The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-03-31
LATEST TELEGRAMS.
NICHOLS vs.. GRANT.
Nichols Has at Grant Again.
He ReIaerates His Former
Statement and G1Ves the
Substance Of the Dis
puted Conversation.

Chicago, S0.-It would i'll be-
come ME or any other man of my
age and standing to speak disre-
spectfully of General Grant, but
believe am justified by a proper
regard fer my own reputation in re-
spending to the doubt General Grant
has thrown upon the correctness Of
a version which | recently gave of
conversation, between him and my
self, concerning General RosecranS.
First, let it be noticed that there is
no question of General Grants
truthfulness raised here. His We
racity Is not impeached. If
[ reported him correctly, all
that needs to be said is that
my visit and the conversation did
not sufficiently impress him as to
cause him to remember it; but if
he is correctly reported my truth
fulness is impeached. If he never
made the statements imputed to
him to me, then | manufactured a
conversation with him as contri-
button to the rfield-Rosecrans
controversy, and put words falsely
into his mouth, which would be an
infamous thing to do. / remember
my call upon General Grant and our
conversation very clearly. It was
and is still the only call ever made
upon him and one of only three
times that / have ever spoken to
him. The call was made at General
Garfield's request, and l was en-
trusted with letter from Garfield
to deliver. l remember Garfeld's
conversation, when he gave me the
letter at Mentor, and remember
our conversation about the call
upon General Grant after my return
to Mentor, but the call, as has been
said, was to me an event to be re-
mem bered, and some parts of the
conversation were too striking to
be ever forgotten. When about
ready to send my card to General
Grants room in the Fifth Avenue
Hotel met Gen. Arson G. McCook,
and asked him to go with me, which
he did. He remained in the room
but a few moments after intro
ducing NE. l handed Grant Gar
fields letter, which he at once
opened and read, and then said,
We'll, how is Garfield >" l an
swered that he was quite well. He
then asked me how Garfield had
stood the campaign. When [ an
swered him he said the democrats
had directed their efforts so desper-
ately to break down Garfeld's per-
sonal character that he was afraid
it might have annoyed him: that
Garfield was a sensitive man a ld, he
supposed, would be easily annoyed
by such a campaign. l said in
answer to this that Garfield had
determined early in the campaign to
not allow himself to be annoyed by
campaign ISLANDERS, and that the
only matter which seemed to have
distressed him at a, was the conduct
of Hewitt and EoSecrans, whom
he regarded as personal friends
and gentleman of character aud
honor; that their conduct had been
a great surprise To Garfield, and
that he felt very deeply about it.
To this General Grant rejoined sub
stantially in the language l gave Ia
the Eoe7ltf1g Journal, that Garfield
could not speak to OR recognize
either Of these men again without a
total sacrifice Of his own self-re-
spect. He said of the two, Rose
Grams was great deal the worse
that his conduct was infamous for
Garfield had been his best friend,
had stood up for him, defended him,
explained and apologized for his
blunders, etc., as I before stated :;
he distinctly said that he hoped
Garfield had found Rosecrans true
character at last, and would let him
(Rosecrans) take care of himself
hereafter. He then said that Rose
Grams never was fit to have COM
mand OF an army; that he would
lead any army to ruin, if it were
not protected by the intelligence of
Subordinate officers and men
that ne couldn't obey orders,
that he was what he Grant
called a constitutional inSubordin-
ate. He added that be did not mean
to say that RosecraDs meant to be
dis0bedient. but that he was one of
those pig-headed, obstinate men,
who would get an idea into his
head, and for the time being would
be incapable of seeing anything op-
posed to his own theory, and again
repeated that he was constitu-
tional insubordinate. He then said
that the Morey letter had lost the
republicans California, Nevada and
New jersey, and had lost the party
not less than 10000, and perhaps
10000 votes in New York. He pro-
nounced the publication of that lei
ter the most infamous that had
ever been done in American politics.
He said he did not know just what
General Garfeld's sentiments were
upon the Chicago question, but that
he never believed that he had writ
ten that letter. He understood that
Garfield had voted against the anti
Chinese bill which passed Congress,
While be was out of the country.
II he did, he voted right. If he
(Grant had been in Congress h
would have voted aroipSt II FOO and