« 上一頁繼續 »
prevented. He would, however, say a few words in reply to the observations of the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Wickliffe] on the subject of the West Point Academy, and the errors into which that gentleman had fallen in re. lation to it. It appeared that the chief objection he had to that institution was, that it shut out from appointment in the army all who were not educated there. e would ask, what had ever been the system pursued in the army Did not all its officers advance by the regular line of promotion? He conceived, when those scholars entered the school, they became attached to the junior class of the of. ficers of the army. If they proved to be qualified, and kept up with their classes, they were commissioned; if not, they retired to make room for others. The doors of the institution, he contended, were open to all classes, even to the poorest boy in the country. M. V. remarked that his indisposition was such as to prevent his o the subject further at present. Mr. WILLIAMS said, he was opposed to the present organization of the army, and it never had been suited to the feelings of the House. It was fastened upon the House by the vote of the Senate. All the military experience of the House condemned its features; but they were compel. led to accept of it at the time, as they were convinced that otherwise no reduction would be effected at that session. Mr. W. said, there appeared to be a contest between the gentlemen belonging to the Military Committee, on the subjeet of the proportion which the officers in the army bore to the men—one calculating it at one to seven, and another at one to twenty. In either case, he contended, the proportion of officers was too great—the army should be re. organized, and the number of officers reduced. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. VANCE] had, in the course of his remarks, alluded to fifty posts to be garrisoned. He would have been obliged to that gentleman if he had, at the same time, named these posts. The House had on a former oc. casion received a report, stating that there were seventy posts, requiring twelve thousand men; but, on examination, the number of essential posts bore but a small comparison with the report. He did not believe that there was need of fifty posts in the United States—indeed, he knew of none, excepting those of the northwestern frontier, and the frontiers of Arkansas and Missouri. He could not admit the necessity of even these, for he had ever believed that keeping up an armed force in the vicinity, was more likel o; on Indian wars, than to prevent them. Such had been the experience of the country at all times, and in all cases, and he would not vote for keeping up a military force to provoke Indian hostilities. In relation to the engineer corps, Mr. W. said, he could not see the propriety of so many surveys by the General Government. If the several States wanted these surveys made, they would doubtless see that they were performed. He said he believed, from the examinations which he had made several years ago, that three thousand men were amply sufficient for the army. He was convinced of this at that time, and he knew of no reason why more should be reuired now than were then. He thought the Military Aca3. at West Point should also be reduced. He had long been of the opinion that this institution should be placed on the peace establishment. He thought it should be confined to one hundred, and then it would not be so apt to prove a nursery for the education of those who were not designed for the army; indeed, its utter annihilation would be far preferable to its continuance in its present condition. He hoped the House would determine on its reduction. Mr. DESHA rose, but the allotted hour had expired.
The SPEAKER presented to the House a letter from Judge Peck, accompanied by a written statement or argument, in explanation and defence of his official conduct in the ease-eomplained of by L. E. Lawless, communicated
in pursuance of the permission given by the House some days ago. Motions were made to commit the argument, and to print it, without reading, as it appeared to be a volumimous statement: but The reading was demanded, first by Mr. WICKLIFFE, and withdrawn, then by Mr. DANIEL, and after proceeding some time. by him withdrawn; next by Mr. WILDE, and the reading continued some time longer, and then withdrawn; then by Mr. STORRS, of New York: and after the reading had progressed some time longer, (in all an hour and a half) Mr. S. withdrew his motion, and the further reading was suspended. The statement was then ordered to be committed to the Committee of the Whole to which was committed the report against Judge Peck; and Mr. CLAY moved that it be printed, with one or two of the papers which accompanied and were referred to in it. Mr. McDUFFIE moved to print, also, the memorial of Mr. Lawless, complaining of the conduct of the Judge. Mr. STERIGERE moved to lay both motions on the table. Negatived. Mr. DAVIS, of South Carolina, moved to except from the printing the papers accompanying the statement of Judge Peck, which was agreed to ; and The statement of i.". and the memorial of his accusers, were ordered to be printed.
BUFFALO AND NEW ORLEANS ROAD BILL.
