Endnotes for Chapter II
1 Dr. George H. Gallup, American Institute of Public Opinion, before the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, Washington, 17 June 1947. Industrial College Library, L 47-150.
2 This remark, recalled by Maj. (later Maj. Gen.) Wilton B. Persons, then attending the hearings, does not appear in the transcript of the Congressional committee hearings and presumably was off the record. It was a policy so well established that on 9 May 1938 Maj. Gen. Stanley D. Embick, Deputy Chief of Staff, in a memorandum to G-4 said: "Our national policy contemplates preparation for defense, not aggression." This is filed in OCofS 17840-115 and is quoted later in this chapter. The 166-plane request by the Army, here referred to, itself represented a severe cut from the air establishment's request.
3 For this and resultant correspondence and quotations cited in text sec (1) Memo, Office of USW for Budget Office, 24 Sep 46, sub: Specific Refutation for Mead Report. (2) Memo, Maj Gen Geo. J. Richards for Charles Parker, Sp Asst to USW, 23 Oct 46, both filed in WDSBU 032.3; Mead Com (23 Oct 46). (3) Binder containing accompanying papers. Copies of all in Hist Div, SSUSA, Cater Files, 1941 folder, "Quotations of War Dept Spokesmen Relative to Inadequacy of National Defense during Period 1919-41."
4 On the eve of World War II a formal example of this practice was presented by General Marshall, then Deputy Chief of Staff, acting for Gen. Malin Craig. A TAG letter of 9 Feb 39, sub: War Department Attitude Regarding Additional Personnel (filed in WPD 3674-13 and in AG 320.2 (2-7-9) Mix F-M, and referred to in Chs. IV and VI in other connections), warned chiefs of arms and other potential witnesses before Congressional committees that, in accord with Presidential views, there had been no recommendations of increases for the mobile ground force. Accordingly "the Chief of Staff desires that this attitude be clearly maintained by all representatives of the War Department who may be called on to testify:" However, the attached statement would guide them in their replies to possible questioning on what "eventually should be the first increases" in case any increase should later be permitted. The guidance was explicit: the first need was for 1,800 officers and 23,000 men with whom to complete the needed five full divisions.
5 Report of the Survey of the Military Establishment by the War Department General Staff, 1 Nov 29, G-I/11229-39.
6 Gen. Douglas MacArthur's Annual Report of the Chief of Staff, in Annual Report of the Secretary of War to the President, 1933. In the 1934 report is mention of only 12 modern tanks.
7 Strength of the Army varies moderately from month to month as enlistments begin and end irregularly. In 1933 enlisted strength varied from 120,065 to 124,955. The House of Representatives in 1932 passed a bill to retire 2,000 more officers. The Senate killed the bill.
8 This included Philippine Scouts. Authorization also was for 17,726 officers, a figure which was not attained until 1940.
9 Personal Ltr, Gen Marshall to Rep Ross A. Collins, 21 Jun 40, OCS 21097-7, copy in G-1/15588-193 (6-21-40).The figure of 1935 enlisted strength (in the first paragraph quoted) does not exactly correspond with the recorded midyear strength of 125,098. The 118,750 is a budget figure omitting Philippine Scouts.
10 WPD Memo for CofS, 19 Apr 33, WPD 3674.
11 Annual Report of CofS, 30 Jun 33. The 118,000 figure is not exact but a budget approximation.
12 The June 1940 total strength, officers and enlisted, was 241,612. Between 23 July 1940 and induction 96,043 were discharged for various reasons. Vacancies were filled by recruits so that the strength on 30 June 1941 was recorded as 263,406. Annual Report, Chief of National Guard Bureau, 1941.
13 Memo, ACofS G-4 (Maj Gen R. E. Callan) for TAG, 16 Sep 32, reciting the Secretary's instructions to notify all Chiefs of Supply Arms and Branches of a six-year program to cope with nonavailability of funds. General Callan on 7 Sep 34 wrote another Memo for DCofS, sub: Rearmament and Reequipment Progress, recording the course of events thereafter. Both arc recorded in G-4/29552, a separate binder labeled "Research and Development, Rearmament and Reequipment, Progress 16 Sep 32-17 Dec 34," P&E file, sec I.
14 Annual Report of CofS, 30 Jun 39.
15 Analysis of War Department appropriations in the Baltimore Sun, 21 May 1940. The analysis was made from figures made available at that time by the War Department, where the resultant articles were scrutinized and approved before publication. Postwar effort to prove the computations by Budget reports has been unsuccessful, the Budget's complexity making it impossible to determine how the appropriate functional items (scattered among a great many classifications) had been assembled in the unofficial computation of 1940. Unfortunately the Budget office itself makes no such computation of prewar outlay as would be applicable to the points here discussed.
