Question. Do I understand you that at the time Bragg arrived there were no fortifications?

I did not mean to say that. (Mr. McElwee here explained.) I did not understand the question as to whether I was in Chattanooga subsequent to the arrival of Bragg. I was not there.

Question. At what time were you there previous to the arrival of Bragg's forces?

I do not know, sir.

Question. I have no further questions to put to the witness, and under the ruling of the court, as I have elicited nothing, there is no ground on which a cross-examination can be had.

General BUELL. When did you leave your home in East Tennessee, Mr. McElwee?

The JUDGE-ADVOCATE. I shall have to object to this, Mr. President; there is really no evidence before the Commission on which to base a cross-examination. We occupy the position of having no witness at all before us, and General Buell, by going into new matter, will be making this witness his own.

General BUELL. I claim that under the rules of proceeding governing all courts it is my privilege to examine the witness on any subject connected with the pending examination. The position assumed by the judge-advocate that there is nothing to cross-examine upon I cannot admit at all. There is nothing in the question which I have asked to show that it may not be pertinent to a cross-examination.

The court was cleared; when, after discussion, it was unanimously decided that the objection should be sustained.

It was further decided that the witness' whole statement having been excluded with the consent of the judge-advocate there could be no cross-examination by General Buell.

Vote unanimous.

On the opening of the court-

The PRESIDENT. The Commission have decided, general, that as the testimony of the witness is so far immaterial it will be excluded from the evidence, and that therefore there is no ground for cross-examination.

General BUELL. Do I understand the Commission to decide that I have not the privilege of examining a witness except upon questions that are introduced by the judge-advocate?

The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir.

General BUELL. I should like to ask whether this ruling is based upon any authority or whether it is arbitrary?

The PRESIDENT. It is based upon a rule of law which applies in all cases of this kind. For instance, the judge-advocate introduces a witness in the way of rebutting testimony; after he has examined in chief you have by the rule of law the right to cross-examine, but you would not have the right to make him your witness originally. The same rule precisely applies to rebutting witnesses as to witnesses originally introduced, and the cross-examination of such witnesses is confined, as a matter of course, to evidence develop in the examination-in-chief.

Rev. W. G. BROWNLOW (a witness for the Government), being duly sworn by the judge-advocate, testified as follows:

By the JUDGE-ADVOCATE:

Question. Please state you name, occupation, and place of residence.

William G. Brownlow; Knoxville, Tenn.; editor and publisher of a newspaper for about a quarter of a century.

43 R R-VOL XVI