Canadian Military History

Volume 17 Issue 1 Article 5

2008

Medical Care of American POWs during the

Gareth A. Newfield Canadian War Museum, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh

Part of the Military History Commons

Recommended Citation Newfield, Gareth A. "Medical Care of American POWs during the War of 1812." Canadian Military History 17, 1 (2008)

This Canadian War Museum is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Military History by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Newfield: Medical Care of POWs

Medical Care of American POWs during the War of 1812

Gareth A. Newfield

n 2005, a service in Halifax upkeep was difficult, rendering medical Icommemorated US soldiers and care often chaotic. British medical sailors who perished in Britain’s Melville officers none the less cared for captives Island prisoner-of-war camp during adequately and comparably to the way the War of 1812 and whose remains they assisted their own forces. now lie on Deadman’s Island, a nearby peninsula. The service culminated Organization nearly a decade of debate, in which local Processing the Sick and history enthusiasts, the Canadian and Wounded American media, and Canadian and US politicians rescued the property ew formal conventions dealt with the from developers. The media in particular had Ftreatment of prisoners of war during highlighted the prisoners’ struggles with disease the period. While it was common for combatant and death, often citing the sombre memoirs of nations to agree upon temporary conventions survivors.1 Curiously, Canadian investigators once hostilities commenced, generally it was relied largely upon American accounts and did quasi-chivalric sentiments, notions of Christian little research on efforts at amelioration from the conduct, and a sense of humanitarian obligation British perspective. that moderated treatment of prisoners, allowing, for example, parole for officers and sometimes for Coverage has emphasized British cruelty, enlisted personnel and care for sick and wounded citing accounts of internees such as that edited by soldiers. Therein, most nations had basic Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse (an American medical guidelines for medical treatment, but practice officer) and American deaths at the hands of depended very much on available resources and guards at Dartmoor Prison in England during a the host country’s attitudes. British military policy riot in April 1815,2 while ignoring more positive provided for such treatment, which in North elements, such as medical care. America was nominally similar to that elsewhere, but pragmatism and local circumstances shaped This article explores British medical care the structure of care both in combat and in for American prisoners of war in terms of internment. organization, delivery, treatments and results, and US observations on the matter. In fact, Most prisoners coming in touch with British British medical authorities addressed problems medical authorities had sustained combat wounds in the custody system and provided humane and that needed immediate attention. Generally, compassionate medical care. Army Medical Department or regimental doctors performed these duties on land, while Royal In the absence of international codes for the Navy and Provincial Marine medical officers did treatment of prisoners and substantial provision so afloat. Memoirs and letters from the conflict for handling thousands of prisoners of war, document British medics treating captured

© Canadian Military History, Volume 17, Number 1, Winter 2008, pp.49-62. 49

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2008 1

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 49 14/02/2008 12:58:10 PM Canadian Military History, Vol. 17 [2008], Iss. 1, Art. 5 Courtesy Parks Canada

“Visite des malades” by Eugène Lelièpvre A British officer inspecting the sick in hospital, 1813. British and American officers appointed as agents at internment facilities monitored the health of American prisoners and arranged for medical treatment.

Americans. Assistant Surgeon William “Tiger” the only medical officer on the Island I had my Dunlop of the British 89th Regiment wrote about hands full for half an hour on their arrival.4 doing so at the siege of Fort Erie in 1814: Measures such as long-term hospitalization, After the action was over, and it was drawing re-dressing of wounds, and surgery following towards dusk, I rapidly traversed the ground, complications took place later. If casualties and finding only a few of the enemy, I ordered overwhelmed medical services, the British them to be carried to the hospital, but I preceded them to make preparations for their reception. could parole and repatriate enemy casualties When nearing the Camp, I found a party of the for treatment, as they did after the Battle of band of our Regiment carrying an American Heights.5 In January 1814, Assistant officer mortally wounded…I ordered them to lay Surgeon Alexander Ogilvie of the Royal Artillery him down, and set myself to dress his wound.3 advocated this for two officers captured at Fort Niagara: “Lt. Balch is in a very bad state of health Assistant Surgeon William Robertson of the 49th from the wound he received which is [illegible] did likewise at Isle aux Noix, after the defeat of and that he will lose the use of his arm in American gunboats on Lake Champlain in June consequence. I found Lieut. Baldridge confined to 1813: his bed with nervous fever and understood from the garrison surgeon that he has been confined There were ten wounded & one killed of the Americans only two of our men wounded being for several months previous, he still continues in a very bad state of health.”6 50

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol17/iss1/5 2

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 50 14/02/2008 12:58:11 PM Newfield: Medical Care of POWs

If circumstances forbade such an exchange, built a prisoner-of-war camp at Melville Island authorities forwarded patients to detention in 1803 to house French prisoners captured in facilities at Quebec and at Halifax to complete North American waters, and the facility remained their convalescence and await their ultimate fate. operational in 1812. Captain Kempt (Royal When prisoners were interned, medical treatment Navy agent for prisoners at Quebec) wrote to Sir officially became the responsibility of the Royal George Prevost’s staff in June 1813: “Halifax is Navy; its Transport Board superintended delivery an old and well established depot where every of troops and materiel to British forces around necessary store has been sent from England, and the globe and also interned and maintained a medical officer appointed by the board.”10 prisoners, having in 1796 taken over the latter tasks from the Admiralty’s Sick and Hurt Board, In response to complaints about conditions which had sustained charges of neglecting at Melville Island, Lieutenant William Miller, prisoners. the Royal Navy’s prisoner agent at Halifax admonished prisoners by reminding them of the The Transport Board employed a naval availability of medical care: “There is a surgeon officer as agent for prisoners at each internment here for you if you are sick, and physic for you to facility, and he supervised their welfare and take if you are sick, and a hospital to go to into the administration. An American officer or diplomat bargain … and if you are not satisfied with this, was also appointed by either the Transport you may die and be d---d.”11 Although supplies Board or the American government (depending and infrastructure were apparently adequate, on circumstances) as the U.S. agent to liaise with British authorities and arrange medical treatment when necessary. The Transport Board’s policy regarding sick prisoners was as follows: “Sick prisoners have the option of going to the Hospitals at the regular [i.e. British military] depots for Medical or Surgical Treatment.”7 It also defined standards of medical care and emphasized that “Sick Prisoners in confinement are treated in every respect the same as Sick Seamen of the Royal Navy.”8 Archives of Ontario, S.17142 Although the general process of medical care for prisoners of war seemed straightforward, in British North America conditions made it very complex.

