12. ASP:MA, IV, 285, 683, V, 307, 347, VI, 988, VII, Iff., 89; Forman, West Point, pp. 49–51.
13. Act of Mar. 1, 1843, 5 Stat. 604; Act of Mar. 3, 1845, 5 Stat. 794; Act of Aug. 31, 1852, 10 Stat. 102; Congressional Globe, XI (May 13, 1842), 499–500, XII (Feb. 7, 1843), 224–225, XXIV (Aug. 30, 1852), 2442–2444; ASP:MA, III, 616; H.Doc. 167, 20th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 3–4 (1828).
14. Paullin, USNIP, XXXIII, 632; Halleck, Military Art and Science, pp. 404–405; Swift, Centennial, pp. 528ff.; Upton, Military Policy, pp. 212–213; Truman Seymour, Military Education: A Vindication of West Point and the Regular Army (1861), p. 6; J. F. C., “Hints on Manning the Navy, Etc.,” Naval Magazine, I (March 1836), 185.
15. Halleck, Military Art and Science, p. 398; James Fenimore Cooper, History of the Navy of the United States of America (London, 2 vols., 1839), I, xxix.
16. Army and Navy Chronicle, II (Jan. 7, 1836), 13 (Feb. 18, 1836), 108–109, (Mar. 2, 1836), 139–140, (May 19, 1836), 315–316.
17. ASP: MA, II, 450.
18. H. Rept. 46, 23rd Cong., 2d Sess., p. 4. See also Secy. Spenser’s similar views in 1842, S. Rept. 555, 45th Cong., 3rd Sess., pp. 408–409 (1878).
19. Art. XXXIX, Par. 1, Army Regulations, Dec. 31, 1836. For subsequent appearances of this clause, see Par. 48, Art. X, in the 1841 and 1847 Regulations, Pars. 186, 187, 813, Regulations for the Army of the United States (Washington, 1889). On the evolution of this provision, see G. Norman Lieber, Remarks on the Army Regulations (Washington, 1898), pp. 63–73.
20. S. Rept. 555, 45th Cong., 3rd Sess., p. 120 (1878). For post-Civil War efforts to introduce a vertical organization, see ibid., pp. 7–8, 121; William H. Carter, The American Army (Indianapolis, 1915), pp. 185–186; Report of the Commission Appointed by the President to Investigate the Conduct of the War Dept, in the War with Spain, S. Doc. 221, 56th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 115–116 (1900).
21. Colonel H. L. Scott, Military Dictionary (New York 1864), pp. 17. 233, 548–549; Upton, Military Policy, p. 129; S. Rept. 555, 45th Cong., 3rd Sess., pp. 398–399. On the bureaus, see Carter, American Army, pp. 188 ff., and General S. V. Benet, “Historical Statement of the Rise and Progress of the Ordnance Department,” 1876, quoted in L. D. Ingersoll, A History of the War Department of the United States (Washington, 1879), p. 317.
22. S. Rept. 555, 45th Cong., 3rd Sess., pp. 410–411; Leonard D. White, The Jacksonians (New York, 1954), pp. 194–196; Upton, Military Policy, p. 365; John McA. Schofield, Forty-Six Years in the Army (New York, 1897), ch. 22, pp. 468–475, 536–538; John McAuley Palmer, Washington, Lincoln, Wilson: Three War Statesmen (Garden City, N.Y., 1930), pp. 157–158; William H. Carter, Creation of the American General Staff (S. Doc. 119, 68th Cong., 2d Sess., 1924), p. 19, and American Army, pp. 185–192; Otto L. Nelson, Jr., National Security and the General Staff (Washington, 1946), pp. 25–28; Rachel Sherman Thorndike (ed.), The Sherman Letters (New York, 1894), pp. 331–332, 339, 346; Elihu Root, Five Years of the War Department (Washington, 1900), p. 330; J. D. Hittle, The Military Staff (Harrisburg, Pa., 1949), p. 166.
23. See Rollin G. Osterweis, Romanticism and Nationalism in the Old South (New Haven, 1949), pp. 90–94; W. J. Cash, The Mind of the South (New York, 1941), pp. 43–44. For a comprehensive description of the Southern military tradition, see John Hope Franklin, The Militant South, 1800–1860 (Cambridge, Mass., 1956), esp. pp. 138–170 on Southern military education. Unfortunately, this book was published too late to be used in the writing of this section.
