[Inclosure Numbers 8.]

HDQRS. TWENTY-FIFTH REGIMENT MISSOURI VOLS.,
February 14, 1862.

All men belonging formerly to the Thirteenth Regiment Missouri Volunteers will report themselves without delay at the headquarters of the regiment at the old distillery, South Saint Joseph, Mo.

By order of Colonel E. Peabody, commanding Twenty-fifth Regiment Missouri Volunteers.

C. W. GAFF,

Adjutant Twenty-fifth Regiment Missouri Volunteers.

[Inclosure Numbers 9.]

ATTENTION, MEMBERS OF THE OLD THIRTEENTH, NOW TWENTY-FIFTH, REGIMENT MISSOURI VOLUNTEERS.

I notice a local in the issue of the Herald of the 4th of March in regard to Major-General McClellan's order reinstating the old Thirteenth (now Twenty-fifth) Regiment Missouri Volunteers, and its application to your enlistment in other regiments. Had General McClellan made such an exposition of the application of the order in question as this article would seem to imply, why had not Colonel Peabody received notice thereof? Why has not the order itself modifying Orders, Numbers 29, been officially published? If General McClellan's order is to be carried into effect it will place you who enlist under these representations in a most unpleasant position. I would ask the author of the article how the regiment could be reinstated if the men were not to be held to their original enlistment? The order expressly states that "men and officers shall be considered as continuously in service. " In what regiment? Most certainly in that regiment in which they originally enlisted and were mustered, for where else is the record that they have ever been in service at all? It is well settled that no enlisted man or officer can leave one regiment and of his own will join another without a regular transfer. All of those men whose names stand on the regiment muster-rolls under Major-General McClellan's order must still be accounted for, and without the proper transfer to those regiments in which many of them are now induced to enlist by such articles and other representations of a kindred nature they must be returned as deserters. One other question: In what manner does Major-General Hunter treat this order? By issuing an order for the immediate return of every man formerly belonging to Colonel Peabody's regiment. Why has he not been notified of this modification of Orders, Numbers 29? I am fully satisfied that no such modification exists, and it is only a new dodge of interested parties to humbug you.

J. B. HAWLEY,

Lieutenant, Twenty-fifth Missouri Volunteers.

Remarks. -It is always well enough to be posted on any question before rushing into public notice. We had the original order before us when making the statement we did in the "local" referred to by Mr. Hawley. General Loan asked General Schofield by letter if a man "can be held as a soldier in the Twenty-fifth Regiment Missouri Volunteers notwithstanding his discharge from the Thirteenth Regiment by virtue of the order of General McClellan?"

The following is the reply:

Special Orders, Numbers 29. -Men having been duly mustered out of service and discharged are freed from the contract entered into on being mustered into service.