United States vs. Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward, USS Chocura

USS Portsmouth
Off New Orleans
January 20th, 1865

The Court met pursuant to adjournment of yesterday, Present
Commander L. C. Sartori
Lieutenant Commander John Watters
Lieutenant Commander Jos. S. Kerrett
Acting Volunteer Lieutenant J. A. Johnston
Lieutenant Charles S. Cotton
Lieutenant Edw. N. Kellogg
George W. Reynolds, Judge Advocate

The Court having concluded the case of Samuel Leslie, Captain of the Forecastle, US Steamer Oneida, proceeded to the trial of Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward, serving on board the USS Chocura, who being called into court and having heard the precept read, was asked if he had any objections to any member named therein, to which he replied that he had no objections.

The Judge Advocate was then duly sworn by the Senior Member of the Court and the Court by the Judge Advocate in presence of the accused.

On being asked by the Judge Advocate if he was ready for trial, and had received a copy of his charges, accused replied affirmatively and stated also that he had no counsel.

The Charges and specifications were then read aloud by the Judge Advocate, witnesses being present.

The witnesses having retired, the accused was arraigned as follows:

Surgeon's Steward Alexander Brown, you have heard the charges and specifications preferred against you, how say you guilty or not guilty?

To which the accused pleaded as follows:

To 1st Charge and Specification - not guilty
To 1st Specification to 2nd Charge - guilty
To 2nd Specification to 2nd Charge - not guilty
To 2nd Charge - not guilty
To 3rd Charge and Specification - not guilty

Surgeon Samuel L. Jones, USN, a witness on the part of the prosecution, being duly sworn, deposed:

Question by Judge Advocate: Give your name, rank and ship or station:

Answer: Samuel L. Jones, Surgeon, USN, in charge of US Naval Hospital at New Orleans, La.

Question by Judge Advocate: State what you know of the case now before the Court.

