New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-02-05

rs tW1ce proposed ny youIstil, you Hau uPoi
Mr. Stanton and made an effort to induce him volun-
tarily to resign from the War Department You con-
clude your communication with reference to our
conversation at the meeting of the Cabinet held on
Tuesday the 18th inst. In your account of what
then occurred you say that after the President had
given his version of previous conversations you
stated them substantially given your letter and
that you in no wise admitted the correctness OF his
| statement of them though, to soften the evident
contradiction my statement gave said abiding to
first communication on the subject, the President
might have understood in the way he said, WIZ that
had promised to resign if did not resist the rein
statement ] made no such promise" My recol-
lection of what then transpired Is dla-
metrically the reverse Of your narration
In the presence of the Cabinet asked you, first IT,
in conversation which took place shortly after your
appointment as Secretary of War; dd interim you did
not agree either to remain at the head OF the war
Department and abide any judicial proceedings that
might follow the non-concurrense by the Senate in
Mr.. Stanton's suspension, OF should you wish not to
become involved in such controversy to put me in
the same position with respect to the office as occu-
pied previous to yOur appointment byreturnIng IL 10
me in time to anticipate such action by tho Senator
This You admitted. Second: then asked you II at
the conference on the preceding Saturday had not
to avoid misunderstanding requested you to state
what you intended to do; and, further II IN reply 10
that inquiry you had not referred to my former con-
versations, saying, that from them understood your
position and that your action would be consistent
with the understanding which had been reached 7
To these questions you also replied in the affirmative
Third: Inext asked IT, at the conclusion Of our inter
view on Saturday, il was not understood that we
were to have another conference on Monday before
A. |, IL. In 1f Mr.
ton You replied that such was the understanding,
but that you did not suppose the Senate would act 80
soon that on Monday you had been engaged in a
conference with Gen. Sherman, and were occupied
with "many little matters" and asked if Gen. Sher
man had not called on that day. What relevancy
Gen Sherman's visit 10 me on Monday had with the
purpose for which You we're to have called am at
loss TO perceive. rs he certainly did not inform me
whether you had determined TO retain possession OF
the office 10 afford me an opportunity to appoint
successor in advance Of attempted reinstatement
of Mr. Stanton. This account of what passed be-
tween us at the Cabinet meeting on the l4h instant
widely differs from that contained in y0uT communi-
cation for it shows that, instead of having stated
our conversations asgIyen III the letter" which has
made this reply necessary, you admitted that my re-
cital Of them was entirely accurate Sincerely ann-
ious however to be correct in my statement, have
to-day read this narration of what occurred on the
18th inst. TO the members of the Cabinet who were
then present. They, without exception agree in its
accuracy. IL is only necessary TO add that on We'd
nesday morning, the 18th, you called on me
in company with Lieut.-Gen. Sherman. After
some preliminary conversation yOu remarked
that an article in The National Itllioenor OF
that date did you much injustice. / replied that
had not read The Intelgencer of that morning. You
A.. - info Mr.
Stanton TO resign bis office. After you had with
drawn, carefully read the article of which you had
spoken, and found that its statements of the under
standings between liz substantially correct. On
the 17ih ! caused il 10 be read To four of the five
members of the Cabinet who were present at our
conference on the l4th, and they concnrred IN the
general accuracy Of its statements respecting our
conversation upon that occasion. Ia reply 10 your
communication have deemed 10 proper in order TO
prevent further misunderstanding, 10 make the
simple recital OF facts Very respectfully yours,
ANDREW JOHNSON.
Gen. u. s. Grant, Commanding u. s. Armies.
HEADQUARTERS ARMY or THE USITED STATES,
WAsHisGTOS, D. G., Feb. 3, 1868. !
10 HIS RIoeeney ANDREW JOHNSON, Fresidentcfhe Uni
dd State.
SIR: have the honor TO acknowledge the receipt
OF your communication of the 3lst ut IN answer to
mine of the 2sth ult. After careful reading and
comparison of it with the article In The National IN
hgoacr Of the 18th ult the article the initials
"JBSD i'm The Aeo York World Of the 9th ul;,
puportng to be based upon your statement and that
of the members of the Cabinet therein named find
il only 10 be but reiteratiOn only somewhat more
in detail, of tho many aud gross misrepresentation
contained in these articles, and which my statement
of facts set forth in my letter of the 18th ut was in
tended to correct and here reassert the correctness
q lit Ia I.t,sr In.
in reply 10 il 10 the contrary notwithstanding
confess my surprise that the Cabinet officers referred
to should so greatly misapprehend tho facts in the
matter of admissions alleged to have been made by
Inc at the Cabinet meeting on the 18th ult., az to
suffer their names be made the basis of the charges
in the newspaper article referred to- or agree 10 the
accuracy, as you affirm they do OF your account of
what occurred at that meeting. You know that We
parted on Saturday, the 18th ult, without any prom
ise on my part either expressed or implied, to the
effect that would hold onto the office Of Secretary
of War adintrm against the action OF the Senate,
declining to do myself would surrender it TO you
before such action was had or that would sec you
again. at any fixed time, on the subject The per-
Torrance of the promises alleged to have been made
by me would have involved a resistance Of the law
and an inconsistency with the whole history Of my
connection with the suspension Of Mr. Stan
ton From our conversation and my writ
ten protest of August !, 1861 against
the removal of Mr.. Stanton, you must have
known that my greatest objection TO his removal
was the fear that would be appointed in his
stead who would, by opposition to the laws relating
to the restoration Of the Southern States to their
proper relation to the Government, embarrass the
army in the performance of the duties especially i'm
posed upon it by the laws and that it was TO prevent
hat fa1 fba nj
ment of Secretary of War adj interim and not for the
,,,oso of enabling von IN get rid of Mr. Stanton by