Year: 1870

That would have been utterly impossible and alb
surd. The Dawes Committee itself could ind
nothing against him but an error of Judgment
The suggestion must have been to kidnap him,
without an accusation OF proof OF probable cause,
and consign him to some dungeon without trial or
hope of other relief. II Stanton attempted to get
this done, he was guilty Of such pertdy as would
have shocked the basest panderer in the court of
Louis X\ But to confute your libel upon Toucey
and Stanton both it is only necessary to recollect
the fact that kidnapping of American citizens was
at that time wholly unknown and absolutely inn
possible We We're living under a Democratic ad-
mlnistration. Tyranny had not yet sunk its bloody
fangs into the vtals of the national liberty. The
systematic perjury which aterward made the Con-
stituton dead letter was not then established
rule of political morality.


Your whole account of the cabinet scene at
which Floyd, raging and storming. arraigned the
President and Cabinet" and ''the President trem-
bed and grew pale" and "Stanton met the baft1ed
traitor and his fellow conspirators with storm Of
fierce and fiery denunciationS," is pure and per-
fectly baseless fabrication. 1t Is absurd, to boot.
What was Floyd's arragnment of the President
and Cabinet for? You say for violating their
pledges to the SecesSOnists and the charge against
the President and Cabinet OF violating their pledges
predicated solely on the fact that Col. Ander-
son had removed from Fort Moultrie to Fort sum
ter; and FI0yd aras disappointed IN Col. Ander-
son. whom he 'had expected,' a Southern man.
to 'carry out his purposes in the interest of trea
son." This is mere driveng, ut best and it Is
completely exploded by the record. which shows
that Col. Anderson's transfer Of his force from
Fort MOultrie to Fort Sumter was in literal
obedience to orders from the President, which
Floyd himself had drawn up, signed, and transmit
ted. Moreover, Floyd at that time was not in a
condition to arragn anybody. He himself had just
before that been not only arraigned but condemned
and the President had notified him that he would
be removed if he did not resign.


Was it this broken-down and powereSs man who
made the President trembe and grow pale by COM
planning that subordinate had unexpectedly obey
ed his own orders? You are not silly enough to
say So Was it Stantons ''storm of fierce and fiery
denunciation!' Stanton was no StDrnaef i'll the
presence of such men as he then had to deal with.
His language was habitually deterential his whole
bearing decent and his behavior at the council
board was entirely tree from the nsolence you i'm
pute to it: Your tales do not hang together. No
one can give credence to your report OF bold and
stormy denunciatiOn by Stanton in the presence OF
his chief and his colleagues, and at the same time
believe what you say of him at another place, -
where you describe him bastard, skulking
about in the dead of night to find place of conceai-
ment remote enough to make him safe, and confess
ing that he did not dare to breathe his accusation IN
the face Of day. The craving sAcopiant- nt-tne
stealthy spy-wi,o barganed so carefully for dark
ness and secrecy when he made his reports. must
have been wholly untitled to play the part OF Jupiter
Tonans in square and open conflict. 1t is not
possible that the fearless Stanton of your Cabinet
scene" could be the same stanton who, at one
o'clock in the night was ''squat like toad at the
ear of Sumner,


Essaying by his devilish arts to reach


The organs OF his fancy.


l take it upon me to deny most emphaticay that
Mr. Stanton ever ''wrote full and detailed account
of that Cabinet scene" by which you can have the
least hope of being corroboraed. l cannot prove 4
negative; but | show that your assertion is i'll
credible. That he should have coolly indited IA let
ter even though he never sent it, filled with foolish
brags of his own prowesS, which half dozen men
then living could prove to be false was not consist
ent either with his prudence veracity, or taste
Besides he often spoke with me about the events
of that PERIOD and never in my hearing did he
manifest the slightest disposition to misunderstood
or misrepresent them. On the contrary when a
limo he a
scene published i'll London paper, suggest
ed that he ought to contradict it: and he replied,
| explaining how and by whom it had been fabrcat-
ed, but said it not worth contradiction, tor
every man of common intelligence would know it
to be mere tissue of lies. You cannot destroy
Stantons character of sense and decency by citing
his own authority against himself. Nor can you
find any other proof to sustain the story 1t is the
weak invention of some scurvy politician whC
sought TO win the patronage of one administration
by maligning another.


