must be increased as the war goes on, until the resources of the Federal Treasury become unequal to the demand. Nor is this the only evil. Those who respond to the first call of their country and enter the service without any stimulus but patriotism regard with disfavor those who could only be induced to take up arms by the pressure of pecuniary motives, while those who subsequently receive a still larger bounty are disliked in turn by their predecessors, to whom a less amount was paid; and so the effect is not only to engender bitter and jealous feelings among the soldiers, but also to induce those not yet enlisted to wait for still greater offers, and thus defeat the very end in view.
The bad effects above mentioned have been realized in this State to a large extent. The ill-nature produced by the disparity of benefits received by different portions of the regiment has, in many instances, been injurious to the morale of the whole command, while taunts and retorts, criminations and recriminations, have impaired the efficiency of the men by diverting attention from duty to angry disputations. I am convinced that, upon the whole, the evils of large Government bounties are greater than the benefits, and do not doubt that a different policy should obtain in case great armies are again to be called into service.
7. Term of service-Short enlistments.-Although not directly called for by the scope of this report, I may be allowed to express my sense of the inexpediency of enlisting men for short periods. In my opinion, all enlistments should have been, from first to last, for three years or the war. The evils of short enlistments are too obvious to require mention. They are not only expensive and vexatious, but involve the hazard of the defeat and miscarriage of the most skillfully planned campaign, or even the loss of a battle, on the very eve of victory. The spectacle described by General McDowell in his report of Bull Run-that of regiments whose time had expired "marching to the rear to the sound of the enemy's cannon"-should never be possible in time of war. It would seem that our experience of the miserable effects of short enlistments in the Mexican war should have been sufficient.
I know that there is no diversity of opinion at the War Department as to the policy of short enlistments, and that the only question there has been in reference to the practicability of filling up the Army with three-years" men. On this point I believe that if "three years or the war" had been the watchword of the Government at the outset, and steadily persisted in, there would have been no serious difficulty in raising the men.
It is known that the patriotism of the country flamed so high in 1861 that tens of thousands of volunteers were rejected after the call was filled, and that thousands who could not get in their own States sought admission to the Army through the organizations of other States. No questions were asked in those months of ardent feeling about the term of service; they would have gone in for five years or the war if it had been so required. Then was the time to have initiated the rule of long enlistments, which could, in my opinion, have been successfully adhered to throughout the war. I am sure that this opinion is entertained by the great mass of loyal men of this State.
My purpose in commenting upon this subject would not be completed if I failed to notice the jealousy and bad feeling created in the Army by the presence in the same regiment of three-years" men who