The House then took up this bill, as reported by the Committee of the Whole yesterday; and having concurred in filling the blank with four dollars, as the daily allowance to the commissioners, Mr. SPEIGHT moved to lay the bill on the table, with the view not to take it up again. Mr. WHITTLESEY demanded the yeas and nays on this question, and they were ordered; when Mr. SPEIGHT, to accommodate his colleagues, who wished to renew their amendments, withdrew his motion. Mr. CARSON then renewed the motion which he made in committee to amend the bill by striking out the part prescribing the route for the New Orleans road, and inserting a provision, directing the adoption of the “most direct, practicable” route. Upon the amendment, Mr. CARSON offered some observations on the length to which the discussion upon the subject had already extended, and asked for the yeas and naw8. i. call being sustained, they were ordered. Mr. BLAIR, of Tennessee, said that he was aware that it would not now be in order to reply to what had been said by gentlemen in the opposition in the committee; but as his friend from North Carolina [Mr. CARson] has now repeated, in part, what he had said in Committee of the §. he was gratified in having it in his power to correct that gentleman in a gross error into which he had fallen, as to the organization of the Committee on Internal Improvements, of which he was an humble member. He has charged that the location of the road upon the western route was the result of combination in the eommittee, and has parcelled out to each member of that committee his portion of the local benefit to be derived from that combination. Sir, Lcannot, I will not believe that my worthy friend intended to impugn my motives in this matter, though such would be the irresistible conclusion, from reading his printed speech. I take this opportunity of informing my friend that I am the only member of the committee who voted in favor of reporting the bill, who was in the slightest degree interested in its location on the western route, or resided on or near to any part of that extended line. It is true that my colleague on the committee [Mr. CRAIG) represents a district in Virginia which
is intersected by the road, but it is due to that gentleman
to say, that his determination to support the bill has been made since it came from the hands of the committee, and was reported without his support. No other member of the committee resides on or near to this road, or the branch contemplated from Zanesville to Florence; hence, if a combination of interested persons produced the location in the bill, I must have combined with myself, and with no one else. To relieve the present committee from imputation, I can inform my friend from North Carolina, that this bill was reported by the Committee on Internal Improvements of the last Congress, as it now is, upon the western route. Will he look to the organization of that committee, and inform me who were the parties in interest then, and why and wherefore was it that that committee selected the western route # If I am not mistaken, the gentleman from Maine [Mr. BUTMAN] is now the only member of that committee who voted for the road, who was of that committee last Congress. This bill had been reported by our predecessors, (not one of whom resided on that route.) giving preference to the western route; and my friend from North Carolina will believe me when I say that their having given preference to the route on which I resided was not likely to call forth any objection from me. Nor am I at liberty to suppose that the location of the road upon the route on which my friend resides, would have been calculated to give offence to him, were I to judge from the pertinacity with which he clings to his amendment for changing the route to his own district. I have felt it due to the committee and myself, as well as to that substantial friendship which has subsisted between the gentleman from North Carolina and myself, to make this statement and correction, believing that if I were to suffer myself to lie under the imputation to which his remarks would subject me, I would be in danger of forfeiting that good opinion which I am convinced he now entertains of Ine. Mr. CARSON shortly rejoined, urging the advantages of taking the direct route, which it would be a truism to say was the nearest route. It would shorten the distance for fifty miles. The West, he observed, in the course of his argument, the West had received its full share, in the way of appropriation for their benefit, by the grants of ublic lands, for the purpose of improvement within the States, in that section of the amendment. To show the influence which had been brought to bear upon this matoter, he might perhaps mention