NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE Bethesda, Maryland COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE COURT MARTIAL AND FINDINGS OF THE PRESIDENT, IN THE CASE OF ASSISTANT SURGEON JAMES SIMONS, WITH OTHER EVIDENCE. AFFIDAVIT OF JUDGE CONWAY. Washington, D. C, February 28, 1856. I am informed that Dr. Simons, late Surgeon in the United States Army, has recently been declared by a Court Martial to have left his post without justification during the prevalence of the cholera at Fort Riley last August, and in consequence has been dismissed by the President from the public service . Although but a casual acquaintance of Dr. Simons, I yet deem it my duty under the circumstances to submit a word or two of testimony. I was present at Fort Riley during the period of the visitation of cholera, and when the ravages of that fearful scourge were at their height, and am, therefore, somewhat cognizant of the bearing of Dr. Simons under the trying circumstances of his condition. It is true that Dr. S. left the Fort during the continuance of the epidemic, but not until worn down by strenuous efforts to arrest its progress and himself one of its most helpless victims ; nor, I may add, until he had secured to those of his fellowsufferers who remained at the Fort, that medical attendance rendered necessary by the exigencies of their situation. At the time of the cholera, Doctor Simons was the only Surgeon at the Fort, and although I did not meet with him there, I was informed by those with whom I conversed, and who had been eye witness of his conduct, that his labors in responding to the demands of the sick, and the dying in every direction, day and night, were arduous and devoted, and almost without intermission. His exertions were said to have been excessive and such as were calculated to exhaust the energies of the strongest constitution. It was, therefore, concluded by A every body with whom I had occasion to speak after the reports of his illness had spread through the community that his sickness was due in a great degree to over exertion in the fulfilment of his pressing and extensive duties. I saw Doctor S. myself immediately after he had left the Fort. We were both on our way eastward at the same time. He passed me on the road in a carriage, add stopped at a house a few miles below. The carriage was filled with men, women and children, fleeing from the pestilence. When I reached this stopping place, I found the company resting themselves under the shade of some trees near the house. Doctor Simons was sitting down reposing on a pillow against a tree, and attended upon either side by a lady. I approached, spoke to him, and extended my hand ; he feebly presented his arm without uttering a word ; he appeared extremely debilitated ; his face was pale, emaciated and haggard, and his skin cold and clammy like that of one approaching dissolution ; he was to all appearance as sick a person as I ever beheld. I enquired of those around as to his case, and was told that he had been taken down by the epidemic, had employed the usual remedies, but seemed so far to have received no benefit from them. I felt convinced that his was one of the worst cases of cholera, and supposed he would be dead before night. It may also be proper for me to state, that Doctor Whitehorne, a well known practising physician, resident at the town of Juniata, in the neighborhood of the Fort, informed me that he had been sent for by Dr. Smith, and engaged to act as physician at the post during the absence of the former. The extraordinary result of the court martial in this case, as well as the action of the President thereon, have affected me with deep surprise. The facts as understood by those who were on the spot at the time of the alleged dereliction, seemed to place Doctor Simons above the slightest suspicion of a disposition to shrink from a brave and full performance of his duty. No one supposed him capable of entertaining such a disposition. His reputation was that of a man of tried courage, a man who in two wars, and in time of imminent peril, had displayed the greatest intrepidity. I cannot, therefore, but fear that some unfortunate and malign influence has presided over these strange proceedings — proceedings by which the public service has been deprived of a valuable officer and great injustice inflicted upon an exemplary man. Signed, M. F. Conwat. This twenty-ninth day of February, 1856, personally appeared before me, a Justice of the Peace for the City of Washington, D. C, Martin F. Conway, of the Territory of Kansas, and made oath to the truth of the statement of facts contained in the foregoing paper. Subscribed and sworn before Signed, John D. Clark. EXTRACT FROM A LETTER OF JUDGE CONWAY OF sth MAR. 1856. " Permit me to say in reply to your kind thanks for my testimony in regard to Dr. Simons, that neither Dr. S. nor any of his friends, are under the slightest obli- "'a .j-e Peabody Inst. of Balto, June 14 1927 3 gationsto me. I have simply told what it had accidentally fallen to my lot to know, and to have been able to serve the cause of truth and justice in so doing, is a source of gratification for which I myself, am profoundly grateful." With much respect, your obedient servant, Signed, M. F. Conway. To L. Gittings, Esq., Baltimore Fort Riley, Kansas Territory, March 8, 1856. Sir : — The non-acquittal of Doctor Simons, by the recent Court-Martial, has given me much pain, and elicits my strongest sympathy. Far from impugning, in the slightest degree, the high sense of duty and honor which I have every reason to believe actuated its members, I wish to state that I conscientiously believe his real case was beyond the reach of justice, and of existing evidence, which, if given, must have fully acquitted him. But he was quite alone and unsupported in all his misfortunes, and this causes his friends the deepest regret. For me, my confidence in Dr. Simons has in no way been impaired or weakened, not in the least degree. If he erred in leaving the post, this must pass for an error of judgment, not that he could have been useful in administering to the sick, for I am fully satisfied he was unable to do so, and from actual sickness and exhaustion. I have known him from his first entrance into the service, sixteen years since, and have served with him as much or perhaps more than any officer of the. army. I have served with him in peace and in war, in the field and in the garrison, and can truly say that I have never known him to commit any act which a high toned and honorable man would wish to conceal. The insinuations made by persons to whom Dr. Simons was an entire stranger, that he had feigned disease and resorted to medicines for any other purpose than for the preservation of his life, would have to be substantiated by evidence stronger than that of laborers or persons on the confines of our frontier garrison, none of whom are in the least accountable to any tribunal for their malicious acts. I, myself, have heard of facts sufficient to convince me that few men have been placed in as trying a position as he, and one, in fact, from which it were quite impossible to pass through unsullied. I can say, without exaggeration, that during all my long service with him, I have never known him, even under the strongest feelings of exultation, or in time of real danger, to depart from the rules of strict sobriety or gentlemanly deportment. Further, I know he entertains a natural repugnance to dissipation in any and all its forms; this he has hitherto often expressed to me when questioned touching his extreme abstemiousness. His character for sobriety is certainly established throughout the army, and is fully believed by all the officers of the post. To the manifest desires of his accusers to bring into question his motives in taking remedies which are said to be usual in cholera, I, in common with his friends, advised him upon legal and just grounds to object to such investigation, fully satisfied his character throughout the army was above suspicion. On this point I feel confident Dr. Simons could have met this or any other point touching his well established character with ease, and I now regret that it was not done, although not specifically charged or anticipated by him. I, in common with Dr. 4 Simons' friends, most deeply regret his great misfortunes. My confidence in him in every way is unshaken, and I feel it my individual duty to try and place his character before you in its proper and true light. Ever temperate, zealous, brave, highminded, and intelligent} he holds in my estimation all those high qualities which adorn both the gentleman and soldier, which combined with conscientious rectitude of conduct on his part, leaves nothing to regret save the wrongs and injustice of others. 1 have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, H. W. Merrill, Capt. 2d Drags. Brevet Maj. U.S.A. Lambert Gittings, Esq., Baltimore} Md. Port Riley, K. T., February 23. Sir: — I deem it a duty that I owe to the army as well as to Dr. Simons, to say that circumstances elicited since the adjournment of the Court Martial which recently assembled at this post for his trial, have come to light, which prove that his whole conduct during the epidemic which prevailed in July and August of last year; has been that of a high-toned gentleman and a faithful and attentive officer. I would state one fact which bears with much Weight on the conduct of Dr. Simons. The Rev. Chaplain, Mr. Clarkson, the chief witness for the prosecution, is known to have admitted before credible witnesses, that he was with Dr. Simons on the night of the 2d of August, and that it was his opinion that Dr. Simons was ill, and that such would have been his declaration before the Court, had a question to the effect been put to him. He further states that, though lie does not know from his own knowledge, or from Major Ogden himself, that it was his desire that Dr. Simons should not attend or prescribe for him, yet, he was convinced that such Was the fact, from information from his friend, Mr. Sawyer. There are other circumstances to the advantage of Dr. Simons, which were not and could not be brought out in evidence, but which, 1 am satisfied, would place his conduct in an entirely new light j and vindicate his hitherto untarnished name. That Dr. Simons was placed in circumstances of peculiar difficulty and embarrassment, is evident to every individual at this post. That he was surrounded by persons inimical to him, and who were ready to adopt the prejudices and opinions of others, does not admit of a doubt. Without a friend upon whom he could rely for advice'— worn out and exhausted by forty-eight hours' continuous labor, and conscious that his every act Was maliciously scrutinized through a medium which could admit of no sympathy or fellowship, I can well imagine the conflicting elements which tortured his mind during that dreadful night of the 2d August, as in the solitude of his own home he listened to the wailing of his dying child, the earnest entreaty of his wife, to take the advice of Mr. Clarkson and others, however doubtful its sincerity, and remove them beyond contagion, and to seek at the same time that repose it is universally acknowledged was so necessary to a further prosecution of his own labors. Under these circumstances it would require 5 a better understanding of the workings of the hunlan heartj than such witnesses as were brought forward by the prosecution, to divine or describe the motives of a person of the Doctor's exalted character. Before he left his post on the morning of the 3d of August, a physician had arrived— that he remained from his post for several days was admitted, but the arrival of an officer of the line with another physician who had been specially sent for his relief, relieved him from the necessity of abandoning his own wife and child $ who were suffering with the disease. I have forborne to dwell upon the high character Doctor Simons has hitherto sustained in the army. It would ill become me to comment upon his professional skill and reputation~-upon those points there can be no better judge than yourself. My object is to present you his case in a point of view which appears to have been inadmissible before the Court; and if in doing so, I have removed from your mind a false impression, if such exists s and thus restore to your corps, one who has ever been an ornament to it, my task will have been accomplished. I am, Sir, very respectfully your obedient servant. H. H. SIBLEYj Captain and Brigade Major Dragoons. Brevet Brigadier General Thomas Lawson, Surgeon General U. S. A., Washington City Baltimore, March 22, 1856. Dear Sir : — I have read and considered with great care a copy of the record of the proceedings of the Court Martial in the case of Assistant Surgeon Simons, lately held at Fort Riley, and am clearly of opinion that the findings of the Court, in so far as they were adverse to the accused, were erroneous. In my judgment, the several charges and specifications Were not only not sustained by the evidence, but the defence to them, each and all, Was singularly triumphant, and, consequently, instead of condemnation and dismissal from the service, the accused Was entitled to a prompt and honorable acquittal. I am, dear sir, yours respectfully, J. Johnson. Lambert Gittings, Esq. Baltimore, March 8, 1856. Dear Sir :—ln: — In reply to your note of the 3rd inst., I have to say, that I have examined the record of the proceedings of the Court Martial, held at Fort Riley, in the case of Assistant Surgeon Simons, and after a careful analysis of the testimony applicable to the various charges and specifications upon which he was tried, am clear in the conviction that he is not only not shown to be guilty of any one of them, but that his vindication upon them all is full and complete. The reasons for this opinion, as you are aware, were submitted by me to the President, who, after mature deliberation, has arrived at a different conclusion, and given effect to a finding, which, in my judgment, does very great injustice to a brave and meritorious officer. 6 It is proper to add, that in what I have done touching the case, I have acted as the friend, and not as the counsel of Dr. Simons. I am, very respectfully, dear sir, your obedient servant, John Nelson. Lambert Gittings, Esq. To Lambert Gittings, Esq. : My Dear Sir : — I have received your letter in which you propound to me some inquiries about Dr. Simons' case, and request my opinion upon them, as founded upon the record of his trial. Feeling a warm interest in the result of this case, as your neighbor and friend, and not having in any way, then or now, assumed the relation of counsel, I carefully examined the record of the trial before the President's approval of the sentence was finally made, and I have again since then (having obtained a copy of the record) studiously reviewed it. This last examination has served to confirm the first, and the views that I hold upon this case are as decided as I have ever held in my professional experience of a good many cases, before civil and some before military Courts ; and the same views that I now hold I presented to the consideration of the President before he approved the proceedings of the Court, and I believe they were, for the most part, also presented to him by others as disinterested as myself, and whose opinions deserved more weight than mine. You ask me if I think the evidence sustains the final action upon the case, or the findings of the Court ? Before replying to this, I must state that Dr. Simons was tried upon two charges, both substantially founded upon the same state of facts. These charges were, in substance, for neglect of duty in not attending to the sick, and in leaving Fort Riley> where he was stationed as a medical officer, during the prevalence of the cholera at that post in the summer of 1855. The accusation was exclusively for offending in his character of medical officer, notwithstanding some members of the Court (and perhaps all who pronounced against him) seemed by their questions to witnesses, to be also accusing him, as if he was the commanding officer of the post, (which I think he could not be by Bth section of Act of Feb. 11th, 1847.) There were several specifications under these two charges. The Court found him guilty on the most of them — upon all the graver specification — and guilty upon both charges. The President, upon a review of the case, however, reversed the Court on all of its principal findings, and only sustained and approved the unfavorable finding, and judgment upon the first charge, and first specification under it. In other words, Dr. Simons has been convicted of " neglect of duty, to the prejudice of good order and military discipline," by having left the Fort, and remained away for six days, while disease (the cholera) was prevailing there. It is proper to say in this place, that at the trial the Doctor objected before the Court, that one of the accusations against him had no legal foundation, and that if guilty, it involved no breach of duty on his part, and he presented the most convincing 7 authorities to support his objection. But the Court overruled him, and proceed to try him upon that specification. Among other errors, the President corrected this, and decided that the Court had also tried him upon other specifications equally untenable in point of law. I think it was very unfortunate for the accused, that he was without professional counsel to aid him and to conduct his defence, and also that a Judge Advocate should have been ordered to prosecute the case, who was a near relative of one of the ladies, who, with her children, died at the post, and for neglecting whom was one of the accusations against him . The Court found the accused guilty also of the second charge, and under it was bound by the 83rd article of war, to sentence him to be dismissed. It had no discretion to inflict a milder sentence. But the President has reversed this decision of the Court, and yet inflicted the same punishment. The conviction of the milder offences and which did not require the same extreme punishment, is yet visited with it. So that, in effect, the President, while reversing and removing the grounds upon which the Court dismissed the Doctor, (as it is fair to presume,) and deciding that their conviction of him, on the gravest accusation, was wrong, yet carried out and executed the punishment appropriated by law, to the offence of which the Court had convicted him. It seems to me it must even be a matter of painful doubt to a just and sensitive mind, whether the Court, if it had merely convicted Doctor Simons to the same extent the President has done, would have applied so extreme a sentence. It is well known to military men and others, that there are precedents in the War Department, and it is understood that the present Chief Magistrate has approved and followed them, which, in such a case, would require the accused to be discharged from punishment altogether, or to mitigate it, where it was uncertain, as in this case, whether the Court would have dismissed the officer for the milder offence, when the law did not so command and require. It is conceived that the President's powers to execute the sentence in such a case, after a trial by a competent Court, and upon a review of its proceedings, do not emanate from his official discretion, or from any absolute and unlimited source, but from the jurisdiction of the Court, and its powers by law to inflict it, and his to review and approve or disapprove its proceedings; and upon the fact appearing by the record that the Court has inflicted it, with the grounds upon which it rests. This does not appear in Doctor Simons' case — and I think it a fair presumption upon what the Court did, and the grounds of its action, that it would not have sentenced him to be dismissed upon a conviction on the first charge and first specification under it. But, in my judgment, the injustice, not only of this severe sentence, but also of his conviction upon this charge, appears plainly upon an examination of the evidence. I say it will appear clearly so to all those who think that an army surgeon may be justified equally with any other officer in leaving his post under some state of facts. 