Brownlow's Knoxville Whig. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1866-1869, 1868-02-26
THE KNOXVILLE WIG
Knoxville, Tenn, February 26, 1858.
From the Washington chronicI,
The Question Of YeFacIty.

t.s,ir,onv of others. He has been involved III
pes,ons Of veracity before, and u be has watched
fhe expressions Of public opinion IN FeiA'i1h 'uol
- ha must have made the unwelcome discovery
40 before that tribunal be labored under very Sc
,io,,s disabilities Hence he probably understands
nov. what Is pretty well understood by every body
else that IN any case where his statements conflict
,rtb chose Of another man, their cOrroOoratiOn by
others Is not merely useful, but Indispensable. In
similar cases arising between private citizens, it is
considered an important point that the witnesses
sbal be disintorested parties. Mr.. JObnsons wit
nssses being members Of bis Cabinet, cannot be
considered a. answering 20 this description. But
although this fact mast necessarily Impair their
rraditahility 70 some extent we can very well AZ
ford 70 rest tho for General Grant upon their
testimony II would be more satisfactory, perhaps
Il We could have the usual privilege Of cross-ques'
toning the witnesses for the prosecution especially
az the defence puts witnesses upon the stand
We would like for irftance, 70 ask Messrs Welles
and McCuIloch who vouch for the Presidents
statements in his letter Of the 3lst ut being cor
rect according 70 their recollection Of what trans
pired at the Cabinet meeting of January l4th--we
saw We would like 10 ask these gentlemen whether
they consider that their memories are ordinarily re-
tsntivs and whether they hRd any distinct "recol-
lection" as 70 what did transpire Sc the Cabinet
meeting In question We would also like 10 test
their recollection" by calling upon them % state
As nearly a. possible, without any PRESIDENTIAL
promptings and without even retreshing their ia
ding memories BY a reference 20 the Presidents
letter OF the 3lst ult what Mr.. johnson said, and
what General Grant said in reply. II put upon
their oath and subjected to e searching eKamina-
ton it Is not improbable that Grandpa Welles
would be forced 10 confess 10 a comfortable nap,
from which be woke up in time 20 hear johnson
have the last word; while McCulloch would very
likely be fan 10 admit that his thoughts were buster
with the question Of hlling the last vacant Office
than with the subject under discussion.
To speak In al seriousness, this is the most char
awr1onatfcn Of fhair xvholpcalp ando~rampnt
Of the Presidents statements. Their colleagues,
Browning and Seward who testify like intelligent
though somewhat partial, witnesses do not sustain
the allegations Of the President but in some points
are directly st variance with them. Shall we &C
cuse these latter gentlemen Of fasehood2 If We do,
It must be Of lyilhl fasehood because they do not
merely express an opinion as 70 the correctness Of
ready made statement placed before them by an
other but they make positive ayermenis of their
own protesting 70 know whereof they speak.
AZ cha testimony Of Wellee and hcQuHoch bears
upon the state ol their own "Tecoilecti9nF,' we can
lot them OF more lightly by charging any depar-
ture from facts 20 defective memory rather than 70
wilful perversion Of truth. Their letters are but
echoes Of that Of the President and The public will
make I'D is verdict entirely without reference TO
their statements. It viii be Observed also, that
Randall refreshes bis memory by quoting from the
published letter OF the President and does not give
= a. Independent statement on the subject. He re-
members only Just as much serves his purpose,
which rnanifestly TO sustain the President. Such
testimony that given by these three would be
ruled out Of any court Of Justice in the land as being
in entire contempt Of the rules Of evidence
Before preceding to consider the statements ol
the other two witnesses, let see what Is 10 DO
proved by their testimony. The several converse
lions between the President and General Grant IN
which the latter Is alleged tc have made the former
certain promises which he has failed 10 keep, were
ali private. There was no witness 10 anything
which transpired In any Of them, cad any question
~ht- fg .erdf 20 % hos
kurelv a question Of veracity between Andrew
johnson and General Grant. But the President
vel knew that be could not afford 70 60 before the
country against General Grant on a simple qnes-
SION Of voracity. Hence It was necessary 70 bring
proofs. But how get them ? General Grant was
the only witness and he must be used against him
set Accordingly, az the Cabinet meeting Of Jan
nhry 18th, 20 which be says he was invited, land
~hioh no would scarcely hsvec5osca 10 attend with.
