Rensselaer Republican, Volume 18, Number 8, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 29 October 1885 — GRANT AND JOHNSON. [ARTICLE]

GRANT AND JOHNSON.

Further Concerning the Misunderstanding Between the President and ... the General. I ■ r- _ " Gen. Sherman Interviewed—What Ben Butler Says of the Impeachment Trial. Sherman Sheds Light. [St. Louis special.] The Globe-Democrat this morning contains the following interview with General Sherman on the pending controversy as to the relations of General Grant with President Johnson: “W hat was your understanding of President Johnson's intention in sending General Grant to Mexico?" “Grant was being spoken of for th? Presidency, and it was supposed that the intention was to get him out of the way. Ido not think, however, that Johnson feared any political foe. It was thought that Seward most dreaded the power of Grant and was most anxious to get ,rid of him.” “How was it you were sent to Mexico instead of Grant?” Before replying to this question. General Sherman rose and retired to a room in the rear of the library, into which he had first ushered the reporter. When he returned he held in his hand some proof-sheets of his forthcoming book, "After the War." "I have all the documents here,” he remarked, “ahd they will be published in time.” Referring to the proofsheets, he continued: “In the year 1866 I was summoned from New Mexico to Washington. When I arrived at Washington I called upon General Grant at his house in I street, and asked him the reason of my being ordered to Washington. He explained that President Johnson wanted to see me, but that he did not know the why or wherefore. He supi osed, however, that it had some connection with an order he had received to escort the newly appointed Minister, Hon. Lew Campbell, of Ohio, to the court of Juarez, the President-elect of Mexico, which country was still in possession of the Emperor Maximilian, supported b.v a corps of French troops, commanded by Marshal Bazaine. Gen. Grant denied the right of the President to order him upon a diplomatic mission unattended by troops. He stated to me that he would disobey the order and take the consequences. “I then went to President Johnson, who received me with great cordiality, and said that he was very glad 1 had come. He stated that Gen. Grant was about to leave for Mexico on business of importance, and that he wanted me to remain in Washington and command the army in Gen. Grant’s absence. I then informed the President that Gen. Grant would not go. He seemed amazed by that statement, and observed that it was generally understood that Gen. Grant considered the occupation of Mexico by French troops and the establishment of an empire there with an Austrian prince at its head as hostile to republican America. The President added that the administration had arranged with the Fiench government for the withdrawal of Bazaine’s troops, which would leave the country free for. President Jnarez to occupy the City of Mexico, and thefact that Mr. Campbell was accompanied by so distinguished a soldier as Gen. Grant would emphasize the act of the United States. I then reiterated that Gen. Grant would not go, and that he (President Johnson) could not afford to quarrel with Gen. Grant at that time. I then suggested that Gen. Hancock or Gen. Sheridan could perf< rm tne same office, and that, if neither of them was acceptable. I myself would go. The President answered, ‘lf you will go, that will answer perfectly.’ Accordingly the following order was issued: “Executive Mansion, Washington, > Oct. 30. 1866. f “To the Hon. Edwin M. Stanton, Secretary of War: “Sir— ‘Gen. U. S; Grant having found it inconvenient to assume the duties specified in my letter to yon of the 2t:th Inst., you will please relieve him and assign them in all respects to William T. Sherman, Lieutenant General of the armies of the United States. By the way of directing Gen. Sherman in the performance of his duties, yonwill furnish him with a copy of your special orders to Gen. Grant, made in compliance with my letter of the 36th inst., together with a copy of the instructions of the Secretary of htate to Lewis D. Campbell, Esq., therein mentioned. The Lieutenant General will proceed to the execution of his duties without delay. Very respectfully yours, Andrew Johnson.” “In pursuance of that order, 1 went to Vera Cruz in the United States ship Susquehanna. We then cruised to Matamoras, where the Minister was in communication with friends of Juarez, and from there I returned to St; Louis. At New Orleans, however. I received the following dispatch from Secretary Stanton: “Washington, Dec. 21,1866. “Lieutenant