Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-06-29

G'e e'ucte IN tne f1erao, with regard to tin.
Segunda Gslhego. which be refssed 10 do
inere was then no alternative but TO bring him
to trial, which l did as speedily as possibI..
aud thought further corresponds nee unpece..
ssry. ~
Question. lshsll hereafter, sir, have occa.
SION TO ask some questions ON the matters
you have introduced in your Testimony. Az
present, 1 have only TO repeat my question.
and ask an answer, affirmative or negative 70
It. (Here the last question was repeatedly
Answer. believe l did not reply to the
letter.
Question. Is the letter now shewn to volt
your reply TO roy letter Of the Slst December ?
Answer. II is not reply to that letter.
Here the last mentioned letter was read and
referred to appendix, which see marked No s6. !
Question. In that letter you refer to an
extract Of instructions from the Secretary If
the Navy-ls the paper now shewn TO YOU the
extract you sent me
Answer. Yes sir. the day Of the date of
the extract is omitted because it was omitted
in the original. THE extract was, by consent,
here read aud referred to appendix which see,
marked No. GEL
Question. When did you receive these IN.
structions, before or after the publication in
the Georgian, or before or after p. Wilson,.
certificate?
Answer. Ibeleve I RECEIVED thern the d,v
left Washington. the s4th December.
Question. Were these priuate Instructions
Tor your personal guidance or use, or were
tney intended as general orders for the. navy
IL the latter, when, how were they published
Or made known to the officers Of the navy ?
Answer. l conceived them Intended as
general orders, and l promulgated then, by
circular to the different commanders un,rrr
my orders. with desire that they would COM
m flrln nfa fHnsr~
tins, had them Inserted i'm the general order
hook on board, which is free for tile inspec-
ton OF every body. l never communicated
them TO lieut., KennOn, except in that letter
and then l communicated them to him in self
Justification. i did moi wish lieut.. Kennnn To
'nisuDdersiand the motives by which was
had believed him to be- acq,uin,-
ed with the orders, should not have sen.
them to him.
Question. In that letter, you state u pro-
posal unsuccessful'y made to me, through Mir.
Samuel Hamhlefon ; on what da, did YOU
authorize Mr.. Hamhleton TO comm unicare that
proposal BE precise, if you please, Sir, as
Answer. On the morning of the day Of
the exhibition of the final charges am GER
tain more thsn twenty-four hours could not
have elapsed between the proposal and the
charges.
Question. In making that proposal, waa
it your wish and intention to cnncilia.e the
difference which ,unhapp'ly,e existed between III?
Answer. my motive was, sincere desire
to release Lieutenant Kenuon from all usylea-
SAINT consequences TO the charges. / made
the proposal, TOO, in conformity with The
orders If the Secretary of the NAVY, and to
ralieve myself from the impuiaipn winch
might be cast upon me, of blasting the pros
poets OLA young officer.
Question In making The prosposai, did you
expect, or intend, that should receive and
act on it in the independent spirit aud temper
bedting every gentleman adjusting differ
ence with another gentleman or, that
should receive it as condescending proposal
coming from my superior officer, which, as an
inferior, lwas bound TO receive
Answer. did not intend il as a condescep-
sion, on my part and did not expect that you
would receive it in that light.
Question. Is there any rule OF naval service,
either express or customary, under which an
inferior officer, in a matter not Of service, but
of personal honor and character, is to be con-
sidered as not on an equality with an officer Of
higher grade ?
TO this question the Judge Advocate OBJ
iected and the court being cleared, it was
decided that 1t vas improper, and irreley ant 10
the matter in issue between the parties, aud
that it should not beput to the witness
The court was opened, and the above de.
cision read.
Question by accused. Was Mr.. Handle
ton, in his first application to me, authorized
by you to bear to me any direct proposal or
to inform me that you had sent him 10 make
a proposal and, if he was, how was that au-
thority given!
Answer. lie never was authorized by me
TO bear any proposal hut once, and then he
bore proposal dictated by me, and written
by him, OF which desired him 10 give Lieu
enant kennon copy, if he wished.
Question. Was il signed by you ?If not,
Why was 1t not so signed ?
Answer. 1t was not signed by me, because
d'd not Consider it necessary IL should be
'gned. Ii was a message, and committed to
writing, in order that there might be no mis-
not, why was it not so addressed
Ansger. You were named in it, and did
not consider it necessary il should be address
sed to you.
Question. Did you address any note TO Mr..
Hamblrton, empowering him 10 make any
Answer. did not.
Question. II you meant fair and candid
explanation, why did you so cautiously old
putting your hand anil name to any thug ?
Answer. IL did not proceed from caution
Mr iamb'eton appeared TO be the warm
inend OF Mr.. kennon, and appeared sincere
y desrous to bring about reconciliation.
question. In the adjustment of n differ
nee ny IN officer and private gentleman. or
with an officer Of equal rank, is il consistent
rnt with usage, or would it be deemed pro-
per To receive or entertain any proposal nei-
her addressed 10 him, or written or signed