.MTAzNA.NjkyOTI

1872 C.O. Ft.Davis Endorsent on extract of Inspection Report of Colonel A.Doubleday, Feby 19, 1872 reports irregularities at Fort Davis [red ink] 840 D.T. 72. Recd. D.T. March 5 1872. Respectfully referred to the Commanding Officer Fort Davis whose attention is called to the irregularities referred to. In future he will please to have them corrected and to utterly break up the scandalous practice customary at Fort Davis, of punishing men at the guard house at the request of their immediate commanders, without notifying either the men themselves or the Officer of the Day of the offence committed. He is also informed that arbitrary or illegal punishment will not be tolerated in any command, and the Commanding Officer will be held responsible that they will not be resorted to. By Command of General Augur (sgd) J.A. Augur Actg. Asst.Adjt. Genl.

C.O.Fort Clark Continuation on letter of Comdg. Officer Co. A 25 Inf. dated Fort Clark Aug. 3, 1871 reports no post found or property was transferred to him &. [red ink] 527 D.T. 71 EB 3/334, 3/410, 3/849 Received back from C.O.Fort Davis, March 7, 72 with following endorsements.

Headquarters, Fort Davis, Texas February 27, 1872 Respectfully returned. In reference to the 10th endorsement hereon I respectfully invite the attention of the Actg Asst. Adjt. General of the Department to enclosed letter dated Hqrs Fort Davis, Aug. 15,1871, in which I have given my reasons for not permitting the library to be divided and the reason why there was no money in the Post Treasury. I do not consider that Co. A had any claim to the books and property it brought to the Post, even any other Co. as it was Post Property and never belonged to the Company. As to the 11th and 12th endorsement I have only to say that there is no question about Capt. French being at the Post on the 11th day of July and that he was in command of his Company. By an order issued on the 10th of July, he with his company was relieved from duty at the post, to take effect on the 11th, for that reason I did not consider him liable for any detail or duty on that day, unless in case of an emergency. He was not therefore detailed as a member of the Council of Administration. I may have been in error for not detailing him for this