24. Seymour, Military Education, pp. 3ff.; Alfred T. Mahan, From Sail to Steam (New York, 1907), p. 151.
25. United States Military Academy, Department of Economics, Government, and History, Military Policy of the United States, 1775–1944 (West Point, 1945), pp. 15–16; Upton, Military Policy, pp. 238–241; Oliver L. Spaulding, The United States Army in War and Peace (New York, 1937), pp. 243–244; E. R. Humphreys, Education of Officers: Preparatory and Professional (Boston, 1862), p. 10; Seymour, Military Education, pp. 5–6; Ellsworth Eliot, Jr., West Point in the Confederacy (New York, 1941), passim. For the significance of the Union government’s acceptance of Southern resignations, see Joseph E. Johnston, Narrative of Military Operations (New York, 1874), p. 11.
26. John A. Logan, The Volunteer Soldier of America (Chicago, 1887), pp. 243–246, 431–435; Mahan, Sail to Steam, pp. 85–87; Lloyd Lewis, Sherman: Fighting Prophet (New York, 1932), pp. 54–55; William A. Gordon, A Compilation of Registers of the Army of the United States from 1815 to 1837 (Washington, 1837), pp. 575ff.; Congressional Globe, XI (May 13, 1842), 498–500; Puleston, Annapolis, pp. 8–9, 14–19, 27–29, 68–69; A. Howard Meneely, The War Department, 1861 (New York, 1928), pp. 26–28; Paullin, USNIP, XXXIII, 1437–1438; P. Melvin, “Stephen Russell Mallory, Southern Naval Statesman,” Jour, of Southern History, X (May 1944), 137–160.
27. On Calhoun’s administrative reforms, see Ingersoll, War Department, pp. 79–107, and White, The Jeffersonians, pp. 233–250. For his views on military policy, see ASP:MA, I, 780–781, 799, 834–835, II, 75–76, 188–191, 699.
28. Paullin, USNIP, XXXIII, 637, 1473ff.; “U.S. Naval Lyceum,” Naval Magazine, I (January 1836), 21–28.
29. Benjamin Blake Minor, The Southern Literary Messenger, 1834–1864 (New York, 1905), pp. 84–85, 90, 119; Frank L. Mott, A History of American Magazines, 1741–1850 (New York, 1930), p. 643. On pre-Civil War military periodicals generally, see Max L. Marshall, “A Survey of Military Periodicals” (M.A. Thesis, Univ. of Missouri, 1953), pp. 10–17.
30. See his “Scraps from the Lucky Bag,” Southern Literary Messenger, VI (April 1840), 235–237, (May 1840), 312–317, (Dec. 1840), 793–795, VII (Jan. 1841), 5, 24.
31. Mahan, Sail to Steam, pp. ix-xiv, 89, 151. The most relevant portions of Dennis Mahan’s writings are Advanced Guard, Out Post, and Detachment Service of Troops (New York, new ed., 1863), pp. 7, 19–20, 26–28, 33, 169, 266; Notes on the Composition of Armies and Strategy (West Point, Lithographed), pp. 2–3, 5, 11; A Treatise on Field Fortifications (New York, 1856), pp. vi-vii. On Mahan, generally, see Dupuy, Where They Have Trod, pp. 272–274, and Men of West Point, ch. 2.
32. Military Art and Science, pp. 11–13, 15–21, 29, 142, 381–382, 398–407; Report on the Means of National Defense, S. Doc. 85, 28th Cong., 2d Sess., pp. 2, 7 (1845).
Chapter 9 — The Creation of the American Military Profession
1. For business pacifist expressions, see Spencer, The Principles of Sociology (New York, 3 vols., 1888), I, 473–491, 568–667; Fiske, Outlines of Cosmic Philosophy (Boston, 2 vols., 11th ed., 1890), II, 240ff.; Sumner, War and Other Essays (New Haven, ed. by A. G. Keller, 1913), pp. 28–29, 33, 35, 39–40, 323, 348; Sumner and A. G. Keller, The Science of Society (New Haven, 4 vols., 1927), I, 407–410; Carnegie, Autobiography (Garden City, N.Y., 1933), pp. 271ff., 321; The Gospel of Wealth and Other Timely Essays (Garden City, N.Y., 1933), pp. 140, 159, 166–167; Miscellaneous Writings (Garden City, N.Y., 2 vols., ed. by B. J. Hendrick, 1933), II, 221, 237, 254–255, 260–267, 275, 284; New Republic, I (Jan. 9, 1915), 9–10. Compare Brooks Adams, The Law of Civilization and Decay (London, 1895), esp. pp. vii-viii. On Sumner and Carnegie, generally, see Robert G. McCloskey, American Conservatism in the Age of Enterprise (Cambridge, Mass., 1951), chs. 2, 3, 6. Spencer’s popularity in the United States is described in Richard Hofstadter, Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860–1915 (Philadelphia, 1945), pp. 18–22. For the activities of Carnegie and his pacifist predecessors among American businessmen, see Merle Curti, Peace or War: The American Struggle, 1636–1936 (New York, 1936), pp. 37, 43–44, 59, 78–79, 127, 164–165, 200–206, 212. For the role of the economics-politics contrast in liberal thought generally, see Hans J. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics (Chicago, 1946), pp. 75–81.
