be considered rebutting evidence, on account of the difference and distinction made by General Buell himself between the statements of the case at two different times; secondly, although it is a question which might properly have come before the Commission at the beginning of its labors, when General Buell could have introduced such testimony on that subject as he might have seen fit, it would at this stage of the proceedings be manifestly unjust to open a new investigation on new points, when the rule of the court not only prevents him froom introducing testimony on that subject as he might have seen fit, it would at this stage of the proceedings be manifestly unjust to open a new investigation on new points, when the rule of the court not only prevents him from introducing testimony on that point, but if the court permitted it it would be impracticable for him to do so; and, thirdly, if the testimony were proper and the subject proper at the present time the proper witness would be General Morgan and not Colonel De Courcy.

The PRESIDENT. I would suggest that the judge-advocate alter the phraseology of his question so as to show if the invasion and occupation of East Tennessee from Central Kentucky was practicable.

The JUDGE-ADVOCATE. In showing that the thing might have been done of course I showed its practicability, and what I meant was to meet the question that was opened by General Buell in his questions to General Granger as to whether it was practicable to seize and hold Eastern Tennessee from that direction.

The court was opened; when the judge-advocate said that he had altered the proposition so as to bring it more within the rule and then read the proposition as altered.

General BUELL. I shall continue my objection to the question, and for take same reasons in general terms that I have previously stated. The examination of General Granger upon this point, it will be seen, evidently has reference to the practicability of the country between Central Kentucky and Eastern Tennessee - the mountainous region, that is, as to the practicability of throwing a large army into that country. The first question put to General Granger in reference to it is as to whether he has studied the problem of throwing a force into East Tennessee from Central Kentucky, and he answers that he has studied it and had abandoned it as impracticable. He studied it, of course, under the circumstances that existed at the time; it was a matter of consequence to him, and he answers as to its practicability with a view to those circumstances. It must be evident that he did not intend to say that it was impossible to march a force to East Tennessee, because the fact is before the country that a force had actually marched into East Tennessee and held possession of a point in that country for some weeks, perhaps some months. He answers as to the practicability with a view to those circumstances. It must be evident that he did not intend to say that it was impossible to march a force to East Tennessee, because the fact is before the country that a force had actually marched into East Tennessee and held possession of a point in that country for some weeks, perhaps some months. He answers as to the practicability with reference to the circumstances which he studied. The question which follows leads to the object of my inquiry; it was as to the character of the country and its agricultural resources between Somerset and East Tennessee, directly across the mountains, and the testimony goes on in reference to that. The judge-advocate has better evidence than any opinion that can be expressed by Colonel De Courcy, or any other witness, as to the practicability of doing what the judge-advocate says was practicable, and which the command of which Colonel De Courcy formed a part actually did. It is an established fact that that column marched to East Tennessee, and it is not necessary to produce evidence to show that it was practicable to do it; so that the proposition as the judge-advocate has shaped it is not less new matter than it was before; but, more than that, it is a mere shift to get at something which is not expressed in his new proposition.

The JUDGE-ADVOCATE. I hope General Buell will not indulge in reflections attributing it to any such motive.