Historical Documents Relating to the Reorganization Plans of the War
Department and to the Present National Defense Act, Hearings Before the
Committee on Military Affairs, House of Representatives, 69th Congress,
2d Session (Washington, 1927) is a collection of documents on the
organization of the War Department from 1900 to 1923. Particularly
valuable are the Congressional testimony and excerpts from the annual
reports of Secretary of War Elihu Root and a "Personal Narrative of
Maj. Gen. William Harding Carter on the Creation of the American General
Staff." The annual reports of the Secretaries of War during this same
period, together with the attached reports of the Chief of Staff and the
bureau chiefs, are another invaluable source of detailed information. The
best published account of the managerial crisis within the War Department
[413]
during the winter of 1917-18 is in the Annual Reports for 1918 and for
1919 of the Chief of Staff submitted by General Peyton C. March.
Valuable statistical data on the War Department during World War I are
contained in U.S. Army, Order of Battle of the Land Forces in the
World War (1917-19), Zone of the Interior (Washington, 1949) . In
the National Archives, Record Group 165, in particular the files of the
General Staff: Purchase, Storage, and Traffic Division, contains
valuable material, most of which has not been thoroughly examined, on
the organization and reorganization of the Army's supply system under
Generals March and Goethals. Of particular value is the history of the
Purchase, Storage, and Traffic Division prepared by Maj. W. M. Adriance
and assisted by Capt. S. T. Dana and 1st Lt. J. R. Douglas about March
1919 which appeared in a much-abbreviated form in the Chief of Staff's
Report for 1919. Also in these same files under 029 PS&T Div. is a
proposed article by Lieutenant Douglas that was never published, The
War's Lessons with Reference to the Supply System of the Army . . . .
Douglas in this case is listed as an instructor in Political Science at
the University of California at Berkeley. The 029 files contain most of
the documents dealing with the reorganization of the Army's supply
system employed in this study. Testimony on the postwar reorganization
of the Army from Secretary of War Newton D. Baker, General March,
General John J. Pershing, on down to disgruntled bureau chiefs may be
found in Army Reorganization, Hearings Before the Committee on
Military Afairs, House of Representatives, 66th Congress, 1st and 2d
Sessions (Washington, 1920) . The discussion of the origins and
development of the Army General Staff by Col. John McAuley Palmer on 15
October 1919 is especially important.
The important private manuscript collections consulted for the period
before World War II were the Papers of Henry L. Stimson at Yale
University and the Papers of Newton D. Baker in the Manuscripts Division
of the Library of Congress. A memoir by Mr. Stimson written just after
he left the War Department in 1913 contains information on his dealings
with a more or less hostile Congress, and the correspondence of
Secretary Baker's private secretary Ralph Hayes, included in the Baker
Papers, contains useful information on the lack of
[414]
effective control over the department's operations during the early
months of the war. The author used neither the Papers of Maj. Gen.
George W. Goethals in the Manuscripts Division of the Library of
Congress nor those of Bernard Baruch at Princeton University. These
papers of Goethals and Baruch should be consulted as well.
The sources used for Chapter II were Lt. Gen. Alexander M. Patch's
interviews in September 1945 `with veterans of the Marshall
reorganization of 1942, General Marshall, General McNarney, General
Harrison, and General Nelson. They form part of the files of the
Patch-Simpson Board on the reorganization of the War Department. Copies
of these interviews are in OCMH files. Also consulted was a copy of an
autobiographical memorandum prepared by Mr. Stimson's special assistant,
Goldthwaite Dorr, entitled Memorandum-Notes on the Activities of an
Informal Group in Connection With the Supply Reorganization in the War
Department, Jan-Mar 42, written in early 1946, a copy of which is in
OCMH files.
The principal published source for General Marshall's views on the
postwar organization of the Army and on unification of the armed
services is his testimony before the Senate Military Affairs Committee
on unification in the fall of 1945. Among unpublished sources the Diary
of Secretary Stimson at Yale University contains summaries of interviews
with General Marshall on unification of armed services in April 1944
before the opening of the hearings by the Woodrum Committee referred to
in Chapter IV. OCMH has a copy from Stimson's correspondence that
paraphrases an interview the Secretary had with General Marshall on 24
April 1944 on unification, in which the general discussed the matter
more freely than in his public testimony.
