The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1889-05-30
BUTLER VS.. PORTER.
The Admiral Of the Navy States His Case.

The Admiral OF the Navy States His Case.
Admiral Porter started out with the inten-
ton, so he stated, of entirely ignoring anything
which Gen. Butler might say against bis char
acter as an officer and seaman, but the Admit
raj is too much of fighter to treat the whole
matter with the silent contempt which was
his first purpose. So when Gen. Butler I'M
earthed letter which he alleges the Admiral
wrote to Secretary Welles which reflected Sc
verely on Gen. Grant, Gen. Butler and the
army generally, the Admiral came forward
and proclaimed the letter to be nothing but
forgery, pure and simple In a recent inter-
view the Admiral says: The forger was one
of three men, whose names were made sufh-
GENTLY prominent at the time when the forgery
was first made public Two of them have since
died. One of them cut his throat, something
similar happened to the other, and as for the
third. he is hopeless, helpless drunkard.
That's as much satisfaction as man could de-
sire"
When asked what was the secret of Gen.
Buffers animosity toward him, the Admiral
said: well, l guess that goes back as far as
the secret of the Generals nature, but the facts
that after Butler had made failure at Fort
Fisher, and that afterwards requested Gen.
Grant to send me the same troops with another
General, and that Gen. Grant did send me the
same troops with another General, and that we
captured the fort, have something to do with
it. Then, Gen. Butler is going to publish
book of his "reminiscences, which, perhaps, he
wants to advertise. Since he made his last out
break ! have received so many letters from
people who know him that l think the CORE
spondence would make much more interest
ing book than anything the General can write
about himself. But, of course l could not
make public any of these letters without the
consent OF the writers.
" If | could take the trouble to look through
IL Eva1 lAfF nv
which would shed an unfav0rable light upon
Gen. Buffers motives in declaring Fort Fisher
impregnable. | have among my papers some
where letter which goes to show that Gen.
Buffers motive in failing to take Fort Fisher
aud in reporting that it was impregnable was
the fact that Ire was financially interested IN
some cotton then stored at Wilmington, and
on that account he did not want to have Fort
Fisher captured. We know that he and his
brother made about million and half dol
lars at New Orleans and that Benjamin after
ward managed to clean the brother out of every
cent of his share of the plumber. We know
that when he was Military Governor at New
Orleans he had the ships of the navy sent down
to support him there, and that he used them
for tugboats and charged every merchant vessel
about $500, or about 10 times the regular charge,
to tow it up the bay to New Orleans. His known
record is not such as to cast diSercdit upon the
charge of mercenary motives at Fort Fisher.
THAT | wrote letter to President Grant
when the Welles forgery appeared, in 1870, is
true. l wrote that letter to say that the one L
was charged with writing TO Secretary Weles
was a forgery, and to say that Welles in giving
it out, must be either the propagation of
forgery or the vile betrayer of personal con-
fidence Without discussing the genuineness
or spuriousness of the Welles letter, that alter
native was unimpeachable: and / said that
even if the letter were genuine, | would rather
be the man who would write it than the man
who, receiving it in confidence afterwards di-
vulged it. / never acknowledged the Welles
letter to be genuine / couldn't. 1t was proved
then to be forgery, and | now repeat the
declaration that it was such. Of course, Gen.
Grant was angry about it, as any man mi ght
well be, when he saw the first publication of
letter like that purporting to have been written
by a friend. But he got over his angry feelings
in the matter.
81 was advised at the time by mutual friends
that if | would call upon President Grant, the
misunderstanding would be wiped out and all
swould be made right; but refused to do any
thing OF the kind. President Grant had taken
natural offense, and / had given the explains
ton which seemed to be called for. Propriety,
| thought, did not require anything more of
me, aud | said that if President Grant desired
to renew former relations with me he would
have to call on me, for would not call on him
first. He called aud all was right.
AS for my writing private and confidential
letters of that kind to Secretary Welles, every
one who knows anything about the events of
that time knows that my relations with Welles
were not of that kind He was never tired of
trying to put obstacles in my way and when
ever the forces under my command gained any
victory he invariably did his best to discount
it. i never owed an opportunity or promo
ton to him, and never acknowledged any
such obligation to him. Congress was appre-
| eiative and gave me many votes of thanks,
which l duly appreciated; but, on the whole,
/ think l can say that for anything l ever got
was indebted at the bottom to nobody but David
| D. Porter.
Butler has always lived on notoriety. The
public has been letting him die out of sight and
out of notice recently. and he wanted some
means of bringing himself forward again.
! That's mainly why, suppose, he has made this
| latest outbreak on me. If the people of this
| country believe | ran away from the enemy at
| New Orleans can't help it; but don't think
| they believe it. They didn't believe it at the
| time; their Representatives in Congress didn't
| believe it. the administration didn't believe
| 1t; the soldiers and the sailors didn't believe
| it, and neither did the newspaper correspond
| ents who were on the same boat with me-"
Secretary Tracy being asked to express an
| opinion of the merits of the controversy be-
| tween Admiral Porter and Gen. Butler, said,
81 can only say that do not believe Porter
ran away"
4