Mr. S. Smith said, the Senate seemed to contemplate these light dragoons, on account of the officers, who were to do duty on horse or foot, as necessity required. From this idea, he would suggest the propriety of agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. Kittera said, the army would be placed so widely from each other, that the horse would prove very useful.
Mr. Giles had no idea of keeping up the horse for the sake of the officers.
Mr. Gilbert was in favor of retaining the whole number of horses.
On motion of Mr. Williams, the yeas and nays were taken, and the amendment was negatived, 58 to 22.
The consideration of the propriety of retaining the Major General was next taken up.
Mr. Nicholas could not conceive any use for generals. He believed if the Senate had struck out the General they sent them, the amendment would have been a good one.
Mr. Giles hoped they should not agree to the amendment. It would be a commencement of sinecures in the Military Department. There would be generals without men to command. He believed the bill, as sent from that House, contained its full proportion of officers.
Mr. S. Smith was in favor of the amendment. He said the expense would be no great things, and the present Major General would be very necessary in taking possession of the posts. Perhaps, at this time, it was essential to keep this man in command, as, if he were discharged, it might create a derangement in our Army which might be fatal. The command of three thousand men, it was true, was too trifling for a Major General. But, perhaps, as this General had been the victorious means of procuring us peace with the Indians, immediately to discharge him would appear like ingratitude, if not injustice.
Mr. Rutherford concurred in opinion with the gentleman last up.