The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1868-02-13
The Testimony of IKE Cabine:.

Since the first page of to-day's paper was
made up,' the letters of the Cabinet officers
who were present at the meeting of the l4th
January have come to hand. These letters, as
we expected, show that the President was en-
tirely mistaken when he claimed that the Cab
met without exception" agreed to the accuracy
of his account of the conversation that even
ing. Secretary Welles does indeed say that
the three points specified in the Presidents
letter of the 3lst ult., are correctly stated"
and Mr.. Randall, citing the three paragraphs
at length, says they accord with his recollec-
tions. Secretary McCulloc says, a little more
guardedly, that the Presidents account Sub
standally" accords with his recollection. So
tar none of these gentlemen furnish any ORR
gtnal testimony. They simply repeat in various
keys the Presidents words, and state their be-
lief that substantially" the facts are as repre-
sented. This is testimony drawn out by a
leading question, aud must be estimated ac-
oordingly.
On the other hand Secretaries Seward and
Browning undertake to give original accounts
of the affair. 1t is evident that theirs is testi-
mony of a higher character than the simple
afirmations of the other gentlemen, in reply
to the Presidents question. In order to APP
preciate the bearing of their evidence-the
only original testimony we have-it is necess-
airy to state sharply the points at issue. The
President asserts-1. That Gen. Grant agreed
on Saturday, Jan. II, either to hold the War
Office and abide the consequences, or to resign
and let the President to appoint somebody
that would 2. That Gen. Grant agreed to call
ha praci6anf MOpdav Tor
nounce his conclusion. s. That Gen. Grant
confessed to both these charges at the Cabinet
meeting, Tuesday evening, Jan. IA. Now let
us see what the witnesses say ON this last
point, which, with both the others, General
Grant styles a gross misrepresentation.
Secretary Browning says General Grant
said he "came over on Saturday, to inform the
President of thr change in his views, and did
so inform him." Z" that they continued to dis
cuss the matter some time, and finally he left
Uithout any conclusion hauin9 been reached, ex-
pecting to see the President again Monday"
This disposes of the Presidents story so far
as the first count is concerned. Secretary
seward says substantially the same thing: 81
did not understand General Grant as denying,
nor as explicitly admitting the statements in
them" As to the proposed conference on
Monday Mr.. Seward says, He acquiesced in
your statement that the Saturdays CONVERSE
tlon ended with an expectation that there could
be subsequent conference on the subject,
which he as well as youself supposed could
seasonably take place on Monday" This is
entirely consistent with General Grants own
account, in which he says, The President said
he would see me again. I did not agree to
call again on Monday, nor at any other definite
time, nor was l sent for by the President until
the following Tuesday. From the 18th instant
to the Cabinet meeting on the 14th instant,
doubt never entered my mind about the Pres
ident's fully understanding my position"
General Grant has done well to limit himself
In his reioinder to the Presidents letter of the
10th, to a simple refutation of the charge of
characterization. The question of veracity is
settled by the evidence SO clearly that no fur
Their comment was needed. The President was
wrong from beginning to end: ,.,... .-.
The man recovered from the bite.
The dog it was that died"