The name, National Guard, was first used by a New York militia unit that paraded to honor the Marquis de Lafayette during his 1824 visit to the United States.44 Lafayette had been elected commander of the Paris Garde Nationale which was established by active citizens to maintain law and order during the French Revolution. The titles National Guard or State Guard vice militia were used intermittently during the nineteenth century. By 1900, the title National Guard in place of militia was universally accepted by most of the states. However, the roles and responsibilities of the state organizations did not change and their affiliation and loyalty did not shift from their state to the national authority until implementation of the Militia Act of 1903.45 Furthermore, as noted by Colonel Colby, changing nomenclature from militiaman to National Guardsman had no effect on the ideological argument that the citizen-soldier employed when he was faced with a call-to-service. The decision to serve continued to be his and his alone. Whether called militiaman or National Guardsman, until 1903 when Congress modified the
44
On August 16, 1824, to honor Lafayette during his visit to New York, recalling the National Guards of Paris, an officer suggested calling the local unit the National Guards. In 1832 that unit became the 7th Regiment of the New York National Guard. Other states followed suit and in 1896 only three states retained the title militia. In 1897, an act of Congress (29 Statute 592) added parenthetical words "generally known as the National Guard" to a
reference to the militia. The use of the term "National Guard" was first mandated by the National Defense Act of 1916.
45
Also known as the Dick Act for Senator Charles Dick, Ohio, Major General in the Ohio National Guard and Chair of the Senate Committee on Militia.
Militia Act of 1792, state soldiery remained as virtuous republican citizen-soldiers empowered with the individual freedom guaranteed in a liberal democracy.46
Following the Civil War, Brevet Major General Emory Upton authored the first systematic examination of the nation's military history in a volume that was eventually published as The Military Policy of the United States. A West Point graduate and recognized scholar of military history, Upton was an outspoken opponent of civilian control of the military and, in particular, the ability of a militia comprised of citizen-soldiers to be viable defenders of the nation's interests.47 His experiences in the recent conflict confirmed his belief that "the military edifice (the Militia Act of 1792) proposed by this law shows that its foundations were built on the sanas (sic) and that the Congress had, through the creation of state militias, substituted multiple state armies for a requisite national army."48 He noted that states had failed to maintain a militia adequate to meet the needs of the Civil War and that "citizen
soldiers will never take the place wisely reserved for them by the framers of the Constitution."49 Upton was convinced that "the General Government could be reduced to a state of utter helplessness and inefficiency if it depended upon the militia alone."50 Upton's position was based on his findings that militia forces had not proved adequate to the nation's needs during its first one hundred years and that the nation needed a dedicated, professional army. He was
46 The fungibility of militia or National Guard can be confusing. In fact, there was no difference until after the
Militia Act of 1903 established a federal role for the state soldiery during peacetime. Prior to that, state soldiers were only subject to federal service when mobilized by the chief executive of the country.
47 Secretary Elihu Root, preface to The Military Policy of the United States, by Emory Upton (Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1912; repr., Memphis: General Books, 2010), 3. Upton died in 1881 and Root had his work privately published in 1904 before Government Printing Office publication. See also, Russell Frank Weigley
Towards an American Army: Military Thought from Washington to Marshall (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962), 156-159.
48
Upton, Military Policy, 102-4. Upton was referring to foundations built on sand.
49 Ibid., 102-4. Upton's use of the word "wisely" is out of context with his argument in general and can only be
considered as a misprint or a unique understanding of the word.
50
further validated by the events of the decade following the Civil War during a period that many historians have identified as the nadir of the nation's citizen-soldier viability.51
Whether they mustered as volunteers or as members of a compulsory force, and whether they joined to socialize, participate in rifle practice or other athletic events, the militiamen of the decades following the Civil War became embroiled in conflicts created by industrial capitalism. In addition to the traditional and cultural roles expected of citizen- soldiers, the economic reality of the late nineteenth century brought about the reinvention of the state military forces as agents of local businessmen as well as antagonists of unions and their membership. It was in this role that they were often reported by the news media as the enemy of labor who were "a menace to workingmen and used in the interest of oppressive capital and corporations."52 The role of domestic peacekeeper would do little to transition the state militias to a well-organized and dependable military force that would be available for national defense.
Following the war, one principal use of the militia was to support the government's efforts to break strikes. Between 1877 and 1892, the militia was called out in thirty-three instances to suppress labor unrest.53 During the summer and fall of 1877, newspapers across the country reported about the conflicts between militiamen and laborers who had brought the nation's railroads to a halt. There was considerable destruction of property and the loss of over one hundred lives during the conflicts between strikers and military forces. Though questioned
51
For discussions of the militias’ decline after the Civil War, see Derthick, The National Guard in Politics; Cooper,
The Rise of the National Guard; and Riker, Soldiers of the States.
