The Cambria freeman. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1867-1938, 1870-07-14
NUMBER d.


his honesty. He met him every dsy with
face OF smiling friendship. Toncey certainly
had not the TeInotest ioea that Stanton was
defaming him Lehind his back, eenspiring
with abolitionists to destroy his Feputation.-
He would soon have suspected him of an
intent to poison his food or stab him in his
sleep. Can it be possible HAT Stanton was
the author OF the Dawes .TeSolution1
That resolution is found in the "Cougress-
ional Globe" second session, Thii ty-sixth
Congress, 1850 CT part second, PIP. i422-24 -
The proceeding WAS begun. doubt, in the
hope of finding something ON which the chsrgs
could be founded OF scattering the navy to pre-
Vent it from being rsed against the South
But that failed miSerabiy; and the committee
reported nothing worse than "a grave error
of the Secretary in accepting, without delay
or inquiry the resignation of certain naval
officers. Even this had no foundation in law
or fact. Its truth was denied and the evidence
called fori none was Produced The right TO
explain and defend was demanded, but the gag
of the previous question was applied before a
word could be said. The accusers knew verv
well that it would not bear the slightest inves-
tigstion. Mr.. Sickles said truly Iamij cries
OF order) that "censure without evidence dis
graces only those who pronounce it.'' Mr..
Ioucey's reputation was never iIjuriously af-
fected by it III the estimation of any fair mind
ed man. But you fish it up lom the oblivion
TO which it has been consigned, and trv to give
inspired it, \ GU do not appear 70 perceive the
hideous depth to which your assertion, If true,
would drag him Down. 1t is not true; the
whole business bears the impress of different
mind.
MIR. Stanton alse suggested tha his colleague
and friend, Toucey, OUGHT TO BE ARREsFED.--
This could not haS been u pa opposition to take
him into legal custody on Il criminal charge
regularly made. That would have been utterly
impossible and absurd. The Dawes committee
itself could find nothing against him but an
error of judgment, The digestion must baVe
been to kidnnp him, without an accusation or
proof of probable cause, and consiga him to
some dungeon without trial or hope of relief
If Stanton attempted 10 get this done lie was
guilty of such perfdy as would have shocked
the basest panderer in the court of Louis XIV,
But to confute your libel upon T0ucey and
StaEton both, it is Only necessary to recoIlect
the fact that kidnapping of American citizers
was at that time wholly unknown and abso-
lutely impossible. w were then living unler
a Democratic adminiStration-=the country was
free and law was supreme Tyranny had net
yet sunk its bloody langs into the vitals of The
national liberty. The systematic perjury which
afterwards made the Constitution d dead letter
was not then established as = rule OF political
morality.
Your whole account of the Cabinet scene''
at which Floyd, raging and storming i.r-
raigned the President and Cabinet" !" and 1.-The
Stanton met the baifled traitor and his fellow
conspirators with a storm OF fierce and fiery
denunclatlon, Is pure and perfectly baseleSs
fabrication Ii is absurd to boot What was
Floyd'S arTaignment of the President ard Cah.-
met for2 You say for violating their pledges
to the secessionistsi and the charge against he
President and Cabinet of violating rHEiR ptedg-
predicted solely on the fact that Colonel
Anderson had rtmoved from Fort Moullrie 10
Fort Sumpter; aid FL' YD WAS DISAPPOINTED
IN COLONEL ANDERSON, whom he had expect
ed as Southern man, to ''carry out his pur-
poses in the interest of treason" This is mere
drifeiirg at best, and it is completely exploded
by the record, which shows that Colonel An
dersOn's transfer of his force from Fort MouI-
trie-to Fort Sumpter was in literal obedience
to orders from the President, which Floyd
himself had Grawh up, signed aud transmitted.
Moreover, Floyd at that time WAS not in con-
ditOn to arraign anybody. He, himself h=d
just before that been not only aTaigned but
condemned, and the President had notified him
that he would be removed if ke7lid not resign
Was ii this broken down and hoHerless man
who made the President tremble and grow
pale by complaining that a subordinate had
unexpectedly obeyed his own orders2 You
not silly enough to say so, " as it Stan
toms storm of fierce and fiery denuncation?'
Stanton was no SroRMEk in the presence of
such men as he then hld to deal wi b. His
language was habitually deferential his whole
bearing decent, and his behavior ut the couL-
Gil board was entirely free from the insolence
YOU impute 10 it. Y our tales do not hold toa
gether. No one can give, ctcdence to your
report of bold and stormy denunciatiUn by
Stanton in the preseI Ice of his chief and his
colleagues, and ut the same time believe what
you say of him at another place, where you
describe him a bastard. skulkiDg about III
the dead of night TO find place Of conceal
ment remote enough to make him safe. and
confessng that he did not dare TO breathe his
accusation in the face of day. The crawling
sycophant-the stealthy spy-who bargsIned
so carefully for darkness and secrecy wher he
made his reports, must have been wholly un-
fitted to play the part of Jupiter Tonans in a
square and open conflict. 1t IS not possible
that the fearless Stanton of your "Cabinet
scene' could be the same Stanton who, at one
o clock at night, was squat like toad at
the ear OF Sumner,
Essaying by his devilish arts TO reach
The organs of his fancy.
take it Upon me to emphatically deny that
Mr.. Stanton ever. wrote full and detailed
account of the Cabinet sceue.'' by which you
can have the least hope of being cOrroborated.
l cannot prove a negative, but can show that
your assertion is incredible That he should
/ have coolly indted a letter, even though he
never sent it, filed with foolish brags OF his
| own proves, which half dozen men living
could prove to be false, was not consistent ei-
| ther with mis- prudence. veracity OF taste. Be-
| sides, he often spoke 9Th me about the events
| of that period, and never, in my hearing, did
he manifest the slightest disposition TO miStr-
deTstand or misrepresert them. On the eons
trary, when a statement resembling yours
! about the Cabinet scene was published in a
| London paper, l suggested that he ought 10
contradict it and be repliedJ shplnaihg how
and by W HON 1t had been fabricated, but said
it was not worth contradiction, for every
mar of common intelligence would know it to
be tissue of lies. You cannot destroy STAN
toms character for sense and deceney by citing
his own authority against himself. Nor can
! you find any other proof to sustain the story.
1t is the weak lnvention of some scurvy politi-
clan who sought to win the patronage of one
administration By maligning. another
Some busy and insinuatitig. rogue,
Some cogging, eoZening slave, to get soras ONCE
Hath devised this slander. +FF'a sfe-
Your histery of his appointment 30 the Wal
4 Department is erroneous as that which you
have given of his conduct while Attorney Gen