2. As late as 1908, regulars could not vote in Kansas, Missouri, Oregon, and Texas. Frederic S. Stimson, The Law of the Federal and State Constitutions of the United States (Boston, 1908), p. 222.
3. T. B
entley Mott, Twenty Years as a Military Attaché (New York, 1937), p. 338; B. A. Fiske, “American Naval Policy,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings (hereafter cited as USNIP), XXXI (1905), 69–72; William Carter, “Army as a Career,” North American, CLXXXIII (Nov. 2, 1906), 873; Liggett Hunter, S. Doc. 621, 62d Cong., 2d Sess., pp. 22–26 (1912); Sidney Forman, West Point (New York, 1950), pp. 216–217. On the effects of business pacifism on technological development, see Harold and Margaret Sprout, The Rise of American Naval Power, 1776–1918 (Princeton, 1946), pp. 167–171; William A. Ganoe, The History of the United States Army (New York, 1932), pp. 348–349; C. Joseph Bernardo and Eugene H. Bacon, American Military Policy (Harrisburg, Pa., 1955), pp. 234–261.
4. See Lloyd Lewis, Sherman: Fighting Prophet (New York, 1932), pp. 411, 531, 635–637. For Sherman’s views, see Ann. Rept. of the Commanding General, 1880, I, 6, 1883, pp. 44–45; Rachel Sherman Thorndike (ed.), The Sherman Letters (New York, 1894), pp. 340–342; W. T. Sherman, Memoirs (New York, 2 vols., 1875), II, 385–386, 406; M. A. DeWolfe Howe (ed.), Home Letters of General Sherman (New York, 1909), p. 387.
5. B. A. Fiske, “Stephen B. Luce: An Appreciation,” USNIP, XLIII (September 1917), 1935–1939. For a summary of Luce’s ideas, see J. D. Hayes, “The Writings of Stephen B. Luce,” Military Affairs, XIX (Winter 1955), 187–196. On Upton, see Peter S. Michie, The Life and Letters of Emory Upton (New York, 1885), pp. 454–457; W. H. Carter, “The Evolution of Army Reforms,” United Service, III (May 1903, 3rd Series), 1190ff.; R. C. Brown, “General Emory Upton — The Army’s Mahan,” Military Affairs, XVII (Fall 1953), 125–131.
6. Letter of Sherman to Sheridan, Nov. 22, 1881, Ira L. Reeves, Military Education in the United States (Burlington, Vt., 1914), p. 205; Ann. Repts. of the Commanding General, 1880, I, 6, 1883, pp. 44–45.
7. The Armies of Europe and Asia (New York, 1878), pp. 51–54, 319–320, 324, 354–358, 360–362.
8. Upton, The Military Policy of the United States (Washington, 1912), p. 258; Sherman, Memoirs, II, 388; Arthur L. Wagner, The Campaign of Königgratz (Fort Leavenworth, 1889), pp. 9, 11, 15, 23; Major Theodore Schwan, Report on the Organization of the German Army (War Dept., Adj. Gen’l.’s Office, Mil. Inf. Div., No. 2, 1894); Captain T. A. Bingham, ‘The Prussian Great General Staff,” Journal of the Military Service Institution (hereafter cited as JMSI), XIII (July 1892), 669; Mott, Twenty Years as a Military Attaché, p. 336; Captain F. E. Chadwick, “Explanation of Course at the Naval War College,” USNIP, XXVII (1901), 332; A. T. Mahan, Naval Strategy (London, 1912), pp. 297–301; A. T. Mahan, ‘The Practical Character of the Naval War College,” USNIP, XIX (1893), 163; W. E. Puleston, Mahan (New Haven, 1939), pp. 75–80, 295–298; J. H. Russell, “A Fragment of Naval War College History,” USNIP, LVIII (August 1932), 1164–1165.
9. Albert Gleaves, Life and Letters of Rear Admiral Stephen B. Luce (New York, 1925), p. 101.
10. See Luce’s letter to William Conant Church, 1882, quoted by Rear Admiral John D. Hayes, Military Affairs, XVIII (Fall 1954), 166; Gleaves, Luce, pp. 168–171; Puleston, Mahan, p. 69; R. Ernest Dupuy, Men of West Point (New York, 1951), pp. 116–118.
