by
Mr. stanton that he has not received any order
limiting his authority to issue orders to the
army according TO the practice of the Depart
ment, and state that while this authority to
the War Department is not countermanaed, it |
Will be satisfactory evidence to me that any
orders issued from the War Department by |
direction OF the President are authorized by |
the Executive" The President issues an order |
to you to obey no orders from the War Depart
ment purporting to be made "by the direction
OF the President" until you have referred to
received the Presidents order and will not /
obey 1t, but will obey an order purportng to |
be given by his direction if it comes from the |
War Department. You will obey no direct
orders Of the President, but will obey his indi
rect orders.
If, as you say, there has been practice in |
the War Department to issue orders in the |
name of the President without his direction, |
does not the precise order you have requested |
and have received change the practice as to |
the General of the army? Could not the |
President countermand any such order issued |
to you from the War Department? IT you |
should receive an order from that Department |
issued in the name of the President to do a |
special act and an order directly from the |
President himself not to do the act is there a, |
doubt which you are 10 obey? You answer /
the question when you say to the President, in |
your letter of the Sd inst, "the Secretary of |
War is NV superior and your subordinate"
and yet refuse obedience to the superior out of |
Difference to the subordinate. Without further |
comment upon the insubo-dinate attitude |
which you have announced, / am at a loss to |
know how you can relieve yourself from the |