Also in OCMH files is a special collection of the various
Somervell-ASF Post-War Organization proposals made from 1943 through the
spring of 1948 and a draft manuscript history of the War Department
Special Planning Division which includes documents and reports on the
history of that unit and on the development of plans for the postwar
organization of the Army before the latter's functions were taken over
by the Patch-Simpson Board.
The material used in Chapter IV on the reorganization of
[415]
1946 came from the files of the Army staff, particularly files 020 and
320 on the organization and reorganization, respectively, of the Army.
File 320 for 1945-46 contains the records of the so-called Patch-Simpson
Board. The Patch Board's interviews in September 1945 with major War
Department and Army staff officials from General Marshall down to the
chiefs of the technical services and in Europe with members of General
Eisenhower's headquarters staff are especially important for an
understanding of the reasons behind the decision to scrap the wartime
Marshall organization of the Army staff with its tight executive control
over operations. Copies of the principal interviews are in OCM H files.
The records of the Army staff in this period are located in RG 165 in
the National Archives in Washington, D.C. Also in this group are file
334 of the War Department Special Planning Division containing material
on the Patch-Simpson Board from 19 August 1945 to 4 April 1946 and those
of the Organization and Management Section of G-3. The latter's files
contain material only from January to April 1946 and are labeled as
backup material for the so-called Eberle Report.
The principal published sources for Chapter V on unification of the
armed services between 1946 and 1950 are the series of hearings held
between 1944 and 1947 by various committees of the House and Senate. The
first unification hearings were conducted in the spring of 1944 by a
Select Committee on Post-War Military Policy of the House of
Representatives under the chairmanship of Congressman Clifton A. Woodrum
of Virginia. Nothing came of these hearings, and the next ones held were
in late 1945 by the Senate Committee on Military Affairs under Senator
Elbert D. Thomas of Utah, followed by hearings in the spring and summer
of 1946 by the Senate Naval Affairs Committee under Senator David I.
Walsh of Massachusetts. Following a reorganization of Congress, the next
hearings were held by the Senate Committee on the Armed Services in the
spring of 1947 under Senator Chan Gurney of South Dakota. The final
hearings were conducted by the House Committee on Expenditures in the
Executive Departments under Congressman Clare Hoffman of Michigan at
about the same time.
Material on the reorganization of the Army staff from 1948
[416]
to 1950 was drawn from the files of the Management Division of the
Office of the Comptroller of the Army located in RG 819 (Army Staff) in
the National Archives and Records Service. The specific files used are
referred to in the footnotes. The Chief of Staff's office file 320 on
reorganization for 1949 was also used. General Lutes' files on The Pros
and Cons of a Logistics Command, compiled in the spring of 1948, is in
the Somervell-ASF Reorganization Proposals file, referred to above, in
OCMH. The Final Report of the War Department Policies and Programs
Review Board, known as the Haislip Board, of 11 August 1947, is now
declassified.
The Johnston plan for realigning the Army staff on functional lines
was mimeographed as Organization of the Department of the Army: A Staff
Study, 15 July 1948. The files of the Management Division, OCA,.contain
valuable documents on events leading to the publication of the Johnston
plan as well as to the publication of the Survey of the Department of
the Army-Final Report by Cresap, McCormick and Paget of 15 April 1949.
The Management Division also compiled and mimeographed a very valuable
collection of documents to accompany the Cresap, McCormick and Paget
Report entitled Tabbed Materials to Accompany a Study on Improvement of
Organization and Procedures of the Department of the Army, dated 22 July
1949. Only the original copy in the Management Division files contains
the formal comments in writing by the Army staff including the chiefs of
the technical services. In the OCMH files is a copy of an address by
Maj. Gen. Everett S. Hughes, the Chief of Ordnance, to the Chief of
Staff on 15 September 1948 on Reorganization of the Army as Viewed From
the Technical Service Level.
A very helpful commentary on the Army Organization Act of 1950 was
prepared by Lt. Col. George Emery Baya of the Management Division, OCA,
entitled An Explanation of the Army Organization Act of 1950, dated 27
July 1950 and reproduced for distribution within the Army. A copy is in
OCMH files.