8 But, on the other hand, it must be admitted, that those who think nothing — no possible state of facts — can justify a surgeon in leaving his post while disease is there, and that it is " his duty to die there" — all such will approve at least of the conviction of Dr. Simons, because he did leave his post, and always admitted it. And I must think that this stern, harsh view of a surgeon's duty, under military law, was taken by the Court, and perhaps also by the President. I think this is the solution of his case ; and if this view of the law of medical duty be correct, then nothing — not a word — can he said in the Doctor's defence. His friends must acquiesce, and only lament that he ever attached himself to a service and jurisdiction where such maxims and rules can prevail. But I presume to believe that not many persons will be found to agree upon this severe rule of even military law, and to all such Dr. Simons' justification addresses itself in the most conclusive way. The ground of this justification was extreme sickness and debility, and utter consequent inability to discharge any duty as a medical man. Dr. Simons did most faithfully perform his duties, (and the President, in his published opinion, admits this,) during the most fatal and extensive ravages of the disease ; and not until he was himself attacked by it, and worn out by incessant labor and vigil, both by day and night ; having no one at all skilled in medicine to aid him ; and after he had reported himself to the commanding officer as utterly incompetent for further duty, and that officer believing such report, had acted upon it, and sent for medical aid; and not until a competent physician had arrived at the post, and been placed in charge of the sick and the hospital ; I say, it was not until after these occurrences that Dr. Simons left the post. The evidence shows that he could not have found repose, though in his sick bed, at the post, from the calls of the sick and dying. He felt it was his duty to try and restore his health, that he might be able again, as soon as possible, to combat the disease. In his then sick and prostrate condition, to remain would have been to impose additional duty on others, already too severely tasked. Besides, he had advised, at the first appearance of the cholera at the post, that all should leave the infected place, and only did in his own case, what he had (and every other physician would have advised) should be done, with respect to every other person at the post, to leave it for a healthier atmosphere. He but followed the universal medical treatment of this terrible malady ; but with this difference, that he remained faithful to duty until worn out and attacked by the disease, he thought he then had the common right of humanity — the right to preserve life for himself, his wife and children — his country's service, and whoever may decide to the contrary, I for one will support him in the assertion of this right. I say without hesitation, that the evidence of these facts above stated, as presented by the record of his trial, is conclusive. Not less than seven or eight highly respectable witnesses testify to this effect, and two of them were very unfriendly witnesses ; and in addition to the evidence in the record, I have read the depositions of two highly respectable and very intelligent persons, Mr. Conway, (personally well known to me) and Mr. Bowen, to the same effect. It is quite impossible to doubt 9 for a moment that Dr. Simons was a very sick man, suffering from diarrhoea and other decided symptoms of cholera, and was also worn out by labor and loss of sleep, and was consequently, before, at the time, and after leaving the Fort, wholly incompetent to perform his duties, or any duty whatever. Several of the witnesses testify that they thought he would certainly die; and they parted from him with that expectation, so sick did he appear to them. He was carried (as the evidence shows) unable to sit up or support himself, in a carriage to " the Mission," the nearest place where he could find proper treatment and nursing, where he remained with his wife and children (one of whom was also very ill at the time, and barely escaped death from the terrible contagion.) The Doctor remained at this place until he was sufficiently recovered to return to the post, which he did after six days absence, and resumed his duties that had been in the meantime performed by two competent, skilful physicians, — one of them an Army Surgeon. These are the facts of the case bearing upon the justification and defence set up and established by Dr. Simons before the Court, aud I think it was a sufficient defence and an honorable one. You request me to say " whether Dr. Simons failed to prove his justification of sickness, and whether, when the Judge Advocate proposed to select it, he (the Doctor) objected to his doing so?" I have already replied to the first branch of this inquiry. I think it quite clear by the record, that the Judge Advocate was of the opinion that the accused had proved his justification, else he would have proposed and insisted before the Court that he should be permitted " to rebut it." It seems to me that to propose to rebut a matter of evidence is an admission that proof has been given of that which is to be rebutted. ' ' The Judge Advocate stated to the Court that he should endeavor to rebut the evidence produced on the part of the defence, that illness was the cause of the departure of Dr. Simons," &c. This is the language of the record at page 153. And so I must consider that, in the opinion of the Judge Advocate, as well as upon the effect of the testimony, (which to the point of justification was not contradicted by a single witness, as the Court refused to hear any rebutting proof,) that the justification of absence by reason of sickness, was fully maintained. As I have before stated, I presume the Court refused to hear evidence to rebut the justification, on the distinct ground that, though established clearly as it was, yet in consideration of military law, it could not be allowed to prevail. The Court, as well as the Judge Advocate, doubtless believed it had been established by Dr. Simons, and it is a great mistake to assert to the contrary. I do not find anything in the record to show that Dr. Simons objected to the investigation of his justification. The Judge Advocate proposed to introduce by way of evidence what Dr. Simons and his friends thought amounted to matter for a substantive distinct charge against him; and inasmuch as ho had not been notified of it before, he objected, and on this ground the Court sustained him. is 10 But it must be clearly understood that he did not object to evidence rebutting his justification. In express terms he stated, " The Judge Advocate may prove I was not sick or enfeebled." See Court paper, No. 7. Thus consenting to and not objecting, as it has been most erroneously supposed he did to the admissibility of the evidence offered by the prosecution to rebut his defence. Every one acquainted with judicial proceedings will at once see that it was proper so to confine the evidence to the charges upon which the accused had been arraigned, and to the issues raised upon them. If an inference unfavorable to Dr. Simons has been, or may be drawn, by any one, from the statement, that, " he objected to the investigation of the justification set up by himself," such an inference is not warranted by the rules of law, any more than by the facts in the record. It is quite clear that no inference can be made from evidence that has been ruled out, or rejected by the Court, and equally so that none can be made against a party objecting to such evidence by reason of such objection. But on the contrary the rules of evidence strictly prohibit such inferences. If Dr. Simons committed an error in objecting that a new charge, on which he had not been arraigned, and of which he had no notice whatever, ought not to be obliquely presented for the first time in the shape of evidence against him, then the Court by approving his objection fell into the same error. Now I think if there is any blame to be bestowed, it falls with more justice upon the Court than the accused. But I think it too clear for doubt, that both the Court and the accused were right in this. As the President saw fit to reverse and disapprove of all the principal findings of the Court in this case, either of the law or the facts, and thus in effect destroyed the sanction and authority of its proceedings, it is much to be regretted that he felt it to be his duty to confirm its harsh sentence, which according to his own decision must be considered as being founded upon much misconception and error. The President informed me that the infliction of the sentence in this case was one of the most painful and reluctant duties he had been called on to perform. He bore testimony from his personal knowledge, in my interviews with him, to the gallantry that had distinguished Dr. Simons' service on the field of battle, in the most exposed situations where he was wounded while performing his professional duties during the Mexican War, and he stated that he was fully satisfied, his personal and professional character was one of the most exemplary degree. I must be allowed in conclusion to say, that I believe some very unfortunate errors or misapprehensions have had an undue part in separating from the Army an officer and a gentleman, who by the common and united report of all who knew him, and most of those who have served with him, is possessed of the highest merit, and has in every situation established, by a public service of now nearly seventeen years, a character for gallantry, for professional skill and fidelity, for humanity and uniform good habits and example from the first day he entered the service of his country. I strongly advise you to cause the record of his trial with all the accompanying Court papers to be printed for distribution among the officers of the army and others. 11 This will be the fairest, and in my judgment, the most efficient mode of relieving the wrong and injustice he has suffered, as I presume to think all who will read his trial with an impartial spirit will easily perceive on which side truth and justice lies, and there will be preserved to Dr. Simons, what is yet left to him — his good name — unsullied. I am very truly your friend and obd't s'v't, Baltimore, March 15, 1856. H. May. Fort Riley, Kansas Territory, Feb. 24th, 1856. Brev. Brig. Gen. Thomas Lawson, Surg'n Gen., U. S. A. Sir : — The numerous friends of Doctor Simons at this post, feeling solicitous that the chief of his department should be correctly informed upon certain points connected with the prevalence of cholera at Fort Riley during the last summer, I have been requested to address you in the hope that the expression of their opinions, based upon facts and circumstances which have come to their knowledge, and which did not appear in evidence before the Court, may disabuse your mind and the minds of his brother officers of the corps, of any unfavorable impressions against him ; in this hope I cordially sympathise. When the six companies of the 2d Dragoons arrived at Fort Riley, the officers were much distressed to find their former friend and associate the subject of rumors, prejudicial to his person and professional character. Their former knowledge of Dr. Simons, led them to believe that the tongue of slander had been busy with his name, that his character had been maliciously assailed, and his conduct grossly misrepresented. The evidence elicited before the Court, to which they were attentive and deeply interested listeners, confirmed the impression that great injustice had been done to his fair fame, and with the most friendly anxiety sustained by hope, they have watched for the arrival of every mail, trusting that it would bring the welcome tidings that the Court of distinguished officers, before whom he had been arraigned would vindicate his character and restore him to the army with unsullied reputation. A review of the circumstances as related by eye witnesses, makes it clear that during the prevalence of the cholera at Fort Riley, Doctor Simons was subjected to a very sore trial. With health and strength unimpaired, the medical man can look with calmness upon the ravages of the most hideous pestilence ; but there is a limit to human endurance, and that limit seems to have been reached in his case. There are moments too when the bravest heart feels the need of sympathy and support. Doctor Simons stood alone, without sympathy, and without hearing the encouraging voice of a single brother officer, in the midst of a frightful epidemic, and breasting a storm of prejudice which had been raised against him. There cannot be a doubt that Doctor Simons was exhausted by untiring devotion to his duties ; that he was forty-eight hours without rest ; that he was surrounded by enemies deeply sympathising with a favorite chief who had conceived a prejudice against him, who had expressed a want of confidence in his professional skill, who had even treated him with indignity, when waiving all considerations except such as arise in the mind of 12 the physician when duty is before him, the Doctor had requested him to command his services, if he could be of any benefit to him. As an additional evidence that Doctor Simons was exhausted by the faithful performance of his duties, and very sick,- it is well understood that the Chaplain (a witness for the prosecution) paid him a visit, and seeing his feeble condition, tendered him the consolations of religion, spoke of the fatal nature of the disease, the absolute necessity of his having repose, and of his being too much exhausted to render assistance to the sick. His friends then cannot but believe that the Doctor was worn out by fatigue, and prostrated by sickness : that he left his post only when incapacitated for further exertion, not however, until a physician had been employed to take charge of the sick. His friends regret that he did not meet the prosecution upon the testimony proposed to be introduced, to prove that his disability resulted from the improper use of opium and brandy.* It is my individual opinion that the prosecution would have failed of proof; that a full investigation would have resulted, if not in a triumphant refutation, at least in impressing the minds of the Court with the doubt, of which Dr. Simons would have had the full benefit, whether symptoms supposed to result from the unjustifiable use of the above mentioned articles in his case might not, with equal fairness and more charity, have been referred to the influence of such articles used in medicinal and moderate doses upon a system exhausted by fatigue of body and mind, and under the prostrating influence of disease. Well informed members of the profession are frequently puzzled to distinguish symptoms resulting from the disease and the remedial agents employed for its relief. What then would have been the value of non-professional evidence on such a points when brought to bear against the character of an officer sustaining an honorable reputation ? If the uncompromising spirit of military discipline shall decide that Dr. Simons committed a capital error in leaving his postj shall an error of judgment, sustained by the advice of a tried soldier, Major Armistead, a good man and true, be allowed to cancel the positive merits of long and faithful services, an error too under the pressure of sickness and long sustained watchfulness, not to mention the illness of a member of his family, and the increased anxiety and distress he experienced in witnessing its sufferings ? Whatever may be the verdict and sentence of the Court, his brother officers at this post will not withdraw their confidence from Dr. Simons. 1 perform a grateful duty in expressing their sentiments , and I trust this communication will be received as evidence of the almost unanimous feeling of the officers at this post in his favor. I am very respectfully, R. Southgate, Assist. Surg. U. S. A Baltimore, November 6th, 1855. The undersigned, being duly requested to express an opinion, do not hesitate to say, that they consider it the duty of a military surgeon, upon the appearance of * It appears from the letters of distinguished officers who attended the trial, that they originated this objection, (as Mr. May thinks correctly,) and as did the Court to which the President has attached such unexpected and fatal importance. 13 epidemic-cholera at any post of which he may have medical charge, to recommend the immediate removal of the garrison to some uninfected district. Signed, Joseph Roby, Professor of Anatomy and Physiology University of Maryland. Samuel Chew, M. D., Professor of Principles and Practice of Medicine Univer. of Md. N. R. Smith, M. D., Professor of Surgery Univer. of Md. G. W. Miltenberger, M. D., Prof. Mat. Med. et Anat. Path. Univer. of Md. B. B. Smith, M. D., Demonstrator of Anatomy U. S. M. Christopher Johnson, M.D., Lecturer on Experimental Philosophy and Microscopy Univ. of Md. James C. Palmer, Surgeon United States Navy. Thomas H. Buckler, M. D. W. B. Sinclair, Surgeon United States Navy. Witness to all the signatures above, ( Signed ) James C. Palmer, Surgeon U. S. Navy. A true* copy, Thomas T. GiTtings. [COPY.] I have to state, that I received a letter from Dr. Simons, of Fort Riley, soliciting my presence and assistance at the Fort immediately* In accordance with this request, I set out forthwith at 1 o'clock, A. M., of Friday, Augus* 2d, and arrived at the Fort at 7or 8 o'clock the same morning. I found the disease raging with fearful violence, the Doctor exhausted, and though I did not examine him myself, apparently very ill — which, he informed me, arose from the incipient symptoms of cholera. Deeming him incapacitated from the disease, and the medicine he had taken, and being fresh and vigorous myself, I advised him to leave; which, after advising with me in regard to the treatment, success, &c, and installing me in his position, he did a few hours after. It is my opinion, deduced from his appearance and fatal effects of the malady in what I deemed parallel cases, which remained and died, that the odds would have been fearfully against him had he remained. It is almost needless to add, that this is my candid and unbiassed opinion, dictated only by a sense of justice. A true copy. S. Whitehorne. R. Wilson, Post Sutler, original in War Department. [COPY.] ' Washington City, December 12th. My Dear Sir; — 1 received your note in reference to Dr. Simons, U. S. A. I have known Dr. Simons for a great many years, and know well his reputation in the army. I know him to have always deported himself as a high-toned, well bred gentleman in time of peace, and in war as a gallant, chivalric man. Though a Surgeon, and not required to expose himself in battle as though he were in the line, there was no danger he did not court; and I think him utterly incapable of ever displaying, 14 on any occasion, any traits of character unbecoming a brave man and a refined gentleman, — and it would require evidence as strong as proof of Holy Writ, to make me believe that he could commit any act that would cause him or his friends to blush. Yours very truly, (Signed) W. H. T. Walker, U. S. A. Fort Riley, Kansas, Jan. 13, 1856. My Dear Sir: — Though not personally known to you, the relations of confidence existing between myself and Dr. Simons, encourage the hope that a letter from me at this moment may not prove unacceptable or out of place ; and I shall be fully recompensed and my purpose served, if I shall be enabled to dissipate, in the slightest degree, the gloom which surrounds the Doctor and his friends at home. My feelings, of course, were, from the first, naturally enlisted in his cause, and my every thought and action devoted to his service during his trial. Possessing his entire confidence, and having been with him almost every hour in the day since our arrival here, his conduct in the trying scene through which he passed during the prevalence of cholera, the motives which actuated him at the different periods and phases of the disease, indeed the very changes of his couutenance, — are as familiar to me at this moment, as if I had been present and witnessed every occurrence* Until the receipt of Mrs. Simons' letter, conveying to the Doctor a few inklings from the proceedings of the Court, none of his friends here doubted of a favorable issue. His intimate and more immediate friends, Captain Anderson and myself, might have been too sanguine, — we might have viewed the evidence adduced before the Court through a medium other than the jaundiced prejudice which must have beclouded the members of the Court-Martial; but other significant signs satisfied me that we were not alone in our opinion. The congratulation of outsiders and indifferent persons who were on the fence, and were ready to lean to the victorious party, the universal reputation and contempt in which the Clarksons are held, convinced me that the Court, too, must have regarded them as false witnesses, and set aside their testimony as far as it tended to a conviction, and that it was very remote, even though it should receive its full value. The defence, I thought, was conducted with considerable ability. Court-Martials are so uncertain, and so often lean with their prejudices, and this Court had nestled for six weeks at Fort Leavenworth in the hotbed of the Doctor's most virulent detractors; and against persons receiving impressions and adopting sympathies which it was all-important should be effaced during the trial, that I advised the employment of the Doctor's own friends here to assist him, and so make a sort of family inquiry of it, rather than employ a lawyer and set him against the Judge Advocate in a trial of skill in law rather than justice. In conducting his defence, the Doctor may have erred in not insisting upon the production by the Judge Advocate of the villainous reports which swelled his portfolio, and upon which the charges were doubtless based. If the members of the Court had had the opportunity of reading them, surely the Doctor, too, should have had the same privilege, and the whole should have been spread upon the record. Anonymous reports and denunciations are universally condemned by all honorable men. These were especially of that character. Let the new trial hinted at by Mrs. 15 Simons come, let him be convicted and re-convicted, the Doctor has a host of warm friends in the army and out of it, whose admiration of his high sense of honor and the purity of his character, will remain unchanged. For a few days after the reception of Mrs. Simons' letters, the reaction was distressing in the extreme, that the fortunate presence of Major Woods here, and the happy thought of bringing about a meeting between them, had the happiest results. Mutual explanations were made, and assurances of confidence were given, which I am satisfied removed many a bitter pang in both parties. Please present my kind regards to Mrs. Simons, and believe me, my dear sir, Very truly yours, (Signed) Lambert Gittings, Esq., Baltimore. New York, December 6th. Dear Sir; — I have known Doctor James Simons, U. S. Army, long and intimately, particularly during the campaign of 1847 and 1848, in Mexico, and have seen him several times under fire, and always composed and faithful in the performance of his duties. 