Answer: The accused was admitted from the USS CHocura, in the Naval Hospital, on or about the 25th of December, 1864, on a regular hospital ticket, representing that accused was suffering from "night blindness" and "chronic inflammation of the bladder" - he was received into Assistant Surgeon Thomas Hiland's ward of the Naval Hospital, who upon a careful examination and treating him for a day or two was fully convinced that the patient was not suffering from those diseases, and so reported the case to me, stating at the same time also, that the demeanor of accused from the time of his admission into the Hospital to that time, had been of a very improper character, and his language to the Asst. Surgeon of a very offensive nature. In an interview with the accused, I told him of that impropriety of his course and admonished him that such a course could not be tolerated in the Hospital - the accused made some complaint of his treatment, stating that he was required to go to the dining room with the men, and that on board his ship he had been allowed to mess with the steerage officers. He was informed that he could not be allowed to mess with the officers in the Hospital, and on his application to be allowed to mess with the steward and matron, he was informed that those messes were private, but that his meals would be furnished him in his own room, and that he would not be required to mess in the general mess room with the men; a separate room was also given him instead of requiring him to be in a common ward. To convince him that I was desirous to make him comfortable, a separate room was given him and I took him as my individual patient, wishing also to satisfy myself that the assistant surgeon was not mistaken in his opinion of him. I then prescribed for him as though he was really suffering from an inflammation of the bladder, as was reported to me; and adopted such a course of treatment as, in my opinion, would be appropriate to a person so suffering, accused had reported to Asst. Surgeon Thomas Hiland about the time of his admission to the Hospital, that during daytime his vision was very much impaired and at night he was scarcely able to see at all. Whist so complaining he went to the theater with Corpl. McLaughlin, Co. "C" 56th Ohio Volunteers, who said that in passing along the street and whilst at the theater, no evidence of imperfect vision were manifested, nor did he complain to the corporal that his vision was defective. To the best of my knowledge and belief he did not complain of defective vision after I took him as my individual patient, but complained of chronic inflammation of the bladder, for which I treated him. I made the prescription myself and directed Dr. Hiland to have the prescription administered; the ward master, Miner, reported soon after that he refused to take some of the medicine, which I had prescribed - I went to see the patient myself and told him my orders must be obeyed and that in future I would not tolerate disobedience of my orders. Although the medicine was of a very mild character, he complained that it gave him pain, which was evidence to a medical man could not be the case. He then did take the medicine and took doses afterwards of which he did not complain, although given in the same amount. I was pacified during that time that the report made by the Assistant Surgeon of his feigning disease was correct. Wishing to leave no room for doubt, I continued to use that course of treatment most appropriate to cases such as he represented his to be - he reported that there was not much improvement in his case as desirable, and that there was great irritability of the bladder requiring him to void his urine very frequently - I then told him that it would be advisable to avoid exercise and consequent irritation of his bladder and that I must require him to keep in a recumbent position and prohibiting the use of tobacco in any form. It was reported to me by Assistant Surgeon Hiland and Wardmaster Miner that he had both left his bed and room - I then went to his room and found him absent, ordered him to his room and to resume his recumbent position in bed. I asked him why he had left his bed, his reply was that he was not able to keep warm in bed. I then asked him why he did not ask for more blankets - his reply was that he had a sufficient number of blankets on his bed to keep him warm, but that his blood would not circulate while he was lying still; and when I went to his room subsequently I found him sitting up with the ordinary amount of clothes on. I asked him if he was able to keep warm in that way? He replied that he was, although the temperature of the room was the same as it was at the time that he said he was not able to keep warm in bed with the proper amount of bed clothing. During the time that he was complaining so much of the irritability of his bladder, a very short period of time elapsing between the occasion when he said it became necessary to void his urine, I was informed by Assistant Surgeon Hiland that he was in the habit of remaining in the smoking room, in communication with other patients in the house, for a period of time much longer than he represented of his voiding his urine, showing that he was not telling the truth in regard to his case. During the time that he had been ordered to keep in a recumbent position, I visited him in his room. I asked him on one occasion if he had left his bed without my permission. And he said that he had only gotten up when I gave him permission to do so. On the contrary, the wardmaster informed me that the accused had not told me the truth, that he had been getting up whenever he pleased, and remaining as long as he wished to, which frequently was during the greater portion of the day. and that he knew the accused had been using tobacco after I had prohibited it. When I found him absent from his room and ordered him to resume his bed, and told him that he would pay the penalty of his repeated disobedience to my orders, after I left the room, he stated to the wardmaster Miner, that he would not return to his bed, and wanted to know what would be the penalty or consequences of his disobedience, which conversation was reported to me by the wardmaster, and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, he did not obey the order. I then ordered the accused under the charge of a sentry and told the sentry that it was my orders that accused should continue in a recumbent position but that I did not require him to use force to keep accused in that position. When accused was told by Corporal McLauglin that such was my order he replied that he did not know how he could be kept in that position. On the following morning I ordered Surgeon Hiland to examine him again carefully and reported to me whether he could discover any disease or any reason why he should not be confined in double irons, as I intended to order him in double irons for trial before a Court Martial if there was no physical reasons why he should no confined in irons. Dr. Hiland reported to me that he so examined him and was unable to discover any disease and knew of no objections on physical grounds to his being confined in irons, I then informed accused that he was no longer regarded as a patient but as a prisoner to be brought to trial by a Court Martial. I ordered him confined in double irons and reported the case to Commodore Palmer, commanding West Gulf Squadron. In this connection I will state that after a few days treatment and after being prohibited from going out the Hospital, the accused stated that he had not come to the Hospital for treatment, but that he expected to go North shortly, and wished to know if he could not be transfered to the convalescent ship Fearnought. I replied that he came as a patient, regularly admitted and must be obedient to all the regulations of the Hospital. I will also state that I received a communication from the Commanding Officer of the Chocura, Lieut. Commander Meade, in which he stated that the accused had been a long time on the sick list and was transfered to the Hospital to render him more comfortable. The endorsement of the medical officer to accused's ticket was very equivocal, stating that there was no evidence of the "night blindness" except the word of accused, and in regard to the other disease my impression was that the ticket was made up entirely from the representations of the accused, in which opinion Assistant Surgeon Hiland concurred.

Question by the Court: On or about what time did these acts of disobedience occur?

Answer: On or about the 13th of January 1865.

The Court and Judge Advocate having no further questions to ask, Accused asked the following:

Question by Accused: What reply did I make when told by you that my language had offended Mr. Hiland?

Answer: That he did not mean to give offense and if he did he was sorry for it; and that he did not suppose that his language was offensive. This regret does not apply to any statement made in my evidence.

Question by Accused: Was it customary in the Hospital to allow the Surgeon's Steward to mess in the Dispensary? If so why was I excepted?

Answer: Not as regards patients.

Question by Accused: What medicine was it I refused to take, and what are its acknowledged properties?

Answer: Two drops Muriated Tincture of Iron, property tonic.

The following question was presented by accused, and after clearing the Court, was duly considered and adjudged by the Court to be irrelevant and inadmissible, of which decision the accused was duly notified on a returning of the Court.

Question by Accused: Had I continued complaining of the medicine would its use had been stopped?

