War of the Rebellion: Serial 114 Page 0294 PRISONERS OF WAR, ETC.

Search Civil War Official Records

of visting her under the protection of the United States Government. At the intercession of friends of the government, who were also friends of the accused, Colonel Fred. Steele, of the Eighth Iowa, acting brigadier-general of the U. S. troops stationed at that post, ordered me to meet the accused at some point to be agreed upon and offer him a safeguard that would permit him to visit his family without molestation. In accordance with that order I met the accused at the residence of Colonel James R. Hughes on or about the 10th day of December. In the interview, which lasted about half an hour, I agreed with him upon the terms under which he could meet his family and remain with them for a limited period, he giving me his verbal parole of honor that during that time he would commit no act against the Government of the United States or communicate any information he should come in possession of. I went with him to his own house, and after remaining there about an hour I left with him a written safeguard under the agreement previously made at the residence of Colonel Hughes. The safeguard was written in the usual form, and essentially as follows:

"A safeguard is granted to Colonel E. Magoffin, protecting him in person and property until the 20th day of December, 1861. Officers and soldiers of the U. S. Army will obey this order, and in no way molest him or his family. "

It was signed by order of Colonel F. Steele, commanding post at Sedalia, with my name and rank as acting aide to General Steele. My regular duties were as commissary and quartermaster of the Fifth Division of the Army of the Missouri. I had no conversation at that time with the accused after he entered his house. On December 15, 1861, it was reported to Colonel Steele that the accused desired an extension of his safeguard, and as the command was ordered to move on that day toward the Osage River, and would not probably return before the 20th, he ordered me to leave another safeguard with Colonel Hughes, to be by him delivered to the accused if he chose to accept it. A copy of that safeguard or the original was sent some time after to headquarters of the departmen. On the night of December 19, 1861, a large number of prisoners were broughClear Creek, about nine miles east of Warrensburg. Those prisoners were delivered into my charge, and amongst them was the accused. I was not personally present when the prisoners were taken. They were delivered to my charge by order of General Pope, as being a body of men or soldier of the Southern Confederacy taken in arms at Milford on the afternoon of that day. The next day the command moved toward Sedalia the accused being with me most of the time, and he remained at Sedalia after the command arrived on his parole given by me and by order of Colonel Steele until the body of prisoners was sent to Saint Louis. When I met the accused first at Clear Creek on the morning following the capture I expressed my surprise to find him there and away from his home. He answered: "I have returned the safeguard with a letter of explanation. I was convinced there would be an attempt made to assassinate me and that my life was not safe at my own house. " He said that he was not in arms; that he was traveling with the body of men who had been captured for his own protection. At numerous times while we were together he reiterated the same sentiments, but acknowledged that he was among the prisoner and was at Milford at the time of the fight between or troops and the enemy. I asked him why he did not give notice to the commander of the post at Sedalia of his aprehensions of being assassinated, and either ask for a guard to protect him at his own house or come within the lines at Sedalia for protection. He replied that there seemed to be an unaccountable bitterness of feeling toward him and that he would not feel safe so long as he remained in that part of Missouri. The safeguards and paroles were given and received under the supposition that the accused was an officer in the army of General Sterling Price, which the accused claimed and acknowldged himself to be, although claiming no command at Mildorf when taken.

Question. In your statements you allude to two safeguards written for the accused on December 10, 1861; were they both written by you, and were they identical in terms an language?

Answer. They were oth written by me, but were not identical in language though they were in general terms. The last safeguard said it was given by order of General Halleck. The first did not cite General Halleck's authority. The last safeguard was unlimited in duration.

Question. In the safeguard left by you with the accused on or about December 10 was there any prohibition in the safeguard or statement to the same effect against the taking up of arms or communicating with the enemy on the part of the accused?

Answer. It expressed in general terms that the accused should receive the protection of the United States Government so long as he remained a loyal citizen. It was