immediate command of the prisoners, and the guard acted under his orders. The name of the officer of the day is not reported. Dr. G. W. Fitzpatrick, acting assistant surgeon, was the surgeon in charge, and for this neglect I respectfully recommend that Lieutenant-Colonel Poten and the officer of the day, if he can be found, be brought to trial for their misconduct, and that Doctor Fitzpatrick, if he knew of the wounding of the prisoner at the time, be discharged from the service.
I have the honor to submit also the first report received from Colonel Wallace. Lieutenant-Colonel Poten states, in the case of Hupman, that he was "put directly under treatment of the surgeon in charge of the prison hospital," while the surgeon, Doctor Fitzpatrick, states that he did not see the wounded man until the following morning at 11 o'clock when making his regular visit.
To meet such cases in future I have given instructions that whenever a prisoner is shot by a sentinel a board of officers will be immediately ordered to investigate the case and make a full report of all the particulars, which is to be forwarded by the commanding officer with his remarks to this office, and I have at the same time requested that both the guard and the prisoners be made fully acquainted with the orders by which they are to be governed. *
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
Colonel Third Infantry and Commissary-General of Prisoners.
[Inclosure Numbers 7.]
HEADQUARTERS U. S. FORCES,
Camp Chase, Columbus, Ohio, March 8, 1864.
Colonel WILLIAM HOFFMAN,
Commissary-General of Prisoners, Washington, D. C.:
COLONEL: In answer to your communication of January 27, 1864, in regard to the shooting of certain prisoners of war confined at this post and in obedience to your instructions therein contained, I have the honor to report-
That having taken command of this post on the 11th of February, 1864, and being without any personal knowledge of these occurrences, I have found it extremely difficult to comply fully with your instructions in regard to the nature and the particularity of the circumstances of each of these cases. Had a full report been made at the time of each occurrence everything of importance could have been easily ascertained, but the lapse of time and the absence of many persons whose evidence would have thrown much light upon the whole subject has rendered it impossible to make a satisfactory report.
It appears that during the months of September, October, November, and December of 1863 fears were entertained that an attempt would be made by disloyal persons in this State to liberate the prisoners confined at this post, and a very decided spirit of mutiny prevailed among the prisoners, arising, as was supposed, from their knowledge of the intentions of the persons referred to. Attempts to escape were frequent and persistent, and consequently the increased vigilance and severity were demanded on the part of the persons responsible for their safe-keeping. Under these circumstances, it is not surprising that the orders in regard to their conduct would be severe, and that they would sometimes be hastily and improperly executed. From the affidavits
*For inclosures 1,2,3,4,5, and 6, see Wallace to Hoffman, January 19, and its inclosures, pp. 854-856.