Question by Accused: When you came into my room and found me sitting up, describe my position with regard to the sunlight entering the room.

Answer: The sun was shining into his room. I did not materially observe his position: it was probably in sunshine.

Question by Accused: What reasons did I give for asking a transfer from the Hospital to the Fearnaught or Portsmouth.

Answer: I don't remember distinctly - my impression is that the reason he gave was that he was not sent to the Hospital as a patient.

Question by Accused: Do you remember the conversation, held on the 6th of January, in your office, the occasion upon which you told me I should have to go to bed if my bladder continued irritable? If so, can you state what led to that conversation?

Answer: I do not remember what directly lead to that remark though my impression is that he said he was not improving.

Question by Accused: Is not Tincture of the Muriate of Iron a local styptic and astringent as well as a tonic?

Answer: Yes, it is when applied locally.

Question by Accused: Will you state positivity that my confinement to the Hospital premises was merely a sanitary measure?

Answer: It was not injurious to his health that he was not allowed to go out under the circumstances.

There being no further questions by Court, Judge Advocate or accused, the testimony was read to and corrected by the witness as follows:

I desire to add to my answer to the last question that I judged it more appropriate for him to remain in the Hospital, if he was really suffering from the disease and symptoms of which he complained.

This addition having been maid the witness pronounced his testimony correctly recorded and retired.

The Court then adjourned to meet tomorrow, Saturday the 20th inst. at 10 1/2 o'clock AM.

USS Portsmouth
Off New Orleans
January 21st, 1865

The proceedings of yesterday were read and approved.

Accused was here introduced.

Assistant Surgeon Thomas Hiland, a witness for the prosecution being duly sworn, deposed:

Question by Judge Advocate: State your name, rank and position?

Answer: Thomas Hiland, Assistant Surgeon USN, on duty at US Naval Hospital, New Orleans, LA

Question by Judge Advocate: State what you know of the case before the Court.

Answer: Surgeon's Steward Brown, the accused, was received into the Hospital, as afflicted with cystitis and Hemeralopia, he was under my treatment for a few days until I was convinced he required no medical treatment, and in my opinion, was in good health. I then reported the case to Surgeon Jones, and he decided to take charge of him for a short time himself until he was satisfied. My direct connection with the accused ceased from that time. I had the medicine given to him by Surgeon Jones' order. He refused at first to take the medicine, directed by Surgeon Jones, but afterwards did take it. I did not see him but it was so reported by the wardmaster. I do know that he left his bed against the orders of Surgeon Jones. This is all I know.

Question by the Court: Do you know anything about accused feigning disease?

Answer: I examined him throughly when he first entered the house as a patient. Found his urine healthy which could not be the case if he had systitis, and gave him permission to go to the theater, which permission he would not have asked if he was suffering from "night blindness" and his companion, Sergeant McLaughlin reported to me that he appeared to enjoy it much and said nothing about want of sight. This sergeant was on duty in connection with the Hospital.

Question by Court: Do you know whether the accused refused to return to his bed when required to do so by Surgeon Jones?

Answer: I did not hear the accused say that he would not obey the order but saw him out of his bed in violation of that order.

There being no further questions by the Court and Judge Advocate, the accused put the following:

Question by accused: By what means did you ascertain that I was in good health and required no medical treatment?

Answer: By the use of all my senses.

There being no further questions by the Court, Judge Advocate or accused, the testimony was read to and approved by the witness who retired.

James Miner, Ordinary Seaman, USN, a witness for the prosecution was duly sworn and deposed:

Question by Judge Advocate: Give your name, rating and ship or station.

Answer: James Miner, Ordinary Seaman and Acting Wardmaster, US Naval Hospital at New Orleans, LA.

Question by Judge Advocate: State what you know of the case before the Court.

Answer: I stood near the door of the ward when Dr. Jones told accused to go to bed. The doctor told me to report to him in a few minutes and see that accused with to bed with his clothes off. I went into his room about ten minutes afterwards and told him he had better go to bed or I would have to go down and report him to Dr. Jones. He told me he wouldn't go to bed till he found out what the consequences were going to be - and he did not go to bed. I reported accused to Dr. Jones. He has got up every day since he has been in hospital. He has smoked until last Thursday which was the last time I saw him smoking. I have heard him say that Navy doctors didn't know much and the reason why was that they didn't study long enough in college. This is all I know.

Question by Court: Do you know anything about accused feigning disease?

Answer: I don't know. I know he did not make his water as often as he said. I never heard him say anything about his eyesight. I believe that there is nothing the matter with his eyes as far as I know.

