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 explanation—­that 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.

WASHINGTON, D.C., February 11, 1868.

To the House of Representatives: 

The accompanying letter from General Grant, received since the transmission to the House of Representatives of my communication of this date, is submitted to the House as a part of the correspondence referred to in the resolution of the 10th instant.

ANDREW JOHNSON.

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES.

Washington, D.C., February 11, 1868.

His Excellency A. JOHNSON,

President of the United States.

SIR:  I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of the 10th instant,[46] accompanied by statements of five Cabinet ministers of their recollection of what occurred in Cabinet meeting on the 14th of January.  Without admitting anything in these statements where they differ from anything heretofore stated by me, I propose to notice only that portion of your communication wherein I am charged with insubordination.  I think it will be plain to the reader of my letter of the 30th of January[47] that I did not propose to disobey any legal order of the President distinctly given, but only gave an interpretation of what would be regarded as satisfactory evidence of the President’s sanction to orders communicated by the Secretary of War.  I will say here that your letter of the 10th instant[48] contains the first intimation I have had that you did not accept that interpretation.

Now for reasons for giving that interpretation.  It was clear to me before my letter of January 30[47] was written that I, the person having more public business to transact with the Secretary of War than any other of the President’s subordinates, was the only one who had been instructed to disregard the authority of Mr. Stanton where his authority was derived as agent of the President.