Some busy and nsnuating rogue,


Some cogging cozenng slave, to get some office


Hath devised this sander.


Your history of his appointment to the War De
part,nent il :ts erroneous AS that which yot HAY
given of his conduct while Attorney General. You
say that he cordially endorsed Mr.. Cameron'>
| recommendation to arm the negroes against the
white people of the South that Mr.. Lincoln diSap-
proved this and required ii 10 be suppressed; that
atterward, when Cameron "elt the pressure of the
multiplied labor he proposed to resign, but
coupled his offer with condition that "some one





armng negroes to which Mr.. Lincoln was himself
opposed; that Cameron did resign upon these
terms, and used the privilege conceded to him by
suggesting the name of Stanton Everybody who
knows Simon Cameron will understand the object
of dragging this thing by the head and shoulders
into your article. In fact and in TRUTH there was
no kind of connection between these two mcn-
no sympathy or mutual respect. Cameron did not
resign he was renaored for good cause He had
no lot or part in naming his successor. The remov-
al and the appointment We're both made before Mr.
~ .hHt thnN 1lllin
cause the President saw the necessity of man at
the head of that department who was competent
and incorruptiblc The correspondence atterward
published under the names of McSSrs. Lincoln and
Cameron was fictitious and got up ut the instance
of the latter to give the affair Il false appearance.
1t is morally impossible that Stanton could have
given his approval to Camerons abortiye report on
the negroes; for he ut that time Il white man
every inch of him, proud of the great race he sprang
from. and full of faith in its anacty to fight it, own
battles and govern itself Nothing would have
Inundated him more than to see the American
people relinquish their riShliui place in the front
rank of the world, surrender their inheritance OF
free government, and sneak back behind the Atri-
can for protection in wa" or i'll peace. Long after
he was Secretary of War he told Mr. Mallory OF
kentucky that he not only refused to sanction the
enlistment OF Il negro regiment, but had punished!
an officer for merely proposing it. | understand
that you have promised TO contradict yourself on
this subject, and hope you Will keep your word.
Your account OF this RAID upon the Treasury, in
company with Governor Morton, would look very
strange in Il panegyrc made by anybody else but
you. / will restate the facts you have given. but
without the drapery by which you can conceal from
yourself the view of them which must unavoidaby
be taken by all men who believe in the obligation
Of any law human or devine. In the winter OF
1858 the Legislature of Indiana was dissolved be-
fore the appropriations had been made to carry on
the State government or aid in putting troops in the
field OF course, Congress did not, and could not,
make appropriations for carrying on the State gov
ernment putting troops in the field, which the
State was bound to raise at her own expense Bnt
the Governor determined to get what money he
wanted without authority of law, and he looked to
Washington for assistance. President Lincoln de-
cined to aid him. because no money coutG be taken
from the Treasury without appropriation. Mr.
Stanton, being applied to, saw the critical condition
of the Governor, and without scruple, joined him
in his financial enterprise. lie drew warrant for
quarter of million of dollars and gave it to the
Governor to spend rs he pleased. not only without
being authorized by any appropriation for that pur-
pose, but in defiance of express law approprlatng
the same money to another and Il totally different
object If this be true, the guilt of the parties
hardly be overcharged by any words which the
English language will supply. 1t was getting
money out of the public treasury, not only unlaw-
fully, but by process as dishonest as larceny. 1t
involved the making of Il fraudulent warrant. of
which the moral turpitude was no less than that
committed by private individual when he fabrl,
Gates and utterS false paper. 1t was gross and
papable violation of the oath which tn Governor
and Secretary had both taken. 1t was, by the
of 1Si nj he