held for others than "the members of Colonel Streight's command. " You showed me a letter from General Hitchcock, in which that fact was announced. It seems that your authorities having been assured, either from my representations or from those of your own people in confinement at Richmond, that Colonel Streight and his officers were receiving precisely the same treatment as that of other prisoners, they have adopted some other excuse for the continued confinement of General Morgan and his officers in a penitentiary. I ask if this does not show a determination to keep those officers in a confinement intended to be ignominious? When one excuse fails another is set up.
Your Secretary of War has himself borne testimony to the
"honor" of Lieutenant-Colonel Alston. It herefore call your attention to his communication, and again ask how can General Morgan's original incarceration in the Ohio penitentiary, his continued confinement therein, the indignities received by him and his brother officers, and your announcement at our last interview be explained if "the U. S. authorities had nothing to do with the treatment General Morgan and his command received when imprisoned at Columbus?" Will you also inform me whether "U. S. authorities" intend to treat these officers as felons in the
future? And if not, whether those authorities will allow others so to treat them?
Respectfully, your obedient servant,
Agent of Exchange.
RICHMOND, October 10, 1863.
Honorable JAMES A. SEDDON, Secretary of War:
In compliance with our request I beg leave to submit the following statement:
On the 5th day of July last Brigadier General John H. Morgan, in command of a force of Confederate cavalry, attacked the Federal garrison at Lebanon, Ky., which consisted of the Twentieth Regiment Kentucky Infantry, about 500 men, and a section of artillery, about forty men, all under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Charles S. Hanson. After a severe engagement of about seven hours Colonel Hanson surrendered the entire force that had not been killed. Here requested General Morgan to parole him and his command, to which General Morgan objected "that his (Colonel Hanson's) Government had published a general order that no more such paroles would be respected. " Colonel Hanson replied that he was aware of this order, but this was a case which be believed, on proper representation to higher authority, would be permitted as an exception to this order, and at any rate if General Morgan would grant the parole to himself and the officers and men of his regiment he would pledge his personal honor that he would not only observe it, but would see that every other one to whom the privilege was extended should observe it. If, after making a proper statement of all the facts to higher to report to General Morgan at some point within the Confederate lines.
This interview took place in the presence of several officers, among whom was Captain Davis, assistant adjutant-general of Duke's brigade, who was an official witness of all that was said, and who immediately reported it to me and brought the order from General Morgan for me to parole Colonel Hanson and his men and officers. Acting under these instructions, I parole them on the evening of the 5th of July, and on the 8th of July Captain William Campbell, of our command,