The principal archival material used in preparing Chapter VI were the
Chief of Staff's 320 (Reorganization) files for 1953 and 1954 in RG 319,
NARS, and the Annual Historical Report of the Deputy Chief of Staff for
Logistics for FY 1955. The
[417]
latter contains a sizable file of documents bearing upon the Army
staff reorganization of 1955. Included are the Davies Committee Report
of 18 December 1953 and the Secretary's Report on Army Reorganization of
17 July 1954, both of which were reproduced and distributed throughout
the Army. General Williston B. Palmer discussed the rationale behind the
1955 changes in the organization of the Army staff in "The General
Staff, United States Army," Armed Forces Management, IV, No.
1 (October 1957) .
Karl Bendetsen's proposals in 1952 for reorganizing the Army staff
appeared in the Military Review, XXXIII, No. 10 (January 1954) ,
as "A Plan for Army Organization." His second plan, dated 1
June 1955, for Army Organization in Peace and War is located in the
files of Group B, Army Headquarters, OSD Project 80 (the Hoelscher
Committee Report), referred to below. Mr. Lovett's letter of 18 November
1952 to President Truman, suggesting a reorganization of the technical
services among other things, appeared in the Army, Navy, and Air
Force Journal, 10 January 1953. The review and analysis of the
organization of the Army staff prepared by McKinsey and Company, dated
March 1955, was reproduced in two volumes.
The unclassified First Army Survey Appraisal of Relationships Now
Established by SR 10-500-1, October 1953, a mimeographed copy of which
is in OCMH files, is the best analysis of the housekeeping problems
encountered by the continental armies and the technical services after
World War II.
For Chapter VII useful material on common supplies and services is
contained in U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Background
Materials on Economic Aspects of Military Procurement and Supply, 86th
Congress, 2d Session. An ICAF lecture on the origins of the single
manager concept by its chief architect, Robert C. Lanphier, Jr.,
entitled Single Manager Plan on 23 November 1955 was also consulted. L.
Van Loan Naisawald's unpublished draft manuscript, acknowledged in the
preface, The History of Army Research and Development, Organization and
Programs: Part I, Organization: The Formative Years, 1961, was
indispensable because of the au-
[418]
thor's intimate personal knowledge of the background and events
described.
For Chapter VIII the hearings and reports on national security
organization published by the Senate Subcommittee on National Policy
Machinery, the so-called Jackson Subcommittee, provided illuminating
background material as well as criticism of the organization and
management of defense policies under President Eisenhower. Particularly
helpful were the statements of former Secretaries of Defense Robert S.
Lovett and Thomas S. Gates, Jr., Wilfred J. McNeil, and Maurice H. Stans,
Director of the Budget, under President Eisenhower, General Taylor, and
Secretary McNamara.
A number of speeches, statements, and articles by Charles J. Hitch,
including testimony before the Jackson Committee, were useful in tracing
the development of the planning programming-budgeting system. The
Economics of National Defense in the Nuclear Age (Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1961) , which he wrote with Roland N. McKean
as a member of the RAND Corporation, outlined in detail its fundamental
concepts. Also of value was Mr. Hitch's Decision-Making for Defense (Berkeley
and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1965) .
Important documents bearing upon the creation of the Defense Supply
Agency are included in the Project 100, Single Manager Activities file
of Project 80's Group D files referred to below.
Material on Project 80 and the Army reorganization of 1962 came from
the files of the Hoelscher Committee and its successor, the Department
of the Army Reorganization Project Office (DARPO). This material was
turned over to OCMH where it is presently located. These files include
the published reports of the study groups as well as the final summary
report and the Green Book of December 1961, the latter containing the
reorganization plan finally approved by Secretary McNamara. The most
important materials are in the files of Mr. Hoelscher's executive office
and the backup files of the several study groups, particularly those of
Group D on Army logistics. Also of much help were the formal criticisms
of the Hoelscher Committee Report by General Illig and Dr. Garvin of
DCSLOG in September 1961 contained in Mr. Hoelscher's personal files
[419]
and the transcript of a speech by Hoelscher before the Army
Management School in March 1963, The Story of Project 80 and the
Reorganization of the Army.