1 have known his practice in hospitals and on marches. I have a high regard for him. I ever thought him a brave and honorable man, a good surgeon and physician. Yours very sincerely and truly, (Signed) R. S. Satterlie, U. S. A. L. Gittings, Baltimore, Md. Surgeon U. S. A. Fort Riley, February 23d, 1856. My Dear Sir ; — I have learned with the utmost pain and astonishment, the sentence of the Court Martial in the case of my most esteemed and injured friend, Dr. Simons. That fault was found at all, after the mass of evidence establishing his entire innocence (of all the specifications, save one, and his complete vindication of himself in the matter of accusation in that one,) seems most strange and unaccountable. His numerous friends here, who heard attentively all the evidence, felt most confidently assured that every item of charge and specification brought against him, (save the mere act of leaving the post,) was triumphantly overthrown. And surely he entirely removed all blame or censure from himself on that point, when he proved, as incontestably as he did, that he had exerted himself in the performance of more than his duty, until sickness and exhaustion rendered him incapable of further effort, and justified the act. The findings and sentence of the Court Martial, show only too plainly to how great a degree the minds of the members had been influenced by the malicious rumors and the perverted statements and distorted narratives which they had previously heard at Fort Leavenworth, and which were, by certain parties, unceasingly poured into their ears throughout their six weeks stay at that place. Dr. Simons desired to show to the Court whence these misrepresentations and aspersions came, and what the motive that created them ; but he was not allowed to do so. Had he been permitted to produce evidence in his possession, he would have proved that they originated in the personal animosity of Major Ogden, in the 16 inveterate and unscrupulous malice of his employees, and the mischievous ill will of the worshipful family of the Rev. Mr. Clarkson. I have had the pleasure of enjoying an intimate acquaintance with Dr. Simons, for about thirteen years ; and throughout that whole period, I know that he always discharged every duty and obligation with the strictest regard to his responsibility and the most jealous care of his honor and reputation. I have seen him under every possible inducement to indulgence in, or resort to, the excitement of drink, and'l have never yet observed in him, either in times of danger or exultation, amidst the license of camps, or the more seductive temptations of convivial hours, the slightest departure from a strict and dignified sobriety. I do not believe that there is any man who can say, truthfully, that he has ever seen Dr. Simons intoxicated. Yet, I know there were witnesses here ready to tell the lie — to gratify their rancorous hatred . They were leagued — understood each other perfectly, and had their testimony at their tongues ends. So far had they concerted their plans, that they were prepared to swear that Major Armistead, (a most estimable gentleman, and, I believe, a member of the Protestant Episcopal Church,) was too drunk when he came back to the post, to give advice to Dr. Simons, or to be in condition to discern whether he was or was not intoxicated. You know, I presume, that Major Armistead was the only officer here whom Dr. Simons could consult, and that he only remained a few hours — and that his testimony was greatly relied on by the Doctor. When it was proposed by the Judge Advocate, to show that the prostration of Dr. Simons was not from sickness, but from the use of brandy or other stimulant, not as medicine or preventive, but from fear or other unworthy motive, the proposition was objected to by the Doctor, on account of the irregularity, if not entire illegality, of the proceeding. He would have been as perfectly willing then, as now, to defy the charge — to meet it and refute it — had it been properly presented in a separate and specific form ; but he could not suffer the Judge Advocate to bring in, almost at the conclusion of the trial, a new charge, of a most grave and serious nature, which was in no way to be conveyed in, or to be inferred from the charges upon which he was arraigned. It was important that the matter should not be met in the form in which it was presented, and under the circumstances to which I have alluded. Men who are willing, under the influences at that time operating upon them, to tell anything but the truth, might the next week, or the next month, be just. Passions which swayed them, would subsid — prejudices which warped them, would be corrected — the combination would be broken up and loosed from its control — its members would hesitate before they again consented to unite in perjuring themselves. These are some of the considerations which guided the Doctor, and were suggested by his advisers. In conclusion, I beg to assure you that my regard and esteem for the Doctor, are in nowise diminished ; and that he and his family and friends, have all my warmest sympathies and most earnest wishes, that he may even yet be justly dealt with, and the unmerited blow be averted. I am, very respectfully, yours with regard, Lambert Gittings, Esq., Baltimore, Md. PROCEEDINGS OF A GENERAL COURT MARTIAL, HELD AT FOKT EILEY, K. T., Between the 30th of Oct. and the 12th of Nov., 1855, IN OBEDIENCE TO THE FOLLOWING ORDERS. War Department, Adjutant General's Office, Washington, July 26, 1855. [Special Orders, No. 134.] By instructions from the President of the United States, a General Court Martial, constituted as hereinafter specified, will assemble at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas Territory, at 10, A. M., on Monday, the twenty-fourth day of September, 1855, or as soon thereafter as practicable, for the trial of Brevet Lieut. Col. William R. Montgomery, Major 2nd Infantry, and such other prisoners as may be brought before it. DETAIL FOR THE COURT. Col. J. K. F. Mansfield, Inspector General. Col. Joseph Plympton, Ist Infantry. Bvt. Col. C. F. Smith, Lieut. Col. 10th Infantry. Col. E. V. Sumner, Ist Cavalry. Bvt. Col. C. A. Waite, Lieut. Col. sth Infantry. Bvt. Col. R. E. Lee, Lieut. Col. 2nd Cavalry. Lieut. Col. J. E. Johnston, Ist Cavalry. Bvt. Major G. D. Ramsay, Capt. of Ordnance. Major John Sedgwick, Ist Cavalry. Brevet Major Samuel C. Ridgely, Captain 4th Artillery, is appointed Judge Advocate of the Court. 1 2 And the President further directs, that if any of the officers named in the detail, shall fail to attend, the court shall, nevertheless, have authority to act, provided the number of members present be not less than five, as no other officers than those above detailed, can be convened, without manifest injury to the service. order of the Secretary of War. S. Cooper, Adjutant General. War Department, Adjutant General's Office, Washington, Jlugust 7, 1855. [Special Orders, No. 142.] By direction of the President of the United States, Brevet Colonel C. A. Waite, Lieutenant Colonel sth Infantry, is relieved from serving on the General Court Martial, directed by " Special Orders," No. 134, to assemble at Fort Leavenworth , the 24th of September next, and Colonel Albert S. Johnston, 2nd Cavalry, is detailed in his stead. order of the Secretary of War, (Signed,) W. G. Freeman, Assistant Adjutant General. War Department, Adjutant General's Office, Washington, Sept. 1, 1855. [Special Orders, No. 167.] By direction of the President of the United States, Colonel E. V. Sumner and Major John Sedgwick, Ist Cavalry, are relieved from serving as members of the General Court Martial, instituted by " Special Orders," INo. 134, and Lieutenant Colonel S. Casey, 9th Infantry, and Major S. P. Heintzelman, Ist Infantry, are detailed in their stead. order of the Secretary of War. S. Cooper, Adjutant General. War Department, Adjutant General's Office, Washington, Sept. 25, 1855. [Special Orders, No. 180.] By direction of the President of the United States, the General Court Martial, instituted by " Special Orders," No. 134, of July 26th, 142 of August 7th, and 167, of September 1, 1855, from the War Department, will try the case of Assistant Surgeon James Simons, U. S. Army, and for this purpose will adjourn to Fort Riley, Kansas Territory. 3 Colonel Albert S. Johnston, 2nd Cavalry, is relieved from serving as a member of the General Court Martial, instituted by the " Special Orders" above referred to, and will repair to the Head Quarters of his regiment. order of the Secretary of War. S. Cooper, Adjutant General. Fort Riley, K. T., October 30, 1855. The General Court Martial, instituted by the foregoing orders, met pursuant to adjournment, — present Colonel J. K. F. Mansfield, Inspector General. Colonel Joseph Plympton, Ist Infantry. Brevet Colonel C. F. Smith, Lieutenant Colonel 10th Infantry Brevet Colonel R. E. Lee, Lieutenant Colonel 2nd Cavalry. Lieutenant Colonel J. E. Johnston, Ist Cavalry. Lieutenant Colonel S. Casey, 9th Infantry. Brevet Major G. D. Ramsay, Captain of Ordnance Major S. P. Heintzelman, Ist Infantry. Brevet Major S. C. Ridgely, Captain 4th Artillery, Judge Advocate. The proceedings of the last meeting held at Fort Leavenworth, were read. The Judge Advocate informed the Court that he was not prepared to proceed with the case of Assistant Surgeon James Simons, U. S. Army. The Court then, on motion of the Judge Advocate, adjourned until the Ist day of November, 1855, at 9 o'clock, A. M. Port Rilet^ K. T., November Ist, 1855. The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present — All the members, and the Judge Advocate. Assistant Surgeon James Simons, XL S. Army, appeared* The proceedings of the last meeting were read. The orders instituting the Court were then read, and the accused asked, if he objected to any officer, on the detail for the Court, to which he replied in the negative. The Court was then duly sworn in his presence. The Judge Advocate was then duly sworn. Assistant Surgeon Simons read the papers annexed, and marked (court paper No. 1.) Assistant Surgeon Simons was then arraigned upon the following charges and specifications: — Charges and specifications thereto, preferred against James Simons, Assistant Surgeon, United States Army, by command of Brevet Lieutenant General Scott, commanding the army. 4 Charge 1. Neglect of duty, to the prejudice of good order and military discipline. Specification 1. In this, that he, the said James Simons, Assistant Surgeon, U. S. Army, was stationed at Fort Riley, Kansas Territory, on the 3d August, 1855, and was then and there the only medical officer of the army, when a fatal and epidemic disease, known as Asiatic Cholera, prevailed among the troops and families of officers of the army, and hired men, in the Quarter-Master's department at said post, whereof many died, nevertheless he, the said Simons, did neglect, and abandon his duty, he quitting said post on the said 3d day of August, and by remaining absent from it for the space of six days, that is to say, until the 10th day of August. Specification 2. In this, that one Martin Matt, a stone-mason in the employ of the Quarter-Master's department, being at Fort Riley ill °f tne cholera, whereof he died, and being carried to the hospital of said post, in the first stage of said disease, at about 4 o'clock in the afternoon of about the thirty-first day of July, 1855, he, the said Simons, did give no medical attention to said Martin Matt, until next morning about 9 o'clock, A. M., when his attention being This charge was preferred and entertained by the Court against the protest of the accused, and as the President remarks, contrary to law and evidence. called to the fact, he directed the steward of the hospital to attend to the patient. Specification 3. In this, that James Simons, Assistant Surgeon U. S. Army, being the only medical officer on duty at Fort Riley, Kansas Territory, did neglect to visit, or give medical attendance to Brevet Major E. A. Ogden, Captain in the Quarter- Master's department, for and during the last twenty-two hours of the life of the said Ogden, who became ill of the cholera, about 8 o'clock of the morning of the 2d of August* and died about 1 o'clock, P. M. of the 3d of August, ]855, he, the said Simons, having left the post of Fort Riley while the said Ogden was still living. All this at Fort Riley, Kansas* Territory. Specification 4. In this, that James Simons, Assistant Surgeon, U. S. Army, being the only medical officer on duty at Fort Riley, K. T., did fail to give proper attention and care to Mrs. C. Woods, the wife of Brevet Major Samuel Woods, Captain 6th Infantry, a patient ill of the cholera, who being taken with the disease about 2 o'clock, P. M., died, visited twice by him before 5 o'clock of the same day, (the 2d of August,) was not seen by him again until between 5 o 'clock and 6 o 'clock, A.M. of the 3d of August, 1855, when the said Simons stood at the door of the room of Mrs. Woods, declining to enter the room, and uttering some remark of a desponding character, and then left without further attention or any aid to the said patient, and quitted his post at Fort Riley while the said patient was still living. Specification 5. In this, that Assistant Surgeon James Simons, U. S. Army, being the only medical officer of the army at Fort Riley, did, when called to attend Clifford Woods, a son of Brevet Major Samuel Woods, Captain 6th Infantry, fail to give proper care and attention to the said Clifford Woods, then ill of the cholera ; but he, the said Simons, standing by the pallet on the floor upon which lay the sick child, only gave utterance to some desponding words, and then without further examination or attention, and without any effort to relieve the pains and distress of the said child, did leave the room. All this at Fort Riley, Kansas Territory, on the 3d day of August, 1855. 5 - S Specification 6. In this, that Assistant Surgeon James Simons, U. S. Army) being the only mddical officer of the army at Fort Ri- ley, K. T.j did fail to attend Mary Woodsj a daughter of Brevet, Major Samuel Woods, Captain 6th Infantry) who was taken ill of cholera about 7 o'clock on the morning of the 3d of August, 1855, and of which disease, she died the same day about 12 o'clock; M. Charge 2. Conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. By Hie army regulations, Dr. S. was not required, as the President says, to attend any one whom he ¦was charged with neglecting, except Major Ogden, who did not wish tiis attendance. (See -evidence.) Specification. In thisj that Assistant Surgeon James Simons) U. S. Army, being the only medical officer of the army on duty at Fort Riley, or at the post of Fort Riley, on the 3d of August, 1855) when a fatal and epidemic cholera was prevailing among the troops and the families of officers of the army s and hired men in the Quarter-Master's department at said post) whereof many died) he, the said Simons, did, then and there, shamefully quit the said post s and abandon his duty. The accused presented in " bar*' of trial, on the Second specification to the first charge, the paper annexed and marked (court paper No. 2.) The Court was then closed, and after deliberation, decided that the plea in " bar" to the second specification be not sustained. The Court opened and the decision was announced. The accused then pleaded to the charges and specifications, — " Not Guilty." The accused then requested that Captain Anderson, 2d Dragoons, might assist him in his defence) which request was granted, and Captain Anderson took his seat. Mr. David Clarkson, the Chaplain of Fort Riley, X, T., duly sworn. Question by Judge Adv. How long have you been the Chaplain at this post ? Answer. I was elected in October, 1853, and commenced performing the duties in May, 1855. Question by Judge Adv. In what month, and on what day of the month, did the cholera make its appearance at this post ? Answer. I think it was on the 24th of July last. Question by Judge Adv. Wbat means have you for knowing the number of sick and the number of deaths ? Answer. I put down the number that were buried, as I ascertained each day. I could not ascertain the number of sick, I could not say how many sick I attended. Question by Judge Adv. How many persons were buried and recorded in your papers ? Answer. Fifty *seven,— from the 24th of July to the 12th of August, — I think it was the 12th. Question by Judge Adv. State, if you can, the progress of numbers, attacked between the commencement and end of the disease ? Answer. From the 24th of July to the 2d of August, from 2to 5 a day, died. On the 2d of August, there were a great many more, I cannot say the exact number — there were six attacked in one house, in the house in which I was quartered, — this was on the 2d and during the night of the 2d, and some other on the morning of the 3d. From the 3d of August to the 12th, the numbers gradually diminished. 6 Question by Judge Adv. Who was the medical officer of the army on duty at this post at that time ? Answer. Doctor Simons was at the time the cholera appeared. Question by Judge Adv. Was Doctor Simons the only medical officer present ? Answer. He was. Question by Judge Adv. When was Major Ogden's illness first made known to you? Answer. It was sometime on the morning of the 2d of August, about 8 o'clock. Question by Judge Adv. How long did he live, — did you visit him, and if so, how often ? Answer. He lived until about 12 or 1 o'clock the next day. I was not with him when he died ; I visited him very shortly after he was taken sick, and several times afterwards during his illness. The last visit I made him, was some time in the morning of the day of his death. I was very much occupied that morning, and I do not recollect exactly the hour, — I think it was before eight o'clock that morning. Question by Judge Adv. Did Major Ogden's mind wander during any of these visits ? Answer. No. Question by Judge Adv. Did he appear in the full possession of his reason and faculties ? Answer. Perfectly so, up to the last words he spoke to me, — those were the last words he spoke as I have since heard. Question by Judge Adv. Do you know when Dr. Simons left the post; if so, state the time and day ? Answer. Doctor Simons left on the morning of the 3d. I can only judge from this, that when I returned from the funeral of Mrs* Armstead, which went from here at about half-past eight, 1 found that my niece, who went with Doctor Simons s had left. I should think, therefore, he must have gone about 9 o'clock. Question by Judge Advocate. Do you know when Doctor Simons returned to this post, and assumed his duties ? Answer. He returned to this post on the 10th of August s—l 5 — I do not know whether he assumed his duties on his return, as I was taken sick on Friday, the day the Doctor returned, and did not leave my bed until Sunday. Question by Judge Adv. When did you know of the illness of Mrs. Woods, and did you visit her ? Answer. I heard of the illness of Mrs. Woods on the 2d. I visited her several times during her illness. She died on the 3d, about 11 o'clock, A. M. Question by Judge Adv. You have said the number of cases of sickness was very large. Will you state as nearly as you can the number which occurred between the breaking out of the cholera and the morning of the 3d of August ? Answer. I could not, without referring to my register, the paper on which I put them down at the time. I cannot give any idea of the number taken sick. Question by Accused. Was it possible for one person to give attention to each and every case which occurred during that period ? 