The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-04-28

erests OF the country require it, In his view OF his duty
he had no discretion left him on that subject
Mr.. STANTON interrupted, 70 ask the gentleman from
Alabama whether he would be willing now on the reso-
ration Of peace, that such Gen Taylor and Cen
Scott should be dismissed absolutely from the service
And 70 this question he would like to have categorcal
answer. -
| Mr.. HOUSTON replied that the law Of 1916 created
officers with the distinct provision that they should be
dispensed with at the close of the war and the officers
brought down to specified number he would not say
whether he would discharge General Taylor or General
discharge But The law Of 1916, which created these Of
fees made provision for the reduction OF the major gene
rails and the bgader general: 10 two and every
the war The law the President discharge that
duty-a duty which he had no doubt the President would
vond the major generals and bgadier generals and pro-
vdes for disbandng the army, except necessary peace
establishment But if they passed this BILL he would
inquire il present army was to be kept in the public
service?
When, where. and how do gentlemen propose to re-
duce the amy Or do they intend to reduce il at all II a
reduction be contemplated, why not hold on to what we
aws' Experience teaches that the great difficulty in
the way Of reducing American army is the influence
sa
friends; and in that way influences brought to bear
upon Congress which it cannot resist.
gentleman from Alabama Il this bill sSoa as Pns into
law and repeal the original proviso to which it refers.
the acts which created the volunteer forces would ope-
t0cm, tney WOulu Out OF the service
matter of course, at the end of the war.
Mr. HOUSTON. The gentleman from Virginia said the
volunteers would be dsbanded at the end of the war; He
was aware of that but this provso applies to the regular
army, and not the volunteers and relates to than
major brgadier generals He would ask, if the Off
GERS for their brilliant services to be retained for
life what they should do with the who had render
ed valuable services to the country for remuneration of
only Us per month! The men by thousands and tens of
thousands, had undergone all the hardships and trials,
and dangers of the campaign and the battle for the
poor pance of $s per month; but they were to be dis
banded-they to be thrown their own resources
There no feeling exhibited for them But when Off
adler generals and other officers OF high rank-were to
be dismissed when their services became unnecessary
when the government had further use for hem the
excited in their behalf Now. he held that if lie men
were to be discharged, the officers should go too We
have too many any officers for peace establishment;
mr. SrANroNl If he in favor of dsbandng the sol
ders and dschargng the officers of lower grade and re-
tanning the field ot6cers Was he willing % make
of the army-a distinction founded alone upon rank
Mr.. STANTON replied that the army would necessa.
y be reduced at the end of the war; but they would dis
feelings of the country and the patriotism of the people
and they would not have the appreciation of the soldiers
themselves who fought under General Taylor and General
Scott, if they dismissed either of them
Mr.. HOUSTON said the gentleman from Tennessee had
gwen most extraordinary answer. In fact it was no
answer at all He was really at loss, too TO know how
O1
the army respecting the dismissal of of its field Off
GERS. He seemed to think that the would not want
to be retained Was it not fair and reasonable to pre-
the peace establishment either To say otherwise was "a
make assault upon them for il an intimation thai
they desired to retain their pay when their services were
Mr. BURT (interupting urther) deied any man, mill.
tary civilian, to point out anywhere an army of an,
nation where the proportion Of officers to was sc
small in the army of the United States-where there
were so many cases of colonies commanding brigades
captains commanding regiments, and second lieutenant.
commanding companies The regular army was now
n4 Rs s TBS IL s Une Saes the S:c1sis,
of War; and every else knowing anything of the sub
ject that army of twenty thousand men would not be
sufficient for the service He agreed also with the gen
t!eman from Tennessee mr. JONES'. that this was moi
the time to discuss the propety of reducing the army to
Mr.. HOUSTON said. thegenteman from South Caro-.
lima dld not present the real ISSUE as he understood it,
disparity Of the number of officers and men in the army
of the United States, when compared with the armies Of
other nations but If ne were to ask the gentleman from
South Carolina il he would have been willing to increase
the number OF officers the war with Mexico had moi
taken place. he should be at no loss to determine what
his answer would BE- That gentleman, he supposed,
would not have been willing to increase the number OF
officers peace establishments but the ground which
he had now assumed was, that as they THERE they
snna rem w wi gentleman had also stated
been compelled to command larger divisions than be-
longed to their rank Would he be pleased to inform
the House why that was so' Did it not proceed from
the fact that there not officers sufficient on the
field in consequence of the Incompetence of some and
the absence of others, who while holding Commissions
under the government of the United States were unable
to serve the country in Mexico'
Mr.. BURT remarked that everybody knew that these
major generals and brgader generals were in the field in
Mexico.
Mr.. HOUSTON knew and acknowledged that fact
he neither made ntmated charge against either OF
hem he proud TO honor them as sklful and brave
generals, who had discharged faithful duty But why
retain the general officers, and discharge the various val
liant officers Of regiments, battalions and companies!
IL brilliant services were to be rewarded by retention
IN the service, why not reward the lowest grade of
Office Justice requires that the same daring Conduct
the same brilliant service, should meet the same reward
whether performed by high in rank or low in rank
He intended to speak in military phrase
This was not ALL. He would ask, Why discharge the
men-the common soldier-and not the officer II we
have no men. or but few men, will want but few Of
fcers; and it follows, that to retain some and not others
expressly upon the ground of brilliant services when ii
conceded that their services longer needed BY
the country, will be drawing an unjust distinction be-
tween meritorious men in favor of those retained Mr.
desired to inquire of gentlemen what brilliant services
had been rendered by the officers in which the soldiers
the rank and e as they caed-did not largely par
tcpate, and to which they did not contribute in the pro-
portion Of forty.nne ifeths, if not ninety nine hun
dredths Look to your batte-feIds in Mexico mosten-
cd with thosp Ind and II