Examination by the ACCUSED:

Question. Will the witness state at about what hour the battle of the 29th of August ceased?

Answer. It was some time after dark; I should think quite as late as half-past 7 or 8 o'clock.

Question. Does the witness know at what hour General Porter, on the 29th of August, received the order bearing date of 4.30 p. m. of that day?

Answer. I do not know.

Question. The witness having spoken of his expectation of an attack to be made upon the enemy by General Porter, are we to understand that he expected such an attack to be made prior to the issue of the order of 4.30 p. m. August 29?

Answer. Yes, sir; that is what I intend the court and the accused to understand, and for the person that I had supposed that any general within hearing of an important battle, in whose power it was to engage in it, would do so; and I had supposed that General Porter's line of march from Manassas Junction would have brought him onto the right of the enemy's lines before 4 o'clock, and I had supposed that he would attack on coming onto those lines.

Question. Under what order was General Porter acting on the 29th of August, prior to the issue of the order of 4.30 p. m. of that day?

Answer. I do not know that he was acting under any special order; but I supposed that the order that directed him to move in that direction was sufficient authority for General Porter to engage in the action.

Question. Having described various specifications in that joint order in your testimony-in-chief, no mention has been made of any specification directing an attack, but, on the contrary, of a specification directing a halt, and a halt in such a position as to reach Bull Run that night; that joint order your consider to have been in force up to the time when the order of 4.30 p. m. was issued?

Answer. There was a discretion in that order which, in my estimation, would have authorized General Porter to have joined, at any time during the fight of the afternoon of the 29th, in that fight when he could have done it to advantage. And, in my estimation, any general has the discretion, in the nature of things, when an important action is going on, to join in it, and is bound to do it.

Question. Did not the joint order specially exclude from the discretion of Generals Porter and McDowell the necessity of their remaining in such position as to enable them to fall back behind Bull Run?

This question was objected to by a member of the court.

The court was thereupon cleared.

After some time the court was reopened, and the judge-advocate announced that the court determine that the question shall not be answered.

Examination continued by the ACCUSED:

Question. If there was no discretion left the accused by the joint order of the 29th of August, would it have been his duty to have joined in the battle, if by doing so he would have violated that joint order?

This question was objected to by a member of the court.

The question was waived by the accused.

Question. It being, in the judgment of the witness, the plain duty of General Porter to have attacked prior to the reception of the order of 4.30 p. m. of the 29th of August, what explanation does the witness give of the fact that the order of 4.30 p. m. prescribed a single specified form of attack, with the positive condition that the attack should be made in