This notation absolutely makes me ill

[Keiri]

http://imgur.com/C0NqJhj

 

[Allie]

I assume the Col Doran is the fellow from this previous thread?

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/what-happened-to-col-john-doran.120057/

Sorry not to be much help but it looks like you're uncovering some interesting stories!

 

[Frederick14Va]

Obviously someone was not maintaining the regimental records properly..... lots of folks not being accurately accounted for as required.... sloppy record keeping.... This page was probably a segment of a larger document... The Adjutant seems to be trying to defend himself from blame.

 

[Don Dixon]

Its called fraud. Soldiers become absent from the regiment due to death, sickness or desertion. The Colonel "neglects" to report their absence and collects their pay and rations and pockets it. This type of situation was the reason for the creation of the Inspector General system in the British Army in the 1700s; to ensure the regiment actually had the number of soldiers and arms the King was paying the colonel for, since the King was essentially renting the regiment from the colonel. In the present day the "ghost soldier" game is a very common form of graft in second and third world armies.

Regards,
Don Dixon

 

[Frederick14Va]

In the ACW, the respective Colonel would not be receiving anyone's pay other than his own. The Federal Army had Paymasters... Confederate Army had Quartermaster Officers that were detailed for the duty. Pay was done by them direct to the soldiers in question, which each had to sign (or give their mark) for on several copies of pay vouchers as record, after being properly identified by their First Sgt of each company in turn as he stood by at the table alongside...

 

[Allie]

In the ACW, the respective Colonel would not be receiving anyone's pay other than his own. The Federal Army had Paymasters... Confederate Army had Quartermaster Officers that were detailed for the duty. Pay was done by them direct to the soldiers in question, which each had to sign (or give their mark) for on several copies of pay vouchers as record, after being properly identified by their First Sgt of each company in turn as he stood by at the table alongside...

That's not going to be true in hospital, though, is it? At the very least, the men of each company will not have any first sergeant present.

 

[Keiri]

Wouldn't put it past Doran to have forged signatures. He was a real winner. Anyway, just to clarify to Frederick14va, I took a photo of this document at the Madison Wisconsin Historical Society Archives yesterday and I cropped it to the relevant portion just to post here. I kept the entire sheet photo separate but it doesn't add anything to this except a date and his accounting for the soldiers he referenced in the selected portion.

 

[MajGenl.Meade]

What was the date on the document? I scanned the 17th names and didn't see a particularly inordinate number of deaths from disease - still less of men who probably should have been discharged (by Grant????). Doran may have been a blot on the landscape but he managed to "kill" all these lads in less than (say) 10 months, allowing time for them not to have actually caught a disease for the first few weeks he was in charge???? Seems a bit unlikely - perhaps the writer had an axe to grind? Interesting stuff that - great find

 

[Frederick14Va]

That's not going to be true in hospital, though, is it? At the very least, the men of each company will not have any first sergeant present.

On the very rare occasions that pay is dispersed to those within a general hospital environment, the pay is to be dispersed in the same manner. Hospital Clerk and/or Hospital Steward in charge generally serving as the notary and adjutant, based upon the hospital registry and identification of the patients present. Voucher copies sent to their respective regiment for record.

It was not typical to simply hand a third party a pile of cash to go give out pay with... The detailed Quartermaster Officer had to account for every penny. Not to say that there might have been some dishonest folks out there... but the existing checks and balances, also the obnoxious levels of repetitive auditing of books and accounts would make a ploy a bit difficult to accomplish void of detection...

 

[Keiri]

Doran resigned in December, 1862. This document was signed as of December 10, 1862. By then, by my count, 116 men had died in the unit since they left for Pittsburgh landing. That includes those wounded or killed in Corinth, of course, but that was about 6 of them, 10 if you count those who died from wounds. The rest died from typhoid, chronic diarrhea, or other sicknesses like them.

 

[ole]

Doran resigned in December, 1862. This document was signed as of December 10, 1862. By then, by my count, 116 men had died in the unit since they left for Pittsburgh landing. That includes those wounded or killed in Corinth, of course, but that was about 6 of them, 10 if you count those who died from wounds. The rest died from typhoid, chronic diarrhea, or other sicknesses like them.

