Question. Was there any formal dissolution of that partnership?

General BUELL. I object to the question, Mr. President, as not being revellent to the matter under investigation.

The JUDGE-ADVOCATE. The witness has undertaken to state the movements and intentions and force of Breckinridge in reference to Kentucky at that time. For the purpose of showing how accurate and reliable his information could be he states himself in his examination-in-chief that he had been the law partner of Mr. Breckinridge. For the purpose of testing precisely what was introduced, as to how far his acquaintance with Mr. Breckinridge would justify his statements to this Commission and a knowledge of his movements or intentions, I ask this, because I think it is pertinent.

General BUELL. In calling upon the witness to state the rations which afforded him facilities for obtaining information in regard to the movements of General Breckinridge I did not base it upon business relations, but upon former social associations more particularly. I do not think that the business relations of General Breckinridge and Mr. Beck have any bearing upon this testimony; it was more particularly his relations with the family of General breckinridge that I meant to inquire into.

(The court was cleared; after discussion it was decided the question be put.)

The WITNESS. We agreed to dissolve and did dissolve. There was no writing either in the formation or dissolution, and I soon after formed a partnership with F. K. Hunt, my present partner.

Question. Where was Mr. Breckinridge at the time you dissolved that partnership?

I saw him in Washington and spoke to him of my intention to form a partnership with mr. Hunt, in which he fully concurred, we both agreeing that our partnership was at an end. I formed an actual partnership with Mr. Hunt after my return, and wrote to Mr. Breckinridge informing him of it, but I do not remember if he replied to me or not.

Question. Was Mr. Breckinridge in Lexington subsequent to that conversation in Washington?

Yes, sir.

Question. What was the cause of the dissolution at that time?

His political engagements were such that he was unable to attend to his law business, he being then Senator from Kentucky.

Question. How frequently was he in Lexington subsequent to that conversation in Washington?

He spent most of his time in and about Lexington from the time Congress adjoined in August, 1861, till September or October, 1861, when he went South.

Question. What became of the business after the dissolution?

I attended to the closing of it.

Question. Have you had any communication with him since of a business character or in reference to your former partnership?

I have had no communication with him since he went South directly. I have said to gentlemen going South that if they saw him to tell him how his family was; nothing more.

Question. Was not that dissolution of partnership really caused by his going South or by his intention of joining the rebel army?

No, sir; it was closed long before I had the least suspicion of any such thing and I think before the war broke out.