A System in Crisis

roblems within the prisoner-of-war system Pand medical departments caused confusion and inefficiency and hampered the efforts of British medical officers. West of Halifax, increasingly makeshift arrangements emerged for internment and long-term care.

The key problem was control by the Transport Board, which concentrated on its supply duties.9 Most of British North America’s infrastructure for prisoners of war was in Halifax, the Royal Navy’s primary base on this continent. The navy had

Assistant Surgeon William “Tiger” Dunlop, 89th Regiment. Dunlop treated wounded Americans following several engagements in .

51

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2008 3

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 51 14/02/2008 12:58:11 PM Canadian Military History, Vol. 17 [2008], Iss. 1, Art. 5 History Collection, Nova Scotia Museum

“Melville Island from the North East” by J.E. Woolford, 1817. The prisoners’ hospital is in this view to the left of and partly obscured by the hill upon which the commandant’s quarters sits.

rivalry between physicians occasionally caused Hospital Establishment can be formed by an difficulties. In 1814 Surgeon Rowlands (chief of order from home.”14 the naval hospital at the Halifax dockyard, whom some called a drunken bully) arranged for the Yet the army’s medical establishment could dismissal of the competent and well-respected do little to assist. In Lower Canada, it was short Surgeon Hume, who had served at Melville Island of medical staff. Writing from Isle aux Noix in for more than a decade.12 1813, Assistant Surgeon Robertson complained: “All winter I had charge of a General Hospital at Still, the Transport Board had failed to St Johns [St. Jean] and for the last two months provide facilities for prisoners anywhere else in have been the only medical man at this post British North America. Even at Quebec, capital where there ought to be three. However, we of the North American colonies and a crucial have a hard duty lately for the scarcity of Army military fortress, the British cobbled together Surgeons in this country, more are daily expected prisoner arrangements (including medical care) from England.”15 None the less, the under-staffed from scratch only in 1813. Despite the presence Army Medical Department took charge. Hospital of Captain Kempt, the city boasted no naval Mate William Clark at Quebec attended to medical officers and few medical supplies for captives held offshore in old, dismasted prison prisoners. When Prevost’s staff complained to hulks: “The vessels…and the number of men ill Kempt about the situation in the summer of 1813, with dysentery, and other troublesome diseases Kempt cited lack of directives and support from rendered the duty extremely hard and fatiguing London, assuring Prevost’s military secretary that so much so that it brought on a fever of which I “when the like arrangement has taken place here, was several days confined to bed, and which has things shall be done with the same facility [as at once very materially injured my constitution.”16 Halifax].”13 Kempt proposed temporary transfer Occasionally, officials appointed civilian doctors of prisoners’ medical treatment in Upper and to alleviate the shortages. Clark remembered that Lower Canada to the army: “I therefore humbly a Mr. Horseman, “a practitioner of medicine in suggest…the charge and expense of victualling, this local [sic] was appointed assistant surgeon clothing &c. the sick in hospital to be done by and dispenser [pharmacist] to the hospital for the military department, until a proper Naval prisoners of war” and received more pay than

52

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol17/iss1/5 4

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 52 14/02/2008 12:58:12 PM Newfield: Medical Care of POWs

he.17 Horseman’s appointment suggests that demand for military buildings of every sort. With Kempt may have taken on additional personnel to hospitals crowded, British medical authorities the naval establishment on his own initiative. found it difficult to house the wounded of either side. In Upper Canada, such problems continued well into 1814, and medical authorities had Aboard ship, sick and injured men normally to improvise. Long-term treatment was nearly received treatment in the sick berth, whose impossible. The Royal Navy in Upper Canada size and location depended on the vessel. On was chronically short of doctors, and occasionally rated ships, the British usually placed it under had to borrow army doctors to serve on ships in the forecastle on the upper deck, where space, action.18 Recalling fighting in the Niagara region light, and ventilation were good; arrangements in 1814, Assistant Surgeon Dunlop of the 89th on smaller Great Lakes vessels are unclear.25 Regiment noted ruefully that “the [medical] Staff However, the upper deck was exposed, and in of the army was never where it was wanted… battle the cockpit, below the waterline, served for when there was hardly a regiment in the field surgery and triage. If heavy casualties flooded the that had its full compliment of medical officers.”19 sick berth or the cockpit, naval surgeons could Nor were post-triage procedures or acquisition of also use the hold, cable tier, and other interior supplies clear cut. British medical authorities in areas. the field hardly knew how to obtain resources for enemy patients, and even senior medical officers On land, the British hospitalized enemy had to seek instructions in mid-campaign.20 wounded alongside their own in whatever structures were available. Dunlop recalled that British forces in Upper Canada sometimes after the Battle of Lundy’s Lane, the wounded relied on the assistance of American doctors and stayed in the ruins of Butler’s Barracks, near resources. On 31 January 1813, Surgeon’s Mate Fort George: “Upon enquiring where my wounded McKeehan of the 2nd Regiment of Ohio Militia were to be put, I was shown a ruinous fabric, crossed near Detroit to tend wounded from the built of logs…Nothing could be worse constructed Battle of the River Raisin.21 Five months later, the for an hospital for wounded men…There was a British permitted a Dr. Young of the 14th Infantry to treat US wounded after the American capture of Fort George.22 Brigadier General Dearborn soon dispatched supplies and clothing to Young.23 Young was ordered to remain with the British to tend to 40 wounded Americans, after he tried several times to return to US lines.24

