The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1868-02-14

Y CONVERSATION AN0uAE stated that, al
though you had reported the reasons
for Mr. Stanton suspension to the
tSenate,Tysu nsYertheless held that he
l would not be entitled to resume the
I of6ce Of Secretary Of War, even If the
| Seuate disappF0ve of bis sus-
lspensIbn, and that you had proposed
to have the question tested by Judicial
process, to-be applied to the per-
tson who should be the incum bent
/ OF the Department under your desig
nation of Secretary of War dd interim,
IN the0place of Mr. Stanton. You
scentep9e1 that this wasewell under
stood betYeenyOu aud General Grant;
Iethat5Ehen he entered the Department
as, Secretary, 0d Interim. he expressed
his concurrence in a belief that the
question ofFMF. Stanton's restoration
would be a question tor the Courts;
with che General you had adverted to
the understanding thus had, and that
General Grant EXPRESSED his concur
renee in it; that at the same conveFa
satiOn which had been previously
held. General Grant said he still adj
hered to the same construction Of the
laws. but said #. he should change his
opinion, he would give rea-.
s9uatle notice of it; SO that you
could in any case be placed
IN the same positioniinTegard to the
War Depart tine ut that you were while
Grant held II. / did not understand
General Grant as denying, nor as ex-
plicitly admitting these staten ents, in
the form aud full extent to which you
made them; his admission of them
was rather Indirect and circumstan-
tialItheugb | d 4 not understand it
to be an evasiYe one. He said that
reasoning froM what occurred IN the
case Of the p lice in Maryland, which
be regarded as a parallel one, he was
of the gIFu,0u and so assured you,
that i wyUl I be his right and duty,
under your instructions, to hold the
War Office after the Senate should
disapprove of Mr.. Stanton's suspen-
sion. The question should be decided
by the Courts; that he remained until
very recently of that opinion, and
that on the Saturday before the Cab
met meeting. a conversation was held
between yourself and him, in which
the subject was generally discussed.
isa General Grants statement was, that
In that conversation he had stated to
you the legal difficulties which might
arise, involving fine and imprison-
ment underyt the Civil Tenure bill, and
that he did not care to subject him
self to those penalties; that you re-
piled TO this remark that you regarded
the Civil Tenure bill as uneonstitu-
tional, and did not think its penalties
were to be feared, or that you would
vOlun tarily assume them, and you in
sisted that General Grant should
either retain the Office until relieved
by yourself, according to what you
claimed was the original understand
seasonable notice of change of pur-
pose On his part, put YOU ii the same
situation which you would be in if he
adhered. You claimed that General
Grant finally said in that Saturdays
conversation that you understood his
views, and his proceedings thereafter
would be consistent with what had
been SO understood. General Grant
did not controvert, nor can say that
he admitted his last statement.
Certainly, General Grant did not at
any time 10 the Cabinet meeting insist
that he had in the Saturday conversa-
ton, either distinctly or finally, adj
vised you of his determination to re-
tire from the charge of the War De-
partment otherwise than under your
own subsequent direction He acqui-
esced in your statement that the Sat
uTday conversation ended with an ex-
pectation that there would be a sub-
sequent conference on the subject.
which he, as well as yourself, suppos- /
ed could reasonably take place on
Monday seG- Giw es1afs
49, You then alluded to the fact that
Gen. Grant did not call upon you on
Monday, as yeu had expected from
that conversation. r aa~.ft
Gen. Grant admitted that il was his
expectation, or purpose, to call upon
you on Monday. Gen. Grant assigned |
reasons for the omission. He said |
that he was in conference with Gen.
Sherman; that there were many little |
matters to be attended to-; he had
conversed upon the matter of the in
cumbency of the War Department |
with Gen. Sherman, and expected |
that Gen. Sherman would call upon |
Monday. My own mind suggested a
further explanation, but I do not re-
member whether it was mentioned or
not, namely, it was not. supposed by /
Gen. Grant, on Monday, that the |
Senate would decide the question so |
promptly as to anticipate further ex-
PLANTATION between yourself and him, T
if delayed beyond that day.
General Grant made another expla- I
ton, that he was engaged on Sunday i