Morning journal and courier., 1885-10-24
News by Telegraph
 FROM ALL QUARTERS. GEN. BUTLER'S SECRET Regarding the Old Johnson
 Grant Controversy. REPUBLICAN MASS MEETING. Addresses By General Fora ker and Other Eminents. PRELLER'S MURDERER IDENTIFIED. No Longer a Mystery Cleveland and State EIec-
 tiOMs--War Troubles.
PRELLER'S MURDERER IDENTIFIED.
GENERAL BUTLER INTERVIEWED

GENERAL l. BUTLER INTERVIEWER Regarding the Grant.J OhnsOn Con- troversy How Andrew Johnson Endeavored to RevoIutIonfze the Government.
 NEW YORK, Oct 23.-A Boston special to the Commercial Advertiser says: General Butler was seen this morning in his office in reference to the Grant-JohRson controversy. The following is report of the meeting: ssGeneral Butler;I am desired to ask you if you have any objection to say why, if it is true, that Andrew Johnson desired to revo- lutionize the government as charged, it was not brought out on the impeachment trial. Have you any objection to answering that questions'
 ssThere would be many reasons why that matter could not have been brought into the impeachment trial-because there was no | charge, no article of impeachment which charged Johnson with that offense, and such evidence would have been incompetent, and for one am not in the habit of offering in competent evidence in trials, but suppose | what you want to know is why it did not ap- pear in the impeachment proceedings, either l in the House where the impeachment was discussed or when the articles were prepareda Simply because there was no legal and prop CT evidence by which it could have | been proved, known to the public or members of the House at that time. Gen eral Grant if he had been approached by his nder-in-chief with any proposition in the confidence that must exist between off cers in regard to military movements could not disclose it. At any rate he did not until long after Johnson's death.
 There was another project of President Johnson's as to revolutionizing the govern ment, some of the details of which were partly known at the time but which could not be proven, which had not ta6en the form of action and which were not into the impeachment proceedings. I had some strong moral evidence upon two questions which I did not care to make known to the public in the impeachment proceedings, but one of which I investigated secretly as chairman for the committee for that purpose and while there was disclosed some damaging facts. Under the circum- stances they were not conclusive that 1t was not deemed proper to exhibit an article of impeachment against the president of the United States in that behalf. 1 still retain some of the instruments of evidence that bSAu eo oupPOAO my oohioA' AAS
 other proposition of MT. Johnson to control the government differing from that of Gen. eral Grant in the measures to be taken but not in the end to be reached,
 it now seems to me for the first time must
 have been made after General Grant had re-
 fused to accede Johnson's proposition, and
 knowing now what had been said to General
 Grant, it would seem to show that the propo-
 sition was entertained because of Grants
 refusal and while what was known to me in
 regard to it gave me strong belief it was not
 in shape to be brought before the public, for
 one dealing with the chief magistrate of
 his country even if he has strong belief that
 he has been guilty of wrong, should not
 make that charge unless that belief is sup
 ported by fully competent evidence"
 "Have you any objection to stating what
 facts, proofs and information were in your
 possession?"
 ssYes, I have. Those facts and that evil
 dence are my property and propose to keep
 them to myself until I advise myself when
 they shall see the light. Perhaps that will
 be after have ceased to see light"