New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1868-01-16

meat suppose that MIR. Stanton would have
done anything but disapprove of this hasty
and passionate step, tending, as it certainly
| did, to lead the troops to the slaughter of
the members of the convention and its
friends, and Mr.. johnson to the guilt Of in
citing and participating in it."
In noticing the 'grave delinquency"
with which the president charges Mr..
| Stanton for his failure to show him General
Bairds dispatch asking for instructions,
Immediately after it was received, the COM
mittee say; "Mr. johnson, in his report,
seeks to throw OFF from himself all re-
sponsibility of the riot, and denies that he
was warned in time. This denial, in the
face of the uncOntested andiHcOntrovertible
facts Of that case, admits of but one reply,
and that is, that it is untrue, and known
| to be so to Mr.. Johnson. He was warned,
and fully warned, of the impending vio-
| lence, and it is in vain for him to deny a
fact SO well established. Mr.. Stanton was
not warned. General Baird's dispatch did
| not intimate that there was any danger of
popular violence arising from the threat
ened arrestsuaa the writs that were TO be
issued. There was nothing in it to raise
an apprehension of such a danger. He had
threatened to prevent the arrests un-
less he was instructed to the con-
trary by the president. Suppose
Mr.. Stanton had instantly shown the dis
patch to the president. What would have
been the consequences Would he have
instructed General Baird to prevent the
arrests? For that alone would have pre-
vented the riot. He had just before, and
on the same day informed Voorhees, by tele-
graph that the military was expected to
sustain, and not to obstruct or interfere
with the proceedings of the court. The
news brought by General Bsird's telegram,
though it notified Secretary Stanton that
the conspirators intended to arrest the del
egates, announced no armed violence and
no danger of popular outbreak, while that
sent to Mr.. johnson the same day by Voor-
bees and Heron, and which Secretary
Stanton never saw till long atterward, not
only advised that the grand jury were act
ing on charges against the delegates, but
that it would be impossible to execute
civil process without certainty of riot"
Was not this dispatch from the lieuten-
ant governor and attorney general a
warning to Mr.. johnson of the approach
ing riot!
Mr. Stanton, as the evidence shows, had
no knowledge even that the convention
was going to assemble, save what was CEN
tanned in General Baird's dispatch. Ia it
not preposterous, then, to suppose that II
he had at once carried the generals dis
patch to the president, the latter would
have paid any attention to it.
The committee next proceed TO point
out what the president should have done,
and in reply to the statement that Mr..
Stanton should have instructed General
Baird, they give Mr.. Stanton's letter to the
committee on New Orleans riot, dated Jan
uary 81 1867, wherein the secretary ex-
plains at length the circumstances under
which he received the telegram in ques-
ton, and his reasons for not sending in
structions 10 General Baird.
The committee then conclude their re-
port as follows: 'And we think these
reasons for withholding further instructions
from General Baird entirely sufficient, con-
sidering the ignorance in which Mr.. Stan
ton actually was of the real state of things
in New Orleans. Mr.. johnson. however,
can plead no such ignorance, for he was
kept fally informed by RoZier, Voorhees,,
. Heron, and others of what was going on,
and seems designedly to have concealed it
from the secretary. Ought not such alarm
ing facts to have been made known by him
promptly and fully to the responsible head
of the war department, who was one of his
time and opportunity to make known to
him the proclamation of Mr. Howell, the
letter of Monroe to General Baird, the dis
patch of Voorhees, and Heron, and all that
was told him by Rozier on the 27th and 2Sth
two days before the riot, and especially the
fact of that ineendiary and fatal dispatch to
Voorhees, on the 2Sth, and yet deliberately
withholds all these pregnant facts from the
secretary. He now has the heart to re.
proach him with not having sent the neces
sary orders to prevent the riot. Such aU
. accusation needs no further comment. The
president, in a complaining mood, says
1t is not the fault, or error, or omission o.
the president that this military commander
was left without instructions; but for al
/ omissions, for all errors, for all failures tC
, instrnet, when instructions might have avert
ed this calamity, the president was openly
and persistently held responsible. Instant
I ly, without waiting for preof the delinquen
; cy Of the president was heralded in every
} form of futterance. Mr.. Stanton knew tha
r the president was not responsible for thi
delinquency. The exeulpation was il
his power, but it was not given by hin
I to the public, and only to the president il
I obedience TO requisition for all the dis
9 patches" Such an assertion as this, il
view OF the IactS, an dGcusallOu SO UNJUST
7 so bold, and audacious, will bear no fur
ther examination. When the character o
a faithful public officer is thus assailed, ant
3 the chief magistrate, in order to accomplish
. bis ruin, present himself as false accuser
we think the duty of the senate is plainly
) to refuse their concurrence in the suspen
! sion. The committee therefore recon
: mend the passage Of the following resolu
: ton;
RESOLVED, That having considered th'
, evidence and reasons given by the presi
} dent in his report of the 18th of December
1867, for the suspension from Office Of thi
secretary of war, Edwin NJ. Stanton, th'
senate do not concur In such suspension.
This report was adopted by the senatI
by decided majority, and certified cOple
sent to the president, Mr.. Stanton, ans
General Grant. a-E
A Youthful Traveller.
A few days ago one of those small coastinl
schoouers that pIv toward the eastward aut