Washington, D. C., November 29, 1862.
* * * * * *
The recorder stated that, in compliance with the instructions of the court, he addressed a communication to the Headquarters of the Army, as follows:
COURT-ROOM, 467 SOUTH FOURTEENTH STREET, Washington, D. C., November 28, 1862.
Headquarters of the Army, Washington, D. C.:
COLONEL: I am instructed by the court of inquiry convened pursuant to Special Orders, Numbers 350, current series, from the Headquarters of the Army, to request that the following official records be furnished for examination by the court:
1st. Those pertaining to the division of the Army of the Potomac, commanded by General McDowell, from 24th August, 1861, to the 13th March, 1862.
2nd. Those pertaining to the First Army Corps, Army of the Potomac, commanded by General McDowell, from 13th March, 1862, till the 4th of April, 1862.
3rd. Those pertaining to the Department of the Rappahannock, commanded by General Dowell, from 4th April, 1862, till 26th June, 1862.
4th. Those pertaining to the Third Army Corps, Army of Virginia, commanded by General McDowell, from 26th June, 1862, to the 6th September, 1862.
I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
L. H. PELOUZE,
Lieutenant-Colonel and Recorder.
Mr. WILLIAM D. WALLACH, a witness, was duly sworn.
Question by General McDOWELL. Did you know Robert E. Scott, of Fauquier County, Virginia? If so, state what was his character, Union man or secessionist, the manner of his death, and the place (exposed or otherwise) in which his widow was left at his death.
Answer. I did know Robert E. Scott for between thirty and forty years before he was killed. He was universally regarded, not only as a gentleman of high personal character and great public utility, but as the Union leader in the State of Virginia. He was understood to have been perhaps the last man in the Virginia Convention that adopted the ordinance of secession to submit to its enactment or adoption, declining, if I am rightly informed, even to sign the ordinance as a member of that body. After its adoption he returned to his estate in Fauquier, and I lost sight of him personally, though it was well understood in hiss county and in mine, adjoining each other, that while submitting to the rule of secession in arms, he did not change his sentiments with reference to the entire impropriety of the act. It is notorious in the counties of Fauquier and Culpeper that from the time of his return to Richmond until his murder he was continually under the surveillance of the authorities, according to the common understanding in the county in which he resided and those surrounding him. He was killed under the following circumstances:
A small party of deserters from the Union forces then in Fauquier County were roaming that region with arms in their hands, entering the houses, marauding and ravishing in the neighborhood. They had ravished two respectable females residing within a few miles from Mr. Scott's home. He hearing of it sent a message to the nearest Union command, urging the apprehension of these desperadoes, and at the same time started, accompanied by his overseer and a half-dozen neighbors, and in attempting to apprehend these men they shot him and killed him. His death caused infinite consternation in the community, as the marauders escaped, and did more to destroy the remaining Union feeling existing in that section of Virginia than any other event of the war that had occurred up to that time.
The court had no questions to ask this witness.
Colonel EDMUND SCHRIVER, aide-de-camp, a witness, was recalled.
Question by the COURT. Have you examined the book of letters; and, if so, on what pages are those o be found to which the attention of the