General Sherman, New Orleans: "Your telegram of yesterday has been submit-ted-to the President. You are authorized to proceed to St. Louis at your convenience. Your performance of the special and delicate duties assigned to you is cordially .appreciated by the President, the Cabinet, and this department. “Edwin M. Stanton." “Have you the instructions to Grant of which you received a copy?" “Yes, I have copies of them somewhere, but they are on file in the State Department at Washington. Some time subsequent to my return—l do not remember the date—Mr. Stanton was suspended under the tenure of the civiloffice bill, and General Grant was appointed by President Johnson to be Secretary of War ad interim. He exercised the functions of that office until January 13, 1868, when, after some proceedings in the Senate, Mr. Stanton was reinstated as Secretary of War. This caused trouble between Gen. Grant and the President, which was probably never healed. That quarrel was the beginning of the trouble which resulted in the impeachment of President Johnson, who was regularly tried by the Senate and acquitted. After that Mr. Stanton resigned and Gen. Schofield was appointed Secretary ot War, and he remained in that office to the end of the Johnson administration. “No, I never understood Gen. Grant to express any fear that Mr. Johnson contemplated any violence. Mr. Johnson firmly believed that the Constitution anti laws then existing were all sufficient for the reconstruction of the Southern States. Congress thought otherwise, and in the quarrel between Congress and the President, Grant was in danger of being made the scapegoat." Gen. Sherman again returned to the rear of his library, and this time he emerged carrying a large file of Gen. Grant's letters. These letters from Gen. 'Grant cover the period in question. They are all of a friendly and confidential nature, but there is nothing in them which ' could go to show that Grant ever apprehended any national danger. When Stanton was restored to office, Johnson accused Grant of having'surrendered his office without sufficient resistance. That was the ■ cause of the quarrel. It was a fight between the President and Congress, and Grant was not willing that they should wage it over Lis shoulders. Stanton being backed by Congress, Grant retired. Johnson was hostile to Stanton, and he did not want him in his cabinet. Grant concluded that the best way out of the difficulty was to let the President, Congress, and Stanton fight it out among themselves. “1 think the papers are making too much of this controversy. It is simply an effort to rekindle the embers of a fire which has long since died out. Ido not believe Mr. Chauncey Depew intended to do more than repeat from memory a statement made by Gen. Grant at a dinner table. He is a very honorable gentleman, but he, no doubt, thought there was something in this matter. But there was nothing more in Mr. Johnson’s attitude than the ordinary political differences which will exist between men of different parties. » , “I repeat again, there was no violence intended. Everybody was sick and tired of war. Nobody thought of fighting, except on paper. Atter Stanton was removed, I wanted President Johnson to nominate Gen. Jacob D. Cox as Secretary of War, and his confirmation by the Senate would have settled the whole controversy. Mr. Reverdy Johnson coincided with me in this particular, but the President would fight it out in his own way. , “As 1 have already stated, Mr. Johnson was impressed with the belief.that with the constitution and the laws he could successfully reconstruct the South. Mr. Lincoln, I think, was of the same opinion. Congress, however, wanted to provide the machinery and dictate the terms upon which the States that had seceded should be received back into the Union.' ■ Gen. Schofield's Reminiscences. [Chicago special. J Maj. Gen. John M. Schofield, Who succeeded' Stanton as Secretary of War under President Johnson, was in a position to know as much, perhaps, as anyone else concerning the unwritten history alluded to in Chauncey Depew’s account of his interview with Gen. Grant. Like Gen Sherman, however, he declines to tell all that he knows. “It is true that I was intimately associated with President Johnson, Gen. Grant, and the Cabinet officers during a portion of the period you mention." he said yesterday, when questioned by a reporter for the Times. “and knew ali.jhat was going on. I may say that there are recoMs-Jp existence which would explain "t~v of a confidential nature, and cannot be made public. For the same reason I do not fee! at liberty to •peak. It is an indisputable fact that that wms