We've gone through this before, Keiri. What one was immune to varied with where one was from. Just for an example, troops from Pennsylvania may well have been immune from measles while troops from Illinois were not.

While, on the other hand, troops from Iowa might have been more resistant to intestinal bugs than those from Ohio.

Who's to know?

 

[Keiri]

Wait, immunity? I'm confused. We're just talking about the allegation made by his adjutant that Doran let soldiers die in the hospital rather than sending them home.

 

[MajGenl.Meade]

Allegation is the key word there. Thanks for the detailed info - but I still don't quite get it. As of December 1862 (Doran resigned Nov 25 '62), this adjutant claims that:

1. There are 91 men absent sick in hospital
2. Most of them are doubtless (so he says) already discharged by Grant but the papers have been suppressed by Doran
3. When he resigned, Doran handed over discharge papers of many poor fellows now in their graves... these discharges predated their decease

I have questions, not least of which is why should anyone believe the adjutant?

a. Men absent sick in hospital cannot be discharged until they are better and out of hospital or perhaps they die. A colonel cannot order men out of hospital treatment just to tell 'em to bugger off
b. What on earth is "General Grant" doing issuing discharges to anyone?
c. Were any of these 91 men now in hospital actually discharged and if so, which ones?
d. Why were any of them discharged - none had fulfilled their term of service?
e. Who were the "many poor fellows" and did they die in hospital with a discharge pending (see a. above)

As I stated before, Doran seems to be a bad apple one way or another but is this particular allegation logical, believable and true?

 

[Keiri]

I must disagree with you on a because in Wisconsin, at least, it was standard procedure to send ill men home to recuperate. Some men would even re-enlist after being discharged for disability. The problem I have is that I have the date the discharges were *approved* -- many are listed as "discharged for disability" on their online records through the WDVA - but I don't know if they were given to them. Also, I don't know that the discharge papers are even documented anywhere. I have pulled all boxes at the Madison Wisconsin Historical society, and though I ran out of time looking at the last box of correspondence, they did not have the orders there. I'm hoping they are at the WDVA or I'm out of luck. So it's impossible for me to say whether or not what the adjutant wrote was true.

b - I know Grant took over some "petty" duties when he was demoted under Halleck. Those discharge papers could feasibly have been signed by Grant. I haven't confirmed this with his papers.

c. The 91 men were not listed by name in this document, just numbered with hatch marks. Not terribly helpful for me to make a comparison.

I'm completely with you on the "suspending my belief" somewhat unless I get additional information, but I will say this - if this is true, it makes me very upset.

 

[Allie]

Allegation is the key word there. Thanks for the detailed info - but I still don't quite get it. As of December 1862 (Doran resigned Nov 25 '62), this adjutant claims that:

1. There are 91 men absent sick in hospital
2. Most of them are doubtless (so he says) already discharged by Grant but the papers have been suppressed by Doran
3. When he resigned, Doran handed over discharge papers of many poor fellows now in their graves... these discharges predated their decease

I have questions, not least of which is why should anyone believe the adjutant?

a. Men absent sick in hospital cannot be discharged until they are better and out of hospital or perhaps they die. A colonel cannot order men out of hospital treatment just to tell 'em to bugger off
b. What on earth is "General Grant" doing issuing discharges to anyone?
c. Were any of these 91 men now in hospital actually discharged and if so, which ones?
d. Why were any of them discharged - none had fulfilled their term of service?
e. Who were the "many poor fellows" and did they die in hospital with a discharge pending (see a. above)

As I stated before, Doran seems to be a bad apple one way or another but is this particular allegation logical, believable and true?

I think what you seem to be suggesting is even more unlikely, which is that someone who was a specialist in the procedures and paperwork of the era, and actually lived then, would accuse someone in a way that got everything wrong (which surely the people he was writing to would notice) while you, from this distance of time and limited by modern research, get all the details right.

If he were going to invent a false accusation, wouldn't he logically try to make the details plausible?