business there was to so much that of an ordnance officer. The reason I was sent back was because it was important to take wagons, off the road to send this ammunition forward-to seize wagons, if necessary, to get it forward; to press men in to load the wagons, and to use authority of that kind. That was the reason, I suppose, why I was sent back by General Pope.
Question. Do you know in what manner General Pope knew that the accused wanted additional ammunition?
Answer. I knew by the memorandum, which was handed to me with General Porter's signature to it, wanting about 405,000 rounds.
Question. That memorandum you saw when?
Answer. I saw it on that day, the 28th of August, and again, as I suppose, after General Porter's arrival on the ground.
Question. What time of the day of the 28th?
Answer. I should think it was between 10 and 11 o'clock that i received it. It may have been earlier. I cannot remember distinctly whether that memorandum was sent to me at the train or whether I received it before starting for the train, for the reason that I may have started to distribute Hooker's ammunition.
Question. You were sent by General Pope to see to the compliance with that request?
Answer. Yes, sir. He ordered Colonel Clary to size some wagons, and, as he was going off, he told me I better go to assist him in the matter and to take charge there-some expression of that kind. I consider myself as having charge of the active duties connected with the distribution of this ammunition. The ordnance officer had charge of the memoranda. in regard to forwarding it, i was placed in charge to see that it was sent forward in charge in the way I have said-to use authority to clear the roads of wagons, to seize wagons, to direct about their seizure, to press men to load the wagons, &c.
Question. Are you to be understood now, with the knowledge that the accused had requested ammunition as early as the morning of the 28th, to say that you were under the impression, when you afterward saw the accused, that he was indifferent whether he had the ammunition or not?
Answer. Yes, sir.
Question. That opinion you derived, did you, exclusively from what you have termed his sneering manner, or was it from his manner in other particulars that were not sneering?
Answer. I do not which to say that his manner was not gentlemanly and courteous, as it was throughout; but-and I stated so-there was his indifferent and sneering manner in regard to these matters of which I spoke. I do not know as I understood indifference in regard to the ammunition so much as his general indifference in regard to the success of General Pope in that campaign. I am speaking now, of course, of my impression from the whole interview. The first impression of that kind i received was from his reply in regard to the ammunition, which was also increased by the whole look and manner of the man.
Question. Do I understand you now to say that, from your present recollection, you do not remember that his manner was sneering?
Answer. No, sir, I do not say that. I am meaning to make a distinction from rudeness; his manner was not rude or insulting-nothing of that kind.
Question. In relation to what did you understand him as sneering at all-from anything that he said?
Answer. I do not know that a person can know to what a sneer is directed. All his expressions in regard to ammunition, and in regard to other matters, gave me the impression that his manner was sneering; that it was indifferent. If the object is to know about the impression that was made upon my mind, I will say that it was that of indifference and hostility to the success of General Pope. The sneers, among other things, gave me that impression.