Question by Court: Did you ever see accused reading by night or day?

Answer: Yes sir, by daylight and candlelight.

Question by Court: Do you remember the date of accused's refusal to go to bed?

Answer: It was in the afternoon of some day last week, I think Thursday.

Question by Court: Do you know whether accused refused to take the medicine prescribed by Dr. Jones?

Answer: He refused to put on a blister, but put it on about two hours after.

There being no further questions by the Court or Judge Advocate, the accused asked the following:

Question by Accused: Did I get out of bed at any time when it was not necessary for the purpose of making up the bed or washing myself?

Answer: I don't know whether he got up for that purpose or not. He said he did but he staid up for a good while.

Question by accused: When I was ordered to stop smoking?

Answer: I could not say when, but I know that he was ordered, and he told me himself that he was ordered to stop smoking.

Question by Accused: Did I not have to call Acting Master's Mate Jones, on one occasion to inform me of the color of a smokestack when plainly observable by others?

Answer: I heard him ask if there wasn't a red stripe on a smokestack. I am not certain about its being a red stripe, but it was something about a mark on a smokestack.

Question by Accused: How many times a day did I void my urine?

Answer: I don't know.

Question by accused: Did you ever hear me use any disrespectful language to Drs. Jones or Hiland?

Answer: No sir.

There being no further questions by accused, the court asked the following:

Question by Court: at what time, during his stay at the Hospital, did the accused ask the question, concerting the color of the band round the smokestack and was it previous to his attending the theater or not?

Answer: It was on a Sunday morning and after he had been at the theater.

Question by Court: When the accused told you he got up out of his bed for it to be made up, about how long a time passed before he returned to it?

Answer: Different lengths of time - sometimes fifteen minutes, sometimes two or three hours.

There being no further questions by Court, Judge Advocate or accused, the testimony was read to and approved by the witness who retired.

William McLaughlin, a witness for the prosecution, was duly sworn and deposed:

Question by Judge Advocate: Give your name, rank and regiment.

Answer: William McLaughlin, Corporal, Company C, 56th Ohio Volunteers, formerly on duty at the Naval Hospital New Orleans.

Question by Judge Advocate: State what you know of the case before the Court.

Answer: About the third day after accused came to the Hospital, he and I went to the theater; when we came back accused retired to his room. I knew nothing further of him until brought down to the Guard Room as a prisoner. Dr Jones came down and gave me orders to have accused remain in bed until further orders but to let him go out when necessary to obey the calls of nature.

Question by Court: Do you know whether the order was given to accused to keep his bed, if yea did he obey that order?

Answer: Dr Jones gave me the order in the presence of accused. He did obey the order until next morning when he got up - I don't know for what reason he got up.

Question by Court: Did accused ever complain to you of his eyesight?

Answer: He did remark in the theater that he couldn't see something, but didn't pay whether on account of his eyes or not.

Question by Court: Did you or did you not report to the Surgeon of the Hospital your opinion of his eyesight, if so what was the nature of the report.

Answer: I did. I told him I could not say as I had never noticed him particular or heard him say anything about his eye sight.

Question by Court: Did he show any defect of vision in going to or returning from the theater?

Answer: Not that I remember - he stopped a couple of times coming back.

Question by Court: Did he take your arm or did you assist him in any manner?

Answer: Part of the time we walked arm in arm, part of the time not so. I took no particular pains to show him the room as I didn't know but what he could see as well as I could.

Question by Court: Was the night a dark one?

Answer: Not very dark, could see to travel first rate.

Question by Court: Do you know anything about accused feigning disease?

Answer: I know nothing about it.

Question by Court: Do you know anything about the accused using tobacco and whether he was forbidden to use it?

Answer: I couldn't say.

Question by Court: Did you ever hear accused say he would not keep his bed?

Answer: No I did not.

The Court and Judge Advocate having no further questions the accused asked the following:

Question by accused: Why did we stop several times when returning from the theater?

Answer: Accused stopped twice to make water.

The accused having no further questions the Court asked the following:

Question by Court: About how long did accused remain at the theater, and did he go out to urinate during the time, if so about how often?

Answer: He remained two or three hours and he did not go out during that time.

The accused then put the following question:

Question by accused: Did I not call your attention to the time when we bought our tickets and also to the time when we returned to the Hospital. If yea, state the hours and as near as possible the interval.

Answer: I do not remember his calling my attention to the time, but think it was about 11 o'clock when we returned. The theater had commenced some time.

There being no further questions by the Court, Judge Advocate or accused, the testimony was read and approved by the witness who retired.

