04.06.2013 Views

Field ArTillery - US Army Center Of Military History

Field ArTillery - US Army Center Of Military History

Field ArTillery - US Army Center Of Military History

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

diverging missiOns<br />

tactics for infantry. 9 In practice, however,<br />

there was little change in artillery<br />

employment or doctrine.<br />

Because the school at Fort Monroe<br />

concentrated on heavy artillery,<br />

the Secretary of War in 1869 directed<br />

the establishment of a school for light<br />

artillery, similar to one recommended<br />

by General Scott in 1857. Established<br />

at Fort Riley, Kansas, as the School of<br />

Instruction for Light Artillery, the new<br />

facility was to provide more uniformity<br />

in artillery tactics and improve ment<br />

in materiel. But the effort turned to<br />

nothing. The <strong>Army</strong> reduced the ten<br />

authorized light batteries to five and<br />

used four to establish the school. The<br />

batteries remained in Kansas only two<br />

years before being reorganized as cavalry<br />

to serve on the frontier, and the<br />

school closed. 10<br />

One of the <strong>Army</strong>’s primary interests<br />

in the latter half of the nineteenth<br />

century was coastal defense. This posture was taken because officers in the reduced<br />

postwar <strong>Army</strong> strongly believed that large numbers of trained troops were required to<br />

conduct an offensive and because the civilian populace viewed defensive measures as<br />

a means of strengthening the country against foreign invasion without incurring the<br />

expense of a large standing army. There were also foreign influences. Great Britain<br />

had led the way in improving seacoast defenses with a vast construction program<br />

between 1863 and 1880, and Germany and France followed suit. Furthermore, the<br />

develop ment of rifled cannon had rendered the old vertical masonry forts along<br />

the American seaboard obsolete. Fortifications needed to be dug into the earth and<br />

armed with breechloading heavy rifled ordnance, shielded by armor plate, in order<br />

to withstand attacks from modern weapons. As early as 1869, General of the <strong>Army</strong><br />

William T. Sherman pushed for the replacement of prewar for tifications with defenses<br />

that could resist modern artil lery. Sherman persisted in his recommendations<br />

throughout the 1870s, and his successor, General of the <strong>Army</strong> Philip H. Sheridan,<br />

did the same. Although some construction work began, appropriations halted in the<br />

mid-1870s, and all work soon ceased. 11<br />

Major General Barry<br />

9 WD GO 60, 6 Aug 1869; HQ <strong>Army</strong> GO 6, 17 Jul 1873. The manual was not actually published<br />

until 1874.<br />

10 WD GO 6, 18 Feb 1869; WD GO 17, 4 Mar 1871; Annual Report of the Secretary of War,<br />

[FY1869], 1:24, 69.<br />

11 Annual Report of Secretary of War, [FY1869], 1:31–32; ibid., 1879, 1:xv–xvi.<br />

77

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!