Congress, before adjourning in 1866, passed a tenure-of-office act,--overriding in this, as in other legislation, the President's veto. The motive was to prevent the President from using the patronage to strengthen his policy. This act required the President to make report to the Senate of all removals during the recess, with his reasons therefor. All appointments to vacancies so created were to be _ad interim_ appointments. If the Senate disapproved of the removals, the officer suspended at once became again the incumbent. Severe penalties were provided for infraction of the law. During the recess the President removed Stanton, and appointed General Grant to be Secretary of War. Grant did not desire the office, but under advice accepted it, lest a worse thing for the country might happen. Johnson hoped to win Grant to his side, and in any event to use him in his strife with Congress to defeat the purpose of the law. While the Senate had Stanton's case under consideration in January, 1867, Grant was called into a cabinet meeting and questioned regarding what he would do. He said that he was not familiar with the law, but would examine it and notify the President. The next day he notified him that he would obey the law. Therefore, when the Senate disapproved of the reasons assigned for the removal of Stanton, Grant at once vacated the office, to the intense mortification and anger of the President, who made a public accusation that Grant had promised to stay in office and oppose Stanton's resumption of it. The charge made a great scandal, but it did not seriously impair Grant's good repute. Johnson was not believed, and the testimony of the members of his cabinet, regarding what happened, was so conflicting that it failed to convince anybody who did not seek to be convinced. There is reason to believe that Johnson never contemplated retaining Grant in the office, except to use his name and fame to break down the tenure-of-office act. General Grant's plain common sense delivered him from the snare spread for him by wily and desperate politicians. On February 3, he closed an unsatisfactory correspondence with President Johnson, with these severe words: "I can but regard this whole business, from the beginning to the end, as an attempt to involve me in the resistance of law, for which you hesitated to assume the responsibility in orders, and thus to destroy my character before the country. I am, in a measure, confirmed in this conclusion by your recent order, directing me to disobey orders from the Secretary of War, my superior and your subordinate, without having countermanded his authority to issue the orders I am to disobey."