The semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1882-1886, 1882-06-17

note, written u day or two after the
charge appeared, did not wish him to
then engage In any controversy that
might embarrass him in his Senatorial
fight, but would he glad to have him
deny the charge ut an early day. In
his reply Garfield makes too many pro-
lestations, he speaking Of having an in
terview with Secretary Stanton ut Lou
tsvi]le, and Of having rebuked him for
bis denunciati0n 0f me, and Of earnest
~ defending me against Stanton's as
saults. He also asserts that Chase had
written him while he was my chief Of
staff in regard to the progress Of the
war.
Now it appears that instead of Chase
writing Garfield, It was Garfield writing
to Chase In regard to the progress Of the
war. Garfield came to me bearing let
ters Of introduction from valued friends.
had met him once in Columbus, and
knew he had been State Senator, hut
he never told me that he had been elect
ed . Representative i'm Congress.
treated him with the utmost courtesy
and with almost paternal consideration,
because I thought saw In him young
man interested heart and soul in the
success Of our army. But he states what
h not the truth when he says In his let
ter to Chase that I offered him . divis-
Jon. He asked for division, and told
him could not give him . division or
even brigade without jumping him
over the heads Of officers Of senior rank.
So made him chief Of staff. Garfield
was rhetorician and aimed to say fine
things at the expense Of facts. In . let
ter marked confidential he makes mi>-
representations Of facts. He says that
in the movement against Bragg In June
1883, Of the eighteen Generals whose
opinions were asked he was the only
one who counseled advance. The truth
II that he was not asked for an opinion,
but - my chief Of staff had to read and
copy the opinions ofseventeen Generals
of whom had asked written opinions.
/ asked him to make summary Of them
and to send them to the War Depart
ment and was shocked 1t the indelicacy
Of the request. He then asked to be
allowed to write me letter analyzing
these opinions and recommending an
advance. refused to allow him, tut
told him was going to make advance
in oppoettion to the opinions Of these
his genius for writing he might write
1110 y 4SGeS1 eAAAOOOyS08 NY vA0Wo OOO
this he did. Ny object was simply to
ner In which knew he was capable Of
doing.
Now, a. to the paragraph in his letter
to me, Of June, 1850, In which he speaks
Of having had an interview with and
rebuked Stanton 1t Louisville, BE-
lieved him, and 90 confident was Of
hts truth that sent this letter to
friend who had warned me against him,
% proof that he must be wrong; but
one year ago when / attended the exer-
cises Ut West Point, Gen. Anson 6tager
told me that he was one Of the four per-
sons present at the Louisville interview
with Stanton, and that what occurred
there was just the reverse Of what was
stated by Gen. Garfield. I believed
6tager, because would place his word
against that Of Garfield.
The General Wa asked If having this
information he had said anything to
General Garfield about It subsequent to
6tager's statement. He said that he had
concluded to say nothing further about
It, but let the matter rest. The sugges-
ton having bern made that coming
year after this statement Of General
etager the publication Of 0arf!eld's con-
1dential letter to Chase should not have
surprised him. He replied: ut did not
surprise me. I had reached the c0nclu-
the facts Of his interview with stanton,
bat my speculations on the subject to |
him reached the extent Of imagining
Being asked II he now felt satisfied |
that General Garfield had written the |
letters In question, he said he did not
doubt 1t, and In answer to the question
% to what motive he thought actuated |
Garfield, he replied: "AmbitiOn; he |
must have thought If I was removed he |
would succeed me. He left the Army OF
The Cumberland, think, on the 10Th Of |
October, to talk. bis seat In Congress.
He came to Washington and &C
cepted y Major Generals commission
md remained at the War Department.
He came to the arms of the man who
afterwards said he had rebuked ut Lou.
|sville on his way here AMI accepted y
and hadn't rt~ixned after
nv removal from command until lie
suw he stO<nl no chance Of being APP
pointed to succeed me, and then he r..
signed and went tO Congress. He did
not resign until within day or two af-
ter the meeting of Congress. He was an
untrue man.
The General then stated his entire he
let that General Garfield wrote the let
ters alleged, although, lie had not yet
seen them, aud said that after the pubIi-
alton Of the confidential letter, two ar
three months ago, Hon. Randall Glib.
Dn. of Louisiana, told him that he had
Known Of its existence for two years.
he also stated ~ a circumstance worthy
II note that Judge Warden Of this city.
relations with Secretary Chase
md the Chase estate were of u peculiar
" confidential character, had told him
hat after 1868 General Garfield's name
lid not appear more titan two or three
lines in Secretary Chase's diary, and
he was hut seldom visitor at Chase's
house. This, in the opinion Of General