DISPERSION OF THE ARMY OF THE UNITED SLATES.

Evening Star, Volume III, Issue 848, 24 January 1866, Page 2

DISPERSION OF THE ARMY OF THE UNITED SLATES.

f From thf' Ntio York Army and Naay Journal'/ The extraordinary spectacle of our great army of citizen soldiers, 1,300,000 strong, quietly separating into the myriad paths of peacful life —fairly evaporating under the reappearing sun of peace —has often been the subject of deserved comment on both sides of the Atlantic. It was the story of Cincinnatus repeated in a multiplying mirror of a million faces. And the fact will not lose interests by the lapse of time, as that elder history has never yet been diminished in glory. One great movement of world wide interest, however, may seem to check our admiration of the speedy and orderly dissolution of the Union armies. It is alleged that the Fenian movement is partly owing to the surplus belligerency of Irish American soldiers. Federal ur Confederate. And this opinion is hazarded not only in America and in England, but even in France, in which latter country, however, it uiay be only a reflex from across the Channel.

For example, the Paris Dehats is disposed to consider Fenianisxn as one of those attempts at free soldiering which was likely to follow as wn almost fatal consequence the sudden disbanding of the Fed&ral armies ; and the same paper avers that it is only a question of finding out in what part of the world the storm will burst. If not in Mexico, it will be in Ireland.” The idea has the merit of being philosophical; but we cannot regard it as accurate. In the first place, the “ major” i*f the logic is untrue. The Dehats declares that “ wherever powerful armies are hastily disbanded after having been hastily formed, they rarely fail to leave behind them certain elements in dissolution which foment and deposit in the atmosphere the germs of fresh storms. It is, then, only a question of finding out “ in what part of the world the storm will burst.” This conclusion, of course, being dependent on facts of human action, must rest u on historic examples by way of support. There are not a few apparently corroborative instances to be cited. Of these the most important, and, probably, that which, from being one of propinquity, and so to speak, of .experience, most influenced the opinion of the Debats—is the French Revolution, which was so largely brought on by the return to Europe of those gallant Frenchmen, who, headed by .Lafayette, had thrown their swords into the trembling scale of American independence. Nevertheless, the generalisation is too hasty. Even the example just cited, was one in which a successful revolution ripened another which was already growing. It needs no Carlyle to tell us that France could not have avoided an uj rising of its people. Our own revolution did not produce, but only precipitated the other. On the other hand, regard the contrary examples. In the second chapter of his History of England , Lord Macaulay thus describes the disbanding of Cromwell’s army of citizen soldiers :— ‘ k Fifty thousand men, accustomed to the

profession of -arms, were at thrown on the world ; and ehce seemed to warrant -the that this change would produce muH misery and crime. But no such suit followed. In a few there remained not a trace that the most formidable army in tJHH world had just been absorbed iujjHl the mass of the community.” A4H| why did this unexpected sobriety peace at the discharge of the occur ? From the very compositicßH of that army, which, according to same writer, consisted of men whHj “ sober, moral, diligent, and tomed + o reflect, had been indue to take up arms, not by the of want, not by the love of aud licence, not by the arts of reci ing officers, but by religious and litical zeal, mingled with the of distinction and promotion.” NottH if human nature remains the what lesson comes from this historiH fact narrated by Macaulay ? CoulH any one be cited in which the cha|H racter of the army in general anflß the motives that stimulated thecHj more closely resemble t..ose of ouH ancestors of two hundred years ago H With so close a parallel, we neecH hardly go further for example out oH history. In a former special articleH published many months since, wA discussed with greater detail thA same historic instances. A centurA laterj an army and navy, just twice stA large as Cromwell's, was dischaigecfl in England, and the same tear wan expressed, and again it proveefl gi’oundless. The Commercial tiz?r of New York, some time sine A happily cited Adam Smith’s com-! mentary on this latter event, as a! guide to our own future. That po-! litical economist said the discharged! men “ were absorbed in the great! mass of the people, and employed in! a great variety of occupations. No! sensible disorders arose from so great! a change in the situation of morel than -a hundred thousand men, ac-l customed to the use of arms, and I many of them to rapine and plunder, I The number of vagrants was scarce I anywhere sensibly increased by it, I and even the wages of laborers were I not reduced by it in any occupation.” I

As a matter of fact, also, the whole temper of the dish mding army has been peaceful. None of the riots occurred which might have been expected. Mexico lay a tempting* prize for adventuiers, a rich field tor glory and for spoils. Our army marched 100,000 strong to the Very brink of the Rubicon, there paused, and the major part of it was fat ed about, and marched quietly homeward No, we need have little fear that the military spirit which was aroused in this country by the war, is hostile either to republicanism or to tranquility. The motive which called the volunteer army together, and the character of those who constituted that army, will sufficiently account for its quiet dispersion.