Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-05-02
BRUNER C0URT-MARTIAL.
Fourteenth Days Proceedings.
TRIAL OF ISHAM HENDERSON


ton m~ie on the Both Of May. 1854, which / re-
jected on account Of Mr.. Henderson wishing to
have the contract Of the market also received
proposition in the shape OF letter from Mr..
Henderson IN relation to furnishing mules.
Q.-State what became Of this letter Of June l.
1854 A. / returned it to Mr.. Henderson with
an Endorsement
The Judge Advocate then made the following
demand on Mr. Henderson for the letter in ques-
ton:
NASHVILLE, April 30. lsG5.-To IsnAM Hex
DERsON. NASHVILLE, TESN.-Sir: You are hereby
notified 10 produce 10 the General Court Martial
before which you are now being tried, Tomorrow
morning. the lst Of May, 1866. 1T ~ o'clock, the
letter addressed by you to Capt. Charles II. Irwin
A. Y. NJ. dated June !, 1884 proposing to furnish
to the United States one thousand mules, and the
acceptance Of said proposition Endorsed thereon
BY said Irwin, dated Nashville, June l. 1864
which letter and acceptance is in your possession.
Your Obcdient servant,
SAN'L j. NORIs
Capt. 3Sth H. Vol.
Judge Advocate.
Counsel for the defense said In reply to the
within demand. the accused states that if any
such letter was written it was to show the United
States Collector that the mules we're not intended
for the rebels or for any other improper purpose.
This was necessary before mules were permitted
to pass into the State from Kentucky. and Of
such letters were given to said collectors to
be used by Mr.. Henderson's agents fer that pur-
pose. Mr.. Henderson, the accused, states that he
has no such letter in his possession.
by the Judge Advocate: Have you a copy Of
said letter and indorsemcnt2 A. / have il here
with me.
Q.-Is the letter just handed me a correct copy
Of the letter from Isham Henderson to you. A.
Yes. SIR
The following copy. Of the letter was then read
by the Judge Advocate:
NASHVILLE, June LIST. lS64-Captain Chas II.
lrwin-Captain: | propose to furnish you lOOJ
mules, all 10 be three years old and up, and not
less than II hands high. sound seryiceable and in
good order. at the following prices: for "a hands
high, $50; lii5, $50; and for u and over Sl65-
the whole 10 be delivered within Gu days, at
Nashville. Respectfully
(Signed,) IsHAu HENDERSON.
On it was the following Endorsement;
NASHVILLE, Tenn, June lst, ls6l.-The within
proposition is accepted, and the mules will be re-
cciyed by me in accordance with orders received
from Lieut.. Col. DOnelsOn. 5. K ). q. NJ, Dept.
Cumb. (SimedD CHAs. II. Irwin,
Capt. A. q, NJ.
Odd he furnish any mules under this propo-
sition? A. lie furnished in July l,57S
Q.-State whether or not there were fire.
quent, and the loss considerable
Q.-What steps were taken to recover stock
lost in this way, also stock that was stolen? A.
Men were detailed for this purpose; the number
detailed was owing to the quantity of stock lost
GLOW was this stock accounted for in your
returns after being taken up? A. Accounted for
by considering the losses so much loss.
Q.-State whether or not stock was constantly
-. l. 4 -.
for ? A. A considerable amount was taken from
citizens. and accounted for on abstract N-and
partly on the supposition that it had been stolen
or lost from my corrals.
Q.-Suppose that this stock was stolen from the
corras. how was it accounted for before it was
taken up? A. 1t was accounted for at the end Of
the month by afiidavits
Q.-What kind Of aGidayits, and by whom
made? A. They were made by almost any fol
man cognizant Of the facts.
Q.-Now state how many mules you have taken
up, az recorded on abstract for 1864 A. can
not state how many.
Q.-Who had charge Of taking up stock during
the months of June. July and August? A. Mr..
