Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1868-02-12
EXECUTIVE MANSION, |
Febl uary 10, 1868; ]

foSbe> printed. ,5s ,ssea .5s ls. @
~. EXECUTIVE MANSION,
February 10, 1868;
General-The extraordinary character of
your letter Of the Sd instant would seem to,
preclude any reply on my part; but the man
ner in which publicity has been given to the
correspondence of which that letter forms a
part, and. the grave questions which are invol=
ved induce me to take this mode OF giving, as
proper sequelto the {communlcasloDs which
have passed between us, the statement OF the
FIVE members of the Cabinet who were present
on the occasion of our conversation on the l4th
ultinno. Copies of the letters which they have
addressed to me are accordingly herewith en-
closed. " GU speak of my letter ofothe 3lst
ultimo as asreiteration of the many gross mis-
representations containedin certain newspaper
articles; and reassert the correctness OF the
statements contained in your communication OF
the 2Sth ultimo, adding, and here | give your
own words, anything IN yours IN reply to tne
| contrary Notwithstanding" When contro-
versy upon matter of fact escapes the point ITO
which this has been brought futher. assertion
l:or denial between the Immediate parties snould
cease, especially where upon either side lt!oses
the character Of respectful discussion, which
| is required by the relations in which the par
ties stand to each other, and degenerates In tone
! and temper. In such a case, it there Is Moth
ing to rely upon but the opposing statements,
| conclusions must be drawn from the statements
alone, and from whatever intrinsic probabilities
they afford in favor of or against either party
I shouldrot shrink from this test in the con-
troyersey but fortunately 1t is not lett to
this test alone. There were five Cabinet OH
GERS present at the conversation, the detail OF
which, ia my letter of the 28th- ultimo, you al
low yourself to say contains smany gross mis-
| representations. ~ These gentlemen heard that
| conversation, and have read my statement
| They speak for themselves: and have the
proof without word of comment deem 1T
| proper, before concluding this communications
to notice some of the statements eontainea IN q
YOUR letter. You say that performance or
the promise alleged to have been made by you
to the President would have involved resIs-
lance to law and an inconsistency with the
| whole history Of my connection with the sus-
pension of Mr. Stanton. -
You then state that you had fears the Presl-
dent would, on the removal OF Mr.. Stanton,
appoint some one in his place who would en-
barrass the army in carrying out the Recon
struction acts, and add: 1T was to prevent
such an appointment that accepted the office
of Secretary of. War ad interim, and not tor the
purpose of enabling you to get rid of MIR. Stan
ton by my Withholding it from him in opposl-
| ton to law, or, not doing so myself surrender
I ing it to one who would, as the statement and
assumptions in your communication plainly
! indicate was sought: &c j. se..@3
First of all, you here admit that from the
very beginning of what, you term the whole
| history" of your connection with MIR. Stanton,s
suspension, YOU intended to circumvent the
President It was to-. carry cut that intent,
| DkoI hot Jnfyn mt
was In your mind at the time OF your accept
ance. It was not then in obedience to the
order Of your superior, as has been heretofore
supposed, that you assumed the duties OF
the Office. : You knewit was the President s
purpose to prevent Mr. Stanton from resuming
the Office Of Secretary Of War, and you intend
ed to defeat that purpose
/ You accepted the Office, not in the interest
of the President, but Of Mr.. Stanton. If this
purpose, so entertained by you, had been con-
fined to yourself; if, when accepting this office,
| you had have done so with a mental reserva-
ton to Illustrate the President, it would have
| been tacit deception. In the ethics OF some
persons such course is allowable. But you
cannot stand upon that questionable ground. :
he history of your connection with your
transaction, as written byyourself, places your
self in different predlcament, and shows that
you not only concealed your design from the
President, but induced him to suppose that
YOU would carry out his purpose to keep Mr..
Stanton out of Office by retaining it yourself,
after an attempted restoration by the Senate,
so as to require Mr.. Stanton to establish his
right by judicial decision.
T now give that part Of this history" as
written by yourself In your letter OF the 18th
| ultimo "Some time attcrI assumed the du-
ties Of Secretary Of War ad interim, the Pre-
sident asked me my views as to the course Mr..
Stanton would have to pursue, in case the Sen
| ate should not concur in his suspension, to OBJ
tain possession Of his Office My reply was,
in. substance, that Mr.. Stanton would have to
appeal to the courts to reinstate him, lllustrat:
ing nv position by citing the ground l had
taken in the case of the Baltimore Polio Com,
missioners. y .Ta.r
Now, at that time, as you admit in your let
ter of the Sd instant, you held the office tor
the very object Of defeating an appeal to the
courts. In that letter you say that, in occupy
| ing the Office, one motive was to prevent the
President from appointing some other person
who would retain possession, and thus make
| judicial proceedings neces sary.
! You knew the President was unwilling to
trust the office with any one who would not, by
holding it, compel Mr.. Stanton to resort tc
the courts. You perfectly understood that in
this interview, some time after you accepted
the Office, the President, not contented with
your silence, desired an expression OF your
views, and you answered hi m that Mr.. Stan.
ton ''would have to appeal to the courts" II
the President had reposed confidence before he
knew your views, and that confidence had been
violated, it might have been said be made a
mistake; but violation Of confidence reposed
j after that conversation was no mistake of his,
nor of yours. Il IS The fact only, that needs
&c stated, that at the date of this conversation
you did not intend to hold the Office with the
purpose of forcing Mr. Stanton into court, but
did hold it 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, y and you said to yourself Il