11. Quoted in Samuel E. Tillman, “The Academic History of the Military Academy, 1802–1902,” The Centennial of the United States Military Academy at West Point, 1802–1902 (Washington, 1904), pp. 289–290.
12. For military discussion and criticism of the Academy curricula see JMSI, XIV (1893), 1019–1026, XVI (1895), 1–24, XX (1897), 23; Inf. Jour., I (Oct. 1, 1904), 7; USNIP, XXXVII (1911), 447–451, XXXVIII (1912), 187–194, 1397–1403, XXXIX (1913), 138; United Serv., VIII (1883), 173. Also: W. D. Puleston, Annapolis (New York, 1942), pp. 108, 114; Mott, Twenty Years as a Military Attaché, pp. 41–42; Charles W. Larned, “The Genius of West Point,” Centennial, pp. 467, 479; U.S. Military Academy, Board of Visitors, Report, 1889, p. 40.
13. Major Eben Swift, Remarks, Introductory to the Course in Military Art at the Infantry and Cavalry School, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas (September 1904), pp. 1–3. On Leavenworth, see also Report of the Secy, of War, H. Ex. Doc. 1, 42d Cong., 3rd Sess., p. 79 (1871); Report of the Cmdg. Genl., 1878, p. 8; Ganoe, United States Army, pp. 363, 422–423; Reeves, Military Education, pp. 213–233; Major Eben Swift, “An American Pioneer in the Cause of Military Education,” JMSI, XLIV (January-February 1909), 67–72. On naval postgraduate education, see Gleaves, Luce, pp. 330–336; Puleston, Annapolis, pp. 119–120; Ralph Earle, Life at the U.S. Naval Academy (New York, 1917), p. 259; Belknap, USNIP, XXXIX. 135–153; Paullin, USNIP, XL, 681–682; Ernest J. King and Walter Whitehill, A Naval Record (New York, 1952), pp. 146–149.
14. For Luce’s views, see USNIP, IX (1883), 635, XII (1886), 528, XXXVI (1910), 560ff. For other aspects of War College history, see USNIP, IX (1883), 155ff., XXXVII (1911), 353–377, LUI (1927), 937–947, LVIII (1932), 1157–1163.
15. Reeves, Military Education, p. 198. Typical military views are in JMSI, XIV (1893), 452ff., XX (1897), 1–54, 453–499. For Root’s attitudes, see Five Years of the War Department (Washington, 1904), pp. 62–65, 335–336, and The Military and Colonial Policy of the United States (Cambridge, Mass., 1916), pp. 121–129. In general, see The Army War College: A Brief Narrative, 1901–1953 (Carlisle Barracks), pp. 1–3.
16. JMSI, XVI, 19, XX, 1–54; “Memorandum for a General Order — Subject: Instruction of Officers,” November 27, 1901, Root, Five Years of the War Department, pp. 414–418; “Report and Recommendations of a Board Appointed by the Bureau of Naviation Regarding the Instruction and Training of Line Officers,” USNIP, XLVI (August 1920), 1265–1292.
17. On the Naval Institute, see “Sixty Years of the Naval Institute,” USNIP, LIX (October 1933), 1417–1432, and on the Military Service Institution, Colonel J. B. Fry, “Origin and Progress of the Military Service Institution of the United States,” JMSI, I (1879), 20–32. For the military publications and associations generally, see Max L. Marshall, “A Survey of Military Periodicals” (M.A. Thesis, Univ. of Missouri, 1951), pp. 18ff.; “The Journal’s First Half Century,” Combat Forces Journal, V (October 1954), 17–20; U.S. Dept, of the Army, The Army Almanac (Washington, 1950), pp. 883–908. For other aspects of the emerging military scholarship, see Paullin, USNIP, XXXIX (September 1913), 1252, (December 1913), 1499; Lt. G. R. Catts, “Post Professional Libraries for Officers,” JMSI, XLIV (January-February 1909), 84–89.
18. On the Navy, see Act of Aug. 5, 1882, 22 Stat. 284; Act of Mar. 3, 1901, 31 Stat. 1129; Ann. Rept. of the Secy, of the Navy, 1882, H. Ex. Doc. 1, 47th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 8; Puleston, Annapolis, p. 223. For the Army: Acts of June 11, 1878, 20 Stat. Ill; June 18, 1878, 20 Stat. 150; July 30, 1892, 27 Stat. 336; Mar. 2, 1899, 30 Stat. 979; Larned, Centennial, pp. 494–496; Herman Beukema, The United States Military Academy and Its Foreign Contemporaries (West Point, 1944), pp. 33–34; Peyton C. March, The Nation at War (Garden City, N.Y., 1932), pp. 53–56; Inf. Jour., XV (February 1919), 681–682; Richard C. Brown, “Social Attitudes of American Generals, 1898–1940” (Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Wisconsin, 1951), pp. 17–19.