7 X ,' Answer. Not knowing the number that were taken, 1 cannot say whether it was possible for one person to attend to them or not. Question by Accused. In stating the number of deaths, do you state from the actual number you buried, or from hearsay ? Answer. From both. Question by Accused. Were there not among the number whom you buried, many citizens who were not connected with the post ? Answer. Not many. Question by Accused. You say the cholera broke out on the 24th July, and from two to five per day died of the disease. Will you state how many you buried between the 24th and 29th July ? Answer. I cannot say positively without referring to my register. The witness was here requested to bring his register, awaiting which the Court took a recess. The Court resumed its sitting at 1| o'clock, the witness having returned with his register. Question by Accused. You say from two to five died per day from the commencement of the disease, (which would be from ten to twenty-five from 24th to the 29th July,) will you now state, since consulting your record, the exact number, their names, and date of each ? Answer. There were sometimes two, sometimes three, and sometimes five died a day, but not on consecutive days. On the 24th of July, I buried two ; on the 25th, none ;on the 26th, two ;on the 27th, 28th, 29th, none. Ido not remember the names of these ; — two were buried from the hospital. The Judge Advocate stated to the Court that he could not proceed at this time, in consequence of the non-attendance of witnesses. The Court then at 2 o'clock, P. M., adjourned until to-morrow morning at 9 o'clock. Fort Riley, K. T., November 2, 1855. The Court met pursuant to adjournment, — present all the members and the Judge Advocate. Assistant Surgeon Simons in attendance. The proceedings of yesterday were read. Mr. J. O. Sawyer, Superintendent of the Public Buildings at Fort Riley, duly sworn. Question by Judge Adv. How long have you been connected with the public works at Fort Riley ? Answer. I arrived here about the 20th of July last, and since that, time, I have been here constantly. 8 Question by Judge Adv. When did the cholera break out at this post ? Answer. I can't recollect the exact date, but I think about the 25th of July. Question by Judge Adv. State, as near as you can recollect, the progress of the disease from its commencement to its termination ? Answer. Before the Ist of August, the disease was mild in its form ; on some days two deaths, on other days none, and some days four or five. On the Ist of August, the disease appeared to be of a more violent character, and caused more alarm among the men ; a number of them quit work, and wished Major Ogden to give them their discharge. The 2nd of August was the day on which the cholera made its appearance in a more violent form ; a great many were taken sick on the 2nd, and died on the 3rd. Among those taken sick on the 2nd, were Major Ogden, the first case I knew of ; the servant of Mrs. Woods, Mrs. Henschall, the wife of one of the Band of the 6th Infantry; Mrs. Woods, the wife of Major Woods ; Henschall, the Musician of the Band of the 6th Infantry ; Major Woods' son, Clifford ; Mary Woods was taken on the 3rd. These all occupied rooms in the commanding officers' quarters ; I occupied a room adjoining Major Ogden's, in the same building spoken of as the commanding officers' quarters. On the 3rd, there was considerable falling off in the number of cases, as compared with the 2nd, — I cannot speak exactly as to the number. The disease commenced declining on the 3rd and 4th, and ceased, I think, about the 12th. I cannot be positive, however, about the date of its ceasing. Question by Judge Adv. Did you see Major Ogden after he was taken, and if so, how often did you see him, and how much of your time was given to him ? Answer. I saw Major Ogden shortly after he was taken, between 7 and 8 o'clock in the morning. I remained with him until his death, except when I was called out of the room for a few minutes by Mrs. Woods and others. Seems to have died in one to two hours after Dr. Simons left post in charge of Dr. Whiteham. Question by Judge Adv. When did Major Ogden die ? Answer. Between 12 o'clock and 1 o'clock, P. M, on the 3rd of August. Question by Judge Adv. To what hour was Major Ogden in possession of his faculties ? Answer. 1 think to the last, to his death. Question by Judge Adv. Was he visited by Doctor Simons, and if so, how often ? Answer. He was visited by Doctor Simons twice ; one visit about 10 o'clock in the morning; another, about 3 o'clock in the afternoon of the 2nd. He did not visit him again. Question by Judge Adv. Was Doctor Simons called on to visit him again? Answer. No. Question by Judge Adv. Had Doctor Simons been sent for before he made the two visits to Major Ogden just spoken of? Answer. After he made the first visit, I requested Mr. Clarkson to call on the Doctor, and see if he could not do something to relieve Major Ogden. He sent a bottle of medicine by Mr. Clarkson, or some one, and afterwards came himself. 9 •^ / Question by Judge Adv. When did Major Ogden's attack assume a dangerous appearance ? Answer. Not until late in the afternoon or evening of the 2nd. Question by Judge Adv. At what time did Major Ogden appear to suffer from the disease ? Answer. He did not suffer much pain in the first part of his illness, except from faintness, which he said was the effect of morphine which he had taken. He had slight cramps, very slight, which commenced about 10 o'clock, A. M., of the 2nd. He had no violent cramps. Question by Judge Adv. Who assisted Major Ogden during these attacks of faintness, — name the persons ? Answer. During the day of the 2nd, until after night-fall, I never left him except when Miss Scrivner was in the room. After that, I got attendance from among the mechanics. Question by Judge Adv. You say that you were sent for by Mrs. Woods and others during the 2nd. How often did you see Mrs. Woods, and what for ? Answer. I could not specify the number of times ; I visited her often, — sometimes at her own request, and sometimes at the request of Mrs. Clarkson. She sent for me to ask my advice as to what she should take, and about three o'clock in the morning of the 3rd, I was sent for by Mrs. Woods; she wanted me to tell her if I thought she would die or not, — what I thought of her case. I saw her often after that, as on the morning of the 3rd, I was called out often by the difficulties among the men, and I saw her often in passing through the hall, her room door opening on the hall. Question by Judge Adv. Who was with Mrs. Woods when you visited her? Answer. Generally Mrs. Clarkson, and sometimes Miss Scrivner ; and on the morning of the third, Mrs. Clarkson procured the services of Mr. Vaydes, one of the superintendents of the work. Question by Judge Adv. When did Mrs. Woods die ? Answer. I can't state the exact hour. Question by Judge Adv. Did you see Clifford Woods after his attack, and before his death, and how often? Answer. Yes, — I can't state the exact number of times. Question by Judge Adv. Did he die before or after his mother ? Answer. I think he died first. Question by Judge Adv. Who was waiting upon him when you visited him? Answer. Mrs. Clarkson first — afterwards I saw a soldier named Joseph, who was serving in the house. Question by Judge Adv. You say Mary Woods was taken ill on the morning of the third. Did you see her, and who was taking care of her ? Answer. I saw Mrs. Clarkson and Miss Scrivner with her, and this man, Joseph, I do not recollect the exact hour. Question by Judge Adv. You say you were called out by others, than Mrs. Woods, — by whom were you called from Major Ogden's room ? 2 10 Answer* I don't think I left the house on the day of the second of August, until about 10 o'clock at night, when I was sent for by Doctor Simons, — after that, I did not leave the house until the morning of the 3rd, when I was sent for by Mr. Hopkins, who was attacked by the cholera, and by several of the men on business Question by Judge Adv. What did Doctor Simons want with you? Answer. He wished me to stay with him. Question by Judge Adv. For what reason did he wish you to stay with him ? Answer. He was in a high state of excitement and alarm. Question by Judge Adv. Did you stay — if not, why? Answer. Anticipating his wish, I requested Mr. Martin, a clerk in the Quarter- Master's department, to accompany me, — I staid but a few minutes, and left him with Doctor Simons. I returned to Major Ogden's room. Question by Judge Adv. Did you know of Doctor Simons' intention to leave the post on the 3d of August, before he left —if so, when did you first learn it? The witnesses for the accused state that be left at 11 o'clock, A.M. Answer* He spoke about leaving the night of the 2d, when I visited him ; I knew nothing more about it until I saw an ambulance before the door on the morning of the third. I did not see him leave—l cannot recollect the hour—l suppose that it was about 9 o'clock that 1 saw the ambulance. Question by Judge Adv. At the time of Dr. Simons' leaving the post, that is, about 9 o'clock, what persons were at the post, not including the persons employed in the Quarter-Master's department? Answer. One or two clerks in the Sutler's store, — I don't know whether the Band left before or after he did — I think they left the same day^-and nearly all the laundresses left the same day. I think there were two or three soldiers, including this man, Joseph, that remained at the post. That is all 1 can call to mind. Question by Judge Advocate. Can you state about the whole number of deaths from cholera at this post, in July and August last? Answer. The only means I had of ascertaining the number of deaths, was by counting the graves. I, in company with Lieutenant Corley, made out sixty, by allowing some for double graves, as I had been told that in some graves were two bodies. Among that number was one from Pawnee. Question by Judge Adv. Do you know how many dead bodies were at any one time laying in one house, or in the hospital ? Answer. I know of five at one time in Major Woods' quarters, on the 3d of August, and I knew of four in the hospital, and on the porch of the hospital, — this, I think, was also on the 3d or on the 4th — I would not be positive. Question by Judge Adv. What do you know in relation to the case of Martin Matt, a stone-mason in the hospital at this post, on the last day of July, or the first of August, 1855. Answer. About the last of July, I saw a man named Martin Matt, sick in his quarters — I was in company with Mr. Martin. After persuasions, there being some symptoms of cholera, he was taken to the hospital. On the following morning, I visited the hospital about 9 o'clock, and this man called to me, or beckoned to me, 11 ¦* <• 4 and stated that he had received no medicine, nor had any thing done for him, since he came to the hospital. I called Dr. Simons' attention, who was then in the hospital, to the man. The Doctor called the hospital steward, and directed him to attend to him. Question by Judge Adv. Do you recollect the hour of the day when this man, Matt, was carried to the hospital ? Answer. Some where near four o'clock in the afternoon, as near as I can recollect. Question by Judge Adv. At the time you were called to see Mrs. Woods, on the 2d of August, did Major Ogden require constant attendance. Answer. I thought so — he had the symptoms of cholera, though but slightly developed ; after he began to suffer from faintness, he required constant attention, fanning, and bathing his temples, during the day of the 2d of August. Miss Scrivner relieved me from the performance of those duties. Question by Judge Adv. What order in respect to sick calls for the men employed in the Quarter-Master's department, was adopted by Major Ogden? Answer. There was a notice placed in the quarters occupied by the hired men, stating the regulations of the hours when the men should apply for medical advice. I don't remember the hours. Question by Judge Adv. Do you know whether that arrangement was adopted by Major Ogden, after consultation with Dr. Simons ? Answer. I know nothing about any agreement — there appeared to be a mutual understanding between them. Question by Accused. Was I informed of the sickness of Major Ogden, or was I sent for to attend him, previously to my first visit ? Answer. Not to my knowledge. Question by Accused. When I first visited Major Ogden, was he not, at that time, being rubbed with mustard? Answer. I can't tell whether it was before the visit of Dr. Simons that I applied a mustard plaster to the body of Major Ogden — this was done in the early part of the attack. I don't think he was rubbed at all with mustard, though cloths were on his feet with hot water and mustard. I rubbed him with my bare hand, and he desired me to stop, it irritated the skin too much. On the morning of the 3d, after Doctor Whitehorn came here, I think Major Ogden's hands were rubbed with mustard. Question by Accused. Did Major Ogden ever request you to call me in, or to inform me that he was sick ? Answer. Never. Question by Accused. You say Mrs. Woods sent for you frequently, to ask what she should take . Did you ever prescribe for her ? Answer. Several times. Question by Accused. Was the treatment of cholera ever a subject of conversation between Major Ogden and yourself? Answer. Yes. 12 Question by Accused. Had Major Ogden taken any medicine before 1 first saw him on the 2d of August. Answer. Yes. Question by Accused. Who prescribed for Major Ogden before my arrival ? Note., Major O. takes and relies on his own medicines, and does not wish Doct. S. to attend him. Answer. I gave him the medicines, but always consulted with him, and gave them to him with his consent. Question by Accused . Did you ever hear Major Ogden speak of, or recommend certain remedies, or peventives, which he had brought to the post ? Answer. Major Ogden brought a preparation which had been made by a friend in St. Louis, which was used very successfully on the route here, and at this post ? Question by Accused. Have you ever heard Major Ogden say that he would rely on the medicine or mixture which he had brought from St. Louis, if he was taken ill? Answer. No. See the opinions of Drs. Southgale and Mills, as well as the whole Medical Faculty of Maryland, as to Dr. Simons' course being the proper one in cholera. Question by Accused. At the time I informed you, (on the evening of the 2nd August,) that I intended to leave, did I say any thing about taking the Band to a certain place outside the garrison ? Answer. I have no recollection about the Band specially ; he suggested that we all had better leave if ive could. Question by Accused. Did you not know at the time I informed you, that I intended leaving the post, that I had sent an express for a physician, and that he was expected during the night ? Answer. I knew that Dr. Whitehorn had been sent for, but when I received the information, it is impossible for me to say, — I might have known it then. Question by Accused. You have said that Mrs. Woods sent for you, and asked your opinion of her case ; did you express an opinion, and what was it ? He, Sawyer, seems to have been regarded as the physician of Mrs. Woods and family and Major Ogden, rather than Doctor Simons. Answer. Mrs. Woods requested me at first to be candid with her, and not to conceal any thing from her. I stated to her that her case was doubtful, and that unless there was a change in her case, she could not get well, — this was about three o'clock on the morning of the 3rd. I encouraged her, — that while there was life there was hope, and talked with her for some time. Question by Judge Adv. From whom was this mixture or preventive, referred to by you in your testimony, obtained? Answer. The bottle had a label bearing the name of Wheaton or Eaton, of St. Louis, a druggist. Question by Court. Do you know whether Assistant Surgeon Simons was requested to visit Martin Matt at the time he was first sent to the hospital ? Answer. No. Mr. A. K. Martin, of Fulton, Mo., duly sworn. Question by Judge Adv. Were you employed at this post in July and August last, and in what capacity? Answer. I was, as a time keeper, in the Quarter-Master's department. 13 t Question by Judge Adv. At what time was Major Ogden taken with the cholera, and how often did you see him ? Answer. Major Ogden was taken with the cholera shortly after breakfast, on Thursday morning, the 2nd day of August ; I saw him, I think, between 9 and 10 o'clock. I went up to see how he was, and he gave me some directions for Mr. Hopkins to write a letter to Fort Leavenworth. 1 saw him again that evening, — I forget the exact time at which I saw him, but I left his room with Mr. Sawyer, when a message came from Doctor Simons for Mr. Sawyer, that Doctor Simons was quite unwell, and wished to see him. I saw him again the next morning, shortly after breakfast, and I did aot see him again living. Question by Judge Adv. Was Major Ogden in the full possession of his faculties at these visits ? Answer. He was, to a degree that was rather surprising to me. When I returned from Mr. Hopkins with the letter, written in compliance with the directions given me by Major Ogden, he made some criticisms, which showed that his mind was very clear. Question by Judge Adv. What reason had you for leaving Major Ogden, with Mr. Sawyer? Answer. One reason was, that I knew that Mr. Sawyer had been exhausted by his attendance on Major Ogden, and another was, that I felt some interest in seeing how the Doctor was. These were the main reasons. Note the designs of this witness. Question by Judge Adv. What passed after you reached the quarters of Dr. Simons ? Answer. A conversation occurred, in which Doctor Simons represented that his condition was such, and that of his family was such, that he felt it would be right for him to leave the post until he could recruit. He represented that he had been through a good many trying labors, and had lost a good deal of rest ; he thought that by being away a day or so, that he would be enabled to renew his energies or strength. This was the substance of what was said. Mr. Sawyer returned no answer at all, and I told Mr. Sawyer I thought it might probably be the best, if the Doctor was exhausted, that he should leave the post, as he would not be able to recruit himself here. Mr. Sawyer still preserved silence, and refused in that way, (as I understand.) to acquiesce in any suggestion. Mr. Sawyer made some remarks, but said nothing in approval of the Doctor's design. Shortly after this, Mr. Sawyer left, previously to which the Doctor invited us to drink some brandy with him, which we did. Mr. Sawyer then left, leaving me there, as Doctor Simons wished some one to remain with him, — he seemed very solicitous that some one should remain with him. After Mr. Sawyer's departure, Doctor Simons paced the room for some time, and he went out in the passage, for what purpose I can't say. He returned to the parlour, and after some conversation, standing on the floor, Doctor Simons laid down on the lounge, or the sofa, and requested me to sit near the side of the sofa, and he took my hand. He, in a short time, fell asleep, and after sleeping some time, he awoke. When he fell asleep, I released my hand from his, and laid down upon the floor and slept myself. I woke as soon as he stirred upon the 14 i sofa, and got up. We then went out into the passage and drank some brandy. After this, the Doctor, after manifesting some excitement in his manner, again laid down upon the sofa, and again took my hand];— after he fell asleep, I again released my hand as before, and laid down upon the floor and went to sleep myself. He woke up just as day was breaking. I told him as the day was breaking, I would leave, — he thanked me for my attention, and 1 left. Question by Judge Adv. When did Dr. Simons leave the post? Answer. Ido not know. Question by Accused. Did you know that I had sent for a physician on the night of the 2d of August ? Answer. I did nut. Question by Accused. Do you know at what time Doctor Whitehorne arrived ? Answer. The first I saw of Doctor Whitehorne was when he came in Major Ogden's room on the 3d. It was not long after breakfast — the breakfast was over about 7 o'clock. Mr. Joseph Hopkins, Clerk to the Quarter-Master at Fort Riley, K. T., duly sworn. Question by Judge Adv. When was Major Ogden taken ill of cholera? Answer. On the morning of the 2nd of August. Question by Judge Adv. Did you notify Dr. Simons thereof? Answer. As I came down from Major Ogden 's room, on my first visit to him, I met Dr. Simons, and told him that Major Ogden was unwell. The witnesses for the accused prove thai Major Ogden had consented to no arrangement with Dr. Simons as to attendance on the Quarter-Master's employees, and without which Doctor S. was under no obligation to attend them. Question by Judge Adv. Do you know of any regulations adopted by Major Ogden in reference to the sick calls for the hired men of the Quarter-Master's Department? Answer. Yes ; the one handed now to the Judge Advocate, is the one signed by Major Ogden. Paper annexed and marked (Court paper No. 3.) Assistant Surgeon Simons here observed, that the paper just presented was his own suggestion, and that the original was in his own handwriting. Question by Judge Adv. When did Doctor Simons leave Fort Riley ? Answer. Ido not know. Question by Accused. At what hour did you mention to me that Major Ogden was unwell ? Answer. I think about 9 o'clock, — I could not state positively the hour. The Court then at 10 minutes before 3 o'clock, P. M., adjourned until 9| o'clock, A. M., to morrow. Fort Riley, Nov. 3rd. The Court met pursuant to adjournment, — present all the members and the Judge Advocate. Assistant Surgeon Simons in attendance. The proceedings of yesterday were read. 15 Mr. John Gilbert, a carpenter employed on the public works at Fort Riley, duly sworn. Question by Judge Adv. Were you with Major Ogden during his illness, and if so, at what time? Answer. I was with him the night previous to his death, from 8 o'clock that night until the next morning at 6 o'clock, — this was the night of the 2nd of August. Question by Judge Adv. Did Doctor Simons visit Major Ogden during the time you were with Major Ogden ? Answer. No, he did not. Question by Judge Adv. Why