that it had been said by one of the members of the Pennsylvania delegation, that if Mr. CARson did not vote for the bill, he [the person speaking] should not give his sanction to a bill, for the passing of which he [Mr. C.) was anxious. He also instanced a case in which a member from West Tennessee had used language of a similar import. Mr. A. H. SHEPPERD thought the order in which the amendment should be proposed should be the same as had been followed in the committee. He therefore moved to strike out the word “western,” in the fourteenth line of the bill, [respecting the location of the line of road] and insert “middle” route. Mr. VINTON made a few remarks on the subject of himself and his constituents being entirely uninterested as to what course it might be decided by the House that the road should be run. . He lived upon the banks of the Ohio, the great channel of intercourse between the East and the West, a circumstance which he felt it due to himself, and those whom he represented, to mention, with a view of showing that the vote he should give upon the question could not possibly result from any prospect, on his or their part, of reaping any advantages from the proposed road. Mr. RAMSEY explained, in reply to Mr. CARson. The observations alluded to by his friend from North Carolina
were merely jocular; they occurred in the course of a pass
ing conversation between himself and a gentleman from Tennessee. He was exceedingly sorry that his estimable friend from North Carolina could, by any possibility, construe them otherwise. Mr. CARSON said that they had not been mentioned to him as such. He was happy, however, to find that it was so, as, indeed, had just been stated to him by the gentleman from Tennessee. Mr. DE WITT moved to strike out the enacting clause of the bill. Mr. STORRS. of New York, moved the previous question. Mr. LETCHER, after a few observations, stated that his district did not approximate to the line which it was proposed to trace for the road in contemplation. Mr. SCOTT hoped that the gentleman from New York [Mr. Storrs] would withdraw his motion for a moment. Mr. STORRS declining to do so, the call for the previous question was sustained by a vote of yeas 117, nays not counted. Mr. J. S. BARBOUR asked for the yeas and nays on the main question, but the motion was not adopted. The main question, which was upon the engrossment of the bill for a third reading, was then ordered to be put. Mr. BARRINGER, Mr. ISACKS, and Mr. DWIGHT simultaneously rose to ask for the yeas and nays upon this question. They were ordered. Mr. P. P. BARBOUR suggested that there were several members probably absent; and as he wished the question to be fully and fairly decided, he moved a call of the House; which was agreed to. The roll was called, when it appeared that nine or ten
members were absent, most of whom it appeared from explanations given, were detained at their lodgings by in
disposition. The main question being put, was decided in the nega
tive by the following vote: YEAS.–Messrs. Noyes, Barber, Baylor, John, Blair,
Boon, Brown, Burges, Butman, Cahoon, Clark, Cole- | man, Condict, Cooper, Coulter, Robert Craig, Crane,
Crawford, Crockett, Creighton, Crowninshield, John Davis, Denny, Doddridge, Duncan, Edward Everett, H. Everett, Finch, Ford, Forward, Green, Grennell, Hawkins, Hemphill, Hodges, Howard, Hughes, Hunt, Huntington, Ihrie, Ingersoll, Thomas Irwin, Wm. W. Irvin, Isacks, Jennings, R. M. Johnson, Kendall, Kincaid, Adam King, Leiper, Letcher, Lyon, Magee, Mallary, Martindale, Thomas Maxwell, Lewis Maxwell, McCreery, Mercer, Miller, Mitchell, Norton, Pearce, Pierson, Ramsey, Randolph, Reed, Richardson, Rose, Russel, Scott, Shields, Semmes, Sprigg, Stanbery, Standifer, Stephens, Strong, Sutherland, Swann, Test, John Thomson, Tracy, Vanee,
Vinton, Washington, Whittlesey, Edward D. White,
Desha, De Witt, Drayton, Dudley, Dwight, Earll, Ellsworth, George Evans, Findlay, Foster, Fry, Gaither,
Gordon, Gorham, Hall, Halsey, Hammons, Harvey, Haynes, Hinds, Hubbard, Johns, Cave Johnson, Perkins, King, Lamar, Lea, Lecompte, Lent, Loyall, Lewis Lumpkin, Martin, McCoy, McDuffie, McIntire, Monell, Muhlenberg, Nuckolls, Overton, Pettis, Polk, Potter, Rencher, Roane, W. B. Shepard, A. H. Shepperd, S. A. Smith, Speight, Ambrose Spencer, Richard Spencer, Sterigere, Henry R. Storrs, William L. Storrs, Swift, Taliaferro, Taylor, Wiley Thompson, Trezvant, Tucker, Varnum, Verplanck, Wayne, Weeks, Camp. P. White, Wickliffe, Wilde, Williams, Wingate, Yancey.—105.
THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 1830.
The House resumed the consideration of the resolution directing the Secretary of War to report a reorganization of the army, with a view to the reduction of the number of officers.
