Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1873-03-08
EXPENSES OF THE ARMY.
SPEECH OF SENATOR CAMERON.

When the appropriation for the support
Of the army was under consideration in
the United States Senate on the 25th ult.,
Mr.. Casserly, OF California, compared the
cost of maintaining our armywith that of
maintaining the army of Great Britain,
concluding his remarks as follows:
l think | observed this morning in the
newspapers telegraphic dispatch that the
estimates for the British army for the pres
ent year were about sc, 900, 900 gold. That
is fourteen million pounds sterling; and
out Of that they support regular line of
more than one hundred and twenty-five
thousand men, besides large number of
militia and yeomanry, the whole of those
additional forces equaling one hundred and
eighty thousand men; so that our army
costs us say S2S. 900, 900 in gold for less than
thirty thousand men, and their army of
over three hundred thousand men costs
them about SIC, 900, 900, gold. And yet we
all know that the pay and compensation
of the higher officers in the British army,
and in that | ueap 10 include colonies, is
much larger sum than anything that we
pay to our higher officers,
Mr. Cameron-It is true, as the Senator
from California says, that our army is the
most expensive army in the world per
head. The reason why that is so, in the
first place, is Because our army is a smaller
one than that of other nations; and, of
course, the expense of smaller body is
greater per head than that of larger
as every one readily perceives. Besides
that, all the members of our army are fel-
low-citizens. When a man leaves his pur-
suits as private citizen at home and en-
ters our army, especially in time ofwar, he
continues citizen, and we treat our army
better than any army in the world.
This debate has brought to my mind an
| incident that occurred at the time l hap
pened to be in London in 1862, at the be-
ginning of our war, at time when almost
everybody abroad thought this country
must succumb to the rebellion of the South.
was invited to breakfast, at which there
were fifteen or twenty gentlemen of high
! position, men of title, and l believe all OF
! them members of Parliament. During the
conversation at the table an inquiry was
! made the CVst Of soldier per year in
| the United States. They were trying TO
convince me that we had no chance of pre-
serving the Union intact. The wish was
father to the thought with all of them.
They tho ught that this, the last great re-
public, would be destroyed because of its
own want Ofstrength TO keep itself together.
| said the cost OF a soldier in the United
States was thousand dollars year, and
it astopished everybody present. Then
my inquiry was, ''what does it cost to feed
and cluthe and keep soldier in Great Bri-
tain!n The answer was 5000. The diff
ference was immense. l was asked for the
reasons, and l gave the reason which
have now given, that here every man has
a common interest in the country, and it is
| tl,., mt - Of h,, ~
the army, to feed and cothe those who GO
into the army as we would be fed and
clothed ourselves; they are our brothers
our cousins, our relatives, our associates IN
every way. Then 1 inquired about thu
cost of a soldier in various countries. dc
not remember all of them, but seventy-tiy,
dollars was stated to be the cost Of main
tanning a soldier in Russia. The momen
man became soldier in any OF those
countries, until the recent war in Ger
many, he became slave, and he was led
and clothed and used like the negro slave
of our own country, ...
Mr.. President, it is because of this dif
ference n the treatment aud standing OF ;
soldier in our country that we can always
provide ap army capable Of preserving th
liberties of This country against all foes
foreign and, domestic. They are part ant
parcel of ourselves, and they live as We dc
No other soldiers ia the world ever got co
) fee or tea br sugar or potatoes as n part o
their rations. / remember myself, in thi
I country, in the war of 1912, when We copie
our regulations from England, our soldier