were you with Major Ogden during that night! Answer. I went there to take care of him, and watched during the night. Mr. A. K. Martin, re-called. Question by Judge Adv. Did you see Dr. Simonsj after leaving his house on the morning of the 3d of August, again that day; if so, where ? Answer. I saw him again at the door of Major Ogden's room, before the arrival of Dr. Whitehorne. He came to the door, and beckoned me to come to the door. When I came, he told me that if he would advise any thing, or suggest any thing, it would be an injection of brandy. He told me to tell this to Mr. Sawyer. He then left, and I saw him no more. Question by the Court. Did Doctor Simons leave the post before the arrival of Doctor Whitehorne. State the hours of arrival and departure of the two ? Answer. I can't say any thing of my own knowledge about that. Question by Court. When Doctor Simons left the post on the 3rd of August, how many officers and soldiers remained, also how many women and children, and how many workmen ? Answer. I know of Major Ogden, the chaplain of the post, a soldier of Major Woods' company, a certain sergeant, I do not know his name — also, the acting steward of the hospital and his wife, or a woman who lived there, — also, the wife of one of the band and her child 4 and the wife of the chaplain. There was before the prevalence of the disease, about five hundred workmen, — between fifty and seventy of these left or died during the disease, leaving about four hundred and thirty workmen here at the time, and there were some families at the post. Question by Court. What hour in the morning was it that Doctor Simons came to the door of Major Ogden's on the 3rd August? Answer. I can't state the exact hour, but it was after I came from breakfast to Major Ogden's room, and a short time before Dr. Whitehorne arrived. Question by Court. Was the Band of the 6th Infantry at the post when Dr Simons left ? Answer. I can't say. Miss Eliza Scrivner duly sworn Question by Judge Adv. Were you at this post on the last days of July lastand with whom were you staying ? Answer. I was; and was staying with my uncle, Mr. Clarkson, the Chaplain of the post. 16 - Question by Judge Adv. In which house or building did you live ? Answer. This one — referring to the one in which the Court is sitting. Question by Judge Adv. Who else resided in this house besides your uncle's family ? Answer. Major Woods' family — Major Ogden had a room, and Mr. Sawyer also had a room. Question by Judge Adv. On what day was Major Ogden taken ill ? Answer. On the second of August. Question by Judge Adv. Did you see Major Ogden on that day? Answer. I did, about 8 o'clock, I think, that morning. Mrs. Major Woods asked me to go with her, — we would lay by all ceremony, and go into his room, if we could render any assistance. Question by Judge Adv. Did you see Major Ogden oftener than this visit? Answer. Yes, several times during that day. I was sent for by my uncle several times, to relieve in fanning Major Ogden. Question by Judge Adv. Were you in the room when Doctor Simons called to visit Major Ogden ? Answer. Yes — he called twice that I know of. I can't recollect the time of the first call — the second was, I think, in the afternoon. Question by Judge Adv. Did Dr. Simons give or send to Major Ogden, any medicines at either of those visits ? Answer. I believe he did — I saw the medicines administered Question by Judge Adv. What appeared to be the principal suffering of Major Ogden ? Answer. He had some cramps, and fainting and sinking spells, and shortness of breath. Question by Judge Adv. How were you employed while in Major Ogden's quarters ? Answer. In fanning him, — I prepared drink for him, and gave it to him several times. Question by Judge Adv. How long was it after Mrs. Woods' visit to Major Ogden, that she herself was taken ill ? Answer. She was not very well that morning — it was about two o 'clock in the afternoon, I think, when she took to her bed. She fainted in the morning, — somewhere about ten o'clock in the morning, she was in her front parlour. Doctor Simons, who was present when she fainted, called me into the room, and I laid her on the bed. She got up after this, and finally took to her bed about 2 o'clock. Question by Judge Adv. Were you with Mrs. Woods much ? Answer. Yes — most of the time, till after one, A.M., when I laid down about a couple of hours. Question by Judge Adv. How often did Doctor Simons visit Mrs. Woods, and what was the last visit that you know of? Answer. I believe he was in twice that afternoon that she was taken, — I think the last visit that I saw him was before 5 o'clock that afternoon, 2d of August. 17 - him, (Major Ogden,) he used the words, " I wish that man would keep out of here," or words to that effect ? Answer. I do. I remember a conversation between Mr. Clarkson and myself, in which he told me that Major Ogden said in his presence, that he wished Dr. Simons would keep out of the room, or words to that effect. This was, I think, about the 27th or 28th of August. It was on the day that I returned to the post. Question by Court. Do you know if the remark attributed to Major Ogden by Mr. Clarkson, in his conversation with you, was made known to Dr. Simons before Major Ogden 's death ? Answer. Ido not. Question by Court. When Mr. Clarkson told you that Major Ogden wished Doctor Simons to keep out of the room, did he say that Major Ogden gave any reason ? Answer. He said, that Major Ogden asked Doctor Simons if there was any opium in the medicine the Doctor had given him a short time previous, — that the Dr. had replied, ' No.' He told me that when Doctor Simons left the room, Major Ogden said, that he had told him what was not so, — that he knew that there was opium in what he had given him. That is as near as I can remember the conversation. Question by Court. At what time did this conversation alluded to, occur between Major Ogden and Mr. Clarkson, in which Major Ogden said he wished Dr. Simons would keep out of his room, — was it when he was laying sick in bed, or at any other time ? Answer. I understood Mr. Clarkson to say, that it was while he was laying sick in his bed. Question by Court. Who was present at the time Mr. Clarkson spoke of Major Ogden 's remark of Dr. Simons ? Answer. I don't think there was any one ; if there was, Ido not remember. Question by Court. Where were you when this conversation took place between you and Mr. Clarkson ? Answer. Sitting on the steps in front of this building. Question by Judge Adv. Have you conversed with other persons than Mr. Clarkson about Major Ogden 's feelings towards Dr. Simons? Answer. Not that I remember; I may have conversed with Dr. Simons about it. Surgeon M. Mills, for defence, duly sworn. Question by Accused. Have you served recently with Major Ogden ; if so, state when and where ? Answer. I have not served very recently with him; I have served within the last eighteen months with him at Fort Leavenworth. Question by Accused. State, if you please, what were his opinions, and the position which he assumed with reference to attendance of the army surgeon on hired men of the Quarter-Master's Department at that post? Answer. He contended that the army surgeon was compelled to attend the hired men of the Quarter-Master's Department at Fort Leavenworth, without compensation. 28 Question by Accused. Would the fact of a patient, taking his own medicine, or permitting a non-medical man to prescribe for him, without the consent of the attending physician, exonerate a medical officer from all responsibility in his case ? Answer. I think it would; if it were my patient, I should certainly consider myself free from all responsibility. Question by Accused. Did Major Ogden ever say to you that he would compel you to attend his men, and say, if we had a commanding officer who was not afraid of his shadow, he would have had it done before this; but he was not going to rest there, but would go beyond the commanding officer. Answer. Yes; he made those remarks to me. He told me, he would carry it up, I understood, to the Secretary of War. He afterwards offered me a dollar per man per month, to attend to the men in the Quarter-Master's employ, and I would not do it. mm . ii:!ll!f Oes» ap<2 oj 5 Question by Accused. Do you know if he applied to the commanding officer to enforce your attendance on his men ? Answer. Colonel Fauntleroy told me that Major Ogden asked him to give an order to me to attend the Quarter-Master's men; and my impression is that Major Ogden told me the same thing. Question by Accused. Did the commanding officer issue such an order ? Answer. Never to my knowledge. Lieutenant J. L. Corley, for defence, duly sworn. Question by accused. Will you please state to the Court, whether there was Such a man as Martin Matt in the employ of the Quarter-Master's Department at this post about the end of last July ? Answer. At the request of Dr. Simons, I examined the roll for that month; and could find no such name on it. If he had been in the employ of the Quarter-Master's Department, his name Would have appeared on the rolls. Question by Judge Adv. Was there any person of the name of Matt on the rolls ? Answer. No; there was a name, George Mott, the nearest I could find to it. Question by Judge Adv. Does the roll, made up to the end of the month, include those who may have worked only the first part of the month ? Answer. Yes. Question by Judge Adv. What became of George Mott ? Answer. He is marked on the rolls as having deserted on the 31st of July. He is credited with a quarter of a day's work on the 31st of July. Question by Court. Is it customary in the Quarter-Master's Department, when a man dies or is not at hand, to sign the rolls, to place his name on an arrearage roll? Answer. No; he is reported on the roll as having so much pay due him, and a remark is made upon the roll how it happens that he is not paid. Question by Court. Was George Mott reported sick at any time during the month of July ? 29 Answer. Ido not know. There was no report of the sick citizens in the Quarter-Master's Department kept during that month, that I am aware of. Question by Court. Was there such a name as Martin Matt on the rolls of the Quarter-Master's Department in August? Answer. 1 don't know ; I don't remember whether there was or was not such a name. Question by Accused. Did not other men in the Quarter -Master's Department desert at about the end of July last, leaving money due to them ? Answer. Yes ; many. Assistant Surgeon R. Southgate, U. S. Army, for defence, duly sworn. Question by Accused. Would the fact of a patient (not an enlisted man) taking his own medicine, or permitting a non-medical man to prescribe for him without the consent of the medical officer, exonerate him (the medical officer) from all responsibility in his case ? Answer. I should feel, under such circumstances, I would be relieved from all further responsibility in the case. Major Armistead recalled. Question by Accused. State, if you please; who it was that called you to the room of Mrs. Woods on the morning of the 3rd of August last ? Answer. lam satisfied in my own mind that it was Dr. Simons; lam convinced in my own mind that it was Dr. Simons. Question by Accused. Was this dying request, with the circumstances as connected with it j of such minute detail as to occupy some time? Answer. It did not occupy more than five minutes, my interview with Mrs. Woods. Question by Accused. Must not this interview between Mrs. Woods and myself} from the minute detail, occupied some time ? Answer. I should not think more than five minutes, if that long. Question by Judge Adv. Who went with you to Mrs. Woods' room ? Answer. Mr. Clarkson and Mrs. Clarkson, and Miss Scrivner, Mrs. Woods and her youngest child, a little girl, were present. Those were all the persons I recollect seeing. My recollection is, that I met Mr. Clarkson at the door. Question by Court. When Dr. Simons called you on the morning of the 3rd, did he state that he had had an interview with Mrs. Woods, and did he state what passed at that interview between him and Mrs. Woods? Answer. I have stated to the Court that I am satisfied that Dr. Simons called me on the 3rd, from circumstances that have since transpired . He has since told me of the circumstances that transpired, that convinced me that he did see Mrs. Woods on that day, and that he was the man who brought me the message from Mrs. Woods. He did not state what passed at that interview at that time, but he has done so since, and his statement of the circumstances that took place at that interview, convince me that he is the person who brought me the message, that Mrs. Woods wished to see me. [This testimony flatly contradicts Mrs. Clarkson.] 30 Mr. John N. Dyer, recalled. Question by Accused. Do you remember my having sent you to Major Ogden, to advise that his workmen be temporarily placed in tents, as the disease appeared to be confined almost exclusively to the quarter ? The medical advice of Doctor Simons seems to have been utterly disregarded by Sawyer, as regards the Quarter Master's men. Answer. I remember that he told me to go to Major Ogden, to advise that the workmen should be put in tents. I told him that Major Ogden was too unwell to be consulted, and he sent me to Mr. Sawyer, who replied that it was almost impossible to put the men in tents. That is as near as I remember. Question by Accused. Did not Mr. Sawyer say to you, that Major Ogden was too sick to attend to anything, or to be consulted ? Answer. Yes. Question by Accused. Did you ever see me in the room of Mrs. Woods, and have you reasons to believe that I visited her frequently ? Answer. I saw him in Mrs. Woods ' room ; I cannot say how often he visited her. Question by Accused. Was I much occupied on the 2nd August, and could one physician have attended all the various calls ? Answer. I think he was occupied, and I don't think one physician could have attended them, and do justice to the sick. Question by Accused. State a circumstance that occurred on the night of the Ist of August, in regard to your advising me to go to bed ? Answer. I think it was on the night of the Ist of August, about 11 o'clock, that I was sitting on the steps of the Doctor's quarters, and I advised him to lay down, as he seemed exhausted. He replied that, either he had to see some men, or that he must go to the hospital that night. This is as near as I remember. Question by Accused. State if I did not say to you on that occasion, that I had been up all the night before, and from appearances, I would be up all that night? Answer. 1 don't remember. Question by Accused. Did 1 appear to be much exhausted and worn out on that occasion ? Answer. Yes, Question by Accused. Have you ever known me to refuse seeing any oneeither soldier, Quarter-Master's men, or citizens, when called professionally ?J Answer. Not to my knowledge. I went to him one evening for some medicine, for a soldier, — I don't remember whether I asked him to go and see him. He gave me some medicine, and dirceted me how to give it. Question by Accused. On what day was that you called on me to see the soldier ? Answer. The 2d of August, I think. Question by Accused. Do you know that I was much occupied on that day, with Mrs. Armistead, Mrs, Woods, Mrs. Woods' servant, and many others? Answer. I think he was, — I saw him going into Mrs. Armistead 's several times. Question by Accused. During the prevalence of cholera, did I appear to remain 31 in my house, or was I seen going from house to house, and remaining a great part of the time in my hospital? Answer. I saw him going from place to place very often, during the prevalence of the cholera, — I am not aware that he remained in his house much of the time. I also saw him going into the hospital very often, though I cannot say what portion of his time was spent in the hospital. Question by Accused. Do you remember my having said to you on the 2d of August, that I was then suffering myself with diarrhoea, and felt more like being in bed than attending the sick ? Answer. I remember his saying to me, that he had been suffering with the diarrhoea. I think he remarked to me on the third, that he had the diarrhoea, and once ¦previous to that, he had mentioned it. Question by Accused. Did you see anything like a disinclination on my part, not to do all in my power for those who were sick. Answer. I did not. Mr. C. Lombard re-called. Question by Accused. State if you were the person who Major Armistead sent for me to visit his camp ? Answer. I was. Question by Accused. Did I obey his call promptly ? Answer. He did. I came to Doctor Simon's quarters oh the 30th of last July, and made known to him Major Armistead's request. He told me he would go, but he would have to get permission of Major Ogden. I went with him to Major Ogden's, who gave permission for Doctor Simons to go. I then left for camp, while the conveyance was getting ready for Doctor Simons. Doctor Simons and Mr. Dyer passed me on their way out. When I got to camp, I found Doctor Simons there, administering medicine to the citizen physician who accompanied the command, and several soldiers — he and several soldiers having taken sick after leaving this post, on that day. Question by Accused. How long did I remain at the camp, and for what purpose did I visit it ? Answer. Doctor Simons remained there until after dark, — his stay there was about three hours. He administered medicine to those taken sick of cholera, — he had been sent for to visit the sick of cholera. Question by Accused. Did I appear worn out and exhausted — and if so, was it the subject of remark ? Answer. He did. I drew my conclusion from his appearance, when I arrived at this post two weeks previous, and when I saw him on that day. He looked worried and fatigued, — it was referred to by Major Armistead, — and when we were a couple of hundred miles from here, neither of us expected to see Doctor Simons alive when we returned. Question by Accused. At what distance from this post was the camp of Major Armistead, when I visited it? Answer. It was very nearly nine miles. 32 Question by Accused. Did I appear to show any disinclination to visit those at tacked with cholera ? Answer. No. I did not observe any. I had been in the hospital at a late hour of the night, when one of Lieutenant Bryan's party was sick — who died that night — and I saw him a little after day-light, coming from the hospital. This was on Monday morning, the 30th of July. The Court then, at 3 o'clock, adjourned until to-morrow morning, at 9 o'clock. Fort Riley, K. T., November 7, 1855. The Court met pursuant to adjournment, — present all the members and the Judge Advocate. Assistant Surgeon Simons, in attendance The proceedings of yesterday were read. Sergeant R. J. Jackson, chief musician, 6th Infantry, duly sworn. Question by Accused. What position do you fill in the Band, and how long have you served ? Answer. lam Leader of the Band, and lam now in my twenty-seventh year of service. Question by Accused. Were you at the post during the prevalence of cholera ? Answer. I was. Question by Accused. Did you see me frequently during the late epidemic, and if so, state if I was much occupied during the time? Answer. I saw the Doctor very frequently — at night as well as in the day-time, On all occasions when 1 have seen him, he appeared to be busily engaged. I have seen as many as five or six persons accost him at one time, and requesting him to attend the sick. I heard the Doctor on one occasion remark, he could not attend to so many cases at once, that he had more than he could attend to, and that he would visit them in turn. Question by Accused. Do you know of any enlisted man, camp woman, or any member of a soldier's family, whom I did not go to promptly when sent for? Answer. Ido not; on the contrary, I have heard many of the command say that the Doctor was ever ready to attend to them when called on, whether night or day. The same remark I have heard uttered by one of the men of the Band in the practice room, who had a sick wife at the time of the cholera, and who had called upon the Doctor, I think he said, twice in the middle of the night, in one night. On each occasion the Doctor attended promptly. Question by Accused. From your opportunities of judging, do you think one physician could have given proper attention to all who were sick ? _, Answer. I should think it would be impossible. Question by Accused. Have you ever heard any complaint from the enlisted men or camp women, of a want of attention on my part to the sick ? Answer. Never. 