Page:The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology-ItsFirstCentury.djvu/181

THE MUSEUM IN A WORLD AT WAR resorted to, unless such reason exists." Commanding officers of hospitals or the senior surgeons present were charged with responsibility for compliance with the ruling. 9

On 18 June, 6 days after this promulgation from the War Department, The Surgeon General sent this further appeal for greater activity in preparing and shipping pathological specimens:

1. The Surgeon General expects that all medical officers will collect and ship pathological specimens to the Army Medical Museum, as provided in paragraph 135, Manual for the Medical Department, and in previous circulars from this office. The specimens should be accompanied by histories, and officers will receive credit for their contributions. 2. A statement is desired as to:


 * (1) Whether your laboratory has already sent specimens to the museum.
 * (2) Whether you have collected specimens and have them ready to ship to the museum.
 * (3) Whether you have material on hand for making Kaiserling solutions.

3. Have you collected large containers for storing and shipping specimens, such as 5-gallon oil cans, crocks, and kegs? 10

Apparently there was some uncertainty in the minds of the hospital commanding officers whose responsibility it was to authorize autopsies in individual cases, for on 30 September, The Surgeon General issued another circular letter which undertook to define more explicitly the "sound military reason" required for authorization of the procedure. This, said the circular, was the "same as the reason for performing an autopsy heretofore; that is, the study of the natural history of the disease in question * * * even when the cause of death in that particular case is known. It is essential from a military point of view that autopsies be performed until the causes of the prevailing diseases are well understood and until suitable therapeutic and prophylactic measures have been elaborated to cure and prevent the lesions found at autopsy."11

With the nature of the authority for making autopsies thus clarified and defined, and with the somewhat disappointing results of Dr. Ewing's mis-