52
"Labor and the Militia," The Milwaukee Sentinel, January 13, 1887.
53
by some, historians have suggested that "the great majority...were killed by militia."54 By the end of the nineteenth century, there were regular conflicts between labor unions and militia forces. In Muncie, Indiana, the local trade council condemned the militia and approved the removal of any union member who served in the state's armed force. While many non-union members decried the action as un-American, the union members responded with claims that the militia was little more than a tool of the corporations.55 The New York Times was less gracious than the unions, reporting that "we have no desire to attempt the ungracious task of underrating the service now rendered to the public by the volunteer Militia...it must be said that the conduct of many of them has been disgraceful, and the plight of the best absolutely pitiable."56
With limited financial support, their unwillingness to serve out of state, and their roles restricted to the suppression of civil unrest, most state militiamen had lost the military bearing expected by President George Washington who had written that "(T)he Militia of this Country must be considered as the Palladium of our security, and the first effectual resort in case of hostility."57 However, they did retain one thing—and that was a commitment to state affiliation without federal intervention. While the leaders of New York's state soldiery focused on rifle
54 Robert M. Fogelson, America’s Armories: Architecture, Society, and Public Order (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1989), 21. Jim Dan Hill defends militiamen and does not mention casualties from the strikes, arguing that militiamen sided with the strikers and took "casualties rather than fire into the rioters." Hill, The Minute Man in Peace and War: A History of the National Guard (Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole, 1964), 126; Riker,
Soldiers of the States, 51-55. Riker provides tabular data about strike occurrences but avoids mention of casualties; Mahon, History of the Militia, 112-113.Conversely, Mahon attributes lost lives to militia firing machineguns into mobs of strikers.
55The Indiana State Journal (Indianapolis, IN), October 4, 1899. 56
"Volunteer Militia and Riots," New York Times, July 26, 1877.
57
George Washington to John Hancock, circular, June 11, 1783, Papers of George Washington,
http://gwpapers.virginia.edu (accessed November 12, 2012). Washington and the other founders would have been familiar with the English militia model, which had been imported to the Colonies. Under that model, the militia was restricted to local service unless expressly called forth in the event of a national exigency.
practice, citizen-soldiers in other parts of the country were conflicted by societal demands for law and order. Until those arguments were resolved, the nation would have difficulty creating an organization that would satisfy everyone. However, in the ranks—whether in response to romantic, masculine or patriotic appeal—men who formed units and purchased arms, uniforms, and equipment in the 1870s would become "the nucleus of the National Guard."58
While the militia fell on hard times following the Civil War, the early 1870s saw a marked increase in men interested in militia membership and service for a variety of reasons. Among those reasons was a longing for military association by many Civil War veterans. Additionally, the romanticism of military service was appealing to young men who had not served and who sought opportunities for manliness, physical fitness, duty, and discipline, which were the values the National Guard promised. Concurrent with this apparent yearning by individuals, former Civil War officers began to consider ways that might be employed to
improve the quality of the average militiaman.59 Improvement would unveil itself through two forums: first the improvement of individual skills, specifically an effort to improve rifle
marksmanship, and second offering those individuals membership in a military organization, which would give rise to the National Guard Association in 1879. In his book, The Segmented
Society, about America's maturation in the latter half of the nineteenth century, Robert Wiebe
argued that in order for segments of society to work together they must find non-threatening
58
Derthick, 16-18; Cooper, Rise of the National Guard; and Riker in Soldiers of the States point out that the states did not assume the title National Guard until the following decade during which every state in the union revised their military codes.
59
Improving American society in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is the theme of Robert Wiebe's
The Search for Order, 1877-1920 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1968); Roger Possner, The Rise of Militarism in the Progressive Era, 1900-1914 (Jefferson, N.C: McFarland, 2009), 10-13 discusses the improvements sought for the National Guard during this period.
common ground.60 For the National Guard, military marksmanship competition was that common ground with a common language and common purpose.
Among the guard officers interested in improvement was Captain George Wingate, a civil war veteran of New York's Twenty-second Regiment "eager to improve the marksmanship skills of his Guardsmen."61 Wingate, a practicing attorney, had enlisted in the New York
National Guard as a private in 1862. After reaching the rank of sergeant, Wingate, who had been familiar with firearms from boyhood, proved to be the best marksman in his company. While certainly proud of his accomplishment, Wingate "became impressed with general
ignorance existing among the troops of the National Guard in relation to the use of their arms." Repeatedly refusing a commission, he rose through the ranks, and, during service at
Gettysburg, was promoted to First Sergeant.62
Wingate finally accepted a commission in late 1863 and was promoted to captain in 1867. Following the war, Wingate began to assess the needs of the soldiers with whom he had served. He noted that state military organizations during the antebellum period had focused on the social rather than military skill attributes. "Being dissatisfied with the time devoted to secure precision in drill while the practical duties of a soldier were almost neglected," led him to seek, inter alia, a method to improve rifle practice. Toward this end, he contacted his brother, J. Phelps Wingate, who was in England. 63 Wingate's brother was able to acquire "copies of text-books used in the English Volunteers and in the British Musketry School in
60
Robert H. Wiebe, The Segmented Society: An Introduction to the Meaning of America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1974), 53.
