The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1868-02-19
An Analysis Of the JOhnSOR-GraBt
Question or FePaeitY.

A careful analysis Of the statements
OF the President his Cabinet wit
nesses, and General Grant, ia regard
to the vital point at issue--namely,
the conversation held on the Satur
day before STATIONS reinstatement-
may throw considerable light on the
question of Yeracity between the two
distinguished disputants. There Is
no controversy as to the General haV-
ing supposed last August that, - as
general principle" the court was the
proper tribunal for the settlement Of
the controversy between the Presi-
dent and the Secretary Of War, and
that he then consented to hold the
position till it was thus settled, or to
resign; and If I should change my
mind an this particular case, 4
a0ould inform him of the fact.
General Grants letter, January
25.) Nor is there any question that
the President, after this long discus
sion on Saturday, January III, Tex
pected to see the General again be-
fore the Senate finally acted. The
President, in his letter Of January 81,
goes no further than to say: 1t was
then understood that there would be
q further conference on Monday"
General Grant states, however, (letter
of January 25:) The President said
he would see me again. 1 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" and Mr.. Seward.
detailing the conversation at the Cab
met, on Tuesday, says that the Gen
eral admitted his expectation or
purpose to call upon you on Monday,
and assigned reasons for the omis-
sion." The Secretary adds:
he acquiesced in your statement
that the Saturdays conversation end
ed with an expectation that there
would be a subsequent conference on
the subject, which he, as well AS your
self, supposed could seasonably take
place on Monday.
The evident reason for the failure
to meet each other on Monday was,
that on that day Gen. Sherman called
on the President "at my particular
request, says Gen. Grant, to suggest
sending in the name of Governor
Cox as satisfactory solution of the
difficulty, and that no one expected
the Senate 60 act as promptly as they
did-the absence of the previous ques-
ton there, and the understanding that
there was TO be general debate on the
subject in Executive session, leading
public men generally to suppose that
the vote could not be taken
before the middle of the
week. After the prolonged and
antagonizing discussion between the
President and the General on Satur-
day, no one can doubt that the Presi-
dent would have sent for General
Grant on Monday, if he had supposed
the Senate would act finally on the
question before their adjournment
that day. =.-
But the vital question is as to lohat
a0ds said at that Saturday discussion
before the Senate acted Let US
FIRST quote the Presidents asser-
tons in regard to it.
Let as first quote the Presidents
own language from his letter to Gen
eral Grant Of j anuary 81 Profess
ing to detail the conversation at the
Cabinet meeting, after alluding to the
first understanding of last August,
which rs not In controversy, he adds:
Second. then asked you if at the con-
ference on the preceding Saturday had
not, TO avoid misunderstanding,r requested
,
1nrther, If in reply to that inquiry you
had not referred to our former converse
tiOns, saying that from them understood
your position, and that your action would
be consistent with the understanding
which had been reached. To these ques-
tions you also replied in the affirma-
tive. Third. 1 ne { asked If at the
conclusion of our interview on SAT-
urday IL was not then under
stood that we were to have another con-
ference on Monday, before final elton by
the Senate on the case Of Mr. Stanton.
You replied that such was the understand
ing, but that you did not suppose the SEN
you had been engaged in q conference
with many little matters" and asked If
General Sherman had not called on that
day.
No wonder that the President, in
making this statement, says my
recollection of what then transpired
is Numerically the reverse of your
narrative" for General Grant, In his
letter of January 25th, had detailed
that Saturdays conversation as fol-
lows:
subsequently, on reading the tenure-Of-
office bill clos .ly, found that l could OF,
without violation of the law, refuse TO va
cate the ONCE of Secretary of War the mo-
ment Mr.. stanton was reingtated by the
senate. even though The President ordered
me TO remain. which he never did. Taking
this view of the subject, and learning on
saturday, the 18th inst, that the Senate
had taken 2 p the subject of StRnton's sus-
pension, after some conversation with
Lieutenant General Sherman and some
members OF my staff, in which TstQted thai |
The ldlO let no discretion as 70 qlV action
should Mr.. Stanton be TetgaStdted and that i
Intended 70 Inform the President tOent 70 1
this decision knot0n, and did so make /
g kRot07l. IN doing this IJutftLed The prom /
use made in our last preceding conner /
however, instead of accepting my view of 4