very critical period In the history of the nation. Johnson was understood to be a candidate for another term, and nobody doubted that the Republicans intended to run Grant for the Presidency. Under the constitution the Ihresldent was Commander-in-chief of the Army, white Grant was the General in command, and there were fourteen States practically under military rule. The. friends of both these parties were terribly in earnest, and’ at such a tirna -to shortly after the close of the war—there was nothing absurd in the apprehension that the contest might develop into a collision of arms. I was aware that Gen. Grant believed that President Johnson's plan of sending him to Mexico was a ruse to get him out ot the country, but what foundation he had tor such belief Ido not know. My mission to France was in relation to the Mexican affair, and was in h trmony with the viewsof the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of War, and Gen. Grant. The purpose of my visit was to terminate the occupation of Mexico by the French. 1 went in November. 18(15, and returned in May, 1866, so that 1 arrived in Washington while the impeachment trial was in progress. In the following fall I was made Secretary of War. My position was that of a mediator; that is, I was put at the head of the War Department to conciliate both parties by divesting the office of any pronounced political color. It was a measure deemed necessary at that time to keep down, as much as possible, the bitter feeling on both sides. "President Johnson," continued Gefieral Schofield, "was the firmest, most obstinate man in his adherence to his political views that I ever knew, and of course he would have carried out his views if it had been possible. I have no reason to believe that he was not conscientious in his views. Personally! have never believed that he contemplated any treasonable measure, though, as I said before, I do not know on what grounda General Grant based his opinion."

Col. Sam Small Defends- Johnson. [Atlanta (Ga.) telegram.] The Atlanta Constitution prints an article from Col. Sam W. Small on the revelations ot the Depew letter. When President Johnson retired to his home in Greenville, Tenn., he set about arranging his papers so that his biographer mignt have no trouble in dealing with the incidents of his life. About the events now under discussion he was especially particular. He called Col. Small to his aid in that work, and thus the latter came In’o the most intimate relations with the ex-l’resident. Since that time all of Mr. Johnson’s family have died save Mrs. Patterson, who was mistress ot the white house. For the purpose of refreshing his memory CoL Small has visited Mrs. Patterson, and the] present statements are the result: First, Andrew Johnson, on reaching the presidency, adopted the i o icy of Lincoln, as attested by Gen. Grant himself in evidence before a Congressional committee in 1867, lull extracts from which are given. Second, at the time when Depew alleges that exCoutederates were swarming around Washington, they could not have done so because their ■paroKs kept them at home. Third, Johnson never favored martial trials for Confederate leaders. He secured the written opinions of Evarts, Charles O’Conor*, and like men. by which he was guided. Fourth, the naming of Gen. Grant to accompany Lewis D. Campbell was done at the written request of Campbell, who thought Grant's military prestige would aid him. Fifth, the statement that Grant, in Johnson’s presence tn the cabinet, declined to go because it was a diplomatic mission, and the alleged scene which followed, was declared by Mr. Johnson to Mr. Small, in a conversation before the death of the former, to be false in every particular. Grant did not go because he feared that General Hancock might be appointed Secretary of War in place of Mr. Stanton. Sixth, Mrs. Patterson utterly denies all the alleged Secret history concerning her father which has been published. In this she is sustained by 'the widow and son of the lat i Gideon Welles, who was Secretary of the Navy. Col. Small produces abundant documentary evidence to sustain all his statements.

