history of the impeachment of andrew johnson-第63章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


ying　that　the　officer　who　had　borne　his　letter　to　the　President　that　morning；　announcing　his　retirement　from　the　War　Department；　had　told　him　that　the　President　desired　to　see　him　at　the　Cabinet；　to　which　the　President　answered；　that　when　General　Grant's　communication　was　delivered　to　him　the　President　simply　replied　that　he　supposed　General　Grant　would　be　very　soon　at　the　Cabinet　meeting。　I　regarded　the　conversation　thus　begun　as　an　incidental　one。　It　went　on　quite　informally；　and　consisted　of　a　statement；　on　your　part；　of　your　views　in　regard　to　the　understanding　of　the　tenure　upon　which　General　Grant　had　assented　to　hold　the　War　Department　ad　interim；　and　of　his　replies　by　way　of　answer　and　explanation。　It　was　respectful　and　courteous　on　both　sides。　Being　in　this　conversational　form；　its　details　could　only　have　been　preserved　by　verbatim　report。　So　far　as　I　know；　no　such　report　was　made　at　the　time。　I　can　give　only　the　general　effect　of　the　conversation。

Certainly　you　stated　that　although　you　had　reported　the　reasons　for　Mr。　Stanton's　suspension　to　the　Senate；　you　nevertheless　held　that　he　would　not　be　entitled　to　resume　the　office　of　Secretary　of　War；　even　if　the　Senate　should　disapprove　of　his　suspension。　and　that　you　had　proposed　to　have　the　question　tested　by　judicial　process；　to　be　applied　to　the　person　who　should　be　the　incumbent　of　the　Department；　under　your　designation　of　Secretary　of　War　ad　interim　in　the　place　of　Mr。　Stanton。　You　contended　that　this　was　well　understood　between　yourself　and　Gen。　Grant；　that　when　he　entered　the　War　Department　as　Secretary　ad　interim　he　expressed　his　concurrence　in　a　belief　that　the　question　of　Mr。　Stanton's　restoration　would　be　a　question　for　the　courts；　that　in　a　subsequent　conversation　with　General　Grant　you　had　adverted　to　the　understanding　thus　had；　and　that　General　Grant　expressed　his　concurrence　in　it：　that　at　some　conversation　which　had　been　previously　held　General　Grant　said　he　still　adhered　to　the　same　construction　of　the　law；　but　said　if　he　should　change　his　opinion　he　would　give　you　seasonable　notice　of　it；　so　that　you　should　in　any　case；　be　placed　in　the　same　position　in　regard　to　the　War　Department　that　you　were　while　General　Grant　held　it　ad　interim。　I　did　not　understand　General　Grant　as　denying；　nor　as　explicitly　admitting；　these　statements　in　the　form　and　full　extent　to　which　you　made　them。　The　admission　of　them　was　rather　indirect　and　circumstantial。　though　I　did　not　understand　it　to　be　an　evasive　one。　He　said　that；　reasoning　from　what　occurred　in　the　case　of　the　police　in　Maryland；　which　he　regarded　as　a　parallel　one；　he　was　of　opinion；　and　so　assured　you；　that　it　would　be　his　right　and　duty；　under　your　instructions；　to　hold　the　War　Office　after　the　Senate　should　disapprove　of　Mr。　Stanton's　suspension　until　the　question　should　be　decided　upon　by　the　courts；　that　he　remained　until　very　recently　of　that　opinion；　and　that　on　the　Saturday　before　the　Cabinet　meeting　a　conversation　was　held　between　yourself　and　him　in　which　the　subject　was　generally　discussed。

General　Grant's　statement　was；　that　in　that　conversation　he　had　stated　to　you　the　legal　difficulties　which　might　arise；　involving　fine　and　imprisonment　under　the　civil　tenure　bill；　and　that　he　did　not　care　to　subject　himself　to　those　penalties；　that　you　replied　to　this　remark；　that　you　regarded　the　civil　tenure　bill　as　unconstitutional。　and　did　not　think　its　penalties　were　to　be　feared；　or　that　you　would　voluntarily　assume　them；　and　you　insisted　that　General　Grant　should　either　retain　the　office　until　relieved　by　yourself　according　to　what　you　claimed　was　the　original　understanding；　between　yourself　and　him；　or；　by　seasonable　notice　of　change　of　purpose　on　his　part；　put　you　in　the　same　situation　which　you　would　be　if　he　adhered。　You　claimed　that　General　Grant　finally　said　in　that　Saturday's　conversation　that　you　understood　his　views；　and　his　proceedings　thereafter　would　be　consistent　with　what　had　been　so　understood。　General　Grant　did　not　controvert　nor　can　I　say　that　he　admitted　this　last　statement。　Certainly　General　Grant　did　not　at　any　time　in　the　Cabinet　meeting　insist　that　he　had　in　the　Saturday's　conversation　either　distinctly　or　finally　advised　you　of　his　determination　to　retire　from　the　charge　of　the　War　Department　otherwise　than　under　your　own　subsequent　direction。　He　acquiesced　in　your　statement　that　the　Saturday's　conversation　ended　with　an　expectation　that　there　would　be　a　subsequent　conference　on　the　subject；　which　he；　as　well　as　yourself；　supposed　could　seasonably　take　place　on　Monday。

You　then　alluded　to　the　fact　that　General　Grant　did　not　call　upon　you　on　Monday；　as　you　had　expected　from　that　conversation。　General　Grant　admitted　that　it　was　his　expectation　or　purpose　to　call　upon　you　on　Monday。　General　Grant　assigned　reasons　for　the　omission。　He　said　he　was　in　conference　with　General　Sherman；　that　there　were　many　little　matters　to　be　attended　to。　He　had　conversed　upon　the　matter　of　the　incumbency　of　the　War　Department　with　General　Sherman；　and　he　expected　that　General　Sherman　would　call　upon　you　on　Monday。　My　own　mind　suggested　a　further　explanation；　but　I　do　not　remember　whether　it　was　mentioned　or　not…namely；　that　it　was　not　supposed　by　General　Grant　on　Monday　that　the　Senate　would　decide　the　question　so　promptly　as　to　anticipate　further　explanation　between　yourself　and　him　if　delayed　beyond　that　day。　General　Grant　made　another　explanationthat　he　was　engaged　on　Sunday　with　General　Sherman；　and；　I　think；　also　on　Monday；　in　regard　to　the　War　Department　matter；　with　a　hope；　though　he　did　not　say　in　an　effort；　to　procure　an　amicable　settlement　of　the　affair　of　Mr。　Stanton；　and　he　still　hoped　that　it　would　be　brought　about。

I　have　the　honor　to　be；　with　great　respect；　your　obedient　servant；

William　H。　Seward。　To　the　President。





End