The prosecution here closed its case and duly notified accused thereof.

The Court then adjourned to meet on Monday the 23rd inst. at 10 1/2 o'clock AM.

USS Portsmouth
Off New Orleans
January 23rd, 1865

The Court met pursuant to adjournment of Saturday, Present
Commander L. C. Sartori
Lieutenant Commander John Watters
Lieutenant Commander Jos. S. Kerrett
Acting Volunteer Lieutenant J. A. Johnston
Lieutenant Charles S. Cotton
Lieutenant Edw. N. Kellogg
George W. Reynolds, Judge Advocate
and accused.

The proceedings of Saturday were read and approved.

Acting Assistant Surgeon Ezra Pray, USN, a witness on the part of the defense being duly sworn.

Question by Accused: State your name, rank and ship to which attached.

Answer: Ezra Pray, Acting Assistant Surgeon, USN, attached to US Steamer Augusta Dinsmore.

Question by accused: Do you recognize accused, if so where, when and how long have you known him?

Answer: I met accused bu once - he took passage from the Coast of Texas in the Steamer Augusta Dinsmore to the Naval Hospital at New Orleans. This was about six weeks ago.

Question by accused: Do you know whether accused was suffering from cystitis?

Answer: No sir.

Question: Do you remember visiting Michael Gilroy on or about midnight of the 24th of December, if so did you see me on that occasion, and what conversation took place?

Answer: I don't remember names but there was a man by visited by me during the night, on or about that time. the man was very sick. I saw accused on that occasion. I have no recollection of the conversation.

The accused having no further questions the Court asked the following:

Question by Court: Did you have accused as a patient on board the Dinsmore and for what did you treat him?

Answer: He came to me on a Hospital Ticket, for two diseases. He was to be transfered to the Naval Hospital at New Orleans. By conversation with accused, I ascertained that he required no treatment during the passage.

The Court, Judge Advocate and accused having no further questions the testimony was read to and approved by the witness after having made the following additional remark.

I desire to add that the diseases on accused's Hospital Ticket were Cystitis and Hemeralopia.

Surgeon T. J. Jones, a witness for defense, being duly sworn, deposed:

Question by accused: When did you forbid accused using tobacco?

Answer: On or about the 12th of January. I think it was prior to the time when I ordered him back to bed from the smoking room., which was on the 13th of January I believe.

There being no further questions by accused, Court or Judge Advocate, the testimony was read to and approved by witness who retired.

J. S. Murray, Surgeon's Steward, USN, a witness for defense being duly sworn, deposed:

Question by Accused: Give your name, rank and ship.

Answer: John S. Murray, Surgeon's Steward of the Dinsmore.

Question by accused: Do you recognize accused?

Answer: I do.

Question by accused: Did you seem him on board the Dinsmore?

Answer: I did.

Question by accused: Do you remember accused complaining of defective vision or disease of the bladder?

Answer: Accused complained of both.

There being no further questions by accused, the Court asked the following:

Question by Court: Do you know the accused was suffering from defective vision or disease of the bladder, if yea, how did you know it.

Answer: Nothing more than I have seen him constantly urinating, that is to say, every quarter of every hour for three or four days. I qualify my answer by stating that I have seen him urinating frequently.

Question by Court: Do you know anything about accused having defective vision?

Answer: I know nothing more than his own words.

Question by Court: Were you ordered by the Surgeon of the Dinsmore to medically treat the accused, if so what did you give him?

Answer: I was not so ordered.

Question by the Court: Did the accused ask you at any time, for medicine, of yea what was it?

Answer: He asked me for nothing.

Question by the Court: How often at night did you see the accused voiding his urine during the passage from Galveston to New Orleans?

Answer: The first night up to 12 o'clock about 5 times I know nothing of the remaining nights.

There being no further question by Court, Judge Advocate and accused the testimony was read to and approved by witness who retired.

John McKenna, Paymaster's Clerk of the Augusta Dinsmore, a witness for the defense, being duly sworn, deposed:

Question by Judge Advocate: Give your name, rank and ship

Answer: John McKenna, Paymaster's Clerk, Augusta Dinsmore.

Question by Accused: Do you remember seeing accused on board the Dinsmore, if so when?

Answer: I saw him on board the last trip up here from the Coast of Texas, on or about the 25th of December.

Question by Accused: did accused complain of defective vision or irritation of the bladder?

Answer: He did complain of both.

There being no further questions by Accused, the Court asked the following:

Question by Court: Do you know whether accused was suffering from defective vision or disease of the bladder, if yea how did you know it?

