Congress was fearful of a standing army, despite its obvious necessity during wartime. How did its fears affect Washington and thus the army? Did Washington deal with congress effectively, why or why not?
Hi. The solution below should get you started. If you have any questions regarding the solution, do let me know via the feedback section and I'll try my best to clarify things for you. You can also use the listed references for further exploration of the topic. Good luck with your studies and thank you for using Brainmass.
OTA 105878/Xenia Jones
Militia Groups & the Standing Army in Early US History
Upon the establishment of American Independence from the British, one of the key issues tackled was how to deal with the militia. While the militia was essential in the American struggle for independence, military leaders, even then Gen. Washington acknowledged the difficulty in managing unity, expectations, and desertions from a non-centralized and untrained loose grouping of formally drafted soldiers side by side with their informal militia counterparts. By the time of the drafting of the US Constitution, the issue of placing military groups and the militia under civilian control aroused great concern due to the experience of abuse of military control by Oliver Cromwell and King James II in Great Britain just a century previous. James Madison however argued that it is essential for the American militia groups to continue their organization and presents in direct opposition to the regular army and the government to balance things out, to ensure power is ...
The solution is an 812-word discussion of the reasons why the US Congress was fearful of a standing army despite the necessity of said army during times of War. The position and views of Pres. Washington on the matter is presented, in particular, how he worked to appease his Congress to assail their fears and concerns. references are listed. A word version of the solution is attached for easy download and printing.