Overall British strategy during the War of 1812 prioritized the defence of Quebec and Halifax at all costs, in which case the medical chaos in Upper Canada is perhaps not surprising. However, the disorder at Quebec, the largest and most important garrison in British North America, was striking. NSARM Map Collection, Acc. No. 240-1812 NSARM Map Collection, Conditions Hospitals

rovision of hospitals remained a problem Pthroughout the war. Most military facilities suited a peacetime garrison, and the war sparked

Detail of the map of Melville Island prison drawn by J.G. Toler in 1812, showing the prison’s medical complex including the hospital, fuel shed, cook house, privy, and sentry boxes.

53

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2008 5

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 53 14/02/2008 12:58:12 PM Canadian Military History, Vol. 17 [2008], Iss. 1, Art. 5

Map of Quebec City and garrison, 1804. The Hôpital Général, near which the prisoner hospital at Lower Bijou was established in 1813, is shown at the upper left.

Halifax received treatment there. At Quebec, vessels converted into hospital ships initially housed sick prisoners. Unlike prison hulks, these vessels had open gunports; removal of bulkheads permitted division into wards for different ailments and increased space, while air scuttles cut into the ship’s sides improved ventilation.29 Financial statements from the Transport Board indicate that the British modified both the captured USS Nautilus and Jane (a merchantman) in this manner for use as floating hospitals.30 Still, these small vessels could not accommodate large numbers of sick men in the conditions that Transport

Canadian War Museum, 19870174-040 Canadian War Board regulations required. Brigadier General Winchester, an American agent for prisoners at Quebec, also recognized the great want of room, so that many had to be laid potential for a major outbreak of disease to on straw on the floor, and these had the best of overwhelm these ships. He wrote to Sir George it, for their comrades were put into berths one Prevost: “Between two and three hundred men above the other as in a transport packet, where crowded together in our vessels in the heat of it was impossible to dress their wounds, and summer I fear will produce diseases that will their removal gave them excruciating pain.”26 carry many of them off…I take the liberty to Nearby civilian houses sometimes sheltered ask for them to be landed and confined in some wounded. Dunlop worried that this practice [illegible] building during the summer months or exposed American patients to local vengeance.27 encamped in this parish.”31 Conversely, Mary Warren Breakenridge, a civilian living in York, Upper Canada, remembered Long-term treatment of sick prisoners that after the US attack in April 1813 local required larger facilities on land, and the women received wounded American officers absence of infrastructure for handling prisoners in their homes and that “they were entertained exacerbated the need for adequate buildings. In hospitably.”28 June 1813 Garrison Surgeon Fisher (principal medical officer at Quebec) proposed that, Hospital facilities at major prisoner-of-war “should contagion make its appearance, I would centres varied greatly. Melville Island certainly recommend sending the sick with every speed, to had a purpose-built hospital. John George Toler’s the Point Levi [sic] side of the river where houses map of the island in 1812 shows this small building might be easily procured, for that purpose.”32 on the south side of the island near the warden’s Hospital Mate Clark recorded that, instead, “On quarters and the docks (see accompanying the 1st of August the sick were removed to an illustration). Presumably, sick prisoners at hospital on shore at Sans Bruit [near modern

54

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol17/iss1/5 6

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 54 14/02/2008 12:58:14 PM Newfield: Medical Care of POWs

Vanier, Quebec] above two miles distance as a militia man or camp follower.…One ball had from Quebec.”33 Although it took six weeks to shattered his thigh bone, and another lodged establish the hospital on shore, the house that in his body, the last obviously mortal.”39 Some the authorities appropriated proved to be in serious wounds had long-term consequences poor repair. Clark complained to Fisher that the for patients: “Lieutenant Balch received a shot structure “will in the course of a few weeks not through the Elbow of his right arm which is now be habitable. I therefore earnestly beg that you perfectly useless to him and leaves him in a poor will be pleased to represent to His Honour Major state of health being unable to rise from his bed General Glasgow [commandant of Quebec] the without he is lifted like an infant, the wound has absolute necessity there will be of soon providing nearly taken his life and in all probability he will another hospital.”34 never enjoy the use of it.”40