Unfortunately because the Hoelscher Committee was dissolved
immediately after its report was presented to the Chief of Staff in
mid-October 1961 a gap in documentation exists between that date and
mid-February 1962 when DARPO began operations. Transcripts of the
interviews with General Taylor in November and December, however, were
preserved as well as the Traub Committee Report. Otherwise material for
this period, when Secretary McNamara was making vital decisions
affecting the reorganization, was culled from personal papers retained
by a few officers who remained on duty after October, particularly Lt.
Col. Lewis J. Ashley and Maxey O. Stewart.
Material dealing with the execution of Project 80 came from the files
of DARPO, especially its correspondence files. On the vital issue of
personnel transfers few records survived of the bitter debates between
the Army staff and DARPO on transferring the former's personnel to the
newly created AMC and CDC.
Secondary Works
For the nineteenth century, three volumes in the late Leonard D.
White's studies in the administrative history of the federal government
were of great value: The Jeffersonians, 1801-1829 (New York:
Macmillan, 1951) , The Jacksonians, 1829-1861 (New York:
Macmillan, 1954) , and The Republican Era, 1869-1901 (New York:
Macmillan, 1958) . William B. Skelton has filled in an important gap in
our knowledge by tracing the origins of the continuing feud between the
Commanding General, on the one hand, and the bureau chiefs, backed by
the Secretary of War, on the other, in "The Commanding General and
the Problem of Command in the United States Army, 1821-1841," Military
Affairs, XXXIV No. 4 (December 1970) .
Until the publication of Graham A. Cosmas' An Army for Empire: The
United States Army in the Spanish-American War (Columbia, Mo.:
University of Missouri Press, 1971) , there was no reliable or
authoritative account of the role the Army and the War Department played
in that conflict. The
[420]
first chapter is an excellent summary of the organization and
administration of the department and the Army in the field in the years
before the war. While concentrating on the Army during the war itself,
Cosmas carries his account right up to the appointment of Elihu Root as
Secretary of War on 1 August 1899. It is a fair, balanced account and
one every student of American military history should have in his
library.
Secondary works on the organization and administration of the War
Department for the period 1900-45 include Otto L. Nelson, National
Security and the General Staff (Washington: Infantry Journal Press,
1946), largely an unorganized miscellaneous collection of documents
printed in full. It is more likely to mislead the reader than to inform
him. Furthermore, government and War Department documents printed in
full, while useful, are to some extent indigestible. Nelson's selections
for the period before World War II are arbitrary, omitting many
important items. Samuel Huntington's The Soldier and the State (Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959) is much broader in scope,
including European armies and their experiences and tracing the
development of American military thought from the Revolution until after
World War II. Paul Y. Hammond, Organizing for Defense: The American
Military Establishment in the Twentieth Century (Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1961) , provides a useful comparison of the
experiences and problems of all three services as well as of the
Department of Defense down to the end of 1958. In discussing the
Secretary of War's alliance with the Chief of Staff he does not seem to
realize that such an alliance existed to only a limited extent during
the two terms that Henry L. Stimson was Secretary, first with Leonard
Wood and later with George C. Marshall. During World War I Newton D.
Baker did not align himself with the Chief of Staff until Peyton C.
March took over that office. Marvin A. Kriedberg and Merton G. Henry in
DA Pamphlet No. 20-212, A History o f Military Mobilization of the
United States Army, 1775-1945 (Washington, 1955) , cover the
organization and administration of the Army in a superior fashion,
although the emphasis is on mobilization procedures. Unfortunately the
book lacks an index. Richard D. Challener's Admirals, Generals and
American Foreign Policy, 1898-1914 (Princeton: Princeton University
[421]
Press, 1978) indicates the Army had much less influence on American
foreign policy than the Navy. Howard Moon is preparing a study on war
plans during this period, emphasizing particularly those involving Japan
and Mexico.
For the period before World War I, Mabel E. Deutrich,
Struggle for Supremacy: The Career of General Fred C. A insworth (Washington,
D.C.: Public Affairs Press, 1962) , and Elting E. Morison, Turmoil and
Tradition: A Study of the Life and Times of Henry L. Stimson (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1960) , are indispensable. John Dickinson, The
Building of an Army (New York: The Century Company, 1922) , who served
on the General Staff during World War I, provides one of the best accounts
of the development of the Army from 1900 to 1920, including the
controversy between the Regular Army and the National Guard, the
background and content of the National Defense Act of 1916, the nation's
first draft law, the reorganizations of the War Department during 1918,
and the Congressional hearings which led to passage of the National
Defense Act amendments of June 1920. George C. Herring, Jr., published a
valuable article, "James Hay and the Preparedness Controversy,
1915-1916," in the Journal o f Southern History, XXX, No. 4
(November 1964) , although he did not discuss the impact of the National
Defense Act of 1916 on the General Staff.
