Question. What was the cause of the large amount of absence without leave from the Army of the Ohio after irs arrival at Louisville and while it remained there?

I think the principal cause was the desire of the soldiers to get home to see their families, form whom they had been absent a long while.

Question. Did they subsequently return to Louisville for the purpose of joining their regiments while the army was in front about Perryville and beyond there?

I think the principal cause was the desire of the soldiers to get home to see their families, form whom they had been absent a long while.

Question. Did they subsequently return to Louisville for the purpose of joining their regiments while the army was in front about Perryville and beyond there?

A great many of them did, sir. A great many of my own regiment returned within four or five days, took their guns, and went up to join their regiment. I made the detachment up and sent them forward under officers, with instructions to gather up stragglers on the road. I made them up largely from men who returned in that way, as being most reliable, adding to them the stragglers that I had gathered up by my cavalry patrol.

Question. What was the cause of the great amount of straggling from the army after it left Louisville to advance against the enemy?

I suppose there were two or three causes, one of which was they did not care much about fighting; another was they wanted to make use of the opportunity to plunder the people of the country. I suppose some straggling was the result of want of ability on the part of the new troops to keep up in the march, as they were raw, inexperienced, undrilled, and undisciplined; but if I should judge by the complaints that came in, I should say that the principal cause for the straggling was the great desire for plunder. I say this because I remember that when I took occasion to lecture some officers for the misdeeds of their commands they gave me to understand that they were in an enemy's country and had a right to plunder the people.

Question. Was this straggling to be ascribed to demoralization in the army or was it due to the want of discipline in the raw troops?

I amy say it was done almost exclusive by the new troops, and therefore could not be from demoralization, but form want of discipline.

Question. In what manner was the march conducted from Nashville to Louisville; was it an orderly march or a disorderly one; were the troops obedient and under control; was there a great amount of straggling and were there desertions - any of those incidents which indicate demoralization in an army?

I consider the march to have been a very orderly on e and generally well conducted. there was some straggling - comparatively little, however - and perhaps there may have been a few desertions, but, if so, they were very few. I have no doubt that some Kentucky troops as they reached the locality of their homes took occasion to go home to see their families; I know that a few did, because before we reached Louisville I saw some three or gout who had stopped about Bowling Green and afterward came up and overtook the column. There was some complaint during the march of the fatigues incident thereto owing to the scarcity of water, the heat, and the great amount of dust. I think those three things combined made it the most terrible march that soldiers ever did make in this country. The troops were obedient and under control, and, I might add, under thorough discipline. There are always a few exceptions in every command, and there were in this army. I heard much more complaint from officers than from men. I do not mean to say complaint of the fatigues of the march and its hardships, but complaint against their commanding officer. I do not mean to specify the names of the officers; perhaps it would be improper to do so; but while our corps was lying at Horse Well, beyond Munfordville, I heard officers who outranked me publicly censure the conduct of General Buell, and on of the officers, major of a regiment, made a speech to his men, in which he questioned the loyal purposes of General Buell and censured his course of conduct. I was not near enough to catch the exact language used, but could hear the applause with which his men greeted his remarks. It was very near the headquarters of the commander of the brigade. I took occasion to say that it I commanded the brigade I would have put the officer in irons, which I would have done. I consider this demoralizing to a great extent, unbecoming in an officer, and injurious to the service.

41 R R-VOL XVI