Glasgow did not know what to do with the Artillery projectiles could be even worse: patients. On 10 September 1813, he wrote round shot could easily plough through men and plaintively to Prevost’s staff for directives: “I tear off limbs. At sea, shot could punch through hope to hear from you in a few days what is to ships’ sides and terrible splinter wounds could become of the Sick Prisoners, if I do not hear be caused by the flying pieces of wood thus from you soon I must send them back to [their] created. Explosive or shrapnel shells wrought ship[s].”35 The idea of renting private homes havoc; Thomas Verchères de Boucherville, a surfaced again, although Glasgow worried about Canadian militiaman serving under Brigadier cost: “After nearly a weeks search for a house to General Brock, made a grisly discovery after the accommodate the sick prisoners I have sir two capture of Detroit: “We found four officers dead proposed. The one from Hunter is quite out of in the mess-room, their brains scattered over the the question and the one from Sauvageau is also walls. They had been killed by the bursting of a very high the house would do very well but the bomb during the bombardment.”41 The skeletal price is more than I should suppose [Prevost] remains of American soldiers exhumed at a US is inclined to [illegible] and am quite at a loss field cemetery at Fort Erie in 1987 revealed effects how to determine. I shall have no room in the of British shrapnel shells. One skeleton contained garrison hospitals unless the Hospital Barrack a brick fragment and an iron shrapnel ball from should be employed in that way.”36 By late a British shell near the spine.42 October 1813, the military selected a permanent location – Sauvageau’s house – at Lower Bijou Diseases and other communicable ailments (just west of the Hôpital Général along the Rivière were the most common cause of deaths and St. Charles). Deputy Barrackmaster-General illness.43 Both Garrison Surgeon Fisher and Van Cortlandt wrote to Glasgow: “I have likewise Hospital Mate Clark diligently noted patients’ taken [the house]…at the yearly rate of £200,0,0 afflictions; a week in 1813 saw a typical range of [sic] Currency Government being bound to keep ailments: it for one year and to give three months notice to be given up at the expiration of that period, to Ailments Suffered by Prisoners 44 be kept for another year.”37 Returns show that at Quebec, 28 August 1813 the structure served as a prisoner hospital into mid-February 1815.38 Fevers: 10 Synochus [diphtheria?] Prisoners’ Injuries and Ailments 15 Typhus ritish medical authorities treating American 5 Intermittent [malaria] Bprisoners confronted a vast array of injuries 1 Opthalmia and ailments. Combat injuries were horrible to 1 Pthisis [pulmonary consumption] behold and difficult to treat, with the majority 9 Catarrhus [cold / flu symptoms] resulting from small-arms fire or artillery. Low- 5 Dysenteria velocity musket balls could produce grievous wounds, many of which surgeons could not heal. 22 Diarrhoea Dr. Dunlop of the 89th Regiment remembered 1 Icterus [jaundice] that the wounded after Lundy’s Lane included 2 Anasarca [swelling of joints] “an American farmer, who had been on the field 1 Cynache [sore throat]

55

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2008 7

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 55 14/02/2008 12:58:14 PM Canadian Military History, Vol. 17 [2008], Iss. 1, Art. 5

1 Paralysis [palsy] American patients may have been suffering from 1 Lues Venara [venereal disease] latent symptoms of diseases they contracted prior 2 Vulnera [wounds] to capture, and internment may not have been 1 Ulcera [skin lesions] the sole source of their medical complaints. 1 Constipatis British medical officers faced a myriad of diseases and gruesome wounds among American Fevers, indicative of diseases such as typhus and prisoners of war. Although conditions were dysentery, were prevalent. Doctors viewed fevers less than ideal, evidence suggests that some as distinct illnesses, not as symptoms of disease ailments were not unique to or the result solely and infection. They acknowledged the association of internment. None the less, treatments required between swampy areas and outbreaks of fever all the doctors’ skill and knowledge. but did not grasp the transmission of diseases by insects. Assistant Surgeon Griffiths of the 1st Regiment saw fevers as endemic to Canada, Treatments and Results a result of the unhealthy climate and decaying Treatments: Surgery, Pharmacy, and Diet flora and fauna. Cramped internment facilities ritish policy was to treat American patients would have encouraged the spread of disease. as they would their own. British doctors used Brigadier General Chandler (American prisoner B the treatments common to the period, which agent at Quebec in July 1813) noted how rapidly we can divide into three categories: surgical, this could occur aboard the hulks at Quebec, pharmacological, and dietary. Treatments writing to Glasgow: “so alarming is the sickness in combat were predominantly surgical; in getting onboard that I cannot avoid saying to you internment, largely pharmacological or dietary. how desirable it is that the prisoners should be 45 got on shore if possible.” Crowded conditions Combat wounds demanded swift, sometimes also spread lice and other parasites. The “itch” brutal, surgical treatment. A surgeon’s frantic – irritation and rashes relating to scabies – was work often limited the types of procedures that very common. Fisher observed it in June 1813, 46 could be performed, indicated by US naval surgeon “making rapid progress among the prisoners.” Usher Parsons’ recollections of the Battle of Lake Kempt wrote several weeks later: “I have Erie: “The wounded poured down the deck so mustered, and otherwise enquired into the state fast that nothing further was attempted for them of the Malabar prison ship [one of the hulks at during the battle than securing bleeding arteries Quebec], and find the number of sick 59, only 4 and applying splints to shattered limbs, and of them bad patients confined to bed, the others severing form [sic] the body such limbs as hung principally Itch, and many more labouring under by a small portion of flesh.”51 Amputation was the like complaint, who did not chuse [sic] to put 47 “the prototypical act of early nineteenth century themselves on the sick list.” surgery” for severe trauma to limbs.52 Private Shadrach Byfield of the British 41st Regiment As for the health of American prisoners, Dr. survived such a procedure in August 1814: “After James Mann, a senior US medical officer on the a few days, our doctor informed me that my arm northern frontier, frequently refers to the fragility must be taken off, as mortification had taken of soldiers on campaign. His memoirs mention place. I consented…They prepared to blind me, many outbreaks of diarrhoea and fevers, two and had men to hold me; but I told them there of the most common complaints at Quebec. He was no need of that. The operation was tedious noted that new recruits – the majority of the and painful, but I was enabled to bear it pretty US forces – were the most susceptible. Many well.”53 In an age without antiseptic, amputation hailed from isolated communities and had never allowed surgeons to convert a complex wound been exposured to communicable diseases, or into a simple one (although most acknowledged were Southerners adapting to conditions in that they could have saved many limbs if time northern New York.48 Inexperience with campaign and resources allowed). Unfortunately many conditions led to inadequate preparation of food; amputees – one period source estimated as many strong drink became a “remedy” for the resultant as half – died during or after the operation.54 bowel complaints and further debilitated the men.49 Mann also bemoaned poor hygiene.50 Many

56

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol17/iss1/5 8

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 56 14/02/2008 12:58:14 PM

Newfield: Medical Care of POWs National Maritime Museum, London, UK London, Museum, Maritime National

Deck plan of a hospital ship, circa 1743, showing the divisions of the decks into different wards and compartments for patients and the vessel’s medical operations. The hospital ships used at Quebec in 1813 would have been divided in a similar manner.