Mr. DESHA said, he regretted very much that the re. marks of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. TAYLoR and of the chairman of the eommittee, [Mr. DRAyton had made it necessary for him again to trouble the House with any remarks of his, but he was not willing that the vote should be taken without briefly replying. He would, however, promise the House that he would consume but little of their time upon this subject.
The gentleman from New York, [Mr. Tayloa] the other day, in order to satisfy this House that the army, as at present organized, is more suitable to both peace and war times, than any organization that can be given to it, had a report read at the Clerk's table, made by a former Secre. tary of War, upon a call of this House. The report goes upon the principle, that it is politic for this Government to keep on a peace establishment a number of officers sufficient to command fifteen thousand, instead of five thousand four or five hundred, the number fixed upon for the peace establishment. Now, [said Mr. D.] this is what I deny; and however high I may estimate the opinions of the Secretary of War, alluded to, I decidedly differ with him in the organization he would give to a peace establishment. He, with a great many others, thinks it necessary to keep an officer in the army a length of time, to prepare him for a state of war, and this with a view to have skilful officers to command. This is in accordance with the views of the gentleman from New York, over the way, [Mr. CAMPRELENG] who says, that, in the event of a war, we shall have nothing to do but fill the rank and file of the army, and we shall have experienced officers to command our forces. He says that privates can be had without difficulty, but that officers cannot. I will state to the House what I have stated on a former occasion. It is, that, from my experience, I do think, if an officer remain
any length of time inactive, upon a peace establishment,
that inactivity has a tendency to disqualify instead of qualifying him for active service in a state war; and that there is more difficulty in obtaining private soldiers than officers. I would 'ask the House, how it has happened that the expenditures of the army have been increasing for the last several years, if it be not owing to the nature of the present organization, and to the very great number of officers who have been breveted since the war, and received the additional pay which their brevet rank entitles them to. I will state that, if there is not some radical change made, this expense will, continue to increase. In a few years the colonels will all be brigadier generals; the lieutenant colonels, colonels commandants; the majors, lieutenant colonels; captains, majors; and the lieutenants, captains by brevet; and all of these will, in every instance, when on detachment, receive the pay attached to such brevet commission. I am satisfied that the present regulation of breveting an officer according to the length of his continuance in service, will make brevet rank too
cheap, besides involving the nation in an unnecessary expense. I would only brevet an officer for distinguished service performed by him in a state of war—an arrangement which would stimulate him to the performance of daring and gallant acts. The gentleman from New York. [Mr. Taylor] in reply to some remarks I made a few days ago, said, that we are compelled to educate our sons at the West Point Academy, provided we intend them for the army. This I am aware of; and this is the very great objection I have to the institution, and it is the ground upon which I predicated my remarks the other day, when I stated I was opposed to all exclusive privileges. But the gentleman contended that it does not give exclusive privileges to any class of our citizens, for the institution is open to all. I would ask, how is this? If there were a vacancy from my district, and there were twenty applicants, could more than one be appointed No, sir. Well, would not the balance be excluded in this case? Most certainly they would; and in making this selection of one, should I not be apt to select the one whose parents would be able to serve me the most effectually at home? This is reasonable. The gentleman from New York asked if I, together with my political friends, who had the power in their hands, am disposed to break down all the institutions in the country. I will say, in reply to that gentleman, no; that I do not know the opinions of but few of the friends with whom I act upon this floor; but will say for myself, that I am ready at all times to lop off all useless expendtures of public money, or to put down any institution where the sons of the wealthy and influential are to be educated at the expense of the people. I have no doubt but the gentleman from New York understands the details of this West Point Academy much better than I do, as it is located in his State; and, moreover, I have understood that the gentleman has been so fortunate as to get his son admitted into the institution, notwithstanding he informs us that there never had been but one young man at the institution from his district, and he was in the senior class. I must confess I could not exactly see what bearing that remark of the gentleman had upon the subject, and must believe the gentleman intends it as a compliment to himself. The gentleman took occasion to say further, in order, I suppose, to show that no abuses had been practised by appointing to that institution more than a fair proportion of the sons of members of Congress, that there never had been more than sixteen boys appointed who were the sons of members of Congress. I do