Year: 1867

The Times, which is now one of the most
Conservative Radical, Copperhead- Republican
Democratic papers we have, and manages to
oppose and support all men and measures with
marvellous consistency, says of Gen. Grants ac
ceptance of the War Office:


Through many channels it will be asserted that Cen
Grants compliance with the ca indicates his approval
which exacts that proceeding On this head fortunately
there Is no room for misrepresentation Gen Grant has
not allowed his habitua reticence 10 eare e country ia
doubt as 10 hs position on the great occasion OF difference
between Congress and the Executive. lie supports The
plan Of Congress- and Is in favor OF its prompt and vgOr
Gus enforcement. The COpperhead counselors Of Mr.
johnson will derive no succOr from Gen. Grant"
Here are certain statements of fact, which
we challenge in the kindest spirit:
/. When has Gen. Grant ever departed from
what is called "his habtual reticence" to sus-
| tain Congress- or in any way criticise the
| Presdent3


ii. When the President began his attack
upon the policy of Congress, did he not send
Gen. Grant down South to make report which
could be used to neutralize the effect of the ex-
haustive and able report of Gen. Schurz Was
not the report of Gen. Grant effectively used
against the policy of COngress7


III. Did not President Johnson state in n
| letter recently printed in these columns, and
written by trustworthy gentleman, that he
had never doubted that Gen. Grant was sup
porter of his policyl


! w. In the very crisis of the Presidential
struggle with Congress, did not Grant accom-
pany tho President on his electiOneering trip ?
Some of his apologists have said, whisperingly,
he did it by official command Has anybody
ever seen the orderf If the order compelled
him to make the trip, did it also compel him
to visit the White House and stand at the side
of the President while he cried over the Phil
adelphia Convention


V. And now when Mr.. Stanton, rightly con-
STRUNG law of Congress to mean that his
Office is not in the hands of the President, dis
tinctly states that he will make an issue with
the President and fall back upon Congress,
do we not see Gen. Grant step in, "accept" the
office, and by this " acceptance" so completely
disarm Mr.. Stanton that he retres Does not
every reasonable person know that had Gen.
Grant declined the ppointment-which being
civil Office, he had o right to decline-the
President would not have succeeded in remov-
ing the War Secretary Is it not well under
stood that Gen. Grant is keeping warm this
place until some Conservative may be found
TO take itY


We are not complaining of Gen Grant.
He has right to his opinions He may hon
esty sustain the President just as other people
honestly oppose him. 1t is a difference of
opinion which does not in the least detract
from his renown as a soldier nor from his pa
triotism and fidelity as a citizen. But we do
most decidedly object to the attempt of The
Times to make him a Radical when there is
no written or spoken word that we have ever
seen or heard to justify the assertion, and
while all his acts, and the acts of his loudest
friends, lead to contrary Inference These
friends of Grant are not so dishonest The