In the process of transmitting evidence regarding the extraordinary issue of rations to Indians, the former commandant explained to Calhoun that a man named Abraham Markle with whom Chunn had quarreled had made the accusations. Markle served as a major in the Canadian Volunteers during the War of 1812 and later moved to the Fort Harrison area with his family in 1816. As a result of his military service, he received “several quarter sections of land which were located in the vicinity of Fort Harrison.” 8 The close proximity to the military fortification troubled Chunn, who refused to allow Markle to build on the property. If the fort came under attack, the commandant did not want to give an enemy a structure to hide behind. 9 Chunn felt the accusations made by Markle had impugned his reputation; he planned to sue him for slander. The former commandant asked Calhoun for copies of all the correspondence the Secretary of War had received from Markle to prepare for a lawsuit. 10
      Judging from the extant documents, Chunn reacted quite irrationally to the presence of Abraham Markle on Fort Harrison’s land. Fort Harrison stood at the approximate center of 1,375 acres of land reserved for the use of the U.S. military. According to the War Department, it was quite possible that Markle had occupied the land close to the fort before the General Land Office could be notified of the military installation. 11 Markle continued to make his case by writing letters to the federal government. Chunn explained to the Secretary of War that Markle refused to relinquish his claim to land at Fort Harrison unless the government gave him title to approximately 418 acres of valuable land in the newly settled Terre Haute just two and one half miles south of Fort Harrison. Chunn refused to grant Markle land in either location assuming it was just a “speculative scheme.” Chunn informed the Secretary of War that, “I further feel it my duty to prevent the government from being speculated on, but more especially by a Canadian refugee.” 12 Chunn even wrote letters to John Calhoun alleging that Markle had “absconded with the inheritance of an orphan.” 13 A quarrel ensued and ended with Chunn caning Markle. After that the two men became enemies. 14
      Calhoun appointed Benjamin Parke, 15 U.S. District Court judge for the District of Indiana, and William Prince, 16 an Indian agent, to investigate “the causes of the extraordinary issues to the Indians” at Fort Harrison. Chunn repeatedly sent Calhoun letters written by prominent citizens, such as county clerks and governors, attesting to his good character. 17 He also began sending dispositions to the War Department that purported to establish that “fraud had been practiced by Mitchell Brouillet.” 18 William Prince was not persuaded by all Chunn’s character references and discarded all the commandant’s efforts to lay the blame on Brouillet or Thomas Posey, who served as Indian Agent during the period in question. 19
      Chunn had learned from the investigators, Parke and Prince, that his “character was considered at issue and that [his] conduct would be one of the principal subjects of their investigation.” This was simply more than Chunn could bear. He requested that a formal court of inquiry be set up to investigate his conduct. 20 During the long period of time before the court-martial began, Chunn challenged Markle to a duel. Chunn asked his friend Lewis Cass to handle the arrangements, but Markle refused to be drawn into such a confrontation and had a warrant issued for the arrest of Chunn and Cass. 21 Cass then challenged Markle to a duel and both Chunn and Cass found themselves indicted by a grand jury. Nothing resulted from the challenge or the indictment. On June 23, 1820, however, John T. Chunn posted a public notice that upbraided Markle for not agreeing to his gentlemanly challenge and called him, “a Liar, a Scoundrel, and a Cowardly Poltroon.” 22 After that the story disappears from the public record. 23
      John Chunn’s court-martial concluded in July of 1820. John Calhoun reported to President James Monroe that Major Chunn had been acquitted of the charges against him. Despite the acquittal, Calhoun considered the verdict improper and characterized Chunn’s behavior at Fort Harrison as “highly censurable.” It seemed, Calhoun reported, that Chunn’s defense focused on a single point. Chunn maintained that the Indian interpreter, Mitchell Brouillet, acting on behalf of the absent agent, Thomas Posey, was solely responsible for the “enormous issue” of rations to the Indians. Calhoun wrote, “I am so perfectly satisfied that the government has been imposed on, that I have refused to give a credit to the contractor and have directed the [Second] Comptroller [Richard Cutts] to write to him to refund a part of the advances, which have been made to him.” 24 In other words, although the government had paid Hugh Glenn, the supplier in Vincennes, for some of the goods he provided for dispersal among the Indians at Fort Harrison, the United States planned to hold Glenn responsible for the fraud perpetrated by Mitchell Brouillet. Even though the government still owed Hugh Glenn a balance of $6,971.26, the Treasury had been directed to ask for a return of the $37,792.76 that had already been paid for the year’s worth of rations provided by Glenn.

[Continued...]