61The National Guardsman, April 1878, 146. 62
Ibid., 146.
63
Hythe.64 Subsequently, Wingate set up a training program and a series of local and interstate competitions for members of the Twenty-second Regiment and, at the request of the "Board of Officers... prepared a short manual of aiming and position drill for regimental use."65
"As there was no book to be had from which the officers could obtain the information necessary to enable them to instruct their men in shooting, the writer was required by the Board of Officers of the Twenty-second to prepare something of that description to be printed for regimental use. In compliance with this request, he wrote a small pamphlet, based upon the system that he had developed in the instruction of Companies A and H."66
Fortuitously, in the summer of 1869, Wingate met Major William H. Powell who was a journalist with the military publication, Army and Navy Journal. Their discussions about marksmanship in the Guard led Powell to introduce Wingate to the future co-founder of the NRA, the Journal's publisher, Colonel William Conant Church.67
In his memoirs, Wingate wrote that "(P)rior to 1871 rifle ranges were as rare as white elephants. The National Guardsman served his entire term of enlistment without firing a shot." "Aiming or position drill was unheard of. The men learned how to load and fire their rifles and that was all."68 This was the condition that prevailed in America until after 1871, although the Civil War had "demonstrated with bloody clarity that soldiers who could not shoot straight
64 George Wood Wingate, History of the Twenty-second Regiment of the National Guard of the State of New York: From Its Organization to 1895 (New York: Edwin W. Dayton, 1896), 387.
65
Wingate, 391-405; The National Guardsman, April 1878, 146.
66 Wingate, 389. 67
Wingate wrote The Last Campaign of the Twenty-Second Regiment: N. G. S. N. Y. June and July 1863 (New York: C.S. Westcott, 1864)as a tribute to his regimental officers. See "Life Sketches - Colonel George W. Wingate,” The National Guardsman, April 1878, 146. The quotes in this and the previous paragraph come from the National Guardsman biography.
68
were of little value."69 Wingate's concern, also reflected in the report of the first meeting of the NRA, was that a changing America was "rapidly depriving (young American men) of the
personal skills in arms and marksmanship, which has hitherto formed one of the greatest elements of our national strength."70 His search for information about marksmanship training led him to Church's Army and Navy Journal. Prior to military service, Church had been an avid sportsman with a keen interest in riflery. This interest guided him to publish several articles on the importance of marksmanship, European methods of training, and the lack of rifle expertise in the American forces.71 One month after the Journal's initial publication, its subscribers read about Church's interest in the "possibility of combining a rifle corps with a reorganized
militia."72 In 1870, America was among the very few major armies that did not have a formal marksmanship program. Perhaps frustrated by limited attention to marksmanship training in the U.S., and with a desire to expand their attention beyond Guard units, Wingate and Church turned to Great Britain. Britain's National Rifle Association would prove to be a valuable source of inspiration and practical knowledge in the establishment of a similar American association and the implementation of a rifle marksmanship program for this nation's citizenry.
69
George Wood Wingate, "Recollections of the National Rifle Association," American Rifleman, May 1951, 32. This was a re-publication of parts of Wingate's memoirs.
70 NRA, Report of the National Rifle Association of America for the Year 1873 (New York: Reynolds & Whelpley,
1877). Henceforth abbreviated as First Annual Report.
71
During the Civil War, Church had been selected to publish the United States Army and Navy Journal and Gazette of the Regular and Volunteer Services, first appearing in August 29, 1863. The publication’s purpose was to counter what some considered a “disloyal and subversive press.” While Church met his obligations to the Union cause, he did not hesitate to use this newly developed vehicle to advocate personal goals. See James B. Trefethen,
Americans and Their Guns: The National Rifle Association Story Through Nearly a Century of Service to the Nation
(Harrisburg, PA.: Stackpole Books, 1967), 30; Donald N. Bigelow, William Conant Church & the Army and Navy Journal (New York: Columbia University Press, 1952), 184; and Charlotte Wallis Chamberlain, “William Conant Church and the Transformation of the National Rifle Association” (master’s thesis, University of New Orleans, 1993).
72