Answer: Only from his own statements.

The Court having no further questions, the accused re-examined as follows:

Question by accused: Do you remember my asking you to read the names of vessels passing up the river?

Answer: I am not positive I think he did.

Accused having no further questions the Court asked the following:

Question by Court: Of what kind of blindness did accused complain?

Answer: He didn't state. He said he couldn't see at a distance.

There being no further questions by the Court, Judge Advocate or accused, the testimony was read to and approved by witness who retired.

The Court then adjourned until tomorrow the 24th isnt. at 10 1/2 AM.

USS Portsmouth
Off New Orleans
January 24th, 1865

The proceedings of yesterday were read and approved.

On account of the absence of Capt. Gherardi, a witness on behalf of the defense, the Court adjourned until tomorrow the 25th inst. at 10 1/2 o'clock.

USS Portsmouth
Off New Orleans
January 25th, 1865

The proceedings of yesterday were read and approved and accused brought into Court.

Lieutenant Commander B. Gherardi, a witness on behalf of the defense being duly sworn deposed.

Question by Accused: Give your name, rank and ship.

Answer: Bancroft Gherardi, Lieutenant Commander, USN, commanding USS Port Royal.

Question by Accused: Do you recognize accused as being in the Naval service, if so state his character and reputation.

Answer: I do, accused was Surgeon's Steward on the USS Chocura when I commanded her - I always found his conduct respectful and obedient. Shortly after taking command I found him messing in the steerage and I though he had a more exalted idea of his station that the customs of the services gave him and I had occasion to speak to the Executive Officer to inform accused that he was not an officer but a petty officer.

There being no further questions by the Court, Judge Advocate or accused, the testimony was read to and approved by the witness who retired.

Accused desired to call Ordinary Seaman Michael Gilroy, acting Nurse, US Naval Hospital, who being seriously sick could not be obtained. Lieut. Commander Meade, Ensign Tracy and Acting Master A. Washburn were also desired as witnesses for character but were inaccessible within a reasonable period of time being on the Coast of Texas. Accused also asked for Asst. Surgeon Charles Gaylord of the USS Chocura, who was also on the coast of Texas.

The accused here rested his call and requested twenty four hours to prepare a written defense, which request was granted and the Court adjourned to meet tomorrow, the 26th inst. at 10 1/3 AM.

USS Portsmouth
Off New Orleans
January 26, 1865

The proceedings of yesterday were read and approved. Accused was here brought into Court and presented the following defense (marked "C") which he read to the Court.

The Court was then cleared for deliberation and after mature consideration on the evidence adduced, find the accused as follows:

Of the 1st Specification to 1st Charge: Proven
Of the 1st Charge: Guilty
Of the 1st Specification to 2nd Charge: Proven by Plea
Of the 2nd Specification to 2nd Charge: Not Proven
Of the 2nd Charge: Guilty
Of the 1st Specification to 3rd Charge: Proven
Of the 2nd Specification to 3rd Charge: Not Proven
Of the 3rd Charge: Guilty

And do therefore sentence him, the said Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward, US Steamer Chocura:

To be confined in the Parish Prison at New Orleans, Louisiana, for three months, to forfeit all pay and prize money now due or that may become due and to be dishonorably discharged at the expiration of the term of his confinement.

Commander L. C. Sartori
Lieutenant Commander John Watters
Lieutenant Commander Jos. S. Kerrett
Acting Volunteer Lieutenant J. A. Johnston
Lieutenant Charles S. Cotton
Lieutenant Edw. N. Kellogg
George W. Reynolds, Judge Advocate

Approved January 29 1865
J. S. Palmer
Commodore
Commanding West Gulf Squadron The Court then adjourned to meet tomorrow the 27th inst. at 10 1/2 AM.
L. C. Sartori, Commander and Presiding Member

"A"

US Naval Headquarters
New Orleans, LA
18th January 1865

By virtue of authority in me vested a Naval General Court Martial is hereby ordered to convene on board the USS Portsmouth lying in the Mississippi River, off New Orleans, on the nineteenth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and sixty five, for the trial of Samuel Leslie, Captain of the Forecastle, of the USS Oneida and such others as many legally brought before it.

The Court will be composed of the following named officers, as members, any five whom are empowered to act, viz:

Commander Louis C. Sartori
Lieutenant Commander John Watters
Lieutenant Commander Jos. S. Kerrett
Acting Volunteer Lieutenant Jno. A. Johnstone
Lieutenant Chas. S. Cotton
Lieutenant Ed. N. Kellog
and Mr. George W. Reynolds of New Orleans, La., is hereby appointed the Judge Advocate.

