National Republican., 1888-02-02

Charleston, II is evident that Mai. Ander.
son had not been informed Of It.. When he
heard almost daily that bis position in Fort
Moultrie would be attacked, and saw the
nightly watch upon him lest he should
transfer his command TO the stronger
and safer position Of Fort Sumter
1t was the latter action,
wholly in violation OF any agreement
that might have been made, that impressed
him beyond all others and mainly Influenced
bis actions-aBd he resolved to take ad-
vantage Of the tangible evidence and re-
move bis command"
In his letter Of Dec. 81, to the War De:
partment, Mai. Anderson says: al will add
that many things convinced me that the
authorities Of the state designed to proceed
to a hostile act.n
In their letter to the President the South
Carolina commi ssioners renewed their de-
mand that Mai. Anderson should be ordered
to remove his command back to Fort Moul
trle, and insisted that 1.-THE removal to Fort
Sumter was made In violation OF pledges
given by the President" On this point,
while the President freely expressed his
surprise and regret at the removal, as
likely to operate injuriously against his
policy for the preservation OF the peace, he
positively denied the existence Of
tying f bis hands. =" "As to p the
alleged pledge the himself says we have
already shown that no such thing existed F"
Nevertheless, strange to say, our Union
general tCrawford) seems to take the oppo-
site side OF this question, and introduces his
secession witnesses In support OF 1t. Says
he "Anderson's action, while not incon-
sistent with the position OF his message nor
the official action OF his Cabinet, was
wholly In violation OF the policy
that the President had pursued. For
time the President was Undetermined
as to what course to take, but he had
eventually prepared draft OF an answer to
the South Carolina commissioners which
yielded the point at Issue, when, by the firm
and decided action Of his Secretary Of state,
the consequence OF such action upon
his part was presented In so clear light as
to induce him to change his purpose.n
Says Tfoscot: "For a moment he waver.d.
But be could t'''o no other course. 70
His Secretary. b. State aud his Attorney
General said to him, Decide; whatever you
may have done, we are uncommitted. Keep
the word which the south says you have
pledged and we resign"
Right at this point beg to introduce as
witness one whose testimony ought to have
nearly, II not quite, as much weight as any
presented in "1rescot's Narrative'--no less
a witness than Judge Black himself. He
was writing. upon his "memorandum"
touching the paper above referred
to, which the President had hastily
sioners Of South Carolina. He had
remarked that had the President refused to
adopt his views, equally approved by
Messrs. Holt and Stanton, as expressed In
his (Judge Black's) 'memor indum"
thereon, both he and Stanton "would have
resigned. Mr.. Holt (he adds) perhaps
would have done the same, but he did not
say go. There never was any talk, or sug.
gestion, o. threat, absolute or conditional,
Of resignation by any northern member Of
the administration than what is here
stated"
1t does not appear on whose authority
Gen. Crawford makes the following state.
ment but presumably ON that Of his assist
ant editor. lie writes:
In regard TO any understanding or agree
menp' the President had acknowledged 1t,
and claimed That he WAS affected by II person.
ally. "Tou do not seem to appreciate, Judge
Black. said he, that my personal honor as a
Standing" said Judge Black, "is impossible.
You could not make IL, or any agreement with
any one that would tic your hands in the exc
cution of the laws, and IL you did make II you
must retire from it," Finally the President
yielded his objections. and committed the
paper which he had submitted to his Cabinet
into the hands of his Secretary OF State.
1t would appear from this that the sup.
position, or allegation, that the President
acknowledged he had bound himself by an
understanding" or agreement" as
charged, 10 based on something he may
have written In that paper, which he
State.h 1t is certain that Gen. Crawford
did not receive from either Judge Black,
Mr.. Stanton, or Mr.. Holt any such admis
sion, however he may have tried TO obtain
1t from the former. as indica'ed by the
following marginal note, saying:
On the 22d OF March, 1882, had Il long aud
earnest conversation with Judge Black upon
the subject OF the interview between the Presi
dent and the congressional delegation OF South
Carolina as TO the understanding or arrange
ment agreed upon at TINT interview. The de-
tails Of his Interview with the President when
the commissioners OF South Carolina were in
Washington were stated, when, at the end.
said: "Ncll, then, Judge Black, there appear
10 be but one conclusion to be reRched-tht
President did MAKE that agreement" The
Judge rose aud, looking steadily at me for q
mol, nj, said: Remember, that IS g0tT con-
ClusiOn y
Mr.. Tiescot, IN his "Narrative," repre-
sents Attorney General Stanton as saying
TO him (TrescOt) "Iou say the President
has pledged himself. | do not knowit.
have not heard his account, hut know you
believe it.n
Referring to this subject Mr.. Blaine, In
his political history, makes the charge thai
"Nlr. Buchanan prepared au answer TO theil
llhe South Carolina commissioners re
honor Of the Executive aud peri
lous 10 the integrity of thu
Union" Mr.. j. Buchanan Henry
the Presidents nephew and private sec
retary, called Gen Holts attention to ant
asked bis opinion particularly on thai
statement. In his answer, May 26, 1884
Gen. Holt goes into q lengthy and nm
answerable yindication Of Mr.. Buchanan
which parer will form an important chap.
will give place only to this paragraph
which Of itself Is sufficient answer to Mr.
Blaine's false and ill.judged charge
Says Gen. Holt "While unable, at thi
late day, to recall all the details o
the answer to the commissioner
drafted by the President, my recollection
Is distinct that II contained nothing, prop
erly understood-that is as the Presiden
himself understood 1t and wished 1t to b,
und,rst by others-which could be hel,
to lie compromising to the honor OF tn
executive and perilous to the integrity o
the Union.' Mr.. Buchanan had so guarded
his personal honor through long life that
at It's close, there was found upon 1t neithe
stain nor trace OF stain; with equal solici
tU' q, and, in my belief, with equal success
d. he watch over the honor OF the grea
| (Glce he held"
The publication OF the Memorandum, ),
| or Judge Blacks Protest. as he styled !
| when he first promulgated II through tn
Lancaster (Pa.) htcHigcnce Of July I
| 1871, has no doubt given rise to very er
| ropeous as well as unjust criticisms uPo
| Mr.. Buchanan, and it is due the memory 0
| Judge Black to express the charitabl
belief that, had he known tn
well intentioned paper agains
which lie 60 e&citedly entere
his "prrtestn was no longer in existence
he never would have given his comments I
the press. Speaking OF II, Gen. Holt, /
his letter just mentioned, says "'fhe iudg
did nothing by halves, and IN the fervOr {
his loyalty to the Union he commented o
what had been evolved IN the Cabinet, b,
| mrh more celebrating and intensity ~ hi
| strirturps nv the VIVpr Of gnpppn far \vhip