United States Army Headgear 1855-1902 - Libreria Militare Ares

NUMBER 30 29This communication elicited in the next severalmonths a total of 168 replies from all geographicalareas covered by the Army. These were digestedand worked into a report for the Surgeon Generalby Assistant Surgeon General Alfred A. Woodhulland submitted in manuscript form on 31 January1868. It was published in printed form as A MedicalReport upon the Uniform and Clothing of theSoldiers of the U.S. Army under the imprint of theSurgeon General's Office, 15 April 1868."' It wasapparently printed in a limited edition in the smallprinting shop annexed to the Surgeon General'soffice at this time.'"Of far greater importance than the report itselfare the 168 reports and/or letters on which it wasbased. But here we encounter an utter void anddisappointment, an exercise in research fascinationand frustration worthy of being included in RichardAltick's Scholar Adventurers had the endingbeen a happier and more fruitful one.""During 1867 and a portion of 1868, Asst. SurgeonWoodhull was assigned to the Surgeon General'sOffice carrying out administrative and professionalduties as assigned."" Sometime during the fall of1867 he was given the task of collating and digestingthe reports requested by the Surgeon Generalin August. The task was Woodhull's alone, for thespecial orders of the period do not show that anyboard was appointed for it and the assignmentwas verbal insofar as the record shows. This latterwould not have been unusual, however, for theoffice was a small and intimate one in those days."'But here the trouble begins. We know from thefinal report that 168 replies were received."' Yetfrom August 1867, when Crane's order went out,until 15 April 1868, the date of the printed report,not one single communication dealing withthe directed subject matter was entered in the registerof letters received at the Surgeon General'sOffice or in the name and subject index of lettersreceived. Similarly, Woodhull's formal letter oftransmittal enclosing the manuscript report, 31January 1868, was not entered in the register. Alist of the officers who replied to Crane's letter, aswell as the entire statements of 22 officers, weresubmitted with the manuscript report but wereomitted from the printed version "on account oftheir voluminousness.""" The names of the twentytwo whose "entire statement" were omitted wereincluded however."" The fate of these "backing"papers can only be guessed at. It does seem mostpossible, however that Woodhull, under the pressof work, instructed the clerks in the office to setaside all answers to Crane's August letter for hisimmediate perusal when time permitted from hisother duties (being sent from all over the country,the letters would have dribbled in over quite awide time span) and thus were never entered inthe register of letters received.The report contains some excellent recommendationsand some of rather dubious value, and itwas of considerable influence in the 1872 uniformchanges. Those portions relating to headgear areas below:HAT AND CAPA very respectable number stationed between the fortiethand forty-second parallels silently acquiesce in the presenthead-covering, but elsewhere it is the subject of generalcomplaint.Proportionably to the exposure of the head to heat andconfinement of its exhalations, is the tendency to cerebraloppression and disease. In northern climates all the wellknowneffects of cold follow the absence of adequateprotection.The hat is objectionable from its size and its great weightand want of ventilation, evils that grow in importance withthe lowness of the latitude, until finally the head is oppressedby a constant, close vapor-bath. In point of practiceat nearly every post south of Washington the hat and capgive place in warm weather to a lighter substitute, generallyof straw. On the northern frontier it does not adequatelyprotect the ears in winter.The objections to the cap are, the difficulty of cleansingwith soap and water, owing to the pasteboard it contains,the interference of the oblique visor with vision, its want ofgrip, for the northern stations in winter its want of warmth,the deficient protection it affords the face and neck againstsun and rain in any climate, and, especially, the absence ofventilation and the transmission of solar heat by its restingdirectly upon the top of the head—an evil that is aggravatedby its color.The suggestions for relief all point to the necessity forincreased lightness and ventilation in warm climates and togreater protection in cold regions.They are chiefly these:1. Authority to wear on all occasions an ordinary lightstraw hat during the warm weather, a period that varieswith the locality. The value of the straw hat consists in itslightness, its porosity and its defense against the direct raysof the sun. But it is not readily transported, is fragile, israrely sightly, is somewhat inconvenient in the exercises ofthe manual, cannot be slept in, and is unsuitable for coldweather. Its general informal use is due to the necessity ofsubstituting something for the uniform, its accessibility, andits low cost.2. For dress a stiff hat, resembling that formerly worn in