19. On naval conditions, see Secy. Chandler, Ann. Rept. of the Secy, of the Navy, 1882, pp. 9, 41–42, 1883, p. 14, 1884, p. 41. For professional naval opinion pro and con selection, see USNIP, XXII (1896), 85–86, XXVII (1901), 25–26, XXXI (1905), 401–454, XXXII (1906), 20ff., 801–806, XXXIV (1908), 1129–1140. The relevant statutes are: Acts of July 16, 1862, 12 Stat. 584; Apr. 21, 1864, 13 Stat. 53; Mar. 3, 1899, 30 Stat. 1004; Aug. 29, 1916, 39 Stat. 578–579. On the Army, see Root, Five Years of the War Department, pp. 61–65; JMSI, XIV (1893), 954–955, XXXVII (1905), 1–7, 289–294, XL (1907), 167–183, LI (1912), 1–12; Inf. Jour., XI (1914), 128–131; United Serv., I (1902, 3rd Series), 373–389; William H. Carter, The American Army (Indianapolis, 1915), pp. 225–230; Act of Oct. 1, 1890, 26 Stat. 562.
20. Acts of Feb. 28, 1855, 10 Stat. 616; Aug. 3, 1861, 12 Stat. 289. For the Navy: Acts of Dec. 12, 1861, 12 Stat. 329; July 16, 1862, 12 Stat. 587; July 28, 1866, 14 Stat. 345; July 15, 1870, 16 Stat. 333;
March 3, 1873, 17 Stat. 547, 556; March 3, 1899, 30 Stat. 1004. For the Army: Acts of July 17, 1862, 12 Stat. 596; July 15, 1870, 16 Stat. 317, 320; June 30, 1882, 22 Stat. 118; Emory Upton, “Facts in Favor of Compulsory Retirement,” United Service, II (March 1880), 269–288, III (December 1880), 649–666, IV (January 1881), 19–32.
21. Acts of July 15, 1870, 16 Stat. 319; Feb. 27, 1877, 19 Stat. 243; July 31, 1894, 28 Stat. 205; Regulations for the Government of the United States Navy, 1876, Ch. vi, Art. 33, 1896, Pars. 219, 236, 1900, Par. 232; Regulations for the Army of the United States, 1895, Art. I, Par. 5. For subsequent problems caused by this legislation, see New York Times, Oct. 22, 1951, p. 10; Hearings before House Committee on the Armed Services on H. R. 5946, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955).
22. Act of Feb. 2, 1901, 31 Stat. 755; Root, Five Years of the War Department, pp. 64, 139; Carter, American Army, p. 235; USNIP, XXIV (1898), 4–6, XXVIII (1902), 231–242, XXXI (1905), 823–944, XL (1914), 676.
23. Ann. Rept. of the Secy, of the Navy, Nov. 30, 1885, pp. xxxviii-xl.
24. The most important expressions of the views of the naval traditionalists are those of Luce, USNIP, XIV (1888), 561–588, XVIII (1902), 839–849, XXIX (1903), 809–821, and Mahan, “The Principles of Naval Administration,” Naval Administration and Warfare (Boston, 1908), pp. 1–48, and Certain Needs of the Navy, S. Doc. 740, 60th Cong., 2d Sess. (1909). See also USNIP, XI (1885), 55ff., XII (1886), 362–363, XIV (1888), 726ff., XX (1894), 498ff., XXVII (1901), 3–10, XXXI (1905), 318ff., XXXIX (1913), 443–444, 965–974. For early support of the vertical system, see Paullin, USNIP, XXXIX, 756–757, 1261–1262; Ann. Rept. of the Secy, of the Navy, 1886, pp. 66–67. The best expression of the insurgent view is H. C. Taylor, “Memorandum on a General Staff for the U.S. Navy,” USNIP, XXVI (1900), 441^48. But, see also USNIP, XXVII (1901), 307–308, XXVIII (1902), 254–255, XXIX (1903), 805–807, XXXIII (1907), 574–576; Bradley A. Fiske, From Midshipman to Rear Admiral (New York, 1919), pp. 558–559; Elting E. Morison, Admiral Sims and the Modern American Navy (Boston, 1942), pp. 114–115.
The Soldier and the State Page 60
