CHAPTER XXIV

THE LAND FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AS THEY OUGHT TO BE ORGANIZED

TH

HE term, "a fool's paradise," describes to perfection. the dreamland in which Americans have slumbered for years in their complacent indifference to national defence. We as a people have not yet learned to think nationally, being much too engrossed in our own individual, local or State interests; and rarely in our career have we demonstrated from a military standpoint that we understood the true meaning of our national motto, E pluribus unum. It is scarcely flattering to one's pride to confess that the latter part of the proverb, "One for all and all for one," is seemingly beyond the comprehension of our people, whose everyday actions belie wholly their loud but spasmodic outbursts of what is termed patriotism - a principle which we apparently do not understand as it is known in many another country. True patriotism is not the sort which is proclaimed from the housetops to the accompaniment of waving flags and boisterous cheers, but the unobtrusive kind which realizes that "Drudgery is the gray angel of Success" and therefore labours unremittingly for long years in order to be prepared when the emergency arises.

There is reason to be grateful that the present European war, which has involved half the world, has at last aroused the American people to a partial realization that our means of national defence are lamentably inadequate. We now stand at the parting of the ways. On one hand, the road which we have been following for years stretches toward national calamity and possible loss of national existence; the other road leads to increased national strength, prosperity, prestige

and continued success.

The time has come for Americans to decide which road they shall take, and to remember that the Scriptural parable anent the five wise and five foolish virgins is peculiarly applicable to our nation.

The average American who has had no military training or who has not studied military history thoroughly is obsessed by the conviction that the principles governing the organization of armies are extraordinarily complex — so intricate and difficult as to be beyond the grasp of the ordinary person. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The fundamental principles which underlie all proper military organization are quite as simple as A B C. To fit them to a multiplicity of conditions and requirements does assuredly demand profound knowledge of a purely technical character, and diversity of opinion is bound to exist in respect to the best method; but the subject is one which can be grasped — in the main essentials at least - by any one of average intelligence. In this chapter no attempt will be made to enter into minute details, but only to indicate in broad outline the basic principles upon which American land forces ought to be organized.

The first essential transcends the mere question of military organization in that it is a fundamental principle of law, viz: that every citizen has a right to the protection of life, liberty and property. Since this protection is indissolubly bound up in the maintenance of proper legal authority, which is in turn dependent upon uninterrupted national existence, it follows that it is the bounden duty of high Government officials, and to an equal degree of the members of the national legislature, to safeguard the destinies of the nation. From the latter flows another duty which, although inseparable from high office, has rarely, as our history shows, been fulfilled by Congress, to wit: that ADEQUATE NATIONAL

DEFENCE IS ONE OF THE CARDINAL DUTIES OF EVERY STATES

MAN, and that there is an obligation to perform such a duty absolutely irrespective of party politics or factional differ

ences.

66

Much clamour is made in these days about our rights," but complete mystification seems to reign as to the basis from which all rights spring. The true principle has rarely been better enunciated than in the declaration of Giuseppe Mazzini, one of the liberators of modern Italy, that “The origin of every right is in a duty fulfilled." If, therefore, we are to be entitled to the right to demand that our Government protect our lives, liberties and property in time of war, we must fulfil our duty toward that Government; and no principle is more in keeping with a republican form of government, no doctrine is more truly democratic, than the second essential, which asserts that EVERY ABLE-BODIED MALE CITIZEN OWES MILITARY SERVICE TO HIS COUNTRY. Indeed, the principle of compulsory service is no more a violation of the policy and traditions of the American people than is the payment of taxes under compulsion.

The third is contained in the question, "Do the people want adequate national defence?" In all In all ages this question has had to be met and answered by the ruling power, be it tribal chief, prince, sovereign or people. Under the form of government of a constitutional monarchy, republic or democracy, the dictum of the people prevails, and the representatives in authority reflect, generally speaking, the dominant public opinion. Too much emphasis cannot be laid upon the historical fact that no nation has ever possessed a great army and navy or has wielded great influence unless the people wished it so.

The fourth of the great underlying principles is that of undivided responsibility of the Government for the public weal. Since the days of primeval man, national disaster has invariably resulted in the blame being laid — and very properly at the door of the ruling power. As war represents the limit of stress to which human beings and human institutions can be subjected, it follows that the responsibility of the Government is even greater than under ordinary cir

cumstances. The motto, "United we stand, divided we fall," has been exemplified countless times throughout history, which further teaches that war can only be conducted with a reasonable assurance of success if the Government be unhampered and if it receive the united support of the people. The more despotically the combined power and resources of a nation are wielded in time of war, the greater the chances of victory-a stern fact too often demonstrated by history to admit of any well-founded doubt as to its truth. Per contra, how seriously the destinies of a nation may be imperilled by interference with the unrestricted exercise of power by the Government during the war has been repeatedly shown in this book. In this respect there has been a striking contrast in the relations between the States and the United States with regard to the land forces on one hand and the naval service on the other. Thus far Congress has been wise enough to hold jealously to its constitutional prerogative "to provide and maintain a navy," instead of delegating any part of its right to the various States and thus giving them the power to interfere in naval as they can, and do, in military affairs. For that reason the record of American land forces suffers sadly when compared with the splendid annals of the Navy. No one has yet had the temerity to advocate that a naval militiaman is competent to command a battleship, a squadron or a fleet. To cite a better example of that efficiency which can only be attained when the Government wields despotic power in time of war than is being given at this very moment by Germany would be impossible. By contrast, the Report on the Organization of the Land Forces of the United States points out the undeniable fact that

"Our traditional theory of a small Regular Army and a great war army of citizen soldiers is not yet embodied as a definite institution. THE MOBILIZATION OF OUR CITIZEN SOLDIERY TO-DAY WOULD NOT RESULT IN A WELL-KNIT NATIONAL ARMY. IT

WOULD BE AN UNCOORDINATED ARMY OF 50 ALLIES, WITH ALL OF THE INHERENT WEAKNESSES OF ALLIED FORCES, EMPHASIZED BY THE UNUSUAL NUMBER OF THE ALLIES."

"1

The difference between German efficiency and American inefficiency in this respect needs no commentary.

The fifth great principle is that World-Power, with its accompanying rank, prestige and possessions, necessarily entails great responsibilities. The American people have danced too long without paying the piper, but they must now decide whether or not they are ready to assume the responsibilities inseparable from their present status among the nations of the world. If so, they must be prepared to make sacrifices and expenditures accordingly, or to relinquish a great part of what has been acquired since the Spanish-American War and the sudden development of the United States into a World-Power.

In entering upon the subject of military organization, it should clearly be borne in mind that any plan for the organization of the land forces of the United States has to be based upon a recognition of the fact that these forces are, and must necessarily be, divided into two distinct parts, namely: (1) The Army stationed in the overseas possessions, and (2) the Army within the territorial limits of continental United States. In the case of troops comprising the overseas garrisons, the problem is comparatively simple and the principles to be followed are obvious. Each one has a distinct strategic and tactical mission to perform, each is destined to operate within a restricted field, but all of them are liable to be isolated for considerable periods, particularly in the critical stages at the beginning of war. It is therefore evident that in each case Regular troops, thoroughly equipped and provided with an abundance of war matériel. and supplies of every sort, should be maintained in sufficient force to defend such possessions as are of vital impor1 Report on the Organization of the Land Forces of the United States,