Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1862-11-27
ARMY CORRESPONDENTS.
letter from The Surgeon of the srh v

We have received very lengthy letter
from Enoch Blanchard Surgeon of the 7th
Vermont Regiment, in reply to some structures
upon the Medical Department of the Regiment
contained in the letter Of Lieut., Col,Fullam,
which we published several weeks ago, The
letter is too long to publish in extenso at this
late day, especially, when the controversy has
has in the main passed from the minds Of cur
readers and besides we are reluctant to open
our columns to a discussion involving personal
! matters. At the same time, it is but Just, in
asmuch as serious reflections were cast by
Lieut. Col, Fullam upon the Surgeon of the
18th regiment, that that officer should have the
opportunity to defend himself. We therefore
condense from his letter the matters of fact
upon which he relies in refutation of the
charges of Lieut.. Col. Fullam, and in defence
of his conduct, previous to and upon the occa-
sion of the battle of Baton Rouge.
Surgeon Blanchard complains, to begin
with, that while the proposed object of Col.
Fullam's letter was to defend the Regiment
from the burden of the charges of Gen. But
Ter, he goes out of the way to "lug in re-
peated pufs for himself and unfavorable re-
Elections on the Surgeons" and that he even
L" charges them with cowardice.n Surgeon
Blanchard then continues:
"He Lieut.. Col. Fuilaml begins by ar
raignlng Surgeon Kelly for not obeying his
order to 90 with the regiment up the river,
when he knows, and knew at the time he re-
peated the order and sent the corporal, that
DR.. Kelly had been selected by Gen. Phelps
as acting Brigade Surgeon, and that ii was ar
ranged between the General and Col. Roberts
that he should remain and act in that capacity
and take charge of the sick of the regiment
who were left behind. Why does not the wri-
ter honestly tell his readers that he preferred
orders against DR.. Kelly and tried to get him
court martialed for disobedience of orders, and
had his charges returned TO him Immediately
/ by General Phelps with an endorsement that
would at least have sllenCed any other man
forever on that point2 Why does he not like
an honest men tell the whole story or say moth
lng2 Further on he attributes all our want
oi medicines and hospital stores TO the disobe-
dience of this order, which he says provided
for hospital stores in such abundance. But
let us refer him and his readers to his written
order now in my possession, which reads as
follows: "The Surgeon will prepare to join
the regiment Immediately, without baggage,
but with supply of medicines and instru
ments, and be ready to proceed lin light march
ing order on board the transport"
''Both the Surgeon of our own and neigh
boring regiment who happened to be present,
sack as that is all that could be carried " in
light marching order" But medicine chest
was taken contain ng an abundant supply of
medicines for two WEE ks which was far beyond
what any body supposed would be the extent
of our separation from our baggage and sup
plies. And | was repeatedly complained of
by the temporary and accidental commander
of the regiment-the very man who puts mein
the newspaper for not taking more-beeause
my chest took up so much room in the only
place where it could be carried, on ship-board.
His own order is responsible for our want of
hospital stores, for how could they be taken
"without baggage" and "in light marching Or
derP' How does this egotlstcal and mali
cous insnuation tend to exonerate the regi-
ment from Gen. Buffers charges But it is
only justice to say that he has never been
blamed by anybody Tor our beng "without
baggage" although the officers suffered much
inconvenience from the want of the contents
of our trunks, as we'll as the men from the
want of tents. But it was supposed to be in
compliance with orders direct from headquar-
tiers . ..E
Again he says that on his return from the
ex oedition at Grand Gulph he "frst learned
that our Assistant Surgeon, who had disem-
barked with the troops prepared for the
march, had, without leave, skunk away on
: board the boat, leaving US entirely unprovided
for"
To this charge and its answer / would ask
part cular attention; as could the writer sus-
tain it before a court -martial, he could have
! the satisfaction Of seeing the said Assistant
J Surgeon justly dismissed the service. He
, never dared make such a charge to the proper
2 authority here, but goes two thousand miles
e away and drags it into newspaper article
If that charge is true, he neglected his duty in
not having it prosecuted and punished; and if
not true, his readers can draw their own CON
illusions as to the spirit IN which 1t Yves pub
: ished," ....... -.. a.
t Surgeon Blanchard here proceeds to make
some serious charges against the Lieut. COL
f but which, not being material to his defence
/ we omit He proceeds:
/ 1t is to be regretted that he should suffer SC
much /" chagrn" that neither of the Surg ons
were on the battle fed at Baton Rouge. Ht
may however, extend his chagrin to the rest o
4 the seven regiments present, as | can learn o
! but one medical officer who was on the field
, during the battle. All the rest were at theil
proper posts in their respective Hospitals at
S tending to the wounded, for which in our regi
S ment ample means for immediate transportation
had been provided by the Surgeon and Quar-
, termaster; and as our Hospital was just in tn
n rear of the extreme right of the line where tn
!, hardest fighting was done, wounded men from
n other regiments began to be brought in sool
after the firing began, followed soon after b.