33 J Question by Accused. Was the disease confined almost exclusively to the quarters ? Answer. It so appeared to be; and I will state, that the Doctor remarked to me the day previous to my leaving the garrison to go into camp, that the command would be benefitted by leaving the gar- rison for a few days, as the sickness appeared to be entirely about the quarters. I might also add, that this conversation occurred through a question the Doctor put to me to this effect, —asking me the condition of the families and men generally, as far as I knew. This was on the 2nd of August last. See the opinions of the Medical Faculty of Maryland as to the propriety or necessity of ordering all away from the infected locality : as also of Doctors Mills, Southgate and Hammond. Question by Accused. Do you know that the quarters were much crowded by the workmen, and that a large part of the Quarter-Master's men were in tents ? Answer. I do. Question by Accused. When I ordered out the Band, did I not send for you, and give you directions myself? Answer. The Doctor did. Question by Accused. Have you ever seen anything in my manner like apprehension or alarm for my personal safety ? Answer. Not in the slightest degree. I have never seen any indication of the kind. Question by Accused. On the morning of the 3rd August, when you saw me, did' I appear to you sick and exhausted ? Answer. Yes ; I noticed it, and remarked to the Doctor that he looked very ill. I likewise made the same remark to my family on returning home, and said to my wife, the Doctor is going to leave the post, 1 don't think we will ever see him again, for I fear he has the cholera. Question by Accused. When I gave orders for the Band to go into camp, did I not say to you, " leave four or six men to take charge of the Commissary and Quarter-Master's store house?" Answer. 1 don't remember particularly as regards the number of men, but the Doctor told me to leave a sufficient number to look after the stores, and what sick might be left behind, — I done that. Question by Accused. At what time did I leave the post on the 3rd of August ? Answer. Between the hours of 10 and 11 o'clock, A. M., to the best of my knowledge. Question by Accused. Was Dr. Whitehorne at the post previous to my departure ? Answer. He was — and conversing with Doctor Simons, when I left the Doctor. Question by Accused. Do you know that previous to my departure, I placed the hospital steward under the direction of Doctor Whitehorne ? Answer. I do. Question by Judge Adv. Did you and the Band leave the post before or after Dr. Simons' departure? Answer. About the same time, 5 34 Question by Judge Adv. Where was your encampment ? Answer. About seven miles from this post, on the Republican Fork. Question by Judge Adv. Why did you go so far, and who selected the place for encampment ? Answer. I selected it myself, on account of water. I could find no good water short of that place, and the Doctor advised me to go at least that distance, — to go some eight or ten miles from the post. Question by Judge Adv. How many men were at the encampment ? Answer. As near as I can recollect, there were about eighteen, — some enlisted men were with me, whom I did not know, except that they were at the post. Question by Judge Adv. Did you take your wife and family, and did the men take their families ? Answer. No family but mine went with me, — some of the families went towards Fort Leaven worth. Many did not return until several days after I returned. Question by Judge Adv. What medical officer, if any, went with you ? Answer. None. Question by Judge Adv. How long did you stay at the encampment ? Answer. Only thirty hours. Question by Judge Adv. Why was that ? Answer. For the reason that a man of the Band was taken ill of cholera, — I set up with him all night, as did many others, and administered such medicines as I had taken for my own family use, together with some brandy which the Doctor had ordered to be put up for the Band. After leaving camp, bringing this man along, he died at the bridge, about a mile from the post. When the man was taken ill, I, having no medical advice, thought it best to bring him back, that he might have a chance for his life by being put in the hospital. Question by Judge Adv. You say you used your own family medicine for the sick man, — was there no other medicine with the command ? Answer. Yes, there was other medicine, — I had some little medicine, but not much. Question by Judge Adv. Was it the same kind of medicine as your own ? Answer. I presume not. I had some opium and some pills, which came from the hospital. I did not know what they contained. I would remark, that the sick man preferred taking the medicine I had for my family use, in preference to the other. He had taken it before for the diarrhoea, — it had had good effects, and lie preferred it on that account. Question by Judge Adv. On what day did you reach your quarters, on your return, and at what time of day ? Answer. About 6 o'clock in the evening of the 4th of August. Question by Judge Adv. Did you return again to camp ? Answer. No. Question by Judge Adv. When was the remark of a member of the Band, that Doctor Simons attended to calls of the sick at all hours, night and day, made, — how long since ? Answer. About the time of the prevalence of the disease, and since that. 35 4 Question by Judge Adv. When did you last hear similar remarks ? Answer. As much, perhaps, as fourteen or fifteen days ago. Question by Judge Adv. You say you told your wife that you feared that you would never see Doctor Simons again — that you feared he would have the cholera. Describe the appearance that made you think so ? Answer. He looked very much worn in feature — the eyes very much sunk, and discolored underneath — and had all the appearance, 1 thought, of a man in the first stage of cholera. Question by Accused. Did you not say to me before the Band went out, that there was in the Band an educated man, who had practiced medicine ? Answer. I did. Question by Accused. Why did not that man go out with you ? Answer. I don't know. I sent for him previous to going out, but could not find him. He stated to me on my return to the barracks, that he was lying on the porch sick, and preferred staying in quarters. Question by Accused. Did you not hear that the disease had disappeared from the post, before your return ? Answer. I heard it was rapidly abating. Question by Accused. On your arrival here, did you not find that the disease had declined ? Answer. Yes. Question by Court. About how many persons belonging to the army were then at this post, in the beginning of August last, and how many of these did not leave the post on the 3d of August ? Answer. I could not exactly say, having never kept a record of them. I rendered no report of any kind, either of the Band or others. I should suppose, however, there might have been some twenty-eight, Band men included — perhaps more than that, — I could not say. I can't, say how many did not leave the post on the 3d of August, as I never had charge of them at all. Question by Court. How many men did you leave to take care of store-houses and sick, when you went away— and did they remain and do that duty? Answer. I left three of the Band, in addition to the Corporal, who was, he said, sick, — the Private who was attending the Commissary store, likewise remained. I believe those men done all that was asked of them. Question by Court. About how many cholera patients were there in any one day, and how many of them belonged to the army ? Answer. To my knowledge there were never more than ten or eleven, and of those not more than two soldiers. Question by Court. Did you see Dr. Simons leave the post on the 3rd of August? Answer. I did not see him leave the post, but believe him to have left shortly after I left his quarters. Question by Court. Is the same hospital steward now at the post that was serving under Dr. Simons in July aud August last ? 36 Answer. The steward who served under Dr. Simons and Dr. Whitehorne is now at this post. Question by Court. When did Bvt. Major Armistead's company leave this post for the "Big Timbers?" Answer. I can't be positive as to the date, but it was a few days, three or four days, before I went into camp, perhaps three days. Assistant Surgeon R. Southgate, U. S. Army, recalled for defence. Question by Accused. Is it recommended by medical writers, when cholera attacks troops or large bodies of men in camp or barracks, to disperse or remove them? Answer. Yes, I think it is ; to remove them to a different locality from where the disease first appears. I would also add, that so strongly am I inclined to the belief that cholera may be communicated from person to person, that I have made up my mind, in case I should ever be at a post where cholera appears, that the sick should be isolated from the well, and that the command should be removed to some point in the vicinity to the windward of the post, and where good water could be obtained. This is my conviction, gathered from all that I have read on the subject . Miss C. Nesbitt, a witness for the defence, duly sworn. Question by Accused. From the situation of the house in which you lived, (next to my own,) had you opportunities for observing that I made frequent visits to the hospital, and passed much of my time there during the prevalence of the cholera at this post? Answer. 1 had. Question by Accused. Have you never observed to me, that I appeared to live i n my hospital ? Answer. I have said so, and while the cholera prevailed. Question by Accused. Have you any reasons for knowing or believing that Maj. Ogden, during his last sickness, did not invite or desire the professional attendance of Dr. Simons; if so, please state them ? Answer. I have reasons for thinking so. I was told by a lady who was in attendance upon Major Ogden, that Dr. Simons was not asked to visit Major Ogden, but that when Dr. Simons went into his room, he would have liked to ask him to walk out. I was told by another lady, who was in Major Ogden 's confidence, that he had no confidence in Dr. Simons, and in case of sickness, he preferred the use of his own medicines. Question by Accused. State who was the first and second lady you refer to in your last answer ? Answer. Miss Scrivner was the lady who told me that Dr. Simons was not sent for, and that Major Ogden would have liked to have asked him to walk out of his room.* Mrs. Woods was the lady who told me that Major Ogden had no confidence in Dr. Simons. Question by Accused. Do you know whether Mrs. Woods took any other medicine than such as Dr. Simons prescribed ? Answer. Yes; I know that she took other medicine * Vid. pages 18, 19. 37 J Question by Accused. Do you know whether Dr. Simons visited and prescribed for Mrs. Woods; if so, how often? Answer. [ know that he visited her frequently ; he paid her two visits while I was with Mrs. Woods, which was about the space of two hours. [A complete contradiction of Mrs. Clarkson.] Question by Accused. Did I exhibit evidence of exhaustion and sickness on the 4th of last August, and where ? Answer. I thought him very ill upon the road; I had no idea that he could live. It was on the road between the Blue and Rock Creek. This completely confirms the deposition of Judge Conway, absent at the time of trial. Question by Court. To your knowledge, was Dr. Simons aware, before Major Ogden's death, of the Major's want of confidence in him, professionally ? Answer. I have no knowledge of that. Question by Court. On what day and at what time of the day, did Dr. Simons visit Mrs. Woods the last time ? Answer. It was in the afternoon, on the 2nd of August, about 4 o'clock, half past 4, probably. This is the last visit that I know of. I left the post about 6g o'clock on that afternoon, and before we started, 1 was at home sometime. Miss Mary Cochran, a witness for defence, duly sworn. Question by Accused. Did you ever see me in Mrs. Woods' room during her illness — if so, state at what time? Answer. Yes, — he was there in the afternoon that she was taken sick, about 3 or half past 3. Question by Accused. Were you living with Mrs. Woods during her illness, — if so, state in what capacity? Answer. I had been sewing for her three weeks, at the time she was taken sick. Question by Accused. When Mrs. Woods was sick, did I not frequently visit her house to see her servant ? Answer. Yes, he did. Question by Accused. Do you know if during my visits to Mrs. Woods and her servant, that I was constantly called away to see others ? Answer. Yes — there were a great many calls while he was visiting Mrs. Woods. Question by Accused. Were you attending on Mrs. Woods that day, or on her servant ? Answer. On both. Question by Accused. Have you reason to believe that I was much occupied on that day ? Answer. Yes, he was very much occupied that day. Question by Accused. Say whether you saw me in the room of Mrs. Woods, on the morning of the 3d of August last ? Answer. Yes, I saw him soon after day-light in the room, — he went in to see Mrs. Woods. Question by Accused. Do you know if I gave her any medicine on that morning, and state the circumstances ? 38 Answer. Yes, he sent over two powders, one for Mrs. Woods, and one for Cliffy. I took them from the man when he brought them over, and they were administered by Mrs. Clarkson.* Question by Accused. Did you see me in Mrs. Woods' room before I sent the medicine ? Answer. Yes. Question by Accused. Did I go to the hospital myself, or did I send for this medicine ? Answer. He called a man who was passing, and desired him to send the hospital steward to his house. Question by Accused. Did you see me at Mrs. Woods' after I sent for the hospital steward ? Answer. No, I left soon after, — I left about half-past six. Question by Accused. Do you know of your own knowledge, that the medicine was administered that I sent that morning ? Answer. It was to Mrs. Woods, but I don't think it was to Cliffy. Question by Judge Adv. In what room were you at this visit of Doctor Simons to Mrs. Woods, on the 3d of August? Answer. I met him on the porch, and went into the room while he was there, — he was by the bed, talking to Mrs. Woods. Question by Judge Adv. What persons were in Mrs. Woods' room at the time of this visit ? This witness, as well as Miss Neslritt, contradicts Mrs. Clarkson in toto. Answer. Mrs. Clarkson and Miss Scrivner.* Question by Judge Adv. Where was Clifford ? Answer. In the parlour. I was with him part of the time, and Joseph, the soldier, who lived in the house. Question by Judge Adv. What other persons were sick in the house at the time ? Answer. Major Ogden, and Mr. and Mrs. Henschall. Question by Judge Adv. Did you see Henschall, or his wife, that morning ? Answer. I saw them both. Question by Judge Adv. Did either of them make any request of you, and if so, what was it ? Answer. Mrs. Henschall requested me to make her a cup of tea. Mr. Henschall made no request. Question by Judge Adv. Did or did not Henschall ask you to send the Doctor to see his wife or himself, that morning ? Answer. He asked me that if I saw the Doctor, would I send him down. Question by Judge Adv. Did you ask the Doctor to see them, and if so, what did he say in reply ? Answer. I asked the Doctor to see them, and the Doctor said he would send the hospital steward. He asked me to go over with him to his house, and he would tell me what to do, — that I could do just as well as he could, for Mrs. Henschall. Vid. 22. 39 J The Rev. J. B. Duerinck, for defence, duly sworn. Question by Accused. Do you know any thing of a despatch sent from this post on the 2d August, signed by Mr. Sawyer, and directed to the commanding officer of Fort Leavenworth ? Answer. I know of one arriving on the 3d of August, at the Mission. The man said he left Fort Riley on the 2d. It was signed by Mr. Sawyer, — it was then en route for Fort Leavenworth. I cannot say whether it was to the commanding officer or to the Quarter-Master. The letter expressed the necessity that existed of having a medical officer, and also a commanding officer, Major Ogden being then confined to his bed. It also said that Doctor Simons was completely worn out, having been en his feet for two or three days and nights, and could renderno services of any importance. The despatch said that Major Ogden was very sick. The reason that I read these papers, was this, — the express man wanted a fresh horse, and to show me the urgency of his errand, he handed me the despatch to read; — it was unsealed, and I read it. Mr. Robert Wilson, for defence, duly sworn. This testimony completely falsifies the insinuations of the inimical Sawyer himself, and proves the Doctor's illness. See also Judge Conway's affidavit. Question by Accused. Were you at this post during the prevalence of the cholera ? Answer. I was. Question by Accused. Did you see me in the room of Mrs.Woods, and have you reasons to believe that I saw her frequently ? Answer. I was at Mrs. Woods' on the evening of the second, — while there, Dr. Simons came in once, and prescribed for her. I was only a short time there. I was with Mrs. Armistead previous to visiting Mrs. Woods. The Doctor left Mrs. Armistead's frequently, and said he was going to see Mrs. Woods. Question by Accused. Did you see me, or meet me frequently during the prevalence of the pholera, and can you say whether I was much called upon and occupied ? Answer. I met the Doctor frequently during the prevalence of the cholera, and visited the hospital with him once or twice. Whenever I saw him, he appeared to be very much engaged. Question by Accused. From the opportunities which you had for observing the calls and demands for my professional attendance whilst the cholera was prevailing, do you think that I, or any one, could have given attention to them all ? Answer. No, Ido not. Question by Accused. Did you see me going frequently to the hospital during the prevalence of cholera ? Answer. Yes, I did. Question by Accused. Were you with me during the day of the 2nd August; if so, state if I was much occupied, and with whom ? Answer. I was with the Doctor from about 12 o'clock until about 8 o'clock, off and on, on that day. He was occupied the greater part of the time with Mrs. Armistead, — he left occasionally to see Mrs. Woods, and the other sick. He seemed to have as much as he could attend to, and 1 thought more. After Mrs. Armistead died, I advised the Doctor to go home and lie down, — I thought he required rest. 40 L I saw nothing more of him until about 7 o'clock, P. M., when, as I was going home, I was called to, by Mrs. Simons to come up and see the Doctor who was sick. I went up and found him lying on a lounge by the hall door. He appeared to be very sick, and I advised him to send for another physician- Shortly after this, Mr. Clarkson came in, and wrote a note to Dr. Whitehorne, requesting him to come immediately. The note was despatched that night, and I understood the Doctor arrived the next morning. I did not see him, however. The Court then, at 3 o'clock, adjourned until to-morrow morning, at 9 o'clock. Fort Riley, K. T., November Bth, 1855. The Court met pursuant lo adjournment, — present all the members, and the Judge Advocate. Assistant Surgeon Simons in attendance. The proceedings of yesterday were read. Mr. Robert Wilson, for defence, in continuation. Question by Accused. Have you any reason to believe that there was no arrangement between myself and Major Ogden relative to attending his workmen ? Answer. lam of the opinion that there was no such arrangement, from a remark the Doctor made to me, — I asked him two evenings before Major Ogden was taken sick, if he had made any arrangement with Major Ogden, — he told me that he had not. Question by Accused. Did you see in my manner anything like fear or appre» hension for my personal safety, during the prevalence of the Cholera ? Answer. No. Question by Accused. Did you advise me to leave the post, if I could procure a physician to relieve me ? Answer. / did. Question by Accused. Do you know if Mr. Clarkson advised me to leave the post, if a physician arrived ? Answer. lam of the impression that he did. lam not positive Question by Accused. From your opportunities of observing, do you believe that there was, and is, a prejudice against me, by persons in the Quarter-Master's department ? Answer. From remarks that I have heard, I should suppose there was a prejudice, though I don't know it. Question by Accused. Have you ever heard any complaint against me, before the arrival of these workmen ? Answer. I never did. Question by Judge Adv. You say Mrs. Simons called you to come up and see the Doctor, who was sick; — what was the matter with him? Answer. He said that he had the diarrhma badly, — I thought him so sick, that I thought that he should have somebody to set up with him. I sent my carpenter over for that purpose, but he had procured somebody else in the meantime. I intended sitting up with the Doctor myself, but my family were sick. 41 \ J Question by Judge Adv. Had Doctor Simons complained of diarrhoea before that time ? Answer. I did not hear him ; but when he left Mrs. Armistead's, he complained of being sick, and I advised him to lie down. Question by Judge Adv. Had Doctor Simons, during the day and evening of the second of August, taken any brandy or opium ? Answer. Not to my knowledge. Question by Accused. Were not you with me nearly all that day? Answer. I was with the Doctor from 12 o'clock until 8 o'clock that evening, off and on. Question by Court. When did the prejudice against Dr. Simons among the persons in the Quarter-Master's department, appear to commence ? Answer. After I returned here from Wild Cat. I left here on the 3d and returned on the sth or 6th of August. Question by Court. Did the arrangement with regard to the Quarter-Master's department, spoken of by you, have reference to attendance or to compensation, merely ? Answer. I have heard the Doctor say that he would not attend the Quarter- Master's men unless he was paid for it, and on that evening I asked the Doctor if he had made any arrangement with Major Ogden to be paid. Question by Court. You have stated that after the death of Mrs. Armistead, you advised Doctor Simons to go home and lie down. Was Doctor Simons in attendance on Mrs. Armistead when she died ? Answer. 