.MTAzNA.NjkzNTA

Sworn to subscribed before me the 15 day of January AD 1875 [Seal] (Sgd) Sam'l [?] Mills Notary Public

2nd Endorsement Returned to Actg. Asst. Inspector General D.T. Jany 29, 1875

3rd Endorsement Office A A Insp. Genl. D.T. February 11 1875 Respectfully returned to Asst. Adj. Genl. D.T. report enclosed. (1 encl, copy of Report entered below) (Sgd) G. B. Russell Capt. 9 Inf. A.A. I. Genl.

4 Endorsement Respectfully returned to Adj Genl of the Army, and attention invited to the accompanying report of Capt. G. B. Russell, Actg. Asst. Insp. Genl D.T. - There is no question as to the fact that Lt. Floyd did sell or dispose of a Spencer Carbine as alleged in within Statement of J. L. Humfreville, but it is doubtful if the Carbine belongs to the Government. If it did, I am satisfied from all I heard in the case that Lt. Floyd was not aware of it. It would seem that the Carbine was claimed by the late Lt. Vincent, 9 Cav. killed at the Howards Wells affair in April 1872, and into possession of Lt. Floyd from him on the supposition that it was private property. The best evidence of this - amongst other - is that Lt. Floyd traded off the Carbine publicly in the presence of officers and men of his company, and his company commander, which he would hardly have done, if he had any reason to suppose it public property. It would appear also that Humfreville supposed so at the time else why did he make no report, nor take any action in the case which he naturally would have done - at least his duty required it of him - had he seen his subordinate selling arms belonging to the Government. But nothing is said about it until after Lt. Floyd appears as a witness in charges preferred agains Humfreville - even then he makes no written charge agains him, but makes vain allegations and holds them in terrorum over the head of Lt. Floyd during the time he is witness on his trial. After the propagation of his sentence, Humfreville states verbally to Capt. Russell the Actg Asst. Insp. Genl. the substance of these charges and is informed he must put charges in writing, and give names of witnesses that the case may be investigated. He fails to do so at the time he subsequently sends the charges to the Adj't. General.

I believe from all I can learn of the case that Lt. Floyd is wholly innocent of any intentional wrong in the matter, even if any wrong is done, which is very doubtful. {?He ink blot?] is a quiet inoffensive officer correct in all his habits, and has been subject to such an amount