Congressional Edition Volume 5253 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1908 edition. Excerpt: ...Army." Now, I think vou stated that was a fact up to the night of that occurrence, that Its reputation was beyond reproach?--A. As far as I knew. Q. I read again: "Many of its old soldiers who had nothing to do with the raid must know something tangible as to identity of the criminals. If they do not disclose their knowledge, they should be made to suffer with others more guilty, as far as the law will permit." Do you recall what particular evidence you based that statement on?--A. It was simply an inference on my part. Q. From what?--A. Of my knowledge of company affairs of soldiers. Q. That was based exclusively on your service, the acquirements of the service?--A. Yes. Q. You had no positive evidence of any kind as an inspector, aside from your knowledge as an army officer that this was true?--A. I did not. Q. What I am trying to get at is this: There was nothing except your inference from the situation as a soldier, that they must know?--A. That is what I inferred. Q. There was nothing told you by any of the officers, the enlisted men, or by the people in the town that bore directly on that point?--A. There was not. Q. While we are speaking of the investigation, I want to ask, did you ever get anything from any of the enlisted men in your examination of them, that would authorize you to report that any particular individuals were guilty--I mean any particular individuals of the Twenty-fifth Infantry, stationed there at Fort Brown?--A. Only because of their position. Q. You didn't eatch the whole question. (Keporter reads question.)--A. The only thing that I can recollect of was the sergeant of the guard telling me that he had this call sounded. Q. Now, then, if that call was sounded, as a matter of fact, under the direct orders...