Jas. S. Palmer
Commodore
Commanding West Gulf Blockading Squadron

"B"

Charges and Specifications of Charges preferred by Commodore James S. Palmer, commanding the West Gulf Blockading Squadron, against Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward of the USS Chocura.

Charge First: Scandalous conduct tending to the destruction of good morals.

Specification: In this, that the said Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward of the USS Chocura, who was received into the US Naval Hospital at New Orleans on the twenty-sixth day of December, one thousand eight hundred and sixty four, has been guilty, since that date at various times of feigning disease.

Charge Second: Disobedience of the lawful orders of his superior officer.

Specification First: In this, that the said Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward of the USS Chocura, being in the US Naval Hospital at New Orleans, having been ordered by Surgeon Samuel J. Jones, US Navy, in charge of said Hospital, to keep in a recumbent position, and not to leave his bed without permission, did on or about the thirteenth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and sixty five, and at various times before that date, leave his bed and room without permission; and when ordered, on or about the thirteenth day of January, by the said Surgeon Jones, to return to his bed, did disobey that order.

Specification Second: In this, that the said Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward of the USS Chocura, being in the US Naval Hospital at New Orleans, having been ordered by Surgeon Samuel J. Jones, US Navy, in charge of said Hospital, to discontinue the use of tobacco, did disobey that order.

Charge Third: Treating with contempt his superior officer.

Specification First: In this, that the said Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward of the USS Chocura, being in the US Naval Hospital at New Orleans, being in the US Naval Hospital at New Orleans, having been ordered by Surgeon Samuel J. Jones, US Navy, in charge of said Hospital, to keep in a recumbent position, and not to leave his bed without permission, did disregard and disobey that order, and did on or about the thirteenth day of January one thousand eight hundred and sixty five and at various times before that date, leave his bed and room without permission, and when ordered by the said Surgeon Jones to return to his bed, did refuse to obey that order and when admonished by the said Surgeon Jones that he would have to pay the penalty of his repeated disobedience, did say to the ward master, James Miner, words to the effect that he would not obey that oder and that he wanted to see what consequences would follow from his disobedience.

Specification Second: In this, that the said Alexander Brown, Surgeon's Steward of the USS Chocura, being in the US Naval Hospital at New Orleans, having been ordered by Surgeon Samuel J. Jones, as a sanitary measure, to discontinue the use of tobacco, did disobey that order, and did continue to use it.

James S. Palmer
Commodore
Commanding West Gulf Blockading Squadron

Witnesses:
Surgeon Samuel J. Jones, US Navy
Assistant Surgeon Thomas Hiland, USN
Assistant Surgeon Hebert Smith, USN
James Miner, Ordinary Seaman, Acting Ward Master
McLaughlin, Corporal Co. C., 56th Ohio Volunteers

"C"

To the Gentlemen Sirs and Honorable Members of the Court

Allow me to state a few facts in regard to this trial. On the twenty-third day of December last, I was transfered to the US Steamer Augusta Dinsmore for passage to the Naval Hospital at this place affected with Hemeralopia (night blindness) and Cystitis (a disease of the bladder). I was not on the list at the time nor did I wish to leave the Chocura, for I was very well contented with my situation on board the vessel, having privileges extended to me not usually extended to Surgeon's Stewards in the United States Navy, but during the time that I was on the sick-list, I performed all the duties of a Surgeon's Steward with the exception of writing the sick reports, which I was unable to do on account of the weakness of my eyes.

In the first charge and specification, I am accused of feigning disease. Why should I feign disease, I did not want to be transfered to the Hospital, nor did I wish to leave the ship and even then why should I to leave the service, resort to such means, when Lt. Commander R. W. Meade, Jr., had told me he would approve and forward any application that I should make for that purpose to the senior officer, also I am bound by Oath to serve the Government faithfully and I consider that I would falsify that Oath to seek to evade the services that I have voluntarily imposed upon myself to perform by any such means.

Also Assistant Surgeon Thomas Hiland states that he tested my urine and found it healthy, it was not until the third day that I had been in the Hospital that he tested it, and in the intervening time I had been taking medicine (potassium nitras) that would materially alter the state of my urine. He also states that a person afflicted in the manner I was would not naturally go to such places as the Theater. It is not more natural, that after being on board the Chocura one year and fifteen days without being into port, and being transfered to a place where I was a perfect stranger with nothing to occupy my mind, that I should seek some place of amusement for that purpose.