Concerning America's role in World War I, Frederick Palmer's
two-volume biography Newton D. Baker, America at War (New York:
Dodd, Mead and Company, 1931) and his Bliss, Peacemaker: The Life and
Letters of Tasker Howard Bliss (New York: Dodd, Mead and Company,
1934) are still commendable accounts. Daniel R. Beaver's "Newton D.
Baker and the Genesis of the War Industries Board," Journal o f
American History, LII, No. 1 (June 1965) and Newton D. Baker and
the American War Effort (Lincoln, Nebr.: University of Nebraska
Press, 1966) are the most valuable and most recent accounts of Baker as
Secretary of War and of his negative attitude toward industrial
mobilization. Robert D. Cuff's recent The War Industries Board:
Business-Government Relations during World War 1 (Baltimore: The
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973) is by far the most detailed,
thorough, and sophisticated treatment of the WIB that has been pub-
[422]
lished. Edward M. Coffman, first in "The Battle Against RedTape:
Business Methods of the War Department General Staff, 1917-1918,"
Military Afairs, XXVI, No. 1 (Spring 1962) , and later in his
authoritative The Hilt of the Sword: The Career of Peyton C. March (Madison,
Wisc.: University of Wisconsin Press, 1966) , has written a
detailed treatment of March's efforts to reorganize the General Staff in
the last six months of the war. His The War to End All Wars: The
American Military Experience in World War 1 (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1968) is the best over-all treatment of our
participation in the war, but it deals only summarily with the problems
in the War Department's supply system. Very little has been written
about the crises in industrial mobilization during World War I.
Grosvenor B. Clarkson in Industrial America in the World War, The
Strategy Behind the Line, 1917-1918 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1923)
has told the story of industrial mobilization from the War
Industries Board viewpoint. Benedict Crowell and Robert F. Wilson in The
Armies of Industry and The Road to France (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1921) have also dealt with the problem of the
disorganization caused by the independence of the bureau chiefs during
the first year of the war effort. All of these accounts, however, tread
very lightly on the subject of Secretary Baker's failure to recognize
the need for effective control over the bureaus' operations and over war
industry. Only Irving Brinton Holley, jr., in Ideas and Weapons (New
Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1953) has dealt exhaustively
with one aspect of industrial mobilization-the development of the infant
aircraft industry and its efforts to produce serviceable military
aircraft. His detailed treatment of the relationship between research,
development, and production of aircraft and the extreme difficulties
which led to at least two major investigations is a model that could
well be followed by other historians dealing with this area from drawing
board to battlefield.
The following volumes in the UNITED STATES ARMY IN WORLD WAR II series
have valuable material on the period of the long armistice between 1919
and 1939: Mark S. Watson, Chief of Staff: Prewar Plans and
Preparations (Washington, 1950) ; Ray S. Cline, Washington
Command Post: The Operations Division (Washington, 1951) ; and Stetson
Conn,
[423]
Rose C. Engelman, and Byron Fairchild, Guarding the United States
and Its Outposts (Washington, 1964) . OCMH also has a copy of a
praiseworthy Ph.D. dissertation by John W. Killigrew, The Impact of the
Great Depression on the Army, 1929-1936, Indiana University, 1960. The
best and most comprehensive treatment of the development of the Air
Corps during the interwar years may be found in Irving Brinton Holley,
jr., Buying Aircraft: Materiél Procurement for the Army Air Forces, UNITED
STATES ARMY IN WORLD WAR II (Washington, 1964) . It not only covers the
organization of the Air Corps but deals with the corps' attempts to
secure money from Congress for aircraft and with the struggling aircraft
industries' efforts to survive in those years of pacifism and isolation.
It goes right up to the defeat of France and to President Roosevelt's
casual decision to ask Congress for 50,000 aircraft in May 1940. The Air
Force's official history and historical studies for the interwar years
are more narrow in their frames of reference and understandably more
biased.
