The JUDGE-ADVOCATE. I am ready at any moment to proceed to read what I propose to use.

GeneraL BUELL. There has been no consultation between the judge-advocate and myself as to what should or not be admitted as evidence before the Commission. I presented the records that I had to him for his inspection and any use he might choose to make of them, and to anything he chooses to present I have no objection ot offer now; the proper time will be when it is read to the Commission, and I shall not object to anything that as any bearing upon the matter under investigation.

The JUDGE-ADVOCATE. I have made selections from this evidence and will proceed to read them if the Commission so desire. It will be necessary to read all the the documentary evidence I propose to introduce.

(Telegram read by judge-advocate.)

General BUELL. I should like to inquire what interpretation the judge-advocate propose to put upon the statements that are made in this documentary evidence as to the strength of the enemy; for instance, whether he expects that it would be admitted as evidence of that strength or only showing what is really expresses, namely, the rumored or reported strength of the enemy? What I wish to know is what effect the judge-advocate means that statements of this kind in documentary evidence, as to the strength of the enemy, for example, shall have; whether it is to be recognized as conclusive as to the strength of the enemy or only as setting forth the information that was received from time to time?

The PRESIDENT. Allow me to ask you, general, that it may be clearly understood, if you hold the position that it is your right to hear the construction which the judge-advocate puts upon these documents submitted to the Commission, and also to have him to distinctly avow for what purposes the proposes to use them - not merely those relating to the strength of the enemy, but all others he may submit to the Commission?

General BUELL. That is the substance of my wish.

The JUDGE-ADVOCATE. I cannot perceive why I should be called upon to put a construction upon these telegrams or letters any more than that I should put a construction upon the evidence of General McCook or state in advance that I expect to prove by the evidence of General McCook. I think I have proved enough when I have introduced his testimony. There are facts bearing upon this investigation which must carry simply what appears upon the fact of them and no more. I do not propose to make arguments or draw conclusion from these documents; that is the business of the members of the Commission, not mine. If General Buell finds anything introduced that has no bearing upon the conduct of the Army of the Ohio in this investigation, he has, of course, a right to make objection to it; but so long as the Commission finds it has a bearing it will be presented, and I have no construction to put upon the evidence. When facts are introduced, argument will be left to the proper time for argument to be made.

General BUELL. Perhaps it may be well to state what are my views as to what should be the rule with reference to evidence introduced before this Commission. The instructions of the Secretary of War specify certain distinct matters which are to be the subject of investigation. All these specifications are distinct except the last, which is somewhat general, and is in these words: "And also to inquire and report upon such other matters touching the military operations aforesaid