The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1896-02-20
THE BLUE AND THE GRAY.
Some Consideration of the Relative Strength
of the Two Armies.

sympathy and hope were for the success o
the Confederate cause, have dwelt with con
siderable JUNCTION on the alleged disparity
In numbers between the Union and the dis
union forces in the several engagements
both of minor import and those having
more important bearing on the general re
suit, and which were more disastrous anC
sanguinary; claiming usually numerical
preponderance of the Union forces, intend
ing thereby, without doubt, to demonstrate
the superior valor and fighting qualities o
the soldiers combating for the destruction o
the Union over those fighting for its preserva
ton. This intention is the more apparent
as no reasons are assigned why force les:
in numbers should defeat its larger oppo
nent The late war, other than its benefi
TO the United States and the world at large
in successfully demonstrating that "a Gov
eminent of the people, by the people, and
for the people " has sufficient strength within
itself, In the affection and loyalty of the
people, to maintain its integrity and unity
has also been of benefit az o school Of expe.
rlence, In which the art of war was thorough.
ly taught, and in the experience of which
the thoughtful participant, or his more timid
non-combatant ally, learned much. At the
beginning of the contest, and during its
continuance, until perhaps during the last
SIX months thereof, the Confederate armies
were equally as strong aud effective as the
Federal armies. While acknowledging the
fact that, so far as soldiers we're concerned,
| the Union army had the larger number, and
of equally as brave men, yet the Confed-
crates were more than compensated for this
comparatively slight preponderance, owing
| to several reasons.
First: The Confederate army acted on the
defensive, and in most battles fought on the
defensive. When they assumed the offensive
| battles fought were generally lost by them.
Second: The bulk of the soldiers compos-
| ing the Confederate army were generally,
from youth up, habituated or Injured to the
use of firearms, and many of them adept in
their use. They were also early taught to
ride on horseback; that mode of travelling
being prevalent throughout the South. The
men comprising The Union army, on the con-
trary, had these useful accomplishments to
acquire. The majority of the men who en-
listed from the towns and cities, coming from
the contingencies, workshops, factories,
mills, offices, and stores, had no practice in
either accomplishments, but had both to
learn. Five men adept in the use offirearms,
other things being equal, ought to be equal
IN battle to 10 unused to handling them /;
and the same proportion of superiority ought
to exist In horsemanship, so far as its use in
cavalry service is concerned. 1t is true that
most of the soldiers recruited from the rural
districts into the Union army were more
habItuated to firearms and to horsemanship,
than their comrades from the towns and
cities, but the majority of these, even, were
not accustomed to the use of either, as were
the majority of the COnfederates.
Third: The Confederates were operating
ID sections of the country with which they
were familiar, and were aided very materially
by the inhabitants, the very large majority
of whom were sympathizers with their
cause; while the Union forces were COM
PEELED to study the country thoroughly
while advancing, and to obtain information
as best they could; the advantage of secret
movements being often nullified by informa-
ton thereof carried to the Confederates by
these same inhabitants, and they thus en-
abled to prepare for defense Again, there
was not as much earnestness felt ut first by
the rank and file OF the Union troops there
seemed to prevail among them hopeful
feeling that show Of force would be suffi-
cient 10 quell the turbulent feelings of their
misguided fellow-ctizens consequently, a
disposition existed to do as little harmful
fighting as possible; particularly was this
noticeable among those commanding officers
graduated from West Point. Later, when it
was demonstrated that such sentiment was
wasted, and that hard blows were necessary
to bring the erring ones to their better senses,
different policy was pursued, which by its
per-lstency brought the success so desirable.
These advantages to the Conlederates and
disadvantages To the Union armies con-
tinued in a greater or less degree, during
the war. The Confederate ranks were re-
cruited from the sources from which the
hrst men were drawn; so, too, was the
Union army recruited from the same mate
rial as at lis first formation. These recruits
to the Union forces, with but little time for
drilling, were pushed forward for duty with
their veteran comrades, and were generally,
for time, of but little more use than to
swell the ranks; while those recruited by
the Confederates had the same advantages
possessed by their comrades originally, and
with but little instruction were of imme-
diate utility.
Fourth: The disparity did not always ex-
list, but was alleged on the reported strength
of the force engaged by the officers in COM
mand. 1t is now well known, however
that The manner of formulating the reports
differed in the two armies. The Confed-
crates reported the number of soldiers carry
pared for battle at the time, as " present for
duty" while the Federas reported all con-
nected with their force engaged as present
for duty,o whether combaiants or non-com-
batants, including those on detailed service
of every kind, many Of whom were miles
away during the battle. 1t does not re-
quire misstatements of this character to
prove the valor of the Confederate soldiers.
They demonstrated the fact on many hard
fought battlefields, as can be testified by
any of us who were there to meet them.
Although they fought in bad cause, they
did so with zeal and valor worthy of a
better. That they were superior to the
Union soldiers in valor or any of the quail
ties which 20 TO make up good soldiers rs
beyond the power of such persons to estab-
lish, even by misstatements of the facts.
They were American soldiers, and differed
from their opponents in that while possess
ing equal courage, they had more dash, but
did not possess the pertinacity and "hold
on of their kindred from the North, East,
and West.-E. l.. BARNES, Thayer, Kan.
First Blood.
EDITOR NATIONAL TRIBUNE: I wOuld
very much like answer to the following
question in THE NATIONAL TRIBUNE. Was