Out an invitation the President takes occasion q
give bis own version Of what had pas cd between
himself and General Grant He subsequently al.
eges that General Grant cdTitted the truth OF the
Charges ho then made. Il Is on bis alleged ad1iis-
os 10 the presence Of witnesses that tho President
rest bis case, and i is by this means that no seek,
70 oschpe from an issue Of veracitv in which ht
would have no earthly chance Of success. The ques
ton Is do hs witnesses prove the admissions q
have been mRdo7 We have already bad three o.
them on the stand and dismissed them, aud we do
not fear that the impartial reader will think W,
they we're entitled TO Before examining the other
two witnesses Jet US see what the alleged sdmis
sious are. In his reply 20 General Granite leite
Of the 10th ult- referring 90 tho Cabinet meeting
of The 18Th, the President says
my recollection Of what then transpirel Be- diH
metriehlly the reverse OF your narration Ia th,
presence Of the Cabinet, / asked you
'tlrst II IN conversation which took plaC,
shortly amer your appointment e. Secretary Of Wal
"a INTERIM you did not agree either % remain a
nN Ia W'asT 4 ! a..
dicihl proceeding that might follow the nor-c0n
currence BY the Senate in Mr. Stanton's fuspen
ti0n or should you wish not 20 become involve,
N tuca controversy 20 put me IN The same posi
ZION win respect 70 The Office az I occupied pre-
viouf 70 your appointment by returning Il 20 mo n
time 70 anticipate such hction By the Senate
This you admitted.
Second. then asked you II, At the c9nferonc,
on the preceding Saturday, I bad nut. 70 avoid mis-
understanding requested yoa 70 state what you In
tended 70 do and further. X in reply % that naui
~ you bad not referred % cur former conversations
saying That from them I understood your position
and thAt your action would be consistent with th
andsr .tanding which had been reached
10 Ilste question: you also replied Ia The a1ll
Third ] next aiked II A. The c,r,r,,,f,, ,.f ,..
interview on Saturday Il was not upderftood IA
we're g. hays another canfe-enca g.7 Mode,
before final action By The 5snate in the case Of NJ
Stanton.
nd n
but thai you did not suppose the Senate would ID
60 soon that on Monday you bad been engaged /
conference with General Sherman, and we're %,
eqpied with many litls Natter and ssk-5 ii Ger
sherman had not called on that day.
Did Gen. Grant unske the admissions Mc-sr
Hsils1i McCulloch and Randall do not tell gs an
iaing "a 10 what be did say, but Measrt Brownin
ahd Coward d.. Let us hear Secretary Brownnl
Aitef detailing What the President said 70 Generi
oTAnl from which 10 does not appear that u
4Hsahont above. numbered J. 2 and g. were ev
faw
ln reply. Gen Grant admitted that o.. convers
Hon had occurred, This waa She convention
hal.feay TIE llth us and said That I'd tbe Ef
conservation be- had given 10 az his opinion 10 q
Ifmlaent that boz the event Of uou-coucurrencs 0
re Senale iu The action Of the Ffeident in rcspc
p me Secretary Of War, the question would Ea-
70 DECIDES ~ the court that Mr. stanton Won
to appeal n the court 70 rensiato him in ,
- ma the uH would remain 10 tiIl they c0u
- llassq and The outs put Ia by legal nrocec
49, la II -nAA bh TEEN thought 60 and had ACRE,
fbs Pr..,s,A4a change bic mind h. would r.til
-..-s. - D" ltua 80 make sr.tt.- ..-.-...
tt - s'--7 ~ the time Of 81 u ~. -
- - very closely into tho 49,. 49,.
had recently uteh eiscussed 80 ~. -. .-"i tnhl
thht tbs had inducnd him - s4ar5i, \. ieIs ti
faily, ard that be had come - H. , .l.iIe car
q The senate should refuse % oone,F In 49, N
1on hr stanton would thereby be rsinsts,es y
tha, De Grant could not continue 70 act A. 81,