not know how this is, but I heard a member of Congress say, he could count twelve from Kentucky and Ohio, who are sons of men who are now, or who have been heretofore, members of Congress. But for the existence of this institution, which I so much deprecate, private institutions would spring up in the country, whence we should have an ample opportunity of preparing our sons to enter the army, at our own proper expense; and then let vacancies in the army be filled from the most worthy amongst the applicants who present themselves, My friend, the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, [Mr. Drayton] says, that the Military Academy is the bulwark of our defence, and that all our Presidents have been in favor of it. Now, in answer to this, I deny that the nation will have to rely upon those educated at this institution, which have been so highly spoken of, for the defence of the country in the event of war, or upon your regular army. No, sir. I consider the militia the bulwark of the nation; and in the event of another war, we shall have to place our reliance upon them for defence. It is true that some of our Presidents have recommended this institution to the fostering care of Government; but I will state that it was not contemplated, when this insti
Two hundred and sixty or two
United States, in his message to this House, says something about the reliance we may place on the militia for the defence of the country in the event of war. My friend from
hundred and seventy young men, preparing, by receiving South Carolina says, besides, that General Brown, too, was
a military education, to fill vacancies in the army, when half the number would be sufficient. Another objection which I have to the institution, is, that when a young man is educated at some thousands of dollars expense to the Government, he is permitted to return home, without rendering to the Government any services in return. Yes, sir, three-fourths of the number of young men who go there, do not intend, when they graduate, to remain in the army; but to return home, and adopt some other profession. It is very convenient for a man to have his son educated at public expense, and then put him to the study of law, medicine, or some other of the liberal professions. I therefore would say, that when a young man enters the institution, he ought to be bound, when he has received his education at the public expense, to render the country Bonne services as a remuneration. The chairman of the committee also denies that any preference is given, in the appointments to that institution, to the wealthy and influential classes. Sir, that gentleman certainly has not examined the report laid on our tables a few days ago, or he would not hazard the assertion. If he will examine the appointments that have been made to the institution, he will find the number from the indigent but small, when compared with those from the wealthy and influential. I do not care what the Secretary of War professes, when he says the object is to appoint poor boys, if they are qualified, when I see the practice is at variance with the profession. I can point my finger to a number of boys who are there at this time, whose parents are immensely wealthy. In order to satisfy gentlemen that the adoption of the resolution cannot operate injuriously, I will read it. [Here, Mr. DESHA read the resolution.] Now, sir, the resolution does not require of the Secretary of War to propose such an organization as will possibly destroy the efficiency of the army, but such a one as will dispense with the services of a portion of its officers without injury to the public service. The expenditures for the army, it will be found, have rapidly increased for the last several years. The sum of four |. thousand dollars annually is expended now more than was some years ago, and it will be found that the present peace establishment costs the Government as much as when the army consisted of one hundred thousand strong. These facts ought to satisfy the House that something ought to be done in the case. The chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, in his remarks, stated that it required much time to learn the art of war. I admit, sir, that it does in time of peace; but I am satisfied that our officers will, when in a state of war, learn as much in six months as in that number of years du: ring peace. The chairman also informed this House that the defeats which our army sustained at the commencement of the last war were attributed to the want of skilful and experienced officers. In reply to this remark, allow me to say that the gentleman is certainly advised of one fact, which is, that the army was officered at the commencement of the last war from men who had seen service. In saying this, I mean the officers of high rank, superannuated old men, and to this circumstance I attributed the many defeats of the last war. The gentleman says, General Washington was in favor of a standing army in time of peace, and that the present Chief Magistrate, likewise, is in favor of a standing army. It is true, sir, that the present Chief Magistrate does not recommend a reduction, nor does he an increase of the army; from which I imagine the gentleman from South Carolina has come to the conclusion that the President is in favor of a standing army in time of peace. If I do not mistake, the President of the
