Evansville weekly journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 184?-18??, 1848-04-27

Al did not.
1 Q.-Has the witness been Unidentified in adj
vance or by promise, by any army officer forac-
knowledging theauthorship of the Leonidas le:-
ter in the face of the general regulation of the
army relative to prohibited letters, reports, &c.
Ale has rot been promised any indem-
nifty.
Q.-The witness says he has not been prom
ised any, State whether he has received any.
Al never asked any promise. I have
never received any indemnity; if it had been
f offered | would have scorned it.
Q.-Has the witness, since the printed copy
of Leonidas appeared in this capital ever denied
the authorship of it, or any knowledge of il?
Al never have; if have, it has been in a
jocose way.
Q.-What hand has the witness had in GER
ain pa pers got up for signature in the late
bird Pillows division, for presenting a
sword to that general, or in another paper III
relation 10 personal conflict between Mexi-
can officer and the said general, in the battles
of Contreras and Churubusco, or IN paper
concerning general address to the said Pill
low in reference TO his conduct on those fields
and at Chapultepec?
/ Al had hand in that paper. | drew up
that for presenting a sword to Gen. Pillow,
| know of no paper in relation to a personal
conflict between that general and Mexican
officer ! know of no general address re-
speeding his conduct in the battles in Mex
| leo.
Q.-Was the paper alluded to submitted to
Gen. Pillow. Has not the witness written
a letter or letters other than Leonidas, for pub
LEGATION, as highly laudatory of Major Gen.
| Pillow; and has not the witness shown one or
more such letters to the said Pillow in manu-
script, or forwarded, open, one more such
letters through him for publication at home
with or without his, the said Pillows, correc-
tons or appreciation?
The witness declined 10 answer. the question
and appealed 10 the court
Gen. Scott rose and said, in substance:
The court will see the bearing of this question.
am sure it is pertinent, and | am willing 10
state to the court, in the absence of the wit
ness, the full bearing of the question. The wit
ness has shown nohesitancy in acknowledging
the authorship of one letter, with the regula-
lions staring him in face, for the benefit of the
defence.
Gen. Pillow rose and said in substance
That the court has seen the latitude given to
this examination, aud rise to make no obec-
ton, but it would be apparent to any man not
/ blinded by passion, that many questions have
I been asked the witness highly rejecting upon
officers of the army. He said he hoped
he was not to be held responsible for all the
letters written by Major Burns during the cam
paign.
Major Gen. Scott then said in substance:-
He had now to state to the court that it was
/ his design TO impeach the testimony of the
witness, by showing that he had been 10 the
habit of writing letters highly laudatory of Maj.
Gen. Pillow, and transmitting them open
through Gen Pillow, and that the probability
was he had done so in the case of this, the
most important of these letters. That this was
a court of inquiry, and required to asce rtain
facts bearing on the case, and he apprehended |
that the witness would not be more criminal |
ed BY acknowledging having written sew
eral letters of laudatory character than
by having acknowledged this one, the sic
onidas"
The court closed for deliberation, and on
being opened, decided that the question
should not be asked, providing the witness stat
ed that by answering it he would criminate |
himself
Upon this decision being made, the witness
declined answering. on the ground that by so
doing be would eliminate himself
Gen. Scott here read the Regulation 262, and
said that the witness hadacknowledged certain
acts which he would not here characterize, and
1t was to late to set up the plea of loss of char
acter ETC., after having with great willingness,
acknowledged the Leonidas letter voluntarily,
for the benefit of the defence. Gen. Scott wish
ed toisubmit argument to the court, which he de
sired should be placed upon its record Court
adjourned.
Ninth Ddy.-MAReH 25, 1913.
The court met pursuant to adournment-
Members all present The proceedings of the
two previous days were read.
Maj. Gen. Scott submitted the following in
writing:
''Major Gen. Scott, present before the court
of inquiry as the prosecutor of certain charges
against Maj. Gen. Pillow, and the said Scott
being engaged in the cross mination of Pay
master A. w. Burns, witness for the defence
respecting the allegations against the said Pill
low, of writing and despatching, or causing to
De written and despatched, for publication in
the United States, certain letter signed lie
onidas, of the authorship of which letter, since
published, the said Burns had recorded himself
to be alone responsible, without the agency or
the knowledge, at the time, of the said Pillow
and the said Scott seeking, and not doubling,
by facts to be elected in the cross-examination
to impugn and to impeach that declaration of
the said witness, by showing his habit of COM
municating his newspaper puffs to the said Pill
low-caused to be put to him from the record
of the court, as the frstof new series ofcross-
questions, the following
"'Que8tiOn of the Prosecutor. Has not the
witness written a letter, or letters, other than
''Leonidas," for publication at home, highly
laudatory of Major Gen. Pillow, and has not
the witness shown one or more such letters to
the said Pillow, in manuscript, or for
warded, open, one or more suchletters through
him, for publication at home, with or with
out his, the said Pillows correction or appro-
baton,
"Whereupon, the said Burns; hesitating to
answer that question, the said Pillow rose in
support, by argument, of the hesitancy of his
own witness, when, partly before the court
was closed to deliberate on the objection, and ,
partly after the court had publicly announced
its decision that the witness would not be com
PEELED to answer the interrogatory, if he should
say that thereby he would criminate himself,and
when the witness hadactually made such declar- i
alton, the said Scott, on the two occasions offer
ed to the court, substantially, the following re-
marks or suggestions, which he is to reduce to
writing and place upon the court as his
argument and protest against the said deci-
sion
s'-Er. President and Gentlemen of the Court:
''It is now too late for the witness, whose