HEADQUARTERS, Huntsville, August 9, 1862.

General McCOOK, Battle Creek:

Preserve absolute secrecy in regard to the letter. Have you any doubt as to its genuineness, or rather is there anything to justify the idea that it may have been intended to deceive? Under what circumstances was it found? Can there by any doubt as to Bragg's having been at Chattanooga or of his troops having been there in the force we supposed?

D. C. BUELL.

BATTLE CREEK, August 9, 1862.

Major-General BUELL:

I have retained the man who brought it; I think it genuine. It was not found in a public road, but on a by-way through the mountain. Secrecy will be preserved. I will have some news in few moments from Chattanooga.

McCOOK,
General.

BATTLE CREEK, August 9, 1862.

Major-General BUELL;

Two facts stated in the letter are true. The paper referred to is the Cleveland Herald. I read the statement referred to. I also know that General Maury is now in command of the post of Chattanooga. One of my men just in states:

I was at White Oak Mountain, Daniels' Gap, on Thursday, 13 miles from Chattanooga, on Knoxville Railroad, when trains passed. I counted sixteen trains, each train eighteen cars, loaded with soldiers, going up. I saw at the same place twelve pieces of artillery and 1,000 cavalry marching same way; at Lineville, 9 miles from Chattanooga, 1,000 men; at House's camp ground, General Leadbetter with 3,000, mostly conscripts.

He says Bragg and Hardee are both at Chattanooga. He was not in the town, but his wife and friends told him, so he says there is not doubt of it. Union men thinks these troops have gone to Richmond.

McCOOK,

General.

HEADQUARTERS, Huntsville, August 9, 1862.

General THOMAS, Decherd:

Is it very desirable that Lieutenant-Colonel Howard should leave the service? I learn that Colonel Hoskins has withdrawn his resignation. I wish you to talk with him and be well assured that he understands now to nature of his step, and that he has sincerely repented of it. He should know that it is treason as well as mutiny. It is not sufficient that he should have been mistaken in regard to the confiscation act. He must understand that it was not for him to pronounce on its constitutionality. I do not desire to treat his folly harshly. but if is necessary that he should appreciate the matter fully.

D. C. BUELL.