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！
to the rebel cause？
AnswerNo。 I did not have that opinion of the letter exactly。 From what I recollect of it； the thing was that he was making a proposition making suggestions as to what their policy should be。
Ques。And if they accepted it？
Ans。If they accepted it； my impression was that he was going with them。
Ques。With the rebels？
Ans。Yes sir。
Question by the Chairman。If there are any other letters that you have seen of Mr。 Johnson's written by him to any person connected with the Confederate Government； or proposing to change the Administration of the Government in their favor after he became President； or anything of a public nature affecting the interests of the United States； please state it and state all you know about such letters。
Ans。I do not know of any letters of that characteror of any other letters。
This constituted the substance of Gen。 Baker's testimony。 His examination was very lengthy； embracing more of this character of testimony； and about pardon brokerage； and other alleged corrupt practicesall evidencing a determination and expectation to fix upon Mr。 Johnson a disposition to disloyalty and corruption； both before and after his succession to the Presidency； but no such testimony was obtained。
A considerable portion of the investigation was devoted to Mr。 Johnson's business and personal affairs； such as could have no possible connection with or indicate implication in corrupt or disloyal practices of any sort。
A strenuous effort appears to have been made by the Committee throughout a long and searching examination of witnesses； and constitutes a conspicuous feature of that investigation； to establish the charges of corruption and disloyalty in the sale of public property； railways； etc。； that had been constructed and equipped； or seized and operated； by the Government in connection with its military operations in the South。 Such an accusation had been made with great pertinacity by Mr。 Johnson's opponents； and was also then believed by a great many people to be true。
Among the parties examined by the committee； were Mr。 James and Mr。 Burns； of Nashville； Tenn。； and Senator Fowler； of that State； and also the Secretary of war； Mr。 Stanton。 No facts whatever were elicited showing a privity to corruption in these matters on the part of Mr。 Johnson。
The information obtained from Mr。 Stanton； however； put an effectual estoppel to further investigation of the charge of corrupt or disloyal disposal of public property by the President。 The following are extracts from Mr。 Stanton's testimony； as given on February 11； 1867：
Shortly after the surrender of the rebel armies； the attention of the War Department was directed to the proper disposition to be made of the railroads and railroad stock throughout the rebel States which came into our possession； either by capture or construction。 It was the subject of a good deal of consultation and conference between the Secretary of War and the Quartermaster General。 It was the opinion of the Secretary of War that it was wholly impracticable for the General Government to operate these roads under any system； and that it would be greatly to the advantage of the country to make such disposition as would allow them； its speedily as possible； to become what they were designed for channels of commerce and trade between the States； and that any terms on which that could be done would be advantageous。 This was especially the case in regard to the Western and Southwestern roads； where it was said there were large amounts of cotton that would be available to remove North； in exchange for supplies to go South； of which it was said they were greatly in want。
Ques。In case of the construction of a railroad by the Government； the Government furnishing the material and the labor； what has been the custom of the Department in surrendering such roads to the companies claiming them？
Ans。In all instances； I think such roads have been surrendered in the same manner as if they had been constructed by the companies。 That subject was talked of a good deal in conference between myself and the Quartermaster General。 My own views； that the great object on the part of the Government； was to get these roads operated； and that to go into an inquiry as to the cost of construction； would be impracticable； either as to the cost of construction or as to any certain rule of compensation； because many of them were constructed under the pressure of war； and for temporary Purposes。 The object of arriving at the cash value or equivalent for the roads was not only impracticable； but really of very little practical interest in comparison with the great end of having the channels of commerce in the rebel states opened and carried on； with a view of getting out their produce； furnishing supplies； and getting commerce in its regular channels。 In my own view； that appeared to be the most； certain and most speedy system of reconstruction we could adopt； and that it would tend more to establish harmony than any other thing that could be done by the Government。 In view of all this； and after the most deliberate consideration we could give it； it was the opinion of the Quartermaster General and myselfcertainly my ownthat it would be impracticable to make any distinction： and so far as I know； no distinction was made in any part of the country in reference to roads built by the Government and roads that had been constructed by Companies before the war commenced。
Mr。 Stanton was asked this question：
Suppose the Government； at his own expense； had constructed seventy miles of railroad in one of the rebel States； and that； at the close of the war； a company should apply to the Executive Department of the Government for a transfer of the road so constructed to it； by what authority or provision of law would Executive Department be authorized to transfer the road so constructed to the company making the application？
Mr。 Stanton answered：
I do not know of any act of Congress that directly； in terms； would authorize any such transfer； but regarding the construction of the road； in time of war； simply as a means； or instrument； of carrying on war； when the war was over I would consider it strictly proven and within the scope of the power of the General Commanding； or especially of the President of the United States； as the Commander…in…Chief of the Army； to render that instrument as available for peace purposes as possible。 And inasmuch as the road would be entirely useless unless it was operated； and it would be for the benefit and interest of the public； to have it operated as speedily as possible； I think it would be in the interest of a wise discretion； and exercising proper authority； to turn over that road to any company or individual who would operate it； for； in that way； he would be applying the war material to the only available use to which it could be applied。 * * * I would regard the rolling stock as coming； to a certain extent； within the same principle。 * * * No transfer of title was at any time made； so far as I know； or could be made； but only possession turned over。 When the military use was no longer required； the railroads were turned over to their original o