.MTAzNA.NjkzNTI

consequence of such derangement of mind he resigned. Attention is invited to the fact that the alleged sale took place in Nov 1872, and no report as far as I am informed, was made of the same by Capt Humfreville until he had been dismissed the service (more than a year after). As to the Statement made by Mr. Henry Warren (not signed) it, being merely hearsay, is not considered testimony, and the statement cannot be investigated properly by me, unless some officers should be ordered to Weatherfords, Tx. to obtain statement of Bell Bros and Mr. "Tige" Littlefield, and without the detailed statement of J. S. Humfreville and Amelato Montez (whose whereabouts is unknown)

2nd. As to the charge, that Lt. Floyd "Knowingly made false accusations against Cap. J. S. Humfreville, charging him with drunkeness &c in Dec 1872 I am unable to fully investigate this allegation, in this city, but have the honor to state the records show that the matter of the charges against Capt. Humfreville, was fully investigated by Capt. C.D.Emory 9 Inf. Judge Adv. of this Dept., and the result of his investigation finally forwarded to the Adjt Genl USA on the 21st of Feby 1874. Finally, holding the opinion, that Lt. Floyd intended no wrong to the Gov't or injustice to Capt. Humfreville, in either of the alleged transactions, no further action is recommended. If it is desired, however, that the testimony of all the witnesses mentioned in the accompanying papers be taken, orders are respectfully requested with authority also to allow Lt. Floyd to present such testimony in rebuttal as he may deem proper. Very respy your obt Srvt. (Sgd) G. B. Russell Capt 9 Inf. A.D.C. A. A.I. G. D.T. (marked 1/1255 DT 75)

A. Gen. U.S.A. thro Hq M.D. Mo 192 Continuation of EB 2/175, '75 (780 DT 75) 3 Encl. (Dup Vouchers & copy of Ls 586 DT 74 Received back from C. O. Post of Austin, Tx. Mar 1 '75 with the following Enc's 3rd Endorsement Austin, Tx Feby 26 1875

Respectfully ret'd to the C.O. Post of Austin, Tx. The enclosed a/c of Ward, Dewey & Co. was presented to me at Huntsville, Tx. last Oct. while at that place for the purpose of conducting military prisoners to Leavenworth, Kans. The prisoners were furnished with Soldiers clothing by the Q.M. Dept.with the exception of hats. The men had no hats except those worn by the convicts, which were the regular striped Penitentiary hats, upon enquiry I found out that in the case of other detachments of military prisoners leaving the penitentiary hats had been furnished by the lessees, and not wishing to conduct men through the country with convict hats, I requested Mr. Ward to give the men other hats. At first he refused to do so, but afterwards consented. Understanding that each man on leaving the prison was to be, or is, furnished with a suit of Clothing and [?] also