1 think he was there when she died, or he came there immediately after. He was there every few minutes, and remained there sometimes a half an hour, or more at a time. Question by Court. Was there no arrangement made between Doctor Simons and the Quarter-Master, for his attendance on the hired men of that department ? Answer. Not that I know of. Question by Judge Advocate. Did you see Doctor Simons on the morning of the 3rd of August ? Answer. Yes. Question by Judge Advocate. Did you observe any indication in the manner or appearance of Doctor Simons, of his being under the influence of stimulants, either on the evening of the 2nd, or morning of the 3d. Answer. On the morning of the 3d, I thought the Doctor was under the effects of opium. It was about 11 o'clock when I first saw him at Wild Cat. See explanation of this witness on next page. duestion by Judge Adv. At what time did you leave this post, on the 3d ? Answer. I think between 7 and 8 o'clock, in the morning. I was at Wild Cat when Dr. Simons arrived, and had been there an hour or an hour and a half. duestion by Court. About how far is Wild Cat from Fort Riley ? Answer. About twelve miles. 6 42 Question by Court- Are you familiar with the appearance produced on a person by the effects of opium ? Describe those appearances. Answer. lam not familiar with them. duestion by Court. Why then do you say the Doctor was laboring under the effects of opium ? Answer. From what Mr. Dyer told me, and I think the Doctor himself told me he had taken large doses of calomel and opium. duestion by Court. What was the appearance and what were the symptoms exhibited by Doctor Simons at Wild Cat ? Answer. I was with him there but a short time ;he appeared a good deal excited. duestion by Judge Adv. What impression did you form before you heard that the Doctor had been taking opium ? Answer. I believe that he told me, when I first saw him, that he had been taking a large dose of calomel and opium, — forty or fifty grains of calomel, and four or five grains of opium. duestion by Accused. You say I appeared under the influence of opium, — did I not appear likewise sick ? Answer. I thought him quite sick ; he laid down upon the bed as soon as he got there, and I was with him once or twice ; my own family being sick, I was with them most of the time. Sergeant R. J. Jackson, recalled. duestion by Judge Adv. Explain your answer to the question asked yesterday, about how many cholera patients were there in any one day , and how many of them belonged to the army ? Answer. I meant that that was the whole amount of patients sick of the cholera on any one day, as far as I know ; I did not mean that that amount were taken sick the same day. Bvt. Major L. Armistead, Captain 6th Infantry, recalled. Question by Accused. From what you know of me, do you think lam generally attentive and prompt in the discharge of my professional duties ? Answer. He is one of the most so of any medical gentleman I have ever known ; I think I have known him since 1841 or 1842. Question by Accused. Have you at any time ever observed any disinclination on my part to visit the sick, or show anything like alarm or fear for my personal safety ? Answer. Not in the least — quite the contrary. Question by Accused. Did I consult you relative to ordering the " Band," with the women and children, away from the post ; if so, what was your advice ? Answer. The Doctor spoke of it in my presence, and I advised that they should be sent to some springs in the neighborhood of the post, and I think I indicated the point to which they afterwards did go — a point across the Republican, about four miles from here. The idea at the time was, that the water that was drank here was one cause of the disease. I know that a great deal of water used here was taken 43 i from the Kansas River below the Republican Fork. The water of the Republican is good, but the water of the Smoky Hill Fork is brackish and not fit to drink. Question by Accused. Did I ask your advice relative to leaving the post — and if so, what was your reply ? Answer. lam not positive about the Doctor asking my advice about his leaving the post, but such was his condition, worn out and exhausted look, that that would have been my advice. I recollect, the Doctor in speaking of leaving the post, did not speak of abandoning the post, but of going only a short distance from here, to where he could get accommodation, in order to recruit. The Doctor also, in this conversation, told me that there was a physician employed whom he believed to be capable, or he was told, was capable. He said, that he himself did not know the man. A man was pointed out to me that morning, the 3d of August, whom I was told was that physician. He was here at this post before the Doctor left. Question by Accused. Do you think that it would have been possible to have obtained rest at this place, with the number of workmen and others who were constantly calling at my house for assistance ? Answer. Ido not think he could, unless he had gone into some of the ravines or hollows, and secreted himself. I don't think it probable that he could otherwise, while at this post. Question by Judge Adv. When did you arrive at this post on the 2d of August, and from what distance did you come on that day ? Answer. I arrived here about, I think, 11 o'clock at night, and from a distance of about thirty-eight or forty miles. Our camp was about that distance from here. Question by Judge Adv. Had you been re-called by an express — and if so, when did that express reach you ? Answer. I had been — and the express reached me a little before sun-down, or about that time. Question by Judge Adv. At what hour did you leave here on the 3d of August, to return to the camp ? Answer. I think it was about 12 o'clock, — I reached the camp not long before sun-down. I wish it to be understood, that I have no watch. I gave my impression as to the time. Question by Court. You stated in a former part of your testimony, that from certain circumstances you believe Doctor Simons was the person who brought you a message from Mrs. Woods on the morning of the 3d. At what o'clock was this ? Answer. It was early in the morning, about 9 o'clock, probably before 9 — but not later than 9. Question by Court. Did you consider Doctor Simons in command of Fort Riley, on the morning of the 3d of August ? Answer. Yes. He gave the orders for the Band to move. Assistant Surgeon W. A. Hammond, U. S. Army, re-called. Question by Accused. In your official letter to Major O. F.Winship, forwarding the charges which you were directed to draw up and prefer against me, you use the following words: — " In the performance of the duty assigned to me, I have heard 44 many charges made against Doctor Simons, which were, in my opinion, actuated by highly improper motives, and which could not be sustained before a Court Martial." Will you please state what those charges were, and what the motives by which they were actuated ? The Judge Advocate objected to the expression of Doctor Hammond 's opinion on the motives of the charges made against Doctor Simons to him, when he was sent by General Harney to prepare charges for trial against Doctor Simons. The Court closed, and the objection of the Judge Advocate was sustained. A member objected to the rest of the question, which objection was sustained. The Court was opened and decision announced. The accused presented the copy of an official letter from Major Ogden to Assistant Adjutant General Winship, dated August 2d, 1855, which was read and appended, (marked Court paper, No. 4.) Jacob Hommes, hospital steward, for the defence, duly sworn. Question by Accused. When were you hospital steward at this post, and when did you leave the post ? Answer. I was hospital steward from the 30th of April to the 20th of July last, — I have served nine years and seven months as hospital steward. Question by Accused. Are the letters handed you, the originals of my official communications, relative to your having been removed from this post? Answer. Yes. The letters read and appended, (marked Court papers, Nos. 5 and 6. Question by Accused. When did you leave this post? Answer. I left it on the 20th of July. Question by Accused. Was the man, Charters, who relieved you, ever in the capacity of steward, before I appointed him: Answer. He was a recruit — only late in the army. (Question by Accused. Do you think he could have given me much assistance ? Answer. Ido not think he could. Question by Accused. State as nearly as you can, the number of soldiers and Quarter-Master's men for whom I prescribed daily, before you left this post? Answer. The last three days before I left, the Doctor prescribed for about seventyfive citizens and about sixteen soldiers. They averaged that a-day, for the last three days. Question by Court. Had Doctor Simons made any arrangement with the Quarter-Master to attend the hired men of that department ? Answer. No, not at that time. Question by Court. Are you the present steward, and when did you return to this post ? Answer. I am — and returned on the 23d of August. Private Allen Charters, of " F" Company, 6th Infantry, for defence, duly sworn. Question by Accused. Had you ever been hospital steward before I appointed you on the 20th July last ? Answer. No. 45 4 Question by Accused. State in general numbers how many men in the duarter- Master's department, did I prescribe for every morning? Answer. From forty to fifty. Question by Accused. How many in the evening? Answer. Jlhout fifty or sixty. Question by Accused. Were these the only times I saw the sick, or was I much occupied with the families and those in quarters ? Answer. He attended at all times, those who came to the hospital in the interval between the sick calls, — he attended all families, and the people in quarter. Question by Accused. Do you know that I had an hour for citizens not connected with the post, who wished me to prescribe ? Answer. Ido not. duestion by Accused. Do you know that I was up continuously for two days and nights preceding the 2d of August ? Answer. I can't say that he was up all the time, that he had not laid down, but he was up the greater part of it t —^one of those nights I think he was up all the time, but the other nights I was unwell myself, and cannot say. Question by Accused. State if I ever allowed you to prescribe for a patient on or about the 31st of July, or at any other time before the evening of 2nd August. Answer. No, he never did. Question by Accused. Do you know that I was called up almost every night for six or seven nights preceding the 3rd of August ? Answer. Yes — he was. Question by Accused. Do you remember that on the night of July 31st, that yon went, with me, at a late hour, to Hie camp of the teamsters, and remained there the greater part of the night? Answer. I remember going there, but J don't, remember remaining there the greater part of the night of the 31st July. Question by Accused. Do you know that I had sent for Major Ogden to relieve me in the attendance on sergeant Allen, on the morning of the 2nd August, and that I was up all that night ? Answer. I did not know that he had sent for Major Ogden, but I saw Major Ogden with Sergeant Allen. Question by Accused. Do you know that I was up nearly all night on the return from Major Armistead's camp, on the night of July 30th, — if so, state with whom ? Answer. He was up nearly the whole of that night ; first with a mechanic in quarters — second, with Mrs. Rodgers, and third, with patients in hospital. Question by Accused. What was my general mode of practice in cholera ? Answer. At first he tried Major Ogden 's remedy, but found it unsuccessful; then he gave large doses of opium and calomel. In case of excessive vomiting, he gave spirits of camphor and ether. In all cases of cramps, he used mustard and red pepper externally, and in a majority of cases, he wrapped the patients up in hot blankets. 46 Question by Accused. Do you remember my coming to the hospital at day-light on the 31st July or Ist August, and requested you to make up some medicine. Answer. Yes. He did, on the Ist of August — he came in the morning before revielle. He said he was sick, had a diarrh(e ; told me to give him some pills that were made up of opium, calomel and sugar of lead. The Doctor laid down on my bed, which was a mattress laid on boxes, — and stopped there until sick-call, at halfpast 8. Question by Accused. Did you make up any medicine for me on the morning of August 3rd ? Answer. Yes ; I made up a large dose of opium and calomel for him. It will appear that Dr. Simons left Dr. Whitehorne in charge, and two days afterwards another physician arrived. Question by Accused. Did I not call you and place you under the charge of Dr. Whitehorne ? Answer. Yes, he did. Question by Accused. When did Dr. Phillips arrive at this post ? Answer. I believe on the sth of August, or 6th. lam not certain. Question by Court. State, if you can, the number of cholera patients at this post, as derived from official records, or personally, on each morning at the usual hour of " sick-call," commencing with July 24th and ending August 3rd, last ? Answer. I can't answer that question. Assistant Surgeon W. A. Hammond recalled. Question by Accused. Is not calomel and opium a recognized practice in cholera ? Answer. It is. Surgeon M. Miles recalled. Question by Accused. Is not the use of calomel and opium, in large doses in the first stages of cholera, a recognized and approved practice ? Answer. It is. Question by Accused, In epidemic cholera, what are the proportions of deaths to the whole command, when the disease attacks large bodies of troops or men ? Answer. It may be various. I have known the deaths to be one in five of the whole command. I have known in Texas, the deaths in one regiment, to bear to the number attacked, the proportion of one to two, or one-half of those attacked. Question by Accused. In the instance you allude to, how long did the epidemic remain with the command ? Answer. 1 think it prevailed for seven or eight days. I think after the seventh day, there were but one or two attacked. The Court then, at 3 o'clock, adjourned until to-morrow morning, at 9 o'clock. Fort Riley, K. T., November 9th, 1855. The Court met pursuant to adjournment, — present all the members, and the Judge Advocate. Assistant Surgeon Simons in attendance. The proceedings of yesterday were read. 47 i The Accused then said, that although all his witnesses had not reached here, he would now close his defence. The Judge Advocate stated that he would show that there was such a man as Martin Matt, upon whose existence some doubt had been thrown. Jacob Bollahar, a witness for prosecution, duly sworn. Mr. John Shoemaker duly sworn as interpreter. Question by Judge Adv. Did you know any person by the name of Matt among the workmen in the Quarter-Master's department at this post? Answer. Yes. Question by Judge Adv. By what name was he called ? Answer. Martin Matt. Question by Judge Adv. Did you ever see him in the hospital ? Answer. Yes. Question by Judge Adv. Was he living or dead ? Answer. He was alive. Question by Judge Adv. Did you see him dead ? Answer. Yes ; in his bed in the hospital, where he died. Question by Judge Adv. Did you know Martin Matt well ? Answer. I worked with him — I did not know him any, otherwise. Question by Accused. For how long a time did you leave him at any one time during his illness ? Answer. I waited on the sick in the hospital, for one day after he came in. I left at times, for about fifteen minutes, at various times during that day. Question by Accused. On what day of the month was this ? Answer. I don't remember. Question by Court. What was the matter with Martin Matt ? Answer. Ido not know what the sickness was, — he had cramps in his bowels, and the diarrhoe. Question by Court. Did Martin Matt die while you were in the hospital? Answer. He did not. Question by Court. How long after you first saw him in the hospital, before you saw him dead ? Answer. About six days. Ernst Newman, for prosecution, duly sworn. Through the Interpreter : Question by Judge Adv. Did you know any man by the name of Matt at this post, last summer ? Answer. Yes. Question by Judge Adv. What was his first name ? Answer. Ido not know ; we only called him Matt. Question by Judge Adv. What became of Matt? Answer. He was in the hospital ; I saw him two or three times. Question by Judge Adv. Did you know Matt well ? Answer. Yes ; from a week to eight days, he was in the same tent with me. 48 Question by Judge Adv. When was it that you saw Matt in the hospital ? Answer. I don't remember, — I saw him there between the 3d and 9th. duestion by Judge Adv. In what party did Matt work ? Answer. First under Mr. Long, then he came from that party to Hartcnstein, — then he went to ths hospital. He was attending the masons. Question by Accused. How long was Matt in the hospital ? Answer. I don't know, exactly. duestion by Court. Did Matt die in the hospital, and of what disease ? Answer. I was not there when he died, — I do not know of what disease. Question by Court. What were you doing in the hospital? Answer. I was employed at the hospital in putting the dead in their coffins. Question by Court. Did you put Matt in a coffin ? Answer. No, Bvt. Major Armistead appeared and requested to be allowed to alter his testimony of yesterday, in respect to the distance between this post and the camp of his company, which distance he had stated to be thirty-eight or forty miles. He wished now to correct his answer, and state that the distance was between twenty-eight and thirty miles, as gathered from his morning report book. Private S. Carncross, a clerk to the Quarter-Master, duly sworn. Question by Judge Adv. Look at the pay-roll for the month of July last, and state how the word deserted, came to be put opposite the name of George Mott? Answer. When these men were paid off, in the month of August, I called these men's names separate ; and George Mott not responding, and not finding his name in the time-book for August, in the party to which he belonged , I concluded that he had deserted. I kept the pay-rolls open for some time, and finally reported him deserted. Question by Court. Was a list of the men who died, kept in the Quarter Master's department ? Answer. There was, I believe — but I was not aware of it at the time I made out the rolls, nor was I present while there was sickness at the post. I came here on the 20th of August, and made out the pay-roll after I came. Question by Court. Have you since examined the list — and if so, was the name of George Matt on the list ? Answer. It was, and dated August 14th. This list, six in all, belonged to Hartenstein's party. This is the only list that lam aware of, and is in Mr. Martin's hand-writing. Question by Accused. When was this list made out ? Answer. I can't say. Lieutenant Corley, re-called. Question by Accused. Are the rolls, and the remarks on them, in every respect identical with those which you examined a few days ago ? Answer. Yes. Question by Accused. Have any changes been made in the time-books, since you examined them a few days since ? 49 4 Answer. I think there has been. Question by Accused. Who kept those books, and in whose hand-writing are they? Answer. The books are kept by two clerks — Mr. Hopkins and Carncross. The hand-writing of one of the books is Mr. Hopkins', the other, I think, by Hartenstein, the foreman, — the third book is Mr. Martin's. This general time-book was in the hand-writing of Mr. Hopkins. I refer now, to those portions of the several books which have been changed since I examined them. Question by Judge Adv. State where the changes occur, and in what they con- sist ? Answer. They consist in the change of a letter in the name of George Mott, the •o' being changed to 'a.' There have been two of those changes. Question by Judge Adv. Did you know that there was aG. Matt on this book of Hartenstein's? Answer. No, I did not Question by Accused. When did you first examine the books of the time keepers ? Answer. It was the day before I gave my evidence the first time. Question by Judge Adv. Why did you not examine Hartenstein's book ? Answer. It was not placed before me, — only the other two were placed before me by one of the clerks. Question by Judge Adv. Are you certain those changes have been made since that time ? Answer. lam as certain as I can be of any thing ; for lam certain the change of the letter 'o' to 'a,' would have struck me. I was looking for the name of Matt, and could find nothing nearer than Mott, plainly written. I will also state, that when I noticed it this morning in the office, and called attention to it, Mr. Hopkins stated that he had noticed it written in the way it now stands, before I looked at it. Question by Judge Adv. Which did you look at first, — the pay-rolls for July, or the time-books ? Answer. I looked at the pay-rolls first. Septimus Carncross recalled. Question by Judge Adv. Have those books (the books in which the alterations are alleged to have been made) been in the hands of any person not now connected with the office ? Answer. Mr. Martin has had them, to my knowledge, once this morning and once two or three days ago. He took them from the desk himself this morning. lam not aware of his making any alterations in them ; he held them in his hand the whole time, he stood up. Mr. Hopkins and Mr. Sawyer were in the office at the same time with him. Question by Judge Adv. What occurred the first time he had them ? 