got away and retreated back to this place. The force General Johnson had was 650 men. I do not know the force the enemy had, but probably more than he had. We were continually troubled here by guerrilla parties who hovered about the country and along the lines, but with no serious results, expect those I have mentioned, in the vicinity. I always considered the force I had here sufficient to hold the city, and I think I never asked General Buell for re-enforcements.

Question. Did these large bodies of cavalry have artillery with them?

I think not till after they took the four pieces at Murfreesborough.

Question. Did they do any harm to the railroad after the capture of Murfreesborough?

Yes, sir; they burned those three Mill Creek bridges after General Nelson had gone out to Murfreesborough.

Question. But before his arrival there did they not destroy some bridges in the vicinity of Murfreesborough?

They destroyed a bridge and the depot at Murfreesborough at the time they had the fight there. I do not know what they did beyond Murfreesborough on the road.

Question. Were these principal depredations you have mentioned committed by organized troops in the rebel service and without reference to the inhabitants along the road?

I do not know whether they were organized troops or not; I know they were in the Confederate service; they were understood to be guerrillas. The Texas Rangers were about, too; we knew them to be forces under Morgan, Forrest, and Starnes.

Question. Are those commands not understood to be composed of troops belonging as much to the rebel army as other troops; are they not of the character of regular troops?

Yes, sir; I suppose they are. They have always been treated the same as other Confederate troops and appear to be organized into regiments and companies, and I have no doubt are in the Confederate service the same as any other troops; that is their reputation. Colonel Morgan has been promoted by the Confederate authorities the same as other officers and so has Colonel Forrest.

Question. You did not understand that they were made up of the inhabitants of the country along those railroads on which they had been depredating?

O, no; sometimes the citizens have joined them perhaps, but they acted in bodies as other invading troops, and seemed to understand their business as if acting under orders.

Question. Do you think if in consequence of these depredations you were to lay the country waste with fire and sword on either side of the railroad the depredations of these troops would be prevented?

I do not think it would have any effect one way or the other. I think they are sent out for the express purpose of destroying the lines of communication and supply lines. They are organized for that business; they go mounted, and the troops are better adapted for that kind of work than perhaps any other. As a reason for this opinion I will state that in this part of the country the depredations they have committed have been committed against the desire of the people, so far as I know, and I know the people are complaining very bitterly of this kind of conduct, for they said, "If our lines are cut and destroyed the army in the State will subsist off the people, off the country; whereas if the lines are left open they will get their supplies from the North." I have heard this argument frequently by people who were not Union people. Further, this railroad line from Louisville here was not troubled by the people. There was a time last spring, in the early part of the summer, when General Dumont was in command, when the bridges were not guarded at all and no depredations were committed.

Question. Is this a very unusual method of operating against an enemy?

I think it is very common in the history of all wars. It is one of the means of crippling an enemy, cutting off his supplies or cutting off his line of retreat, and I should think a very good plan of operation.