« AnteriorContinua »
UTAH-EXPENSES IN SUPPRESSING INDIAN HOSTILI
JANUARY 29, 1855.–Laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. FAULKNER, from the Committee on Military Affairs, made the
The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was referred the resolution of the House, inquiring as to the expediency of refunding to the Territory of Utah certain expenses incurred by said Territory in 1853, have, according to order, had the same under consideration, and respectfully report:
That there is no evidence in the case of such a character as to enable the committee to judge of the necessity of the expenditure; that the vouchers submitted are not authenticated either by the governor or any other of the federal officers of the Territory; that the committee have no cognizance either of a proclamation of the governor calling out the troops, which necessitated this expenditure, or of any of his messages to the Territorial legislature with reference thereto. The committee, therefore, without prejudicing any application for the claim in future, when it may become better supported by evidence, ask to be discharged from the further consideration of the subject.
2d Session. $
INCREASE AND BETTER ORGANIZATION OF THE ARMY.
JANUARY 29, 1855.---Laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. FAULKNER, from the Committee on Military Affairs, made the fol
The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was recommitted House bill No. 615, entitled “A bill for the increase and better organization of the army, and for other purposes," have, according to order, had the same under consideration; and, having availed themselves of the oral testimony and written views of several distinguished and intelligent officers of the army, in maturing the details of the bill, they respectfully submit the same to the House, and ask that the accompanying testimony and letters may be printed.
Memorandum of the order of papers.
1. Winfield Scott's testimony. 2. Letter of General Jesup. 3. Letter of General Totten. 4. Letters of Adjutant General Cooper and Judge Advocate Lee. 5. Letter of General Lawson. 6. Letter of General Gibson. 7. Letter of Colonel Craig. 8. Letter of Colonel Abert. 9. Letter of Major Mordecai. 10. Letter of Captain Maynadier.
MILITARY COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Examination of Major General Winfield Scott, of the U. S. Army, on
the subject of its reorganization.
WEDNESDAY, January 3, 1854.
and the pretthe inte by the Wahighly ng
Question by Mr. Faulkner, chairman of the committee: What, in your opinion, should be the strength of the army of the United States at this time, in view of our extensive seaboard and foreign frontier; our present and prospective relations with the Indian tribes of the West, and the protection due to our several routes of emigration ?
Answer. The increase in the strength of the army, as provided for in the bill submitted by the War Department, now under consideration by the committee, I deem highly necessary. The bill proposes that there shall be two additional regiments of infantry and two of cavalry. This is, I consider, the minimum force that is essential to be added to the army to protect the frontiers against the hostilities of Indians, the present force on the frontiers being entirely inadequate for that purpose. In Texas, the Indian hostilities have been more destructive than at other points, principally on account of the small force stationed in that country. The troops are constantly engaged in encounters with hostile Indians, and the loss of men, when successful, is always in the inverse ratio of our inferior numbers. Hence the proposed increase, simply in reference to Indian frontiers, seems to be dictated by considerations both of policy and humanity, in order that adequate protection may be afforded to our border inhabitants without a useless sacrifice of our brave detachments.
The increase proposed, of two regiments of infantry and two of cavalry, organized like the present forces, and characterized by the like zeal and activity, would, in my opinion, give reasonable protection to our frontiers and overland immigrants.
Question by Mr. Faulkner: Is the proposed increase essential to the present exigencies of the country, without any reference to the probabilities of a foreign war?
Answer. This addition has no reference to war with any foreign power. If such event were anticipated, it is presumed that ten or fifteen times as many regiments would be called for.
Question by Mr. Faulkner: How many companies are there at present on the seacoast of the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico?
Answer. But twelve-two of which are at Boston; none east of Boston; two at New York; none between Boston and New York ; two at Old Point Comfort; two at Charleston; none on the Savannah; one at Pensacola ; one at Key West; and none at New Orleans.
Question by Mr. Faulkner: By the bill now before me the artillery has been reduced two regiments. Is it the idea, by this reduction, to confine that corps to duties on the seaboard ?
Answer. The Secretary of War, after a full conference, has allowed me humbly to suggest to the committee (and neither presumes on