7 50 Answer. I did not see him make any alterations in them at that time. Ido not remember whether he sat down or not. Mr. Joseph Hopkins recalled. Question by Judge Adv. Has Mr. Martin had these books (the books in which the alterations are alleged to be made) in his hands lately, and if so, state the circumstances ? Answer. Yes ; Mr. Martin had both these books in his hands on the day that Lieutenant Corley had appeared before this Court. He had them in my presence, and pointing out to me the name Mott or Matt in each of these books. As soon as he made the remark that this was the man he was looking for, he gave the books back to me. He made no alterations in those books while he had them. Question by Judge Adv. When did you first notice the double spelling of that name, Matt or Mott ? Answer. I noticed it the morning Mr. Martin had them in his hand, — he pointed it out to me. Question by Judge Adv. Did Mr. Martin alter those books before he pointed out the double spelling ? Answer. No. Question by Judge Adv. Did Mr. Martin say anything about the double spelling ; if so, what? Answer. He said in amount, that is the man Mott or Matt, as I wrote him. 1 remarked to him, that there had been a dispute about his name. To the best of my knowledge, the name of Mott or Matt in each book is in Mr. Martin's hand-writing. The list of deceased persons is written by Mr. Martin in the August time-book, in the July time-book, — only the two last names are in Mr. Martin's hand-writing. Question by Accused. Was there any dispute or misunderstanding as to whether Mott's or Matt's given name was George or Martin? Answer. I never heard of any dispute about the first name. Mr. A. K. Martin recalled. Question by Judge Adv. Who made out the list of deceased persons, and what was the object of that list? Answer. I did at the request of Mr. Hopkins, who was making out the pay-roll. The foreman of this party had gone away, and I called upon some member of the party, — who it was, I do not recollect; — from him, and probably others of the party, I learned the substance of this list, the dates of the deaths, and the names of the individuals. I took this whole list at the same time, and from information I received from others. The way this list was made, was this : — I took down the names of those who had appeared on previous lists, and who could not be accounted for, and then I made inquiries about those. On the time-book for July, the two last names are in my hand-writing ; the others were written by Mr. Hopkins, as I read them out to him. I made out the list of deceased persons sometime in the last part of August ; we were somewhat behind-hand with our books and papers. I believe it was about the 20th August. 51 i» 4 Question by Judge Adv. Will you please state, if you know, how that double spelling of Mott or Matt's name was made, and where? Answer. In the July time-book it was written Matt ; in talking about it, it became a matter of doubt whether it was Matt or Mott, and it was changed. This change took place in July last, I believe. The name in the August time-book was taken from the July book, and I suppose the double spelling made then, so that on making inquiries among the Germans, they might understand me. Question by Accused. Are you certain you have not changed it since your return to this post ? Answer. Yes. Question by Judge Adv. Did you notice the double spelling when you saw the books in the Quarter-Master's office, — if so, did you make any remark about it to any one ? Answer. I noticed it as soon as I opened the book and found the name, and handed it to Mr. Hopkins. The witness says that judging from his hand-writing, the name on the July timebook was first written Matt, and then changed to Mott, and on the August book it was first written Mott and then changed to Matt. Question by Judge Adv. Explain how it was that Matt's name became confused ? Answer. George Martin was a labourer on Mr. Long's book. I copied from his book, George Martin, and when Mr. Hertenstein took him, he wrote his name Matt. 1 then copied from Mr. Hertenstein's list. Mr. Hertenstein was a German, and Mr. Long was an American. The Judge Advocate stated to the Court, that he should endeavor to rebut the evidence produced on the part of defence, that illness was the cause of the departure of Dr. Simons. That it was thought by the prosecution, that it could be established, that the signs of indisposition were caused by the use of stimulants, such as brandy and opium. [The Judge Advocate, from the above, certainly thought the Doctor had proven his justification of illness.] Assistant Surgeon Simons presented the paper (marked Court paper, No. 7.) The Court was then closed, and after some time was opened. The Court at 3 o'clock, P. M., adjourned until to-morrow morning, at 9 o'clock. Fort Riley, K. T., November 10th, 1855. The Court met pursuant to adjournment, — present all the members, and the Judge Advocate. Assistant Surgeon Simons in attendance. The proceedings of yesterday were read. The Judge Advocate then read the following : Mr. President and gentlemen : — I wish before the Court closes, to consider the question raised yesterday, by the defence, to say a few words in relation to the course I proposed to adopt. 52 This is a base and gratuitous inference and insinuation, wholly without evidence and directly at variance with the character of the accused. See Court papers No. 7 and let- Kirs of Majors Merrill, Sibley, and Capt. Anderson, and Dr. Southaate, that the accused was advised by his friends to avail of his legal right to object to the improper new charge, and not expose himself unnecessarily to the venom of the unprincipled quartermaster's citizen employees. The defence raised the plea of illness as justification. I submit that it. is perfectly competent and legal for the prosecution to rebut that plea, by showing that what appeared to some of the witnesses as illness, was only a state of excited alarm, which was nerved to a show of strength and occasional calmness, by the use of stimulants. It is not intended to prove drunkenness or intoxication ; it is not intended to prove any new offence, but it is intended to prove that there was no illness to justify the departure of the accused. The Court then closed, and made the following decision : That in view of the testimony for the prosecution, as well as that for the defence, being closed, except on the point presented by the Judge Advocate, the Court believing that the ends of justice do not require the course proposed by the public prosecutor, decides that further testimony shall not be admitted. The Court was opened and the decision made known. The Accused asked until Monday morning, at 9 o'clock, to prepare his defence. The Court then adjourned until Monday morning, at 9 o'clock. Fort Riley* K. T., November 12th, 1855. The Court met pursuant to adjournment > — present all the members, and the Judge Advocate. Assistant Surgeon Simons, in attendance. The proceedings of Saturday were read. The Accused then read the annexed defence The Accused then presented the paper, appended and marked (Court paper, No. 8.) The Court then closed, and after full consideration of the testimony and evidence in the case, find the Accused, Assistant Surgeon James Simons, U. S. Army, as follows: — Guilty of the Ist Specification to Ist Charge. Not Guilty of Id Specification of Ist Charge. Guilty of 3d Specification of Ist Charge. Guilty of 4th Specification of Ist Charge. Guilty of sth Specification of laf Charge. Not Guilty of 6th Specification of Ist Charge. Guilty of Ist Charge. Guilty of the Specification of the Second Charge Guilty of the Second Charge. And do sentence him, Assistant Surgeon James Simons, U. S. Army, " To be dis missed the Service of the United States." 53 4 JOS. K. F. MANSFIELD, Col. and Insp. Gen. U. S.JI., and S. C. RIDGELY, Capt. 4th Art. and Bvt. Maj., J. Adv. President of the Court. There being no further business, the Court then adjourned sine die. S. C. RIDGELY, JOS. K. F. MANSFIELD, Capt. 4th Art. and Bvt Maj., J. Adv. Col. and Insp. Gen. U. S. A., and President of the Court. The proceedings of the Court Martial having been laid before me, and having been maturely examined, the following is my decision thereon : The evidence sustains the finding upon the first specification to the first charge, and upon the first charge, but does not show that Assistant Surgeon Simons, while he remained at the post, refused or wilfully failed to give medical attendance to Major Ogden or Mrs. Woods or her son. Nor does it appear that the regulations of the Army require a medical officer to attend to the families of officers — the specification upon this point therefore is not legally tenable. The finding of guilty on the third, fourth, and fifth specifications to the first charge is not confirmed, — the acquittal on the second and sixth specifications is confirmed. The facts in the specification to the second charge are the same as the first specification to the first charge, and there is no denial of the main fact that Dr. Simons, left his post during the pestilence. He alleges in his defence that he was sick and so exhausted as no longer to be capable of attending to the sick at the post. But he did not establish this before the Court, but when the Judge Advocate offered to rebut and disprove it, he objected to the investigation, and the Court refused to make it. Still not being fully satisfied that the act of Dr. Simons was, under the circumstances, of the immoral and hishonorable or disreputable character necessary to sustain the charge under the 83d Article of War, the finding on the second charge and specification is not confirmed. I cannot, however, doubt that the facts proved sustain the first charge, and not only justify the sentence of the Court, but require that it shall be executed. Assistant Surgeon James Simons therefore ceases to be an officer of the Army. FRANKLIN PIERCE. January 16, 1856 54 [Court Paper No I.] I beg leave to say to the Court, that during the prevalence of the late epidemic at this post, I was entirely alone, and without the necessary assistance to enable me to attend to the military and overwhelming professional duties which devolved upon me. I have been violently and bitterly assailed by ex-parte statements and investigations. My conduct has been commented upon with the most acrimonious injustice in the public prints ; and in some quarters I have reason to believe that 1 have already been condemned, without my having had the slightest opportunity to defend myself or exhibit the truth. I therefore respectfully and earnestly beg the Court to divest their minds of any impressions which adverse statements and accusations may have excited, and judge me by an unprejudiced and impartial investigation of all the facts connected with the case. J. Simons, Assist, Sur. U. S. A. [Court Paper No. 2.] Plea in Bar of Triah — Second Specification, First Charge. To this specification, I beg leave to plead in bar of trial, that there is no criminality whatever, nor any neglect of duty, nor yet any breach of obligation set forth in the specification, and that though the specification be proven, the charge will not thereby be sustained — and for the following reasons, viz: A decision of the Secretary of War, in the case of Assistant Sur* geon John Campbell, U. St A., dated Washington, D. C, March 23d, 1854. A decision of the General commanding the department of the West, in reply to certain inquiries from the Acting Assistant Quarter-Master at Fort Riley, Kansas Territory. The custom of service, and the duties of a medical officer, as defined by paragraph 82 of the army regulations for the medical department, of 1850. Notwithstanding this protest, based upon the instructions of the Secretary of War, the Court try him on the charge contrary, as the President remarks, to the law and evidence, as also was the case with Mrs. Woods and family. This plea is entered, not from any reluctance to meet the accusation made in the specification, (which can be shown to be totally groundless,) but from my entire conviction, as I have already stated, that no neglect of duty, nor any breach of obligation, is contained in the matter alleged. J. Simons, Assist. Surg. U. S. A. [ Attached to Court Paper No. 2.] Head Quarters, Dept. of the West. St. Louis, Mo., Sept. 17th, 1855. Sir : — I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of the 2nd inst., in reference to the issue of medical supplies by the Assistant Surgeon at Fort Riley to the employees of the Quarter -Master's department, at that post. 55 - J- In reply, I am instructed by the Gen'l commanding the department, to refer you to General Orders, No. 20, 1851, which establishes a rule to be followed in cases similar to the one now in point. And further, it is his opinion that when practicable, the medicines and medical supplies needed by the employees of the Quarter-Master's department at Fort Riley, should be obtained from other sources than from the regular supplies for the permanent garrison of the post. I am sir, very respectfully, your ob't serv't, M. S. Hancock, Ist Lt. Adj. 6th Inf. A. A. Gen'l. Lieut. J. L. Corlet, A. A. Q. Mast., Fort Riley, K. T. (Through Comd'g. Officer.) [Attached to Court Paper No. 2.] (Copy.) Adjutant General's Office, Washington, March 23d, 1854. General :-^I have duly submitted your letter of the 28th of January last, reporting the arrest of Assistant Surgeon John Campbell, by the commander of Fort Reading, for refusing to attend gratuitously the employees of the Quarter-Master's department at that post, and requesting the decision of the War Department, whether the condition of those men is considered as bringing them within the provisions of "General Orders" No. 20, of 1851, directing such attendance to be furnished to employees of the Staff departments, " On marches and at distant posts or stations, where other medical aid cannot be obtained." — In reply, I am instructed by the Secretary of War to say, that in carrying out the regulation cited, commanding officers are expected to exercise a sound discretion in determining the cases to which it is applicable ; but he does not think the commander of Fort Reading has made a proper discrimination in the present instance. It appears from the papers forwarded, that within a reasonable distance of the post there are several private physicians, who, in case of sickness, could be called to attend the citizens employed by the Quarter-Master's department, and two of those physicians certify that it is their daily practice to ride from ten to twenty miles to see their patients. This statement receives confirmation from Bvt. Col. Wright's own course in employing, (at a heavy rate of compensation,) Dr. Slack, a resident of Cottenwood, twelve miles from Fort Reading, to attend the troops at that post. It would clearly seem, therefore, that the case of the employees in question, is not one of that absolute necessity, contemplated by General Orders No. 20, " where other medical aid cannot be obtained," but that they stand in regard to medical attendance on the same footing as other citizens of California ; and the high wages paid them ought surely to be adequate to meet their ordinary expenses in this respect. I am further instructed by the Secretary of War, to express his regret, that, instead of placing Assistant Surgeon Campbell in close arrest, and throwing a heavy charge on the medical department by employing a citizen physician to perform his duties, Bvt. Col. Wright did not pursue the course recommended in paragraph 299 56 of the General Regulations. Doctor Campbell will be released from arrest, and with a view to the harmony of the service, ordered from Fort Reading to some other station. I have the honor to be, General, your ob't serv't, (Signed) S. Cooper, Adjutant General. Bvt. Brig. Gen'l E. A. Hitchcock, or Comd'g Officer, Dep't of the Pacific, San Francisco, Cal Adjutant General's Office, Washington, Sept. 27th, 1855. [ A true copy,] Seth Williams, Assist. Adj. Gen'l. [Court Paper No. 3.] Fort Rilet, July 28th, 1855. Men employed in the Quarter-Master's department, who need medical attendance, if too ill to work, will call at the hospital between the hours of half-past 7 and halfpast 8, A. M. Others, whose illness does not preclude their attention to their usual employment, will call at the hospital immediately after the evening signal to cease work. E. A. Ogden, Assist. Quarter-Master. [Court Paper No. 4.] Fort Riley, K. T., August 2d, ]855. If there were no other evidence for the defence, is not this evidence sufficient to prove his illness, the want of which is the only ground upon which the President condemns him. Sir, — The prevalence of cholera among the soldiers and the citizens employed at this post, in the Quarter-Master's department, has devolved an excessive amount of labor upon Doctor Simons, who reports himself this morning, worn out and unable to proceed with his duties. As there are yet no decided indications of relief from the epidemic, I respectfully request from the General commanding, that a medical officer of experience may be temporarily assigned to duty here, with orders to report here as soon as possible. Very respectfully, your obedient servant. E. A. Ogden, Assist. Qr. Master. Major O. F. Winship, Assist. Adjt. Gen. Hd. Q,rs. Sioux Expedition (A true copy.) R. Ransom, Jr., Lieut. Adjt. J. Corlet 57 " J [Court Paper No. 5.] (Copy.) Fort Riley, K. T., July 17th, 1855. Colonel, — With the consent of his Company Commander, Bvt. Major S. Woods, I have to request that Jacob Hommes, E Co. 6th Inft., be transferred to the hospital department, and attached to one of the companies at, or to be stationed at this post. Hommes has been acting nine years in the capacity of hospital steward, and is one of the most competent persons I have ever had under me in that capacity. His services would be infinitely more valuable in the hospital, than in the ranks of the army. I am sir, very respectfully, your obd't servant, J. Simons, Ass't Surg. U. S. A. S. Cooper, Adjt. Gen'l U. S. A., Washington, D. C. [Court Paper No. 6.] Fort Riley, K. T., July 15th, 1855. Major, — The late order for Major Woods to proceed with his company to Fort Kearney, has deprived me of my hospital steward, (Jacob Hommes, Company E, 6th Infantry,) and left me with a large number of sick, without any person capable of making up an ordinary prescription. As it is probable that the company will not act by itself, and as I understand, there are two or more stewards at Kearney, I should be happy if he could be ordered to return to this post. Should circumstances prevent the company from returning to this place, the steward could join with the invalids left at this post. I am, Sir, very respectfully, your obd't serv't, J. Simons, Assist. U. S. Surg. Major O. F. Winship, Assist. Adjt. Gen. Sioux Expedition. [ Court Paper No. 7.] Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Court : — I object to the proceedings which the Judge Advocate proposes to institute. Nowhere in the Charges and Specifications, upon which I stand arraigned before you, do I find myself accused of drunkenness. " Drunkenness" on duty, or drunkenness to any degree which might interfere with a proper discharge of duty, is, in a commissioned officer, a distinct military offence, and punishable by the Articles of War. The Judge Advocate may offer testimony to prove that I was not sick, nor enfeebled ; but to introduce evidence of intoxication, would be to call up new matter for charges and specifications against me ; and I therefore, respectfully request that the proposition of the Judge Advocate be not entertained. J. Simons, Assist. Surg'n U. S. A. 8 58 [Court Paper Sfo. B.] Extract from British and Foreign Medico- Chirurgical Review for July, 1855, — Jlrtick, Epidemic Cholera. The Report of the Treatment Committee is of a nature which See how completely his treatment in all things is sustained by Doctors Souihgate, Mills, Hammond and the Medical Faculty of Maryland, as to the removal of troops. renders it almost impossible to present to our readers a summary of the results. It is, in fact, a summary of returns received from the members of the profession, and contains numerous tables which require and deserve careful study. The general conclusions deduced . from them as to the relative success of the different modes of treatment in cholera cases, are given in the following extract: The evidence of the tables condemns the Eliminant Treatment altogether, as a principle of practice. It testifies against the stimulant principle, excepting as a resource in extreme cases. It displays a decided advantage in the alterative principle, especially as carried out by calomel and opium, and it shows a still superior advantage in the astringent principle as applied through the means of chalk and opium : the general percentage of deaths, following each plan of treatment, being — Of Eliminants, 71.7 Stimulants, 54. Alteratives, Calomel and Opium, 36.2 Astringents, Chalk and Opium, 20.3 Dr. Hammond having been examined as to the above says, the Journal in which it is found, is the highest medical authority in the world — and that it is furnished by authority of the medical department of our army, to the officers of the department. S. C. RIDGELY, Judge Advocate.