The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-06-09
CONGRESSIONAL.
REMARKS OF MIR. CUSHING,
OF MASSACHUSETTS,
ON THE ARMY APPROPRIATION BILL.
DELIVERED IN rHE HOUSE OF REPREsENrArpEs
MAY &c, 1912.
Concluded from yesterday,)

In regard to the Army, the first proposition hae
been to reduce il from Its present nominal force o.
twelve thousand five hundred to six thousand, anc
then TO eight thousands besides which, one OF the
bills reported by the gentleman from Georgia pro-
posed further reduction to what amount he did moi
know. On these various reductions, here was the
practical question for the consideration Of the CON-
mttee whether consistently with the positions he
had assumed, of the admitted uses of the Army IN
time of peace, this reduction could be made compat
IDLY with the public interests. No gentleman had
gone into details on the subject, or had enumerated
the various posts, and estimated the number of men
required in each of Them not even the accurate gen.
tleman from North Carolina, (Mr. MckayO who SC
thoroughly understood the subject, from his expert
ence in past Congresses, to show that this thing was
compatible with the public interests.
That was the first remarkable fact with which he
entered on this investigation The next fact was
that in the report OF the Secretary OF War and Cen
eral Scott, a minute and detailed exhibition OF
the proposed dis osition of the Army Of the United
States among the various posts and analytical ex
position of the amount required for this peace force
To this reply had been made. The whole argu-
ment had been Indefinite vague, and inconcusve, or
based specific facts, which, he should show IN no
sort, touched the conclusion.
Gentlemen shrank from the idea OF the magnitude
of the Army of the United States What was the
number of the Armyl $500 among l7,0OO,O0O OF
inhabitants In other words, II to every 1900
souls in the United States, and about AZ to his dis
trict 1t seemed to him idle to say that there was
any cause Of apprehension from that force
Gentlemen had said that they relied on our mill
tia, but it admitted that we were not 10 employ
militia to garrison our forts.
In the next place, there were certain specific
charges of abuse in the administration Of the Army
of the United States Most of the remarks of the
gentleman from North Carolina Mr.. Mckay con-
sisted of this On this subject the first question was
How long had these abuses existed Had they sprung
up this year. or since the 4th of March, lS4l The
gentleman himself had told them that they were
abuses of long standing, or as the negro song has IT.
g long time ago." On these specific abuses he put 1t
to the gentleman whether they were not old abuses
- whether the idea that military bureau here was
a military post, and, therefore, that it drew double
ration was not old abuse Why, then, had not
these abuses been previously reformed' Why bad
not the majority to which he belonged and who were
in power for twelve years, struck at them Why
had not the gentleman from North Carolina himself
then introduced specific bill for the reformation
of these abuses and why did he not now
MIR. MCKAY explained that he had alluded to what
he considered abuses in the Administration Of the
Army for the purpose OF bringing them 70 the notice
of the House, that they might act Understandings
when proposition for their correction should be
submitted
Mr.. CUSHING said the gentleman from North
Carolina had urged the committee long ar
ray of antiquated abuses, which might and which
ought have been reformed by the past Administra
ton, and which, though the gentleman professed not
to have used them argument in favor OF reduc-
ton, certainly were calculated to produce bias
in the mind towards the gentleman's side of the
question, unless (Which was not very usua) the
House made exact analysis of the pertinency of
the arguments to the question pending. Mr.. G. said
it remarkable fact that most of these very abuses
existed prior to the law 1925 for the increase ofthe
Army
If they were an argument for the reduction Of the
Army now, surely they infinitely stronger
argument against its increase then which ncreas the
gentleman from North Carolina advocated and urged
in the House. Mr. G.. regretted that the long speech
in vndication of his course, to which the gentleman
had alluded yesterday, never printed by him. Mr.
c. remembers that speech we'll Why, in that speech
of two hours, had not the gentleman inveghed against
these abuses q Such remarks would certainly have
been more relevant then than now, when they were
altogether irrelevant What was the argument
There are abuses in the Army-therefOre the Army
nust be abolished. 1t would be good an arg ument
to say there are abuses in this House-heretore the
House ought to be abolished. Or, there abuses
in this Observation-Disclosures the Government ought
to be abolished The argument either proved this or
it proved nothing.
There remained one argument more in favor of the
amendment One gentleman had said that an Army
of six thousand was sufiicent another, that
$1,000 another, that 10000. But had gentlemen IN
vesgaled the subject How did il appear that 5000
men would be sufficient On what details did that
calculation rest : Had gentlemen who spoke SO def
nitey of results, investigated the specific want OF the
servce2 The Army now amounted to an actual foce OF
ing 1880. And supposing the ranks to be filled,
how many men did II give to our frontieri The Sec
retary showed it but man fol every two miles.
The troops could scarcely each other; they were
not enough to mount guard on the frontier OF the
country.
hear the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nc
Keon) say, 'try the British army by that test Yes,
and lei tell him that he cannot 90 to British post
throughout all her vast domnons, an find no man
there to respond to salute; yet how many days ago
"a ,,.nfa int a nf nj
polls, to fire a gun when the WaIspite landed Lord
Ashburton2 And as hear some gentleman exclaim-
ing the other side ofthe House. that not two years
ago it happened in the same way that there were no
means of answering salute in the harbor OF New
York
NJ. C. asked the Committee to consider the extent
and condition of the frontier of the United States
the long line of coast on the Atlantic that along
the Gulf of Mexico 1.-The exposed frontier adjoining
the British provinces the North and the long line
of Western frontier, with more than 10000 Indian
warriors concentrated within striking distance OF Little
Rock and st. Louis
The gentleman from Tennessee (Mr CampbeD
had said that the increase of the Army in 1888
had no respect to the wants of the West but
Mr.. c. appealed to all gentlemen here present
who were in the House at that time to bear
witness that the wants of the West, so far
from having had nothing to do with the mea-
sure, constituted the chief consideration for it. 1t
was the chief argument used All must remember
with what zeal and pertinacity Mr.. Yell now Cover
nor of Arkansas pressed the bill on that very ground
the number of Indians had not diminished since that
time, and there was need that the flag of the United
States should float before their eyes, If for nothing
else, yet as means of maintaining the police OF the
borders and preserving order among the Indians
themselves.
What was the chief of difficulty in the con-
dition of those peoplel Mr.. G. well remembered
the striking explanation of this, given many years
ago, by General Cass and General Clark, in docu-
ment Of theirs communicated to Congress. The
buffalo, if by the force of instinct retreats from be-
fore the march Of civilization, and the approaching
presence of the white race; in this long belt Of ter
ritory intevenes always between The pioneer settle
ment of the West, and the plains which the buff
fao still continues to roam within this belt the In
dian remains still obstnaiey refusing to engage in