Evansville weekly journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 184?-18??, 1848-04-27
OF THE COURT OF IN
CURRY
Eighth Dan.
MARCH "a. 1913.

A.-On the 18th, | saw portion of the op-
erations | was on the field of battle on the
18th; | was not at the battle on the Goth Of
August.
General Pillow requested to have the ques
ton limited in its application to Leonidas
alone.
General Scott requested that the witness
might be addressed through the Recorder.
Odd the witness hand the Leonidas let
ter in person to Maj. Gen. Pillow; was ii
opened or sealed; and was there no remark
made to Major General Pillow as to the ques-
ton?
Al cannot say thatI handed the letter to
! Mai. Gen. Pillow to be forwarded, and there
fore, there could not have been any converse
| ton on the subject Iwrote the letter, .envel-
oping it, and think directed it, it is seven
months since the thing was done, and l said
| yesterday | took 40 copy of the letter.
Q-Were there few or many opportunities,
pending the armis.ice, for forwarding letters to
the United States?
Al cannot say whether there were few
OF many; | believe there Were few; | have
heard of the British courier-of subscriptions
by officers for sending off their letters-of pri-
vate expresses | cannot recollect into whose
hands | placed the Leonidas letter for trans
mission.
IA WHOSE INSTANCE anu LOT WHAT reason
was the address to the editors of the Union,
Washington, d. c., first cancelled at the top
and then at the bottom of that letter, and that
of the editors of the n. o. Delta substituted in
both places?
A.-The words were cancelled at nv own
instance, and the reason was to give it pub
licity.
Q.-Would not the letter have had equal OF
greater publicity if published in the Washing
ton Union?
Al do not know the circulation of either
of those papers.
Witness was here shown paper marked No.
l, and then remarked, 81 have never seen
it."
Q.-Was rot the true reason for changing
the address of the Leonidas letter this-fnding
that the twin paper to the Leonidas letter was
not likely to 60 through Mr.. Freaner; and if
SO, did you get the suggestion from Gen. Pill
low, or from whom?
Al did not. sir-I never saw this paper
never knew its existence, until after ! had
sent the other letter.
Odd the witness mean TO say that, with
out the special authority or the knowledge of
Gen. Pillow, he went into his private office or
apartment and purloined thence an important
paper or copy of one?
Al do say that did enter the Office of
Gen. Pillow without his knowledge and took
copy of paper have alluded to in my former
testimony.
Odd Gen. Pillow, upon his having mis-
sed the paper, or learning that the witness had
copied it in August last, make inquiry into
it, and rebuke or pardon him for SO doing?
Al have never heard of his having missed
the paper; did not take it out of the of
flee; know nothing about the matters in
the remainder of the question, and cannot an
swer it.
Q.-As the memory of the witness seems
excellent in some particulars, will he try to-
rally ii, and and answer the latter part of the
last question.
Al never heard any conversation on that
subject; | do not know that he did,
Q,-Was that paper from which Leonidas
was copied, left by Gen Pillow in the usual
haunts of the witness deslgnedly or not in Or
der that he might take copy of it?
Al am satisfied it was not
Q.-Was that paper found on the private
table Of Gen. Pillow alone, OR mixed up with
other papers.
Al took no particular notice Of that fact;
it was lying on his private table.
Witness was here requested to read paper
marked No. l, by the Judge Advocate.
Q.-Was the paper found as heretofore stat
ed by the witness, a copy with or without in
terlineations, identically or substantially the
same as paper marked No. |?
Al cannot say it was; stated yesterday
ii appeared to be partial memorandum report
Of the operations of his command ON the 18th
or 10th Of August.
Odd the witness do more in respect tol
the Leonidas letter than copy address and alp
the paper found in Gen. Pillow private apart
ment or office?
Al did.
Q.-In whose quarters or office did the wit
ness write or copy theLeonidas letter.
A.-Ihave stated before, that in Gen. Pillow
Office took partial copy of the memorandum
or report.
Q.--When did the witness write Or copy
the paper, article or letter, signed Leonidas,
and in what particulars did it differ from the
paper from which be copied?
Al have stated that copied it in General
Pillows Office. | cannot point out the diff
ferences, never having compared the Leonl- |
das letter with the original from which | cop
led it.
Q.-Was the witness secure against the
interruption whilst copying the letter in
Gen. Pillows office, or did he feel secure
against it?
Al never was interrupted in any way in
particular
Q.-Who called the attention of the witness
10 the interlipeations in the twin paper before
the court, marked |, and were the same inter
lineaions in the paper that witness accidental
ly found?
A.-They were This is the first time
that have yer seen paper No. l.
Q.-The witness is again asked if the inter
Gneations in paper No. l were in the paper
found in Gen. Pillows Office?
Al cannot say they were.
Q.-When did the witness make the interli-
neations in the Leonidas letter or were they
copied from No. l?
A.-They never were copied from No. l. l
have said never saw the paper No. !, until
to-day this was made after the letter was
written.
Q.--The witness answers the interlineations
were made long after the letter was written.
No doubt; but how long after, and at whose
suggestion?
Al cannot say how long after, but they
were made at no ones suggestion.
Odd the witness write the Leonidas let
ter at one sitting, the interlineations and all,
or at several, and did he show it to any one in
its progress?
Al did not show it to anybody, I believe