The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-10-07

Not Aissgsthsr Certain what he Did
say % Dr. Fowler.

X0I AuI0AW04109 ~ $500 - - -
say % Or. Fowler.
/ Rgylsxp EDITION OF BIS sNALL-BoRE At
TACK on GENERAL uANcoCK-THE Ex-PREsi'
DENT EVIDENTLY IL BAD HANDS AND IN
VERY BAD WAY.
CHICAGO, October 5.--TMe Inter. Ocean
will publish tomorrow the following inter-
view with General Grant, In explanation OF
the DIR. Fowler interview, published to-day
bv the Cincinnati Gazette. The General
was quite ready 10 converse, o. the report
Of his conversation was In many resrec's
owing, OF course. to the TACT tnat
DR.. Fowler reported 1t entirely from men,
DRY.
Grant, "th0ugh IL Il In most respects cor.
rect, contains also many mistakes. ana
makes me say things In way not intended,
aud contains some language that i dld not
employ. The facts are that DIR. Fowler
called at my house In company with DIT.
Cramb TO pay bis respects, and The CONVEX
sation turned upon politics. talked ffee'y
without suspecting for moment that the
conversation was ever TO be puolisned.
Some time afterward DR.. Fowler, on whose
mind the conversation had made some i'm.
preston, wrote 10 me saying he desired
to publish II II / did not object. l re-
piled, saying would rather this would not
be done until one OF our speakers, who had
the same facts and was verifying them, bad
made them public; that as he was pre-
pairing the facts carefully, II would hardly
be fair 10 anticipate him. Tha might I'M
ply permission 10 DIR. Fowler to publish
bis report of the conversation when the
speaker alluded 10 bad made his speech.
have not heard that he has made it,, hut he
probably has, or DR.. Fowler would not have
published this article"
Wherein is the statement OF DR.. Fow-
Ter incorrect"
"It is inaccurate 10 many respects. He
reports me, for instance, as follows: Down
to 1864 he General Hancock) seemed like
man ambitious to do bis duty as an officer;
but in 1864, when Mcclellan was nomi-
mated, Hancock received one vote, and that
greatly excited and changed him. He was
so delighted that he smiled all over. Ii
craZed him. Before that we got on well
after that he would hardly speak to me. /
was working TO enforce the laws OF Con-
gress, and be was working for The presi-
dency. Perhaps he thought didn't praise
him enough; but, anyway, he hardly spoke
to me-
81 said substantially that up to 1894 did
not suppose Hancock had a thought OF The
but at the Democratic Conveni
ton OF that year he got a vOte-not one
vote, as DIR. Fowler has ii, which makes me
imply that be got the support OF but one
from that time he had the
bee in his bonnet. When !
-. Ill. t. mil broad
that YOU could almost see il when his back
was turned. | do not know that | said he
thought did not praise him enough, though
that may be the fact. Hancock is
a man who likes to hear himself praised,
and sometimes complained that he was not
highly enough"
.'How about his prOmotion?"
81 stated TO DR.. Fowler that Hancock
was promoted to be a brigadier- and major
general on my recommendation. recon-
mended him and Sheridan at the same time.
Hancock's appointment was delayed for
time. Hancock's promotion was made after
the war, and | think ii was after the Chi
cago Convention that he was made briga-
der. When | recommended him for ma
he had been very cold toward
me, and we had not spoken for long time.
i never hItN hUdl was 'ut
he thought | had not consulted him in
making his assignments to duty. When
promoted, however, he wrote manly lei
tel to me, in which he said substantially
thu he believed be was entirely indebted 10
me for it. though he had thought | was not
willing TO do justice. This convinced him
that he had been mistaken. He was made
a major-general when was made General"
n afI tNtal In
Doctor is mistaken! z"
"Yes, he does not get hold OF the points
about Order No. 40 correctly. BY the va
ri0us reconstruction acts, Congress, for
sake suppose, stripped me
Of all authority over the district command
ers in their civil duties, except in the
matter Of the appointment and removal
of civil officers in the reconstructed
States. AS wa. the senior, my author.
ity was superior TO others. DR.. Fowler
quoted me as saying the Louisiana Legs
lature favored law authorizing the issue OF
s., 000, 900 of levee bonds. This may have
said, but il ] did it was a mistake, the
amount being S4,000,000. In regard TO the
statement that the Louisiana commissioners
agreed to pay Reverdy johnson and other
lawyers $250,000, | stated what / under
food, and not fact within my own per-
sOnal knowledge.
THE next paragraph OF Or. Fowler's
report is wide OF the mark. / am made to
say that he (Johnson) called Hancock TO
Washington to instruct HIM in defeating
the laws OF Congress. OF course do not
know why he called him. | could only sur"
mise. knew Hancock came.
"a mistake also occurs" said General
Grant, 4" ia the following paragraph, where
in am made 10 say, he went South and
removed the Governor and commissioners
that General Sheridan had appointed. ]
telegraphed him not to appoint
70 office any men VINO had been removed,
and to give his reasons by mail for remOY-
ing the men, When Hancock went South
| published an order prohibiting him from
appointing anybody to office who had been
removed by his predecessors. This, sup
pose, he did not like, but my object was TO
prevent the possibility OF men being put in
place who had arranged for the negotia.
ton OF those bonds, even for one hour.
| had intended to tell Hancock all
abont it, as had Johnson, but
seeing, during nv interview with him,
That 1t was not going to please him, |
did not tell him. After be had been down
South some time he made pretty clean
sweep Of officers who bad been appointed
by Sheridan. then teIegrapbed TO bin 10
suspend his orders OF removals and report
to me by mail. There was an order exist
ing. il remember right, prohibiting the
use OF the telegraph when the mails could
be employed. He replied in very long
dis patch, costing, IL | remember correctly,
about S42.50. / Informed him | was not
satisfied, but II be had any further reasons
10 communicate to do so by mail. He
again replied by telegraph, but gave
nothing new, saying simply that his
usefulness would be DESTROYED VI be
was not free TO act, and unless he was