The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1868-02-06


bly, from our various. conversations
1t ls certain, however, that even un-
der these circun stances, you did not
offer to return the place to my pos
session, but, according to your own
statement, placed yourself in posi-
tiOn where, could | have anticipated
your action, [ would have been CON-
PEELED to ask of you, as I was com
PEELED to ask Of your predecessor In
the War Department, a letter of
forst fresortlte the more
disagreeable expedient of suspending
you. by the appointment of a success
sor.
8 As stated in your letter. the nomi-
nation Of Governor Cox, of Ohio, for
Secretary of War. was suggested to
me. This appointment as Mr.. Stan
toms successor, was urged in your
name, and it was said that his selec-
ton would save further embarrass-
ment. | did not think that. In the
selection of Cabinet officer. | should
be trammeled by such considerations.
| was prepared to take the response
bility of deciding the question in ac-
cordance with my ideas of constitu-
tional duties. and having determined
upon a course which | deemed right
and proper, was anxious to learn
the steps you would take should
the possession of the War Depart
ment be demanded by Mr.. Stanton.
Had your action been in conformity
with the understanding between US, [
do not believe that the embarrassment
would have attained the present pro-
portions, or that the probability of its
repetition would have been so great |
know that with a view to any early
determination of a state of affairs so
detrimental to the public interests.
you voluntarily offered, both on Mon
day, the 10Th inst, and on the sue.
ceeding Sunday, to call upon Mr..
Stanton and urge upon him that the
good of the service required his res
ignation.
" l confess [ considered your pro-
posal as sort of reparation for the
failure on your part to act In accord
ance with an understanding more
than once repeated, which had re-
ceived your full assent, and under
which you could have returned to me
the Office which | had conferred upon
you, thus saving yourself from en-
barrassments and leaving the respoH-
sibility where it properly belonged,
with the President. who is accounta-
ble for the faithful execution of the
Taw::tp' -
. I have not yet been informed by
you whether, as twice proposed your
SELF. YOU had called upon Mr. Se9nton
and made an effort toaindnce hin, vol
tufltarilvI5-s to resign from the War De-
,l,.+ MON kss 8 = 2 -.tat izzsa2Ese s9fa4nt
Z 6ul conclnde' JOUR conqfnd ddbfcation
with a reference to pnf yerY9tiQn
a. the meeting Cf the Cabinet held, on
the. l4th inst, La your aeeouat Of
what there occurred. you say that afr
Yer the PresiaeRe4had given his ver-
sch eff eur Apfevf6us eAonversation,
you stated that substantially as given
in your letter. and.th you Ia no wise
admitted the correctness Of his state
ment. though to soften the evident
contradiction my statement, made, |
said, alluding to our. first communi-
cation on the subject, the President
might have understood In the way he
said, viz: that [ had promised to
resign if [ did not resist refnstate-
ment. / made no such promise.
Ny recollection of v hat then
transpired is diametrically the reverse
of your narration 1In.tfre presence of
the Cabinet | asked you first, If, in a
conversation which took place shortly
after your appointment as Secretary
OF War dd, interim, you did agree to
remain at the head cf the War De-
partment, and abide any judicial pro-
ceedings that might follow the non
concurrence of the Senate in Mr.. Stan
tons suspension or should you not
wish to become involved in such con-
troversy. to put me Ia the same posi-
ton with refefence to the office a.
previous to your appointment, by re-
turning it TO me in time to anticlpa te
such action by the Senate. This you
admitted =, 2 t--t-eNs7 = s-'' -
Second-I then asked you if, al
the time of the conference on the
preceding Saturday. a had not, tc
avoid misunderstanding, requested
you to state what you intended ii
do; and further, if, in reply to tha
inquiry, you had not referred to my
former Conversations, saying tha
from them understood your posi-
ton, and that your action would
be consistent with the understand.
| ing which had been reached. 4,
these questions you also replied ii
the affirmative.
Third then asked if at the con
ciusion of our interview on Saturday
it was understood that we were t
have another conference on Monday
before final action by the Senate IL
the case of Mr.. Stanton. You re
piled that such was the understand
ing, but that you did not suppose the
Senate would act so soon; that OF
Monday YOU had been engaged in