ABSTRACT
Men charged with the making of military policy cautiously sought a middle ground between the demands of liberty and the requirements of national defence, needs which seemed best answered by an army of citizen volunteers in temporary service. The military potential of the nation was hardly brought into play, and the crowning event of the sorry affair-the sacking of Washington-put an end to the hope for an effective militia defence in some political leaders' minds. General Winfield Scott's plan would have created an expansible army of the kind that Washington and James Monroe had contemplated. The congressional debates of 1820–1821 on the army question were viewed in this respect by the officers of the army as a referendum on whether the military establishment had earned a secure place for itself as one of the nation's permanent institutions. Attending the House debates and voting with the Madison administration was John C. Calhoun of South Carolina.
