Question. Are you aware that General Thomas' division did not arrive in North Alabama from Corinth until the last of July?

I do not know at what time it arrived there.

Question. Did you know that division was considerably in rear of the rest of the Army of the Ohio that marched from Corinth?

I was advised of it, but do not know.

Question. In speaking of the strength of the Army of the Ohio in Middle Tennessee and North Alabama and setting it at 50,000, did you mean to give that only as an approximate estimate founded on your opinion or as an accurate statement?

I think it was a very near approximation, but I did not give it as an accurate statement. It was based upon what I supposed to be the average strength of the several divisions composing it.

Question. In the cross-examination by the court this question was put to you by General Schoepf: "Suppose General Buell had marched his army directly to and occupied Chattanooga and Knoxville, with Cumberland Gap in our possession and East Tennessee loyal to the Union, what would have been the strategic and moral effect?" Your answer to that question is: "The occupancy of those positions by our troops would have been an advantage scarcely to be estimated." In that answer do you mean to express an opinion as to the practicably of doing that thing any more than though Richmond and Gordonsville had been substituted for Chattanooga and Knoxville, Washington for Cumberland Gap, and Virginia for East Tennessee?

I did not mean to express any opinion as to the practicability of taking possession of the points named. A supposed case was presented. I simply took the hypothesis as granted, and answered, as I was asked, what the strategic and moral effect would have been in my opinion.

Question. In the examination by the court you expressed the opinion that Chattanooga could be held by 25,000 against 50,000. You also expressed the opinion that 25,000 men would be sufficient to defend Nashville, which, supposing the force in Middle Tennessee to be 50,000, would leave 25,000 for other service. What force now do you suppose would be sufficient to hold Chattanooga against those 25,000, supposing them to have been direct against that point?

I think 12,000 men could resist and prevent the crossing of 25,000 over the Tennessee River at any point in the vicinity of Chattanooga, and if Chattanooga itself were intrenched with reference to a defense of the place by 10,000 men they could hold it against an attack of 25,000.

Question. In the examination by the court this question was put by General Schoepf: "You stated in your reply that you could have held Chattanooga with 25,000 men; would not the remaining 25,000 have been sufficient to defend Nashville?" and you answered, "Supposing General Grant's army to occupy the positions then held by it and the position already named taken by the troops of the Army of the Ohio, Nashville would have been in a very retired position and I think safe without any considerable garrison. The remainder of the troops of the Army of the Ohio would have been more than sufficient for that purpose." In your answer did you mean to be understood as expressing the opinion that 25,000 men would be sufficient to occupy and hold East Tennessee and the railroad communication between Georgia and Virginia to East Tennessee?

I did not mean to express the opinion that 25,000 men would have been sufficient, on the supposition made, to hold Chattanooga and the line of communication through