The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1868-02-13

letter 70 the House of Representa
tives, 10 accordance with the resOlu-
ton adopted yesterday:
THE PRESIDENT TO GEN. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION
Feb. 10, 1858.
GENERAL-The extraordinary char
aeter Of your letter of the Sd inst.
would seem to preclude any reply on
my part; but the manner 10 which
publicity has been given TO the cor
respondence of which that letter forms
a part, and the grave questions which
are involved, induce me to take this
method of giving, as q proper sequel
to the communications which have
passed between US, the statements of
the five members of the Cabinet who
were present on the occasion of our
conversation on the l4th Ult. Copies
Of the letters which they have address,
ed to me upon the subject are accord
ingly herewith inclosed.
You speak of my letter Of the 1st
ult as reiteration of the many
and gross misrepresentation con-
tanned in certain newspaper articles,
and re-assert the correctaess Of the
statements contained in your commu-
nication of the 18th ult., adding-and
here | give your own words any
thing Of yours Ia reply to it to the
contrary Notwithstanding When
controversy upon matters of fact
reaches the point to which this has
been brought, further assertion or
denial between the immediate parties
should cease, especially when upon
either side it loses the character of
respectful discussion, which Is re-
quired by the relation in which the
parties stand to each other, and de-
generates In tone aud temper. La
such a case, if there is nothing to re-
~ upon but the opposing statements,
conclusions must be drawn from those
statements alonRaaand fr0m whatever
intrinsic probabilities They aHoreti ip,
favor of or againsceither Vt tHaFafA
ties.
/ should not shrink from this con.
troversv. But, fortunately it is not
left to this test alone. There were
FIVE Cabmet officers present at the
conversation, the details Of which. IN
my letter of the 18th ult., you allow
yourself to say contains many and
gross. lisrepresentatIons. These gen
tlemen heard that converse ton, and
have read my statement. They speak
for themselves, and / leave the proof
without a Werd of comment.
/ deem 1t proper before concluding
this communication, to notiee.some of
the statements contained in your let
ter. You say that performance Of
the promises alleged to have. been
made by YOU TO. tie -Presidene
w0u1ashaVe involved resistance to
law, aud an Inconsistency with the
whole history of my connection with
the suspension of Mr.. Stanton"
You then state that yon had fears
that the President would, on the re-
moval Of Mr.. Stanton, appoint some
one in his place who would embarrass
the army In carrying out the Recon-
struction Acts, aud add, 1T was to pre-
vent such an appointment [ aeeep ed
tie office of Secretary of War adj IN
teagng, and not for the purpose of ena-
blEy you to get rid of Mr. Stanton,
by my Withholding It from him In op-
position to the law, or, not doing so
myself, 8urreudeTing It to one who
would as the statements and assump-
tions in your communication plainly
indicate, was sought.
First of all, you here admit that
from the very beginning of what you
term the whole history of your con-
nection with Mr.. Stanton S suspension,
you intended to clrcUmYent the Presi-
dent. 1t was to carry out that intent
that you accepted the appointment;
this was In your mind at the time of
your acceptance. 1t was not then In
obedience to the order of your supe-
rior, as has heretofore heen supposed,
that you assumed the duties of the
Office. You knew it was the Presi-
dents purpose to prevent Mr. Stanton
from resuming the ofice of Sec
retary of War, and you in
tended to defeat that purpose.
You accepted the Office, not in
the interest of the President, but of
Mr. Stanton. If this purpose, so en-
tertalned by you, had been confined
10 yourself; If, when accepting the
office, you had done so with a mental
| reservation to Illustrate the President,
it would have been a deception, In
the ethics Of some persons each
course is allowable; but you can not
stand even upon that questionable
ground. The history OF your -eonnec-
/ ton with the transaction, as written
| by yourself, places you In different
| predlcament, and shows that you not
/ only concealed your design from the
President, but induced him to sup
pose that you would carry out his
purpose to keep Mr. Stanton out of
Office by retaining it yourself after
an attempted restoration by the Sen
ate, so as to require Mr.. Stanton to
establish his right by judicial de-
/ cisiOn.
now give that part of the history,