Most wounds to vital organs were difficult to rudimentary. Assistant Surgeon Douglas of the treat, and internal surgery was rare, with doctors 8th Regiment recalled several basic regimens: allowing nature to take its course. Projectile or “In the remittent [fever] of Canada, the ablution blunt-force trauma wounds to the cranium would of the body with cold water often brought on a necessitate trepanning – opening of the skull to remission, after which the bark [cinchona] was reduce pressure on the brain, using a circular given with advantage. Calomel, however, was the drill.55 Less traumatic injuries to soft tissue principal remedy.”58 Cinchona, or “Jesuit’s” bark, simply required removal of foreign objects and was a popular fever remedy – the patient took debris, securing of blood vessels, and routine it as powder and drank it as an infusion with suturing and dressing. Venesection (bleeding) was wine. Calomel, a mercuric compound, was as also a common treatment for prevailing diseases much poison as medicine. Its over-prescription such as fevers, with physicians usually drawing could harm soldiers’ health. Military doctors blood from the temples to ease the illness’s effects did not understand mercury poisoning, even on the head. Griffiths of the 1st Regiment recalled though they observed its symptoms.59 Other that he “bled freely in Canada.”56 dubious substances were common: Douglas remembered using arsenical solutions for The treatment of most illnesses involved particularly stubborn fevers in York during the chemical and naturopathic regimens. British morbid summer of 1814.60 Other treatments were army regulations list nearly 70 pharmacological less deadly, but equally unpleasant. American substances.57 Despite surgeons’ complex chests, prisoners’ reluctance to report the “itch” resulted treatments for common diseases could be from its rough and malodorous cure. British

57

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2008 9

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 57 14/02/2008 12:58:16 PM Canadian Military History, Vol. 17 [2008], Iss. 1, Art. 5

army regulations stipulated: “Men with the itch mortality and sickness rates, but prisoner of war should be cured in a separate tent in summer, returns and records from Quebec and Halifax or in a separate room of the Hospital; such men offer insight and also suggest the degree of British should each bring a clean shirt for a change doctors’ success, despite hardships. after they are cured; – four frictions, or smearing of the body all over four times, at six hours The prevalence of disease is clear in a sample distance, with the sulphur ointment (keeping in of typical sick returns from Quebec between bed the whole time)…They must be well washed December 1813 and February 1814 (Table 2). with warm water, and put on clean linen and clothes.”61 An average sick rate of 20 per cent during winter appears to have been common at Quebec. Doctors also recognized the preventive The experience at was comparable; for and curative value of food. Prisoners with example, during the week of 27 January 1814, diarrhoea at Quebec may have received milk- 15 per cent of the 165 prisoners were sick in based concoctions. A British medical pamphlet hospital.70 Despite prevalent sickness, mortality observed in 1812: “To Stay a Looseness [of the rates were moderate. Figures for the hospital bowels]: Take a very good nutmeg, prick it full at Quebec during summer 1813 (Table 3) are of holes, and toast it on the point of a knife; then illustrative. boil it in milk till half be consumed; then eat the milk with the nutmeg powdered in it: in a few Registers from Halifax provide a longer-term times it will stop.”62 Diets reflected contemporary perspective. Of the nearly 8,200 Americans theories of the human constitution, counteracting interned there during the war, 195 died75 – the physical conditions to re-establish equilibrium majority from diseases we saw above, such as within the body. Food was bland or meagre if the pneumonia or fever. Private Jeremiah Woodman, body was “excited,” as with fevers, and hearty captured near Fort Erie in August 1814, who for weakness. The typical dietary table (Table 1) died of fever at Halifax on 20 February 1815, appeared in the army regulations of 1808: is typical.76 A few men, such as Peter Adams, a sailor on the captured USS Chesapeake, who died Local foodstuffs supplemented the hospital on 7 June 1813, expired from wounds shortly diet. In July 1813, Surgeon Rowlands advertised after internment at Melville Island.77 Overall, the in the Halifax Weekly Chronicle for a good cow camp at Halifax experienced a mortality rate of to supply fresh milk for the Melville Island two per cent over the two-and-a-half years of the hospital.64 Similarly, Royal Navy regulations war. ordered shipboard officers to employ fit men to catch fish for patients.65 In spite of difficulties, British doctors did well treating sick prisoners. Consider discharge rates These treatments were standard procedures at Quebec during summer 1813 (Table 4). and regimens used by British doctors of the period, even though surgery was comparatively primitive The sharp rise during the last week of August and pharmacy often poisonous. Regarding their 1813 is difficult to explain, as returns for the efficacy, Dunlop famously remarked: “some preceding week have not survived. Still, earlier [patients] recovered by the remedies employed, high rates show many more prisoners recovering or in spite of them.”66 Still, British physicians than dying. applied such treatments indiscriminately to American and British patients. American prisoners suffered under internment in Canada, and conditions for prisoners were Results: Morbidity, Mortality, and Recovery hardly conducive to captives’ welfare. While conditions at Quebec and Halifax were not ickness and death were ubiquitous realities ideal, and sickness and mortality were common, Sfor prisoners of war, and British medical British medical officers appear to have striven, officers strove to prevent and alleviate them. None often successfully, to combat prisoners’ ailments the less conditions in most internment facilities and limit contagion. The high discharge rate at rendered mortality and illness far too common. A Quebec certainly suggests a degree of medical dearth of records makes it difficult to determine success under challenging circumstances.

