The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-04-29
SUNDAY. APRIL %, 1900
The Army in Politics.


stalking horse for the promotion Of theii
prejudlces, private spites or chamber ami
mosities. Indeed, it is an eternal pity
that the subject of Army legislation can
not be taken up and discussed in the Senate
and the House without partisanship. Sen
ator Jones of Arkansas has a right to thini
that an army Of an hundred thousand
eighty thousand, sixty thousand, or forty
thousand men, as permanent establish
ment would be dangerous TO the institu-
lions of the country and the liberties OF
its people But neither he nor any other
member of the Legislature possesses
right to block all legislation on military
subjects.
The matter of our regular and reserve
Army organization in the future is one of
grave concern. The Times is not at this
time disposed to present arguments for or
against a large, a moderate, or small
establishment. There are certain consid-
erations. however, connected with our
military situation which ought not TO be
ignored. and a deliberate attempt to post
pone all action on Army matters to the
short session of Congress next winter, at
which they could hardly receive careful
and leisurely treatment. would amount TO
a plain violation OF propriety.
Within another year the immediate fu-
ture of the Army must be settled. The
problems which confront Congress in pro-
viding the means and methods for the re-
forms which all honest soldiers and all
disiuterested public men feel TO be essen
tial to the good of the service and the
rountry are not OF kind to be left to
Nreless and haphazard consideration at
the eleventh hour. 1t might be possible to
delay definitive action in regard to the
size OF the force in a general sense with
out great damage; but this cannot be said
of the artillery, for example. At great
cost we have been constructing an elab-
crate system of coast defence. We have
spent millions in providing magnificent
guns and delicate machinery by which TO
serve them. Both demand adequate and
skilled manning. or they will simply
become fit only for the scrap pile in
very short time. Yet at present our
artillery arm is so deficient in numbers
that il provides but single relief for
the men who must be employed in the
work. If war were to break out tomorrow
the United States would be in the ridicu-
lous position of lacking artillerists enough
to man the batteries. Competent gunners,
under modern conditions, cannot be made
out of recruits in a day or year. Even
though We were TO adopt the policy Of
cutting down or starving our cavalry and
infantry, the artillery must be kept at an
effective standard or practically the coasts
will be defenceless. and the national in
yestment designed for their protection
will, to a great extent, be lost and have
been in vain.
II is unpleasaont to hear that there are
Democrats in Congress who objec. TO an
increase of even six thousand in the artil-
terry arm, and who are ready to carry their
opposition to the point of holding UP the
Army Reorganization bill to the day CT
adjournment in June, or whenever it may
happen. A. a matter of truth, the artillery
ought to be increased by not less than
twelve thousand, including officers, rsnk
and file. One Of these days we are likely 10
find ourselves in the presence OF an emer-
gency. and if doddering provinciaism IS
to dictate our course toward the Amy
we shall be as unprepared as We were
when the Spanish war hove in sigtJ II IS
passing strange that, with the lessons OF
1898 still fresh in the memory, AMI tire
spectacle of British unpreparednsss FOR
the South African struggle before our
eyes, there should be solitary nan
in the National Legislature willing TO OBJ
struct consideration of our military stu
alton.
What viii the country think of Demo-
cratic statesmen who, while denouncing
the scandals of Algerism and Ed ganism in
the Army, are absolutely unwilling TO aid
in securing the reforms which would
clue such vices? Every decent Am-ri-
can who gives any attention to public at
fairs knows that at the present time the
organization of our Army is archaic, and,
as to its staff departments. ridiculous. We
have a General-iu- Chief who. in point Il
professional ability. experience, and all that
goes to make commander, ranks at least
equally with any European general OF this
generation. Yet under the political and
corrupt system which has grown up in the
service during many years, the General
Of the Army is but little more than fig
urehead, and his proper functions are
usurped by the Adjutaot Generals oiH,e.
normally a clerical department which
should be completely under the direction
OF the chief Of staff.
Then We have a fosiliaeG stan office sys-
tenn which is the contempt OF foreign writ
ers and observers. Its personnel is the
result largely of nepotism and favoritism
II is on permanent and immovable basis
utterly at variance with all recognized
professional ideas and standards adopted
since the days OF Frederick the Great OH
GERS in other armies are transferred from
line to staff and from one branch of the
service TO another, until by the time an
educated soldier reaches the age OF forty
or forty-hve he has been trained in every
arm; understands commissary, transport,
quartermaster, aud all other duties. neces-
sites. and organization requisite to the
successful maintenance of an army in the
field, and is fully equipped to take com
officers, on the other hand. as a rule are
. { :. - fat old desk men. They should not
be 50. The advice OF General Miles and
Secretary Root, that the stan be modern