Page:The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology-ItsFirstCentury.djvu/53

32 be again inscribed upon the roll of honor in companionship with those brave men who had fought the good fight and rested on their unstained laurels. 22

The verdict of the Senate Committee, concurred in by the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the President, that William Alexander Hammond deserved well of his country, has been accepted by all who are acquainted with the achievements of his 15 months in actual charge of the affairs of the Medical Department and with the circumstances surrounding his dismissal. In the face of indifference, and even obstinate opposition, he had initiated reforms and launched institutions which were to be of lasting benefit, and even his unfulfilled recommendations were to come to fruition in later years.

The change in surgeons general was followed, a month later, by the relief of Major Brinton from his duties in the Surgeon General's Office and also as Curator of the Medical Museum, and by orders for him to report to Assistant Surgeon General Robert C. Wood at Louisville, Ky., for assignment in the West. On 3 October, Dr. George Alexander Otis (fig. 12), who had been Brinton's assistant since July, was named as his successor and was to serve as Curator longer than any other individual. 23

The new Curator, 34 years old, was from Massachusetts but had received his M.D. degree from the University of Pennsylvania, had studied in Paris, and had practiced for 2 years in Richmond, where he had founded and edited the Virginia Medical and Surgical Journal. From 1854 to trie outbreak of the war, he had practiced in Springfield, where he had joined a Massachusetts regiment as surgeon. After 3 years' service, in which he had attracted the favorable attention of Charles Henry Crane, Assistant Surgeon General, he was assigned to the Museum." 24

Upon his designation as Curator, the Surgical and Photographic Sections of the Museum were assigned to Dr. Otis, while the Medical and Microscopic