58

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol17/iss1/5 10

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 58 14/02/2008 12:58:16 PM Newfield: Medical Care of POWs Table 1: Diet Table for Army Regimental Hospitals, 180863 Meals Full Half Low Spoon or Fever 1 Pint of Milk-Porridge 1 Pint of Milk-Porridge 1 Pint of Milk-Porridge Breakfast Tea or Rice-Gruel or Rice-Gruel or Rice-Gruel ¼ Pound of Meat or ¼ Pound of Bread made ½ Pound of Meat ¾ Pound of Meat made into a weak broth into Punado or Pudding Dinner ½ Pound of Potatoes 1 Pound of Bread ½ Pound of Bread with as much Milk or 1 Pound of Bread ½ Pound of Potatoes Sago 1 Pint of Milk-Porridge Supper 1 Pint of Broth made from the Meat Tea or Rice-Gruel

Table 2: Prisoners Sick Rates at Quebec, 21 December 1813 – 3 February 1814 Week to Date Number of Prisoners Sick in Hospital Sick Rate 21 December 181367 191 46 26% 17 January 181468 189 41 22% 3 February 181469 408 51 13%

Table 3: Prisoner Mortality Rates at Quebec, 26 July–28 August 1813 Week to Date Hospital Sick in Hospital Died Mortality Rate 26 July 181371 ? 135 7 5% 31 July 181372 Jane & USS Nautilus 124 6 5% 14 August 181373 ? 125 7 5% 28 August 181374 Sans Bruit 89 6 7%

Table 4: Prisoner Hospital Discharge versus Mortality Rates at Quebec, 26 July–28 August 1813 Week to Date Hospital Discharged Died Ratio 26 July 1813 ? 19% 5% 2.71 : 1 31 July 1813 Jane & USS Nautilus 14% 5% 2.80 : 1 14 August 1813 ? 34% 5% 6.80 : 1 28 August 1813 Sans Bruit 0% 7% 0 : 1

Observations and Conclusions American Observations Kentucky, Pennsylvania and New York than American prisoners did in Canada. British ccounts of internment such as that of Dr. forces on active service often experienced higher AWaterhouse depict the custody of American sickness rates than occurred under the worst prisoners as cruel and inhumane, with particular conditions at Quebec and Halifax.78 Regarding emphasis towards mortality and sickness. mortality, British prisoners in the United States Similarly, British guards’ killing of rioting often fared much worse than their American American prisoners at Dartmoor Prison in counterparts. One detachment of sick British England in April 1815 has become evidence soldiers repatriated to Upper Canada from of alleged British maltreatment and brutality. Kentucky in October 1814 had become so weak However, when we compare these with similar from their treatment under incarceration that experiences of British prisoners in American 30 per cent of them died during the journey.79 hands, the sickness and mortality rates appear Furthermore, the British did not intentionally neither extraordinary nor extreme. treat prisoners badly, as sometimes occurred to British prisoners in the United States. Several British troops frequently endured comparable British soldiers who escaped from the prison or harsher conditions while held captive in camp at Greenbush, New York, in 1813 told of

59

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2008 11

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 59 14/02/2008 12:58:16 PM

Canadian Military History, Vol. 17 [2008], Iss. 1, Art. 5 National Maritime Museum, London, UK London, Museum, Maritime National

A Royal Navy surgeon’s medicine chest, c. 1801, typical of those used by naval medical officers.

American guards bayoneting starving comrades Amidst desperate shortages of supplies and on the march to captivity and shooting at them hospital space, American prisoners maintained through the prison barracks windows for their confidence in British ability to rectify the amusement.80 problems. During the hospital crisis at Quebec in 1813, General Chandler wrote to Glasgow: Although conditions for American prisoners “I am sure you will do all you can consistently in Canada were far from perfect, they were not with the public good to alleviate their [the sick wilfully careless. As we saw above, good intentions prisoners’] distress.”82 Even at Melville Island, framed British policy, with most suffering caused which many Americans (particularly Waterhouse) by administrative and logistical complications. depict as a death trap, not all prisoners were Indeed, evidence exists to contradict popular disparaging. According to the anonymous stereotypes of British cruelty and to suggest surgeon of Waterhouse’s narrative, they “were that British medical efforts vis-à-vis prisoners generally robust and hearty at Melville Island,” were compassionate and diligent, despite the presumably with the help of British medical prevailing difficulties. The most poignant sources officers.83 Similarly, Captain Mills of the US are prisoners’ correspondence and memoirs. As 14th Infantry, while a patient at York during indicated, conditions at internment facilities are a summer 1813, wrote “to the Head Quarters of the major source of accusations of neglect. American American Army and from thence to his Family, prisoner agents gained first-hand experience of assuring them that his wound is doing well, that these conditions through their inspections, yet he is very comfortably situated, and experiences officials such as General Chandler at Quebec all the soothing attention which he would expect left reports that imply or confirm good care in the bosom of his Friends.”84 for American hospital patients. A poignant testimonial was written by Chandler during the Clearly some American prisoners found summer of 1813: “I …visited the prison ships at British medical efforts effective. Indeed, Quebec, and I am happy to say to you sir, that I Waterhouse’s surgeon and Mills indicate that found the Hospital Ships and the Malabar [prison British medical attention could, even under hulk] in quite as good order as I expected. They adverse circumstances, be compassionate and appear to be kept clean & well regulated.…They effective. Such statements counterbalance the [the sick] will be made as comfortable as they depiction of inhumane treatment in Canada. can expect to be.”81

60

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol17/iss1/5 12

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 60 14/02/2008 12:58:19 PM Newfield: Medical Care of POWs