Bruner, who was the chief superintendent Of the
corras.
q. Where was the stock put when brought in
into what cerrals? A. The mules were put into
the mule corrals, and the horses into the horse
corrals.
Q.-You stated that contractors had to brand
Their stock; now state what was Mr. Hcndcrson's
brand. A. | don't know.
Q.-State whether he had one or not d? A. be-
lcre that he had.
By the counsel for the defense: Colonel Irwin.
don't you know that Mr.. Henderson wrote IN
this letter. just put in evidence because he had
some difficulty with Mr.. GalIaher. the Treasury
agent, about getting the mules here from Ken
lucky? A. ! recolect that Mr.. Henderson had
some difficulty with Mr.. Gsllahcr but cannot say
that any conversation Of this kind occurred AT
the time Of making this Endorsement
Odd not Mr.. Henderson commence putting
in mules within a few days? A. The first entry
find ON the recording book is June 9th; and one
lot delivered By J. II. Dennis. and after lot by
lsham Henderson
BY the counsel for the defense: Was not the
agreement with him closed rs soon as the ,OOC
mules were put in by him2 A. I could not hold
him TO put in any more, AZ I understood the
agreement
BY Judge Advocate: Look at this receipt, made
in the charges and specifications. and say whether
or not it is entirely worthless? A. This receipa
alleged to have been forged by the accused. would
not have been paid, because the prices Of mules
therein stated were incorrect
Counsel for the defense: Does il not bear worth
lessuess on its face? A. do not think that il
would have been paid at my Office without being
referred back to Mr. Bruner for explanation.
Odd Mr. Henderson ever present you any
such vouchers, and if he had. would you not have
detected it? A. They could not have come into
my possession, a their proper place was in the
sub-voucher's Office. kept by Mr., s. II. Gould.
prom your knowledge ofthe custom ofdoinq
business in the voucher clerk 5 Office what should
he have done with this paper after detecting IL
incorrectness2 A. The voucher clerk if he haC
followed his instructions as / heretofore stated
would at least have referred it back to Mr.. Brunei
! for reconsideration. The clerk, however, did no
| deem it necessary to call his attention to it.
Q.-Lool at this receipt and see if it is not tn,
| only one upon which you would have authorized
| the issuance Of voucher l. il notg A. Thi
copy Of receipt contains all that was necessary
10 obtain a voucher. Without the three las
! lines Il would have been worthless.
a description Of the form Of the receipt wa
! here given in ful0
Odd you ever have any other contract will
| the accused than the one for feeding mules A
| l continued the contract with the accused 70
fueding mules after the time had cxpired-th
contract for feeding mules also embraced horses
Q.-Was that contract carried out TO your salts
faction, or is there are any dissatisfaction in YOU
/ mind nt present in relation 10 any agreement
! A. IL was carried out 10 my satisfaction.
Q.-Was there any complaints in relation to an,
coutract2 A. I do not know ofany.
Q.--uas no not in all transactions acted toward
| you in the most honorable manner?
The Judge Advocate objected 70 the witncs
answering this question, saying that the ques
ton was not a legitimate one. there had beef
no evidence produced that the accused Nd acie,
dishonarahlc.
Counsel for the defense said--l desire TIL
question TO be answered, because the s,ccia
agreement may be ATTENDED to be called and
there should be any other contract that Col. irwin
does not roeQllcct IT, Il is no evidence Of charac
ter. but how be performed contracts a. tcstiGo'
! by the contracting parties.
Court was cleared aud the objection by tn
| judge Advocate was sustained.
By counsel for the defense ON whose nam,
was these vouchers given for mules rceeiycdg A
The vouchers were given in the names cf the par
tie. furnishing stock,
Of Mr. Smith should put in mules for MI
| Henderson in whose name should the voucher
be is,ucd2 A. Mr. Hendcrsons.
Q.-Docs not your voucher book show tina
vouchers were given TO persons for mules VIII