in favor of a standing army in time of peace. I have no doubt of it, sir; this I conceive to be natural enough; and you will not hear an officer in the army say that the number of officers ought to be reduced. My friends certainly would not expect it, for it is not reasonable to expect an officer in the army, more especially the general in command, to say that his command ought to be reduced. My friend [Mr. DRAyton] said that I was in error wheu I stated what the proportion of the officers were to privates, and, instead of seven and a half or eight privates to each commissioned officer, there are twenty. Now, I stated, distinctly, there was one commissioned officer receiving pay for every seven and a half or eight privates; and one for every nine or ten, to count the non-commissioned officers and musicians. I did not say this was the proportion between the officers doing duty in the line, and the pri. vates; but I here assert, without the fear of contradiction, that, to calculate the whole number of officers in commission, who are attached to the army, and in the receipt of F. I am right in my calculation. My friend went into a ong calculation to show that he had not officers enough to command the military posts, and that I ought to have made a deduction in my calculation of the number of officers on furlough, sick, courts martial, and on the recruiting ser: vice, and then I should be satisfied myself that we have not a sufficient number to command five thousand eight hundred men: and further, that in one or two instances companies had to be commanded by the graduates from West Point. To obviate that difficulty, I would suggest to the Secretary of War to order the officers, wherever they may be, to appear in their uniform. If this were to be done, it would be very easy to account for the scarcity of officers on duty. Yes, sir, you would find a number in this place, during the sessions of Congress, who, if kept on duty, as they ought to be, would prevent you hearing of such a circumstance as that of graduates from West Point commanding entire companies. The gentleman says that, from the calculation he has made, the proportion of officers now is not greater than when a company consisted of one hundred rank and file, and the regiment of one thousand. In this it appears to me that he is greatly mistaken; and I beg to suggest to him, when he makes his calculation of the absentees, that in war times, when the army had a different organization from the existing one, officers frequently had to be on the recruiting service, were sick occasionally, were on courts martial, and even on furlough; and if it be right under one system of organization, it certainly must be so under another. But, sir, this is not all; the gentleman says, from the fact of the national debt being reduced, and the probability of a speedy payment of the whole debt, a necessity will be created of an increase of the army. I hope not, sir; I cannot, for my own part, possibly subscribe to such a doctrine. An army of six thousand not sufficient, in time of peace, to take care of about fifty little military posts on our frontier I cannot, I say, see the necessity of such a measure. I am opposed, sir, to a large standing army in time of peace, and so have been the greatest statesmen in our country. The militia will have to defend this country
in the event of a war, and the militia, where their services
It is true, the colonel of the regiment had been in the army before the war; but it is not true that the discipline and good order that prevailed in the twenty-fourth regiment, of which the geutleman speaks, is ... to the skill and experience of its commander, or to the superiority of any of the superior officers, of that regiment; but to two of its captains, who had never been in service before the war, but who were possessed of those natural powers, which, of themselves, render persons eminent as military men; I mean Holmes and Armstrong. I must do my friend, the chairman of the committee, the justice to say, that, notwithstanding he consented to the resolution reported by myself, he was not satisfied that a reduction of the number 9f officers in the army could be made, with propriety or facility. He stated, distinctly, that it was a subject of great importance, and one that he had not sufficiently examined to come to a conclusion upon. The gentleman now tells us that he has examined the subject, and is satisfied that,
instead of too many officers, we have not enough; but that
he will vote for the resolution. Now, sir, I have never contended, that, under the present organization of the army, there are many supernumerary officers; but, under a dif. ferent organization, there would be a number whose services could be dispensed with, without injury to the public serviee, and would save an immense sum of money to the The gentleman says the cadets at
West Point are officers of the army from the time they
are received into the institution.
If so, I acknowledge I have been mistaken in my calculation; and instead of one commissioned officer for every seven or eight privates, there are one for every five. Mr. D. said, in conclusion, he hoped the House would take the vote on the resolution; that the discussiou had already consumed more time than he had anticipated, as the
* resolution he considered to be one of inquiry only.
* Mr. TAYLOR rose in reply to Mr. Desha, and express. ed his hope that, before the House proceeded to act in reference to the resolution, they would hear the views and * arguments presented at the time the army received its preA sent organization by a distinguished citizen, then Secretary
of War, and now Vice President of the United States. The
* report of that able officer would be found in the first voA lume of the Executive papers of the second session sixteenth • Congress, number twenty-one. It consisted but of eight
or ten pages, which every gentleman would find well worthy of perusal.
