Question. So that for various reasons an army may be on the offensive one day as far as its movements are concerned and on the defensive another day; is it not so?

Yes. I have stated in my former answers that an army might at one time he on the offensive and at another on the defensive; limited in its movements, offensive or defensive, by its means of subsistence, means of transportation of subsistence, by the advantage of position of the enemy, and by other considerations. Having the advantage of supplies within the reach of depots of supplies, its operations might be made offensive. I would suppose that the relative positions of armies as to whether they are acting on the offensive or defensive would depend entirely upon these considerations, or at least mainly upon these considerations.

Commission adjournment to meet January 30, 1863.

CINCINNATI, January 30, 1863.

Commission met pursuant to adjournment. All the members present; also the judge-advocate and General Buell.

General BOYLE'S testimony continued, as follows:

By General BUELL:

Question. Can you state whether Major-General Nelson served under the command of his junior in Kentucky about the time of the invasion of that State by the rebel forces?

He did, sir. I was present when he met General Wright, and he stated to him, as General Wallace had to me, that he was ready to serve in any capacity that he could for his country's service; that rank should make no difference and should not be regarded. He did receive orders from General Wright.

Recross-examination by the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. General, please look at the paragraph marked there (a strip of newspaper was handed to the witness by the judge-advocate) and state to the Commission whether that is what you referred to yesterday in speaking of Colonel Forsyth's estimate of the forces in Kentucky?

(Objected to by General Buell. Objection overruled.)

The WITNESS. No, sir; I never saw that notice before.

Question. In your cross-examination of yesterday this question was asked you: "Do you consider that the statement of General Forsyth in the article you referred to, that Kentucky was backed by an army of 40,000 men, is any indication of the actual strength of Bragg's army?"

General BUELL. This may be a proper time to urge the objection I made to the question.

The JUDGE-ADVOCATE. What is the ground of your objection?

General BUELL. The objection is that the question assumes that an estimate was made by Mr. Forsyth in this article as to the strength of Bragg's army, whereas neither my question nor the answer to that question implies that any specific estimate was made by Mr. Forsyth in the article alluded to. I only alluded to it myself because the statement is one that might by an ingenious critic be put forward as an estimate by Mr. Forsyth of the strength of that army.

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. I now ask you if this is the article to which you referred?

No, sir; I had no reference to this article, which is one I never saw before in all my life. The article which I saw was many times less in length than this. We had a condensed statement in some paper of the controversy alluded to, but I never saw this before. I understood from the paper that I did read that the controversy was