Canadian Militia: Missing in Action? (3)

Would all the formations that historically came into existence by April 1862 have done so in an alternate time line? Almost certainly not. Yet the April 1862 list provides an exceptionally good baseline. Can anybody really suggest that the volunteering impetus was strengthened rather than weakened by the peaceful resolution of the Trent? Why should Canada be the only nation in existence capable of raising fewer troops in wartime than she was in peacetime?

TFSmith has shown that he accepts that units which were historically formed after December 1861 would be available to the British in the event of a conflict. In Chapter 2, part 2, set explicitly in January 1862, we see the drilling of the University Rifle Company. This unit was recognised on 10 May 1862, and as such does not even appear in the April 1862 list. As such, the reason TFSmith did not take the April 1862 list as his basis can only have been because he was unable to find it.
 Shoddy research runs through TFSmith's order of battle like the wording in a rather disappointing stick of rock. He fixates on the date at which units were officially recognised as deciding what might be available in a conflict: 'units noted as "provisional" were those raised in 1863 or later, but which had at least two companies that existed earlier than 1862'. However, official recognition was often the end, rather than the start of the process. Take, for instance, these extracts from the history of the 10th Royal Grenadiers, a unit which TFSmith excluded from his list because it "did not exist" until March 1862:

‘December 21st 1861, a meeting presided over by the late Mr. F. W. Cumberland was held in the Mechanic's Institute, Toronto, the present Central Library, to discuss the organization of a regiment of volunteer militia among the artisan class of the city. The project had been for some time canvassed, and had met with general approval. There was a large attendance, particularly of workingmen, and after the delivery of some patriotic speeches it was decided unanimously to make the attempt to raise the regiment, and a committee was appointed to give effect to this resolution. A goodly proportion of those attending the meeting were old soldiers, and they supported very strongly a suggestion which was made and carried, that the regiment should be a scarlet coated one, in fact, one of infantry and not of rifles, as were the other companies being raised throughout Canada at this time. Meantime subscription lists were circulated, for in those days the regiments themselves had to bear a considerable portion of the cost of organization and equipment. When the committee met December 28th, 1861, it was reported that one thousand five hundred dollars had been subscribed to the guarantee fund. Nominal rolls had also been circulated, and it was reported at the same meeting that the names of two hundred and thirty men had been subscribed.

December 30th the committee held another meeting and appointed a special committee to nominate officers for the projected regiment. This committee reported January 1st, 1862… such of these gentlemen as decided to accept commissions, set themselves to work assiduously to prepare themselves for their new duties, drill beginning for the officers on January 7th, 1862. It was not until March 14, 1862, that the regiment was formally gazetted’

With more careful research, and a little thought, TFSmith might have avoided fundamental errors. Of course, if he set out deliberately to minimise the strength of the Canadian militia, in order to provide the Union an easier military target and to reinforce his narrative about the Canadians yearning for liberation from the British yoke, then this would be a lie rather than an error. However, other errors strengthen the supposition that this is a failure in research.

Most would never have considered a source from 1867 to have been an acceptable starting point. Yet TFSmith's laziness in using it has resulted in him missing hundreds of rifle companies which either existed well before the point of departure or could easily have been formed after it. For instance:

10th Military District, Lower Canada
    [1st Sherbrooke Rifle Company] 20 March 1856
    [2nd Sherbrooke Rifle Company] 13 November 1860
    [1st Lennoxville Rifle Company] 19 June 1861
    [2nd Lennoxville Rifle Company] 6 December 1861
    [3rd Lennoxville Rifle Company] 6 December 1861
    [Danville Rifle Company] 17 July 1861
    [Granby Rifle Company] 13 June 1856
6th Military District, Upper Canada
    [Owen Sound Rifle Company] 17 July 1861
    [Southampton Rifle Company] 13 December 1861
    [Guelph Rifle Company] 6 March 1856
    [Stratford Rifle Company] 6 May 1858
    [Goderich Rifle Company] 22 January 1862
    [Mount Forest Rifle Company] 30 August 1861
    [Galt Rifle Company] 1 August 1861
    [Fergus Rifle Company] 13 August 1861
    [Elora Rifle Company] 30 August 1861
7th Military District, Upper Canada
    [Oakville Rifle Company] 13 December 1861
    [1st Hamilton Rifle Company] 27 December 1855
    [2nd Hamilton Rifle Company] 27 December 1855
    [3rd Hamilton Rifle Company (Highland)] 2 April 1860
    [Thorold Rifle Company] 15 October 1861
    [Dunville Rifle Company] 24 July 1856
    [1st St Catharines Rifle Company] 27 September 1855
    [2nd St Catharines Rifle Company] 31 January 1862

In peacetime, these were ephemeral organisations. It was not uncommon for a company to be disbanded and a replacement to be immediately reformed. Although only 30% of the companies survived until 1867, this has absolutely no effect on the question of whether they would be available in a Trent war- any more than the demobilisation of the Union in 1865 would affect their ability to launch an attack on Canada in 1862.
 
TFSmith probably hoped to cover himself- indeed, to appear generous- by allowing '~10 local companies per district' of 'organized volunteers and "service" militia'. But because he’s missed so many rifle companies, what he believes 'actually exaggerates what would have been immediately available in the winter of 1861 – 62' is more or less what the Canadians had in volunteer militia alone. 10 companies per each of 8 military districts for 2 provinces provides 160 'local companies'. However, his original list has 146 rifle companies missing, plus artillery, engineers, and marine companies.

This compounds a more fundamental error, related to General Order No. 1. This order called on the 459 battalions of sedentary militia in Canada to provide one company for imminent service. TFSmith has managed the rather impressive feat of not only denying the existence of General Order No. 1, but denying the denial. With the 146 missing rifle companies added back, the figure of 160 militia companies implies that only 14 sedentary battalions (3%) provided a company. However, even taken on its own, 160 'local companies' of militia implies that fewer than 35% of the battalions called on would have provided a company.

Scoring 29.7% on the volunteer militia component, and 35% on the sedentary militia component, the only grade that this order of battle deserves is an F.