Conclusion was an American army doctor who served as medical superintendent of US posts in New England during the war and thus never underwent internment at Halifax. he medical concerns of American prisoners He may have adapted his anonymous account from the Tunder British custody were indeed great, but journal of Surgeon Amos Babcock of the Enterprise (a we must view them in context. Yes, illness was privateer from Salem, Massachusetts) and stories he common among prisoners, but British troops heard from repatriated prisoners from Melville Island. 3. W. Dunlop, “Recollections of the American War 1812- on active service had notably higher sick rates. 1814” in Tiger Dunlop’s Upper Canada (Toronto, 1967), True, prisoners suffered from unpleasant and p.49. debilitating maladies, yet the observations of 4. W. Robertson to J. Robertson, Isle aux Noix, 5 June American doctors, such as Mann, of their poor 1813, private collection of Mrs. J. Shaw, Toronto. 5. See The Letterbook of Sir (Buffalo, health and general predisposition to disease 1915), pp.282-93. suggest that internment was not the sole cause. 6. Baldridge and Balch to Prevost, Fort Niagara, 14 January Treatments were rudimentary by modern 1814, Library and Archives Canada (LAC) RG 8 I, vol. standards, but were the best available and 692, pp.63-4. 7. “Statement of Treatment American Prisoners of War in the same as British personnel received. Many Great Britain in Confinement and on Parole,” Transport Americans did die in British custody, although a Board, London, 25 Feb. 1813, LAC WO 98/298, p.42. larger proportion of British prisoners succumbed 8. Ibid. under worse conditions. It was a brutal time, 9. B. Lavery, Nelson’s Navy: The Ships, Men and Organisation 1793-1815 (London, 1989), p.319. and medicine could accomplish only so much. 10. Kempt to Freer, Quebec, 25 June 1813, LAC RG 8 I, vol. Injuries, sickness, and death were common and 693, p.42-5. unavoidable for prisoners of war on both sides. 11. Shea and Watts, Deadman’s, 31. 12. J. Gwyn, Ashore and Afloat: The British Navy and the Halifax Naval Yard before 1820 (Ottawa, 2004), pp.50-3. The British sought to combat these realities. 13. Kempt to Freer, Quebec, 25 June 1813. Ibid. With minimal infrastructure, medical staff, and 14. Ibid. resources, medical care of prisoners of war often 15. W. Robertson to J. Robertson, Isle aux Noix, 5 June became a chaotic scramble. However, these issues 1813. Ibid. 16. Clark to Freer, Quebec, 6 September 1813, LAC RG 8 I, affected care not only of prisoners but also of vol. 690, pp.136-8. British personnel, who depended on the same 17. Ibid. doctors and resources. 18. Kennedy to Prevost, York, 18 May 1814, Ibid., vol. 912, pp.33-7. Most British doctors were humane and 19. Dunlop, “Recollections,” p.34. 20. See Macaulay to Freer, Quebec, 11 February 1813, LAC did their utmost to overcome these obstacles. RG 8 I, vol. 689, p.203. Captain Kempt could “not help thinking it is a 21. McKeehan to Dearborn, Albany, 24 May 1813, Ibid., vol. rather curious circumstance that evils should 690, pp.100-2. See also Letter Book, p.350. have grown to such a magnitude,” and prisoners’ 22. Dearborn to de Rottenburg, Fort George, 6 July 1813, LAC, RG 8 I, vol. 689, pp.175-9. medical problems endured despite the best 23. Ibid. work of British medical authorities.85 American 24. Boerstler to Prevost, no location, no date (autumn prisoners in fact received the best care possible 1813?), Ibid., p.144. This letter, though undated, under the circumstances, comparable to that probably postdates Boerstler’s capture at the Battle of Beaver Dams on 24 June 1813, and he wrote it while for British forces, and they certainly fared no acting as US prisoner agent at Quebec. It presumably worse than British prisoners in US hands. dates to the autumn of 1813, as Generals Chandler and The testimonials of the American prisoners to Winchester had been his predecessors prior to their compassionate and effective care honour the parole. 25. Lavery, Nelson’s Navy, p.214. efforts of British medical authorities on their 26. Dunlop, “Recollections,” pp.34-5. behalf. 27. Ibid., p.16. 28. Some Account of the Settlement in Canada of Robert Baldwin (1859), Breakenridge Fond, Baldwin Room Manuscript Collection, Toronto Reference Library. Notes 29. Regulations and Instructions relating to His Majesty’s Service at Sea (London, 1790), p.139. 30. “List of Transports Employed by the Prisoner of War 1. For example, see C. Nickerson, “Old War’s Victims Department,” Transport Board Prisoner of War Dept., Forgotten No Longer,” Globe, 12 May 2000. Quebec, summer 1813, LAC RG 8 I, vol. 690, p.54. 2. I. Shea and H. Watts, Deadman’s: Melville Island and 31. Winchester to Prevost, Beauport, 24 June 1813, Ibid, Its Burial Ground (Halifax, 2005), pp.104-5. Waterhouse vol. 689, pp.160-1.

61

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2008 13

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 61 14/02/2008 12:58:19 PM Canadian Military History, Vol. 17 [2008], Iss. 1, Art. 5