Also in regard to the disease of the bladder, James Miner (witness for the prosecution) states in his testimony that I did not void my urine as often as I said I did, yet he cannot say how many times a day I did void it - or how often. I reported to Surgeon S. J. Jones that I did; Regarding Charge second, first specification, I have nothing to say.

Regarding the Second Specification of this charge, I would wish to call attention of the court to the fact that Jas. Minder testified that he did not see me using any tobacco after Thursday, and that he did not know when I was forbidden to use it. Surgeon S. J. Jones when recalled for the defense, states that he prohibited the use of tobacco on the twelfth of January, which was the day referred to in Miner's testimony.

I have also proven by witnesses for the defense that I was sick on the passage to this place and complained of both dieases and that I was actually suffering from both so acutely from the disease of the bladder that I could not sleep. I did not apply to Acting Assistant Surgeon Pray for medical treatment for the short time I would be on board the vessel, any medicine the he would have prescribed would not have had time to act before I would be transfered to the Hospital and the Medicine altered by the Surgeon's in charge of the Hospital.

In regard to Charge Third and its specifications, in the first specification, no contempt whatever was intended to Surgeon S. J. Jones, what I did was done for my own personal comfort, the weather for the past few days had been damp and rainy, my room had been whitewashed and was not dry when the rain set in, consequently I caught a very heavy cold, causing pain in all parts of my body, also producing a diarrhea, which caused me to arise from my bed several times during the day and three or four times during the night, the weather having become excessively cold, this kept me in a cold and chilly state all the time and as I could not keep warm, not having sufficient exercise. I had to recourse to artificial means for that purpose.

May it also please the Court to notice the fact that the Testimony of Surgeon S. J. Jones consists mostly of reports part of which are not confirmed by the subsequent witnesses. Corporal William McLaughlin states in his testimony that after I was brought down to the Guard Room, I did obey that order and that he did not hear me speak with any contempt of Surgeon S. J. Jones' order to him.

May it also please the Court to notice that Wardmaster Miner states that he heard me complaining of my eyesight in regard to asking the color or distinguishing mark on the smokestack of a gunboat lying in the river which was plainly visible to all in the room.

May it also please the Court to notice the fact, that while the prosecution has all the professional testimony, while I have been deprived of such, by my inability to procure the testimony of that character as such witnesses are on the Coast of Texas, and consequently are unavailable at present and also of positive testimony by the sickness of one of the witnesses for the defense. Also Surgeon S. J. Jones and Asst. Surgeon Thos. Hiland, testify that I was in perfect health, and yet I was ordered to stop using tobacco and keep in a recumbent position as sanitary measures. If I was not sick in their judgment, why these orders, when I asked to be transfered to the Portsmouth or Fearnot for the purpose of being sent back to the vessel I was told that persons were not sent out of the Hospital until they were well, I tried to make Surgeon S. J. Jones to testify to this conversation by cross-examination, but his memory was very forgetful on that point.

Also regarding that part of Surgeon S. J. Jones testimony in which he state "that the statement of my case on the back of the Hospital Ticket was of an equivocal nature, when Act. Asst. Surgeon Charles Gaylord wrote that statement he had not been over three months in the service and was entirely unacquainted with the usual forms used in the Medical Department of the service, he also examined my urine on board the vessel, he told me that there was albumen in it, also that the swelling of my testicles was from sympathy with the bladder, he thought the testicle has hardly regained its usual size yet, this could also be proven by the witnesses who are absent. Also that for month or so onboard the vessel, I could not either read or write with any satisfaction whatever.

Further Act. Asst. Surgeon Gaylord states on the Hospital Ticket, that in regard to the weakness of the eyes, there is no evidence except my own statements, the Court must be aware of the fact that after he came on board, I went off the list and ceased to complain of my eyes and regarded the weakness of the eyes as a permanent thing.

The testimony of Lt. Commdr. B. Gherardi established my previous good character, therefore why should I ruin my whole character and do a thing which would disgrace me forever in the eyes of every Officer in the Squadron and materially affect my whole life, it also establishes the fact that I was allowed to mess with the steerage officers of the Chocura, and as Surgeon S. J. Jones remonstrates in his testimony, that such was not the case. I deem it necessary to call the attention of the Court to the fact.

Having stated the whole case truly to the Court, I would respectfully ask to be acquitted of CHarge First and Specification and of Charge second and Second Specification and of Charge Third and its Specifications. Of the First specification of Charge Second, I respectfully ask the leniency of the COurt, as it is the first disobedience of any order whatever since I have been in the service.

Very Respectfully,
Alexander Brown
Surgeon's Steward
USN