The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1869-01-07
Grant and the Tenure Office Bill.

/
ence Of the New York World.
| The day ending this morning has been
one of intense political excitement among
politicians here. The cause of the excite
| lnent is the difference Of opinion between
Gen. Grant and leading Congressman N
regard to the continuance of the Civil
| Tenure law. The exclusive disclosure of
your dispatches Of this difference are as
true as exclusive pains are taken to keep
the breach private in order TO heal it.
The facts are as follows: Gen. Grant
has on three occasions since Tuesday eX-
pressed his intention, in terms worthy in
emphasis of Andrew Jackson, to have the
CivilTenure bill repealed. His firstutter-
ance Of the kind was to Washburne, at
his (Grants) residence on | street, on
Tuesday night, after the receipt of that
days World containing the disclosures of
Buffers dodge to have the bill repeating
the Civil-Tenure act lie over till after a
day long enough to let Mr. Johnson peck
ct it with fatal effect, Gen. Grant excitedly
asked his friend: els there anything in
this: If thought that such game was
meant, would"
The rest of the sentence ended literally
in smoke
Yesterday morning a Senator of the
State of Missouri, just about to depart
home for the recess, called to pay his re-
spects, and to say goodbye TO Gen. Grant
at his headquarters. The conversation got
around to politics, and the Senator made
the initiative remark:
General, think the CivilT-enure law
has worked badly, and will work worse"
To this opinion General Grant replied
exactly in the following words:
81 think so, too. | am glad you think
so. That law must be really repealed be-
fore begin"
Evidently General Grant was resolving
purposes in his mind, and was harboring
suspicion, there, too. These suspicious
found vent and these purposes unwOnted
emphatic expression that very afternoon
Two Congressman came to see him
One was Mr.. Washburne The other is
said to have been Senator Stewart, al
! though some say it was Senator Williams
To these gentlemen General Grant de-
clared that he believed a purpose existed
not to repeal the Civil Tenure bill in good
! faith, and that Congress had better under
stand that, if there was any double-deal-
ing designed there was another Congress
to fix things straight He had thought
that the Forty First Congress need not
meet, further than an extra session Of the
Senate to confirm few appointments. If
affairs went right this winter, the expense
of another session of Congress would be
avoided, and he was opposed to unneces-
sary expense. On reflection, however, he
thought the Forty-First Congress hsd bet
| ter meet in March. That was his opinion.
! Therefore, he supposed that the bill re-
pealing continuous session had better be
| dropped. Ii it was passed, he wanted it
I md lore Il hot hn
Congress together by proclamation, at an
early day.
This in truthful substance, almost in lit
eral words, is what General Grant said to
these two Congressmen.yesterday after
noon. Gen. Grant said "he wanted it
understood that the Congress of 1s69-10
/ the same day that "he wanted it under
stood that the Civil-Tenure bill must be
really repealed before he began"
What does this mean? 1t means that
Gen. Grant believes that the Civil-Tenure
law would rot be "really" repealed by
this Congress. Tt means that he intends
TO have the next Congress meet and
really" repeal it "before he begins"
Gen. Grant demands that Congress shall
back down from the Civil-Tenure law and
leave him as freehanded as Abraham Lin
/ coin was.
/ What is the sentiment of Congress in
regard to repeating the Civil-Tenure law !?
| will try to show that plain facts prove
Congress to be opposed to the repeal Of
the act. No one has even proposed to re-
peal it except Gen. Butler. He merely
introduced the repeal bill without word
of comment, or statement to tell what the
bill was. Its very title was not known till
the clerk read it out. It was referred to
the Judiciary Committee of the House.
| The committee is as follows:
James +. Wilson, Iowa; Geo. s. Bout
we'll, Massachusetts, Francis Thomas,
Maryland; Thos. Williams, Pennsylvania !;
F. E. Woodbridge, Vermont; VIM Law
renee. Ohio; John c. Churchill, New
York; Samuel S. Marshall, Illinois; Chas.
A. Eldridge, Wisconsin.
Seven of this committee are Radicals.
Six of them are Radicals of the intense
kind. One (Mr Woodbridge is little
less Radical, but /" he will serve" Three
of this committee were managers (prose-
cut0rs) of impeachment. They were:
James f. Wilson, Iowa; George S. Bout
well, Massachusetts Thomas Williams,
Pennsylvania. The gravamen of impeach
ment was alleged violation of the Civil
1Cuul = law. luC vi
speeches was glorifcation of the law. Mr..
Williams and Mr.. Wilson made elaborate
arguments to prove its constitutionality
and policy, and insist that it be perma-
nent part of the government. This Judi
ciary Committee must report the bill But
Ter offered, if it be reported at all. The
committee met every day of the two
weeks session. During all these meetings,
fourteen in all. tire bill was never even
named once. Every day the committee
adjourned for want of business therefore
they did not consider it their business to
take up the bill. The committee are IN
doubtedly opposed to the BILL The House
undoubtedly follows the committee. Bust
ness languished every day in the House.
Ben Butler was present every day in the
House Ben Butler never once asked after
or for his bill. This proves he had no de-
sire to bring it up now.
POLITICAL ITEMS.