The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1868-02-25

onoO tao " tdk6 butS lu0u6 VI giving, aS
"a proper sequel to the communications
which has passed between US, the state
mentsof the five members of the Oabi-
net who were present on the occasion Of
our conversation on the 14th ult. Cop
les of the letters which they have ad-
dressed to me upon the subject are ac-
cordingly herewith inolosed.
! You speak of my letter of the 31st
ultimo as reiteration of the many and
gross misrepresentation contained in
certain newspaper articles, and reassert
the correctness of the statement contained
in your communication of the 29th ult.,
adding, and here I give your own words,
Anything in yours in reply to it to the
contrary Notwithstanding" When a
CONTROVERSY upon matters of fact reaches
the point to which this has been brought
further assertion or denial between the
immediate parties should cease, espe-
+cially whom upon either side it loses the
character Of the respectful discussion
which is required by the relations in
which the parties stand TO each other,
and degenerates in tone and temper. In
|auchs case if there is nothing to rely
upon but the opposing statements, con-
clnsiona must be drawn from those state
ments alone, and from whatever intrinsic
probabilities they afford in favor Of or
against either Of the parties, should
not shrink from the controversy.
But fortunately it is not left to this
test alone. There were Eve Cabinet Of
fcers present at the conversation, the de.
tails Of which, in my letter of the 28th
|ult., you allow yourself to say contains
many and gross misrepresentation. -
These gentleman heard that conversation,
and have read my statement. They
speak for themselves, and I leave the
proof without word of comment.
/ deem it proper before concluding
this communication to notice some Of the
statements contained in your letter.
You say that performance Of the prom.
iso, alleged to have been made by you
to the President "would have involved a
resistance to law, and an Inconsistency
with the whole. history Of my connection
with the suspension of Mr.. Stanton -
Yeu then state that you had fears the
President would on the removal Of Mr..
Stanton, appoint some one in his place
who would embarrass the army in carry
ing out the reconstruction acts, and add:
It was to prevent such an appointment
that I accepted the Office Of Secretary of
War ad interim, and not for the purpose
of enabling you to get rid of Mr.. Stan
ton by my Withholding it from him, in
opposition to the law, or not doing SO
myself, surrendering it to one who would
as the statements and assumptions in
your communication plainly indicate was
soussht, first of all.
You he,a admit that from the very
sf shat you term the whole
history Of your connection with Mr..
suspension .yeu intended to cir
cumvent the President. IT was 90 carry
out that intent that you acceptccd the az
this was in your mind AZ the
time of your acceptance. It was nos
then, in obedience to- the order of your
superior, as has heretofore been supposed
that you assumed the duties of the
Office. You knew it was the Presi-
dents. purpose to prevent Mr.. Stanton
from resuming the Office of Secretary Of
War, and yeu intended 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 confined to yourself--if, when
accepting the Office, you had done so with
q mental reservation to frustrate the
would have been tacit
deception. In the ethics Of some per-.
sons such acourse is allowable, but you
cannot stand even upon that questionable
ground. The history Of your connection
with this transaction, as written by your.
self, places you in q different predicament
and shows that you not only concealed
you design from the President, but in
duced. him to suppose that you would
carry ou. his purpose to keep Mr., Stan
ton out 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.
Inow give that part of this history as
written BY yoursel.in your letter of the
18th ultimo:
Some time after | assumed the duties
Of Secretary of War ad interim, the
President asked me my views as to the
course Mr.. Stanton would have to pur-
sue in case the Senate should not concur
in his suspension, to obtain possession of
his Office. My reply was in substance
that Mr.. Stanton would have to appeal
to the courts to reinstate him, illustra-
ting my position by citing the ground I
had taken in the case of the Baltimore
Police Commissioners.
Now. at that time, you admit in your
letter Of the Sd inst, you held the Of
fce for the very object of defeating an
appeal to the courts; in that letter you
say that in accepting the office one mo-
tive was to prevent the President from
some other person who would
retain possession, and thus make judicial
proceedings necessary. You knew the
President was unwilling to trust the Of
fee with any one who would not, by
holding it, compel Mr.. Stanton to resort
to the courts. You perfectly under
stood that in this interview. Some time
after you accepted the efico, the Presi-
dent, not content with your silence, de.
sired an expression Of your views, and
you answered him that Mr.. Stanton
iswould have to appeal to the court" If
the President had reposed confidence
sbefore" be knew your views, and that
confidence had been violated, it might