Gov. Hendricks Talks. (Indianapolis dispatch.! The Indianapolis A'ews contains an interview with Vice President Hendricks about the story put into circulation bv Chauncey M. Depew to the effect that President Andrew Johnson contemplated the establishment ot a congress composed entirely of rebel sympathizers. “That s;ory won’t do," said Mr. Hendricks, “and public opinion will not sustain any such charges made twenty years after the. alleged events happened, and after all the persons who were directly connected with them are dead. Personally I know nothing of Mr. Johnson’s opinions or intent‘ons further than the information that came to me in the position that I held. I was in the United States Senate, aud I botn spoke and voted against the impeachment of Johnson. While! never had anv conversation with him on the subject referred to by Depew, I am sure that Johnson had no such intentions. He believed in restoring, and not m reconstructing, States, and that the Federal Government had no light to change or abrogate their constitutions. I think Mr. Lincoln had this view also. I have no doubt Johnson wanted Mr. Stanton removed, but it was on personal grounds, for they were not friends. I cannot believe he had any such purpose as that attributed to him, and I have never heard it .charged before the last few days. It is not likely that such an important political mat’er conld have remained silent for twenty years. I have read the various statements about it in the papers, and 1 am inclined to give the greatest credence to that of Judge Goodin, of Greenfield, whose recollection about such matters is always accurate, and who was then in a position to know what President Johnson wanted to do."

"Word* in Johnson’s Behalf. [Washington telegram.] The Washington Ater prints interviews with W. Warden, who was Assistant Private Secretary to President Johnson, and A. H. Evans, Washington correspondent of the Boston Bout during President Johnson’s administration, regarding the President’s policy during the reconstruction period. Mr. Warden says that "there was not the shadow of a reason for believing that President Johnson ever had an Idea o's an armed conflict arising from his disagreement with Congress, and through bis intimate relations with the President had satisfied himself that no extreme measures would be employed. Mr. Evans says he enjoyed the confidence of Presideht Johnson, who related to him in detail the causes leading up to the quarrel with Gen. Grant. President Johnson told Mr. Evans that Gen. Grant had caused the suspension of Secretary Stanton by his repeated complaints agains that officiaL Gen. Grant agreed to assume the office of Secretary of War until it should please the President to relieve him, and that agreement was made before the full Cabinet. When President Johnson was informed that Gen. Grant had abandoned the office to Mr. Stanton and had returned to his headquarters he charged him with treachery at a Cabinet meeting. Ben Butler Interviewed. (Boston special.] Gen. Butler said to-day that there were many reasons why the GrAnt-Johnson matter was not brought into the impeachment trial. Johnson was not charged with the offense of which Grant mistrusted him, and the evidence they "could have produced would have been Incompetent. There was no legal evidence by which it could have been proveh. Gen. Grant could not have .disclosed it. There was another project of President Johnson’s, as to’ revolutionizing the Government, which was not brought into the impeachment proceedings "I had some very strong moral evidence,” said Gen. Butler, “which I did not care to make known in the impeachment proceedings. The facts, however, were not so conclusive that 1 deemed it proper to exhibit an article of impeachment. founded on them, against the President. I still retain some of the instruments of evidence that strongly tend to support my belief. The proposition of Mr. Johnson to control the Government, differing from that of Gen. Grant, it now seems to me. for the first time, must have been made after Gen. Grant had refused to accede to it. What was known to me was not in shape to be brought before the public.' General Opinion. [New York telegram.] The Herald of this city prints a long installment of interviews with persons on ttat Depew matter relative to President Jobnsonz I tank Thompson, of the Pennsylvania Railroad, and Col. Fred Grant reiterate their former statements. The latter said: “I have heard mv father say again and again the same things in very much the same language.’ I have documentary evidence in my possession that would be collateral proof of the fapts referred to in the conversation my father had with Mr. Depew, and I intend to collate them and my recollections upon that subject.*' Frederick W. Seward, secretary of Secretary Seward, said he never heard anything of the story fit question, and, like Hugh McCulloch, tbe story being new to him, he doubted its correctness. '

Gen. Sickles reiterated his story, saying: “There is no doubt of Gen. Grant's tear of Johnson’s loyalty to the Government. Such, fears were known to the leading Generals enjoying Gen. Grant’s confidence in 1 sex. I well remember how worried he was when he visited me at Charleston. He seemed to have very little confidence in Johnson's policy or intentions. On several occasions Grant talked over the situation at Washington with tne Until 3 or t o'clock in the morning It is true that Grant, did not reveal his worst suspicions, but he told me enough to show that he was alarmed for the safety of the Government and tbe success of reomstzuetion."