Year: 1870

From the New York Herald.


Since the death of Mr. Stanton some
newspaper writers have revived the
scandalous accounts which began to
be propagated, / think, in 1862, con-
cerning his conduct while a member
of Mr.. Buchanan's Cabinet. II is
asserted that he came into that
administration with views entirely
opposed to those Of the President and
the men who were to be his colleagues,
all of whom, except Messrs. Holt and
Dix, were in favor of the Southern
Confederacy, and ready to sacrifice
the Union; that supported by these
two he bullied the rest that he terri
fed the President by threats of resig-
nation into measures which otherwise
would not have been thought of; that
he urged immediate war upon the
seeding States to crush out the rebel
lion; that though defeated in this by
the treason Of his associates, he car
ried with high hand other points Of
sound policy; that by these hardy
displays of hostility TO the admins
tration which trusted him hepromoted
the interests and won the gratitude
of its enemies.


This is the substance expressed in
my own plain English of many state
ments coming from various sources
extensively circulated and sogenerally
believed that if not soon contradicted
they arc likely TO be received as
authentic history. They are not
only false, but they must be injurious
to Mr.. Stanton's reputation; and they
are grossly unjust TO others, dead as
well as living.


/ am not the special defender Of Mr..
Stanton and | certainly would not
assail him. Before be fell away from
the Democratic faith our friendship
was intimate and close. There was
no separation afterwards except the
separation which is inevitable between
two persons who differ widely on
public subjects believed by both TO be
vitality important. Our correspondent
of last summer and autumn began by
himself) shows that | was able TO for
give him my particular share ofinjury
he had done to the country, and he
had my sincere good wishes for his
future health and welfare. His polit.
ieal attitude toward the Buchanan
Administration previous to bis ap-
pointment as Attorney-General is
wholly misunderstood or else wilfully
misrepresented. lie was fully with
us at every stage of the Kansas ques.
ton, and no man felt more loathing
contempt than he did for the knavery
of the abolitionists in refusing to vote
upon tho Lecompton Constitution,
when nothing but vote was needed
to oxpel slavery from the new State,
and thus terminate the dispute by
deciding il in the way which they
themselves pretended TO wish. He
wholly denied Mr. Douglas notions,
and blamed him severely for the un.
reasonable and mischevous schism
which he had created in the party.
The Know-Nothingism of Bell and
Everett found no favor in his ewes
Tn ihc eanvoss of 1860 he regarded
the salvation of the country as hanging
upon the forlorn hope of Breckinridge's
election. We knew the abolitionists
TO be the avowed enemies of the Con.
stitution and the Union, and we
thought tho Republicans would nooos-
sarily be corrupted by their alliance
with them. As we saw the march Of
these combined forces upon tho CAPT
tai we felt that the constitutional lib
critics of the country were in as much
peril as Rome was when the Gauls
were pouring over the broken deienses
Of the city. Whether we were right
or wrong Is not the question now. 1t
is enough TO say that Mr. Stanton
shared those apprehensions fully. He
more than shared thcm to some ex-
tent he inspired them, for he knew
Mr. Lincoln personally, and the
account he gave Of him was anything
but favorable.


The 9th of November came, and
Mr.. Lincoln was legally chosen Prcsi.
dent by the electoral machinery of
tho Constitution, though the majority
Of the popular vote was against him
by moro than a million. The question
was now to be tested by actual expert.
ment whether a party which existed
only in one section, and which was
organized on the sole principle Of hos
tility TO the rights, interests and feel
ings Of the other, could or would
administer the federal government in
arightoous spirit Of justice, or whether
the predictions of all our great states
men for thirty years must be verified
that the abolitionists when they got
into power would disregard their
sworn duty TO the Constitution, break
down the judicial authorities and
claim obedience to their own mere
will as n "higher law" than the law
of the land The danger was greatly
aggravated by the criminal misconduct
Of large bodies in tho South, nnd bar.