Question. Was this reduction of baggage in the division to which you were attached the cause of complaint or dissatisfaction or grumblings?

Answer. It was.

General King (see proceedings December 17):

Question. Do you know if the arrival near your division of troops more abundantly provided than they were with wagons, tents, &c., was the cause of any remarks or feeling with reference to the allowances made to your division?

Answer. It was.

General Hartsuff (see proceedings December 15):

Question. What reduction was made in the means of transportation and in the camp equipage on your coming under General McDowell's immediate command at Fredericksburg?

Answer. The number of wagons to each regiment was reduced to seven or eight, I think. The Sibley tents with which the command was furnished were changed to shelter-tents. Officers' baggage was necessarily considerably reduced, and the baggage of company messes and baggage generally of officers and men.

Question. Do you know if the reduction of means of transportation and camp equipage was a cause of any feeling or the subject of any remark in the brigade (Hartsuff's)?

Answer. It was the cause of considerable feeling and of many remarks of ill-feeling or ill-will toward General McDowell by officers and men. I did not hear the remarks of the men, but am satisfied remarks of the kind were made.

Question. State if you know of any other cause of ill-feeling toward General McDowell, or dissatisfaction with him in that brigade, connected with their having been under another department commander, where these restrictions had not been made.

Answer. Three of the four regiments composing my brigade had been under the command of General Banks. The brigade was, as they believed, temporarily attached to General McDowell's command. They were very desirous of getting back under General Banks' command, believing the amount of transportation they brought to General McDowell's command would be restored to them, and with it their baggage and comforts.

General Hartsuff (proceedings December 15) being asked if the forced march which I made over the Blue Ridge to Front Royal (to comply with orders given me) was the cause of any complaint, states:

It was the cause of complaint, and I saw afterward letters written by officers of the, brigade and published in Boston newspapers, containing severe strictures on General McDowell, as the author of suffering on the marches. The letter was filled with falsehoods.

Question. Was there any complaint that the men were forced over the Blue Ridge in the rain without tents or shelter?

Answer. There was such complaint.

He further says there was a severe rain-storm during nearly the whole of the night.

It will be recollected this was all done to comply with the President's orders, and was nothing more than is incident to military operations; but the troops who made the march were not used to it.

POLICY PURSUED TOWARD THE INHABITANTS.

As to the policy I pursued toward the inhabitants of the country with respect to themselves I refer to General Orders, Nos. 12 and 19, and Special Orders, Numbers 65 (proceedings of November 29), which, taken in connection with my orders concerning their property, will show the nature of that policy. It was simply as a matter of justice to them, as one of discipline to my men, to protect their persons from outrage and insult, and so much of their property as was not needed by the army from destruction or damage; in return, to require them, at the peril of their lives, not to harm my communications, either by rail or telegraph, or see them harmed by others.