The most valuable account of General Marshall's reorganization of the
War Department in 1942 is Col. Frederick S. Haydon, "War Department
Reorganization, August 1941March 1942," Military Afairs, XVI (1952)
. The McNarney Committee appointed to carry out the reorganization left
few documents behind. Colonel Haydon had to reconstruct events
laboriously from scattered sources and from the volumes of Watson and
Cline cited above. He left well-organized notes and copies of his
interviews with participants. These interviews are in OCMH files.
Forrest C. Pogue has an excellent account of Marshall's views on
reorganization in the second volume of his biography of the general, Ordeal
and Hope, 1939-1942 (New York: Viking Press, 1966) .
In addition to the volumes of Morison, Cline, and Watson, cited above,
the following volumes in the UNITED STATES ARMY IN WORLD WAR II series
were especially helpful in preparing Chapters II and III: R. Elberton
Smith, The Army and Economic Mobilization (Washington, 1959) ;
Richard M. Leighton and Robert W. Coakley, Global Logistics and
Strategy: 1940-1943 (Washington, 1955) ; Robert W. Coakley and
Richard M. Leighton, Global Logistics and Strategy:
1943-1945 (Washington, 1968) ; Kent Roberts Greenfield,
[424]
Robert R. Palmer, and Bell I. Wiley, The Organization o f Ground
Combat Troops (Washington, 1947) ; John D. Millett, The
Organization and Role of the Army Service Forces (Washington, 1954)
; Constance McL. Green, Harry C. Thomson, and Peter C. Roots, The
Ordnance Department: Planning Munitions for War (Washington, 1955) ;
and Lenore Fine and Jesse A. Remington, The Corps of Engineers:
Construction in the United States (Washington, 1973) , which the
author consulted in draft form. Of the offical "Army Air Forces in
World War II" series edited by Wesley F. Craven and James L. Cate, Men
and Planes, vol. VI (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956) ,
was useful, as were portions of Holley's volume on Air Force
procurement.
The following unpublished official monographs, all located in OCMH
files, were consulted: Kent Roberts Greenfield, A Short History of the
Army Ground Forces, AGF Historical Studies No. 10, c. 1944; D. L.
McCaskey, The Role of Army Ground Forces in the Development of
Equipment, AGF Historical Series, No. 34, 1946; John D. Millett,
Organizational Problems of the Army Ground Forces, 1942-1945, c. April
1945; Richard M. Leighton, History of the Control Division, ASF,
1942-1945, April 1946; Research and Development Division, ASF, History
of the Research and Development Division, ASF, 1 July 1940-1 July 1945
with Supplement to 1 January 1946, c. 1946. Personnel Division, G-1, War
Department General Staff, History of the Personnel Division, G-1, War
Department General Staff, n.d.; Military Intelligence Division, War
Department General Staff, History of the Military Intelligence Division,
War Department General Staff, 7 December 1941-2 September 1945, n.d.;
Bruce W. Bidwell, History of the Military Intelligence Division,
Department of the Army General Staff, c. 1953; Richard W. Armour and
Others, History of the G-3 Division, War Department General Staff During
World War II, c. February 1946; Supply Division, War Department General
Staff, History of the Supply Division, G-4, War Department General
Staff, n.d.; Strength Accounting and Reporting Office, War Department
Special Staff, History of the Strength Accounting and Reporting Office,
n.d.; George W. Peck, History of the War Department Manpower Board, c.
May 1946; Edwin L. Hayward, History of the Civil
[425]
Affairs Division, War Department Special Staff, During World War II to
March 1946, n.d.; New Developments Division, War Department Special
Staff, History of the New Developments Division, War Department General
Staff, c. April 1946.
Among monographs used that were prepared by the Army Air Forces were
Chase C. Mooney, Organization of the Army Air Arm, 1935-1945, AAF
Historical Study No. 10, Air Historical Office, April 1947, and L. V.
Howard and C. C. Mooney, Development of Administrative Planning and
Control in the AAF, AAF Histories Studies No. 28 (revised), Air
Historical Office, Hq., AAF, August 1946.
