The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1898-09-28
The Chickamauga Camp.

The Chattanooga Times publishes an
explanation of the sickness at Chicka.
manga Park by the surgeon of the gen.
eral hospital, Major II. Emmett Giffen.
Major Giffen, the Times says, was
placed in charge Of Sternberg hospital
at the Park because of his recognized
ability and experience in handling
large bodies of sick. He has made
study of the conditions existing at the
camp, which he finds in "one of the
healthiest locations in the entire
country" "no more desirable place
could have been found anywhere"
The trouble was "the neglect of the
proper care and precautions to preserve
health"
Among the fragrant abuses Major
Giffen points out was the location of
sinks within fifty feet of the company
kitchen, when they should have been
at least three hundred feet away.
These "were left unprotected, the
proper disinfectants were not used, the
most foul odors were allowed to escape
from them," and, as a natural result,
"almost any one in the world" no mat
ter how robust, "would have been
made sick in as close proximity to the
sinks as were the soldiers at this
camp" Maj,r Giffen lays the blame
for the condition of things at the Park
on the regimental and company Off
GERS. He says:
1.-THE surgeons cannot enforce rules and
regulations; they can only make recommen-
dations, and here their authority in this re-
spect ends. The records will show that the
proper orders in reference to the proper
sanitary conditions OF the Park were issued
but that the regimental and company COM
manders simply neglected and failed to put
them into execution. From the results Of
my investigations of the Park can express
the entire situation in the following sem
tence: The sickness at Chickamauga Park
has been caused by the improper and neg
ligent manner in which the sanitary regula-
tions, recommended by the army surgeons,
have been enforced. That is the situation
in nutshell"
That is to say the regimental and
company officers were running vast
military camp over which a general of
the regular army had been placed in
command. This seems to be "the sit
uation in NUTSHELL" reduced to its
last analysis. What was the general in
command and his staff there for? To
look on while the regimental and COM
pany officers were disregarding orders
and wantonly creating conditions Soon
ducive to ill health? If the command
er was commanding, if he was compe-
tent to command and was attending to
the first duties of his office, why were
not these delinquent regimental and
company officers brought into subjec-
ton to the superior authority Major
Citizens "explanation'' constitutes an
other of the long and melancholy Sc
ries of indictments that have been
brought against the army management
at every step of its course in creating
an army, providing for it in camp at
home, in its active operations in a
tropical climate, or in bringing it back
from the scenes of it's awful hardships
and in ministering to its sick and
wounded and enfeeblsd members. The
primal responsibility was in the general
commanding. 1t was his business to
know if the proper measures were
taken to preserve the health of the
camp, if the proper orders were issued,
and enforce obedience upon careless
or negligent regimental and company
officers.