i; 



SURGEONS KKPOKTS ILLINOIS SKVENTII DISTRICT. 445 



luitteiit fever. I do uot, however, suppose that all tliese skin-diseases proceed Cioin this cause, but 

 1 believe that many of tliein do. 



in the exatiiiiiatiou of drafted men, substitutes, and recruits, I found that live men were exam- 

 ined and rejected for tl)e loss of teeth ; and in the examination of enrolled men a])pl,ving for exemp- 

 tion, 1 lind that fourteen were exempted for the same cause, making in all nineteen cases. It is a 

 nu ions, if not an interesting, fact, that all of thepi but one were rejected for the loss of upper teeth; 

 and this one was for the loss of both upper and lower teeth. Why the loss of npi)ei' teeth should 

 be so mu(;h more frequent than of the lower, 1 am unable even to suggest. I merely mention it as 

 a curious fact. 



1 observe also that varicocele was more frequent on the left than on the right side. 1 rarely 

 met with a case on the right side. 1 mention this only to confirm the statement so often made by 

 the authorities. 



I found hernia rather more frequent on the right side ; but I do not know that it was so much 

 so as to induce the opinion that there is a greater predisposition to it on that side than on the other. 

 In twenty-eight cases, fourteen were on the right side, nine on the left, four were double, and in one 

 the side was not mentioned. 



I met with but one case of the rare malformation of hypospadia, and not one of ej)ispadia. 



I am requested to give my ''views in reference to the different sections of paragraph 85. Ee- 

 vised Regulations of the Provost Marshal-General's Bureau, and what changes I would recom- 

 mend.'' 



I do not know of any changes that I could recommend ; but there might, in my opinion, be 

 some slight additions made. For instance, I had nine cases that I could not properly bring under 

 any section in paragraph 85. I therefore think there should be a "miscellaneous section" placed 

 in the blank forms for such cases. A few such anomalous cases will occur, and the surgeon needs 

 a numbered section for them, so that he may jdace the number against the name exempted, in the 

 right-hand margin of his record-book and in the monthly report of drafted men, as well as in 

 Tables Nos. 1 and 2 of the final report of the draft. 



1 would remark as to epilepsy that the Revised Regulations require that lor this disability 

 the man should be rejected; but they make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the board 

 to do so in many cases, as they require "the duly-attested affidavit of a i)liysician in good standing, 

 who has attended him (the epileptic man) in the disease within six mouths immediately preceding 

 his examination by the board." Now, this disease being one generally considered incurable, it is 

 not common to have a physician in attendance. The family-physician, even, will raiely see the 

 man during the fit. We have had difficulty in these cases. I therefore think that the evidence 

 of other reliable persons should be received by the board as sufficient. 



There are no provisions made in the Revised Regulations for the exemjition or rejection of 

 asthmatic subjects. It appears to \\w that this should be done. It is known tliat there are uuiuy 

 cases of this disease, where the subjects are for the greater part of the time engaged in their usual 

 business, apparently in good health, but who are, notwithstanding, subject to frequent and severe 

 j)ar(>x.\sms of the disease, which would entirely disqualify them for military service, nearly or quit*?, 

 as much as epilepsy, in many cases. A nuudier were before the board in whom no trace of the 

 disease could be discovered at the time, some of whom, I am satisfied, were subject to frequent 

 severe attacks. These men proposed to procure the affidavits of their family-physicians and their 

 neighbors to show how badly they often suffered with these paroxysms, but even if they had done 

 so the regulations made no provision for their exemption under any head that I know of. It could 

 hardly come under section 5 of paragraph 85, "organic disease of internal organs," unless it was 

 the result of organic disease of the heart, which is rarely the case. However, the surgeon who 

 drew up the various sections of paragraph 85 may have considered that section 5 embraced asthma. 

 But, even if this is the view to be taken of it, when the asthmatic subject presents himself to the 

 b0(»rd for examination between the paroxysms, and with no penseptible symi)toms of the existence 

 of the disease, the surgeon could not exem|)t him, except from his own statements, which of course 

 would be insufficient, and the regulations make no provisions for the introduction of other evidence. 

 I think bad cases of asthma should exempt, and that the regulations should be amended so that 



