32

troops of a state was probably correct.

Inside the regimental organization, many states

permitted volunteer companies to become a part of the system. Voluntary enlistment of this nature was permitted by Indiana in 1844, and these organizations, since they were free-will in plan, got only the more energetic and so formed the backbone of the volunteers for the Mexican War. Numerous crack companies are referred to in the County histories of the period, and their relation to the regular organizations is 33 olearly brought out. In 1846, just after the outbreak of hostilities, the Adjutant-General called attention, in his report, to..."the claims of that useful body of men-the volunteers of New Jersey, who have been, and may be again, called 34 upon to uphold the flag of our country! In Virginia, the Adjutant-General, in his annual report for 1849, made a clear distinction between the state guard, or regular militia, and the companies of volunteers. Here the inducements to volunteer do not seem to have been as great as in 35

some other sections. The organization inside the units was the same in the case of the volunteer companies as in the regular units.

The condition of the militia system after the

war is to be considered in another part of this paper, bùt

33. Indiana Laws, 1844, p. 17; Perry, Indiana in the Mexican War,p. 33. "The Spencer Grays, of New Albany, was a crack company". Ibid., p. 43,..."three regiments were assigned as the quota of Indiana. The County militia formed the nucleus that furnished the men for the company"

34. Adjutant-General's Report, New Jersey, 1846,

35. Adjutant General's Report, Virginia, 1849, Document 8, p. 3; Ibid., Document 1, p. 22.

it is necessary to stop here long enough to call attention to the chnages in units and officers, brought about by conditions existing at the close of the Mexican War. Diminished interest produced what might be called a period of "skeleton regiments" As early as 1847 in New York, the Adjutant-General suggested a complete reorganization of the militia because so many of the companies of both Infantry and Artillery, had been reduced to small numbers. By the time of the next report the legislature of that state had provided that the artillery, cavalry and riflemen should no longer be divided into regi36

ments, brigades and divisions. Even Massachusetts, who had

boasted that she had the best organized militia in the Union only a few years previous, proposed to drop the 'artillery' and 'light infantry' and call it all just infantry. The next year, 1856, the Adjutant-General recommended the dropping of the third and fourth lieutenants from companies; and, in 1858, his report showed that one-third of the companies of the state had been affected by an order of March the twenty-seventh, which provided for the disbanding of all companies having less than thirty-two privates. Much of the trouble in keeping up the size of the units was blamed on the action of the law of 1840, which

had practically disorganized the regular units and provided

37

for complete volunteering. Virginia had to make provision

for the same situation in 1850. If companies were too

36. Adjutant-General's Report, 1847, New York)

Adjutant-General's Report New York, 1848, in Assembly Documents, Vol. II.

37. Adjutant-General's Report, Massachusetts, 1855, p. 25.

small, men from other companies, containing a few too many,

38

might be brought in. A reorganization was effected in Wis

39

consin in 1858. In Indiana, also, there was need for reorganization. In 1853 a new law had been passed but it had been very general in its provisions. In 1856 the AdjutantGeneral made an appeal for a still better organization, noting that it was even harder than ever to get returne, to say nothing of a better organization. His remark, near the end of his report, summed up the case as it existed in many 40 states; "Literally,... there is no report to make..."

38. Militia Law, Virginia, 1850

39. Adjutant-General's Report, Wisconsin, 1858, p. 21. 40. Adjutant-General's Report, Indiana, 1856, in Documentary Journal, Part I, p. 398. He went on to say... "We have Sowed commissions broadcast through the state..."; .. "Our desires fell off from an entire reorganization to simply a new enumeration, yet even in these modest efforts we have signally failed, and we have to abide by the enumeration of 1833". This enumeration was still the latest in 1860.