An unpublished doctoral dissertation by Theodore Wyckoff, Jr., The
Office of Secretary of War Under Henry L. Stimson, 1940-1945, Princeton
University, 1960, copy in OCMH files, was also used.
Two OCMH studies on Army personnel management were valuable: R. W.
Coakley, B. C. Mossman, and B. F. Cooling, Review of Deployment
Procedures in World War Il and in the Korean War, 1965, and R. W.
Coakley, Historical Summary of Army Manpower and Personnel Management
System, 1965.
In preparing Chapter IV John C. Sparrow, History o f Personnel
Demobilization in the United States Army, DA Pamphlet 20-210
(Washington, 1954) , and an OCMH study prepared by Robert W. Coakley,
Ernest F. Fisher, Karl E. Cocke, and Daniel P. Griffin, Resume of Army
Roll-Up Following World War II (revised), 1968, were of value in
analyzing the Army's proposals for universal military training.
The best published account of the battle over unification discussed
briefly in- Chapter V is Demetrios Caraley, The Politics of Military
Unification: A Study of Conflict and the Policy Process (New York:
Columbia University Press, 1966) .
The most significant published analysis of national defense policy
from World War II to 1960 is Samuel P. Huntington's The Common
Defense: Strategic Programs in National Politics (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1961) . For the period between 1947 and 1953 Warner R.
Schilling, Paul Y. Hammond, and Glenn H. Snyder's Strategy, Politics,
and Defense Budgets (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962) was
invaluable. Schilling's "The Politics of National Defense: Fiscal
Year 1950" brilliantly demonstrates what General Mar-
[426]
shall had warned, the futility and irresponsibility of attempting to
determine the size of defense budgets without considering American
military commitments and strategy. Schilling also shows how this
development inevitably led to the bitter interservice rivalry that
loomed so large in defense policy from 1947 to 1961.
The most useful study on the evolution of the Army's program budgets
during the 1950s is Frederick C. Mosher, Program Budgets: Theory and
Practice (Chicago: Public Administration Service, 1954) . An article
by Allen Schick, "The Road to PPB: The Stages of Budget
Reform," in the December 1966 issue of the Public Administration
Review, XVI, No. 4, provides an excellent historical background,
while an OCA official, William O. Harris, in an ICAF student thesis in
March 1961, An Appraisal of Military Comptrollership, Thesis No. 59,
M61-92, traced the development of OCA during the fifties with emphasis
on the increasing authority of Wilfred J. McNeil, the DOD Comptroller,
over defense budgets.
Since much of the services' research and development was conducted on
contract by outside "think tanks," the author consulted Bruce
L. R. Smith's The RAND Corporation: Case Study of a Nonprofit
Advisory Corporation (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,
1966) , a thorough account of the background and development of the
first and still the foremost of these scientific advisory groups.
Two historical studies on combat developments within the Army were
used: Marshall D. Moody, The Transportation Corps Combat Developments
Program: Its Origin and Status, Office, Chief of Transportation, 30
April 1958, and Historical Background of United States Continental Army
Command Participation in Combat and Materiél Development Activities,
prepared in 1963 by the Historical Branch, Deputy Chief of Staff for
Unit Training and Readiness, Hq., USCONARC.
ICAF and AWC student theses on the development of integrated supply
management were useful, including J. S. Goldberg, Fourth Military
Service, Student Report on Policy No. 288, ICAF Economic Mobilization
Course, 1951-52; H. D. Linscott, The Evolution of Integrated Material
Management in the Department of Defense, IG`AF Student Thesis No. 76,
M61-49, 31 March 1961; and Robert S. Cunningham, The
[427]
Organization and Management of the Department of Defense Wholesale
Supply System, U.S. Army War College Student Thesis AWCLG 61-2-41V, 10
February 1961.
The most valuable treatment of Army logistics from the creation of ASF
through the Army reorganization of 1962 is an OCMH study, Three Studies
on the Historical Development of Army Logistical Organization, prepared
for the Board of Inquiry on Army Logistics Systems (the Brown Board),
July 1966. Part B on Army logistics between World War II and 1960 was of
great help in preparing Chapter VI.
Martin Blumenson's Reorganization of the Army, 1962, OCMH Monograph
87M, April 1965, was used extensively in preparing those sections
dealing with Project 80.
[428]