He would at present request that the two ...]". might be read from the Clerk's table. They contained, within a brief space, better views, and expressed in a more luminous and impressive manner, than any which he had to offer. “No position connected with the organization of the peace establishment is susceptible of being more rigidly proved, than that the proportion of its officers to the rank and file ought to be greater than in a war establishment. It results immediately from a position, the truth of which cannot be fairly doubted, and which I have attempted to illustrate in the preliminary remarks, that the leading object of a regular army in time of peace ought to be, to enable the country to meet with honor and safety, particularly at the eommencement of war, the dangers incident to that state; to effect this object as far as practicable, the peace organization ought, as has been shown, to be such, that, in passing to a state of war, there should be nothing either to new-model, or to create; and that the difference between that and the war organization ought to be simply in the greater magnitude of the latter. The application of this principle has governed in that portion of the formation of the proposed military establishment now underconsideration. The companies, both of the artillery and infantry, are proposed to be reduced to their minimum peace formation, the former to consist of sixty-four privates and non-commissioned officers, and the latter to thirty-seven, which will give to the aggregate of both corps thus formed Vol. WI-100.
six thousand three hundred and sixteen non-commission" ed officers, musicians, and privates. Without adding an additional officer, or a single company, they may be augmented, should a just precaution, growing out of our foreign relations, render it necessary, to eleven thousand five hundred and fifty-eight; and, pending hostilities, by adding two hundred and eighty-eight officers, the two corps on the maximum of the war formation may be raised to the respectable force of four thousand five hundred and forty-five of the artillery, and fourteen thousand four hundred and ninety of the infantry, making, in the aggregate, nineteen thousand and thirty-five officers, non-commissioned officers, and privates, (see table E.) The war organization, thus raised on the basis of the peace establishment, will bring into effective operation the whole of the experience and skill of the latter, which, with attention, would, in a short period, be communicated to the new recruits, and the officers recently appointed, so as to constitute a well disciplined force. Should the organization of full companies, on the contrary, be adopted for the peace, es: tablishment, this process could be carried to a very limited extent. Six thousand men so organized can be augmented on the full war establishment only to nine thousand one hundred and fifteen, by doubling the battalions, (see table E.) Any additional force, beyond that, must be obtained by adding new regiments and battalions, with all of the disadvantages of experience in the officers and men, with: out the means of immediate instruction. This was the fatal error at the commencement of the late war, which cost the country so much treasure and blood. The peace establishment which preceded it, was very imperfectly, organized, and did not admit of the necessary augmentation; nor did the Government avail itself of even its limited eapacity in that respect. The forces raised were organized into new corps, in which, consequently, every branch of military duty was to be learned by the officers as well as men. But, with all of these disadvantages, the experience and discipline of the oldestablishment was of immense use, and has not been duly appreciated. The officers belonging to it gradually diffused their military knowledge through the army, and contributed much to the brilliant results of the campaign of 1814. For the truth of this as: sertion, I might with confidence appeal to those officers who then acquired so much glory for themselves and their country. “Another reason remains to be urged, why, in the peace establishment, the number of officers ought to be great compared with the actual force. At the commencement of war, an adequate number of experienced officers is of greater importance than that of disciplined troops, even were it possible to have the latter without the former; for it is not difficult to form in a short time well disciplined troops by experienced officers, but the reverse is impossible. The qualifications of the officers are essentially superior to those oftthe soldiers, and are more diffi: cult" to be acquired. The progress of military science has not added much to the difficulty of performiug the duty of the soldier, or of training him, but it has greatly to that of the officer. No Government can, in the present improved state of the military science, neglect with impu. nity to instruct a sufficient number of its citizens in a science indispensable to its independence and safety, and to perfect which instruction, it is ... that some portion of them (the number to be regulated by the resources of the country, and its relation, with other Governments) should make arms their profession. *Table F exhibits the estimate of the saving which will be made by the proposed organization. “I have thus presented an organization which I deem the most effective, and which, in the future exigencies of the country, may be of the utmost importance. A different one, requiring for the present an expenditure something less o that propesed, might, in some respects, be