Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1868-02-12

been said that he made mistake; but,
in the violation Of the confidence reposed
in you after that conversation, there could
be no mistake Of his or ofyours This fact
alone needs to be stated; At the date Of
this conversation you did not intend to
hold the office with the purpose Of forcing
Mr.. Stanton into court, but did hold Il
then, aud had accepted it TO prevent that
course being carried out. In other
words, you said to the President, " that
is the proper course" and to yourself,
~ have accepted this Office, and now
hold il to defeat that course" The ex-
cuse that you make in subsequent par
sgraph Of that letter Of the 18th ultimo,
that afterwards you changed your views
as to what would be the proper course,
has nothing to do with the point now
under consideration; the point is, that
before you changed your views you had
secretly determined to do the very thing
which at last you did-surrender up the
Office to Mr.. Stanton. You certainly did
not change your views as to the course
you had marked out for yourself from the
beginning.
/ will only notice one more statement
in your letter of the Sd instant-viz;
That the performance Of the promise al
legged to have been made by you would
have involved you in resistance to the
law. / know of no statute that would
have been violated had you carried out
your promises in good faith; or had you
rendered your resignation when you con-
cluded not to be party in any legal
proceedings. You add: 81 am in q
measure confirmed in this conclusion by
your recent orders to disobey orders from
the Secretary of Warmly superior and
your subordinate-without having coun-
fernandez his authority to issue the or
ders / am to disobey." On the Oath ult.
you addressed a note to the President,
requesting, in writing, an order given to
you verbally, five days before, to disre-
gard orders from Mr.. Stanton, as Sec
rotary of War, until you knew
from the President himself that they
we're his orders. On the 10th, in compli'
auce with your request, | did give you
instructions in writing not to obey any
orders from the War Department, as
sumed to be issued by direction of the
President, unless such order was known
by the General commanding the armies
of the United States to have been author
lied by the Executive. There are some
orders which Secretary Of War may
issue without the authority of the Presi-
dent, there are others which he uses
simply as the agent of the President, and
which purport to be by direction of the
President, and for such orders the Presi.
dent is responsible, and he should there
fore know and understand what they are
before giving such directions.
Mr.. Stanton, in his letter of the 4th
inst, which accompanied the published
correspondence with the President since
the 18th of August, says that since he
resumed the duties of the Office, he has
continued to discharge them without any
personal or written communication with
the President. He adds: I" No orders
have been issued from this Department
in the name of the President with my
knowledge; and have received no or
ders from him." 1t thus seems that Mr..
Stanton now discharges the duties of the
War Department without any reference
to the President, and without using his
name. Ny order had reference only to
the orders assumed to be issued by the
President. 1t would seem, from Mr..
Stanton's letter, that you had received no
such orders from him, though, in your
note to the President, on the 18th inst,
lin which you acknowledge the reception
of the written order of January 29) you
say you have been informed by Mr.. STAN
ton that he has not received any order
limiting his authority to issue orders to
the army in accordance with the prac-
tice of the Department, and you state
that while this authority of the War De-
partment is not countermanded, it will
be satisfactory evidence to me (you) that
any orders issued from the War Depart
ment by direction of the President are
authorized by the Executive. The Pres
ident issues an order to you to obey no
order from the War Department, pur-
porting to be made by his direction,
until you have referred it to him for APP
proval. You reply that you have re-
ceived the Presidents order and will not
obey it, but will obey an order purport-
ing to be given by his direction, if it
comes from the War Department. You
will obey no direct order from the Presi.
dent, but will obey his indirect order.
If, as you say, it has been the practice
in the War Department to issue orders
in the name Of the President, without his
direction, does not the precise order you
have requested, and have received,
change the practice as to the General OF
the army2 Could not the President
couutermand any such order, issued
in the name Of the President to
do special act, and an order