orders had been issued by him that I knew nothing of. He then said to me, "You know that such orders were given?" I answered, "Yes sir," He said, "And you know that they were not carried out?" I answered that that was what I h ad been told; that that was my impression. He then said that was sufficient; that he would have me summoned as the principal witness. Then, according to my recollection, I reminded him of that conversation. I felt that I was not sufficiently conversant with the case, and I immediately reported this conversation to the Adjutant-General of the Army, and to Colonel Kelton, the Assistant Adjutant-General, at the Headquarters of the Army, and requested that General Pope might be summoned as a witness in the case. They told me that he should be summoned, and both of them also told me to see Colonel Holt about it; but, before doing so, I understood that the order for the trial had been suspended, and the impression was that there would be not trial. I therefore took no further action in the matter.

Before offering any comments upon this testimony, I am very glad, in so far as relates to the distinguished judge-advocate of this court, to insert into this defense, in justice to him, the following brief but entirely satisfactory evidence as to his action in the matter. I quote from Colonel Ruggles' testimony, as written in pages 623 and 624 [978] of the record, and given under examination by the accused:

Question. Were you summoned by the Government to testify in this case?

Answer. I was summoned by the Government.

Question. Who discharged you, and why?

Answer. On the 16th of December I reported to the judge-advocate of this court that I had been detailed as judge-advocate of a court-martial, to be convened at West Point on the 18th of December, and asked him if I should be needed in this case of General Porter. After some consultation, he told me that he did not think he would need me, and said he thought I had been summoned as a witness for the defense. I told him no; that I was a witness for the prosecution. He then told me I might go to West Point, and, if my presence was required here, I would be telegraphed for. I went on, and on the evening of the 28th of December I received a telegram to come on here.

Question. From whom?

Answer. It was signed by the Adjutant-General.

The record proceeds to state the admission of the accused that that telegram had been sent at his request.

I now respectfully ask the court to consider, in connection with the origin of this accusation, and the testimony of General Pope in support of it, the now cited extracts from Colonel Ruggles' testimony; and, first, I observe that it is not of the slightest importance whether or not Colonel Ruggles is correct in his recollection that on the 5th of 6th of September, on the road between Arlington and Washington, [he] did remind General Pope of the exculpatory declaration which he, General Pope, addressed to me at Fairfax Court-House three or four days before, that is, on the 2nd of September. Colonel Ruggles states that, to the best of his recollection, he did, on the 5th or 6th, so remind General Pope, and that General Pope, when reminded, made no reply. But to this point of the reminder, as it may be, Colonel Ruggles' reiterated testimony is positive and peremptory to the point that he distinctly heard General Pope make the exculpatory declaration to mae at Fairfax Court-House on the 2nd of September, at the close of our conversation, and in a voice loud enough to be heard all over the room.

The exact remembrance by Colonel Ruggles of the one exception made by General Pope to the general terms [of] that exculpation, when he uttered it to me, is perfect proof that Colonel Ruggles heard the exculpation itself with attention, and that it then and there graved itself in his memory. His careful doubt as to whether General Pope did certainly use the word " entirely" before the word "satisfactory," in addressing that exculpation to me, is proof of the conscientious circumspection with which Colonel Ruggles gives his most important testimony. His belief that the word "entirely" was used by General Pope, goes, therefore, far