32. Fisher to Freer, Quebec, 16 June 1813, Ibid., p.102-3. Reference to the Principle Use of Surgeons and 33. Clark to Freer, Quebec, 6 September 1813, Ibid. Physicians (London, 1812). 34. Clark to Fisher, Quebec, 29 August 1813, Ibid., vol. 690, 63. Instructions to Regimental Surgeons, p.56. p.113. 64. Shea and Watts, Deadman’s, p.26. 35. Glasgow to Freer, Quebec, 10 September 1813, Ibid., 65. Regulations and Instructions, p.55. vol. 680, p.47-9. 66. Dunlop, “Recollections,” p.17. 36. Glasgow to Freer, Quebec, 17 September 1813, Ibid., 67. “Return of Prisoners of War at Quebec,” Transport Board p.82. Prisoner of War Dept., Quebec, 21 December 1813, LAC 37. Van Cortlandt to Glasgow, Quebec, 25 October 1813, RG 8 I, vol. 691, p.176. Ibid., vol. 691, p.64. 68. “A Return of Prisoners of War at Quebec,” Transport 38. “A Return of American Prisoners of War in Custody at Board Prisoner of War Dept., Quebec, 17 January 1814, Quebec This 1_th February, 1815,” Transport Board Ibid., p.175. Prisoner of War Dept., Quebec, 1 February 1815, Ibid., 69. “A Return of Prisoners of War at Quebec,” Transport vol. 694, p.40. Board Prisoner of War Dept., Quebec, 3 February 1814, 39. Dunlop, “Recollections,” p.35. Ibid., p.174. 40. Balridge and Balch to Prevost, Fort Niagara, 14 January 70. “Return of American Prisoners of War in Montreal 1814, Ibid. January 27th 1814,” Adjutant General’s Dept., Montreal, 41. M.M. Quaife, ed., “The Chronicles of Thomas Verchères 27 January 1814, Ibid., vol. 692, p.92. Also “Return of de Boucherville,” in War on the Detroit: The Chronicles American Prisoners of War in the General Hospital at of Thomas Verchères de Boucherville, and The Montreal January 27th 1814,” Adjutant General’s Dept., Capitulation by an Ohio Volunteer (Chicago, 1940), Montreal, 27 January 1814, Ibid., p.93. p.110. 71. “Weekly Return of Sick Prisoners of War,” Army Medical 42. D. Owsley, R. Mann, and P. Murphy, “Injuries, Surgical Dept., Quebec, 26 July 1813. Ibid. Care and Disease,” in S. Pfiffer and R. Williamson, eds., 72. “Weekly Return of the Sick of American Prisoners of War Snake Hill: An Investigation of a Military Cemetery on Board the Jane and Nautilus Hospital Ships from from the War of 1812 (Toronto, 1991), p.201. the 26th to 31st of July inclusive,” Army Medical Dept., 43. For example, see “Weekly Return of Sick American Quebec, 31 July 1813, LAC RG 8 I, vol. 690, p.52. Prisoners of War,” Army Medical Dept., Quebec, 26 July 73. “Weekly Sick Return of American Prisoners of War from 1813, LAC RG 8 I, vol. 689, p.216. the 8th to the 15th of August inclusive,” Army Medical 44. “Weekly Sick Return of American Prisoners of War in Dept., Quebec, 16 August 1813, Ibid., p.84. Hospital at Sans Bruit from the 22nd until the 28th of 74. “Weekly Sick Return of American Prisoners of War in August 1813,” Army Medical Dept., Quebec, 28 August Hospital at Sans Bruit from the 22nd until the 28th of 1813, Ibid., vol. 690, p.114. August 1813,” Army Medical Dept., Quebec, 28 August 45. Chandler to Glasgow, Quebec, 27 July 1813, Ibid., pp.50-1. 1813. Ibid. 46. Fisher to Freer, Quebec, 16 June 1813, Ibid. 75. H.S. Baker, American Prisoners of War Held at Halifax 47. Kempt to Freer, Quebec, 25 June 1813, LAC RG 8 I, vol. during the War of 1812 (Westminster, Ohio, 2005), 693, pp.42-5. p.iii. 48. J. Mann, Medical Sketches of the Campaigns of 1812, 76. Ibid, p.448. 13, 14 (Dedham, 1816), p.12. 77. Ibid, p.3. 49. Ibid., p.14. 78. Douglas recalled that during the 1814 Niagara campaign, 50. Ibid., p.79. 50 per cent of his regiment had been hospitalized with 51. J.C. Fredriksen, Surgeon of the Lakes: The Diary of Dr. malarial fevers during the month leading up to the Battle Usher Parsons 1812-1814 (Erie, Penn., 2000), p.111. of Chippawa. See Douglas, Medical Topography, p.21. 52. See C.G. Roland, “War Amputations in Upper Canada,” 79. “Return of the Sick of the 41st Regimt. In Hospitals at Archivaria 10 (summer 1980), pp.73-84. Ancaster, November 25th 1814,” Correspondence of the 53. S. Byfield, “A Common Soldier’s Account,” in J. 41st Regiment, Ancaster, 25 Nov. 1814, LAC RG 8 I, vol. Gellner, ed., Recollections of the War of 1812: Three 912, pp.99-100. Eyewitnesses’ Accounts (Toronto, 1963), p.40. 80. This information comes from statements by British 54. Roland, “War Amputations,” p.76. prisoners who escaped from the prison camp at 55. See M.K.H Crumplin and P. Starling, A Surgical Artist Greenbush, NY, during summer 1813. Adjutant at War: The Paintings and Sketches of Sir Charles General’s Dept., Ibid., vol. 691, pp.91-7. Bell 1809-1815 (Edinburgh, 2005). Though relating 81. Chandler to Glasgow, Beauport, 27 July 1813. Ibid. to treatment of casualties from the Battle of Waterloo, 82. Ibid. this work describes the complex wounds that British 83. Shea and Watts, Deadman’s, p.27. Ibid. surgeons would have encountered and the corresponding 84. Mills to Family, York, 17 July 1813, LAC RG 8 I, vol. procedures. 689, p.107. 56. J. Douglas, Medical Topography of Upper Canada 85. Kempt to Freer, Quebec, 25 June 1813. (Canton, NY, 1985), p.24. 57. Instructions to Regimental Surgeons, For Regulating the Concerns of the Sick, and of the Hospital (London, Gareth A. Newfield holds an undergraduate 1808), pp.57-8. degree in History from York University, and 58. Ibid. a Master’s degree in Museum Studies from 59. Mann, Medical Sketches, p.80. the University of Leicester, England. He is 60. Douglas, Medical Topography, p.30. 61. Instructions to Regimental Surgeons, p.30. currently employed on the Canadian War 62. Dr. Chicoyneau, Dictionary of Pharmacopia or Museum’s Research Fellowship Program, Apothecaric Notes on Medicines and Salves with investigating military medicine of the War of 1812 period. 62

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol17/iss1/5 14

Newfield - Medical Care of US POWs.indd 62 14/02/2008 12:58:19 PM