surgeons' reports IOWA FIRST DISTRICT. 459 



tlic ticlil, at their sport-, antl often make exhibitions of their agility, and demand a trial of strength. 

 They, moreover, appear so anxious to take a part in the fight that it retpiires philosoi)hy to resist 

 their entreaties. Partly stimulated by the bounty, elated with the' novelty of the sensation, per- 

 haps moved by aaibition, delighted to get away from the restraints of home, and, doubtless, often 

 impelled by a sentiment of patriotism, and a desire to do their share to preserve the Government, 

 they urge their claims vehemently. All these considerations regarded, it is not wonderful that 

 men yield, and accept the decision of the law " that the declaration of the recruit shall he conclusive as 

 to hin aije.^' 



There are petty annoyances that attend every public calling ; not to enumerate them, let it be 

 said that the chief obstacle in the way of the discharge of the delicate duties of this position was 

 the regulation requiring the surgeon to present each case examined to the " board of enrollment for 

 its decision in the premises." (Circular No. 5o, July 22, 1SC3.) It is contended that the surgeon 

 should not recommend, but that he should decide every case as to its fitness for military duty. 

 This should be his exclusive business. It is well that the examinations should be conducted 

 in the "presence of the board of enrollment;" the provost-marshal and commissioner should 

 exercise a most rigid scrutiny of the surgeon's official acts; and he should be ii,ade personally 

 responsible. But when he decides that a man should be exempted or not exempted, that a drafted 

 man should be held to service or discharged, that a recruit is lit or unfit for military duty, as far 

 oidy, of course, as the physical examination is concerned, they should have no right to over- 

 rule his decision. The recommendation of the surgeon should not be acquiesced in, as a matter of 

 courtesy, by his associates of the board, but he should have power to decide the case as his legal 

 right. 



The provost-marshal decides as to who are deserters and si)ies, puts them in prison, and dis- 

 poses of them without any voice from the other members of the board ; and this is as it should be, 

 for it is his special duty and study, and he has a number of otheers to help him in this work. In 

 like manner, it is the special duty and study of the surgeon to decide as to the fitness of men fur 

 military service ; and the others should have uo right to make an adverse decision. Consider what 

 a remarkable position the surgeon must necessarily occupy iu all those cases which are rejected by 

 hfm but accepted by the other members of the board. For example: the two members by their 

 vote dechire a recruit fit for service whom the surgeon, as an expert, has declared unfit; but before 

 the recruit can be mustered at general rendezvous, the enlistment-papers must be signed, and the 

 surgeon, over his signature, "certifies on honor that the soldier is free from all bodily defects 

 or mental infirmity that would in any way disqualify him from performing the duties of a soldier.'' 

 In other words, he signs a certificate which he does not believe to be correct, and he must do it, for 

 without his signature the papers would be incom|)lete, It is the duty of the Provost-Marshal's 

 Bureau to "put men into the field," but it should be the prime duty of the medical staff of the 

 department to decide as to their physical fitness ; and uo person should have power to overrule 

 his decision. 



The most absurd and ridiculous farce enacted since the organization of the Provost-Marshal's 

 Bureau was the authorizing and appointing, by the Adjutant-General's Office, of a board of inspect- 

 ors at draft-rendezvous. This board was su])posed to be made up of the "best talent of the 

 medical corps." The object of its appointment was not appreciable by the nicest sense of surgeons 

 of boards of enrollment. They were nothing more nor less than a board of censors to decide upon 

 the medical and moral qualifications of surgeons of boards of enrollment. They were to inspect our 

 work ; and if they chose to differ with us, they rei)orted to headcpiartcrs, and surgeons were required 

 to give reasons why the expense of recruiting or drafting the man they had rejected should not be 

 taken from their pay. nap|)ily, the vocation of these elegant gentlemen, thus exercising a most 

 iusultingcensorship, received a death-blow by Circular No. 38, November 7, 1804, conveying the order 

 of the assistant adjutant-general that these boards of inspection should be governed by the same 

 rules and regulations iu their examinations of drafted men as those prescribed for the govern luent of 

 boards of enrollment. They did not, prior to this order, confine themselves to the requirements of 

 paragrai)h 85; soon after its issuance, they retired quietly to the shades of private life. As an 

 orgauiy.ation— for no fault is found with the individual members — these boards were a disgrace to 