16 Ibid. Further analysis of appropriations during the preceding decade, computed on the same basis, showed the following percentages of money devoted to new equipment: 1930-8.5%, 1931-9.2%, 1932-9.6%, 1933-6.2%, 1934-3-2%, 1935-7.6%, 1936-15.3%, 1937-16.3%, 1938-14.1%, 1939-18.5%. A War Department computation, employing different minor items, appearing as an unsigned memorandum in CofS files, Emergency, bndr t, shows new equipment and ammunition as follows: 1937-17%, 1938-16%, 1939-19%, 1940-33%. Still another computation accompanies a statement by Secretary of War Harry H. Woodring, 28 May 40, copy of which is in a compilation by H. W. Cater, "Annotations of War Department Spokesmen Relative to the Inadequacy of the National Defense during the Period 1919 to 1941," in Cater files, 1941 folder, Kist Div files. It concludes that of $6,169,300,000 military appropriations for the Army over 16 years (1925-40) 86.1 % was for "recurring changes and improvement of plant," 8.3% for Air Corps equipment, and only 5.6% for arms and equipment of the ground forces.
17 Pub 639, 75th Cong, 3d sess.
18 Pub 723, 75th Cong, 3d sess.
19 See Plant Surveys and Educational Orders in World War II, U. S. Army Industrial College, Dept of Research, Jan 1947.
20 49 U. S. Stat 116.
21 The 1940 listing of the Army and Navy Munitions Board included 14 "strategic" materials (necessary to national defense but not domestically produced in sufficient quantity or quality) and 15 "critical" materials (equally essential to defense but not facing such acute difficulties in procurement from abroad). The first group comprised antimony, chromium, coconut shell char, manganese, manila fiber, mercury, mica, nickel, quarter. crystal, quinine, rubber, silk, tin, tungsten. In the second group were aluminum, asbestos, cork; graphite, hides, iodine, kapok, opium, optical glass, phenol, platinum, tanning materials, toluol, vanadium, wool. The lists were variable, and the board kept its eye on other essentials which might some day be required for import, notably petroleum, beryllium, cobalt, and uranium.
22 Memo, DCofS, Maj Gen (later Lt Gen) Stanley D. Embick for ACofS G-4, 9 May 38, CofS files17840-115.
23 Memo, SW for CofAC, 9 Jun 38, CofS files 17840-121.
24 Memo, SW for CofAC, 29 Jul 38, CofS files 17840-115.
25 Tab B of Air Board Report found in AGO 320.2 (6-26-39)
26 Ltr, CofS to SW, 7 Sep 39, AG 302.2 (9-7-39).
27 Testimony of 28 April 1941 before House Appropriations Committee, 77th Cong,, ist sess, Military Establishment Appropriation Bill for 1942. Hearings, p. 3.
28 Testimony of 5 August 1940 before Senate Appropriations Committee, 76th Cong, 3d sess, Second Supplementary National Defense Appropriation for 1941. Hearings . . . on HR 10263, p. 2.
29 The reference is to a succession of events following Munich, dealt with at length in Chapter V.
30 Memo, ACofS G-4 for TAG, 16 Sep 32, G-4/29552, in bode labeled "Research and Development, Rearmament and Reequipment, Progress, 16 Sep 32-17 Dec 34," P&F file, sec 1. In same binder is General Callan's Memo for DCofS, sub: Rearmament and Reequipment Progress, 7 Sep 34, summarizing related events of the two years preceding.
31 See General Callan's Memo of 7 Sep 34 cited above.
32 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 26 Jun 34, sub: Recommendation of Projects for Inclusion in the War Department Rearmament and Reequipment Programs FY 1936, G-4/29552.
33 Memo, TAG for Chiefs of Arms, Branches, and Services, 22 Nov 33, sub: Policy for Mechanization and Motorization, AG 537.3 (11-9-33 Misc D).
34 Summarized in Memo, ACofS G-4 for DCofS, 7 Sep 34, in G-4/29552, in "Research and Development, Rearmament and Reequipment Progress, 16 Sep 32-17 Dec 34," P&E file, sec 1.
35 Testimony of 21 Feb 39 before Senate Committee on Military Affairs, 76th Long, ist less, National Defense Hearings . . . on HR 3791. pp. 285-93.
36 Memo, CofFA for TAG, 1 May 34, sub: Six-Year Programs FY 1936-41, G-4/29552.
37 Gen Marshall's testimony of 23 Feb 40 before subcommittee of House Appropriations Committee, 76th Cong, 3d sess, Military Establishment Appropriation Bill for 1941, Hearings, p. 5.
38 Ordnance Department Order 48, 15 Jun 34, sub: Ordnance Laboratories.
39 Final Report of War Department Special Committee On Army Air Corps, 18 July 1934 (Washington, 1934). The quotations are from pages 73 and 48.
40 Memo, DCofS for ACofS G-4, 31 Jul 34, sub: Co-ordination of Research and Development Programs of Various Arms and Services, G-4/29552-1.
41 Memo, ACofS G-4 for DCofS, 6 Aug 34, sub: Co-ordination of Research . . ., G-4/29552-1 or AG I I I (7-31-34). The methods for development of equipment were specified in AR 850-25 as originally framed in 1924, revised in 1927, 1931, and 1936.
42 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS. 27 Aug 34, G-4/29552-2.
43 Memo, DCofS (General Drum) for ACofS G-4, 28 Sep 34, G-4/29552-2.
44 Memo, ACofS G-4 for TAG, 24 Oct 34. G-41/29552-2.
45 Memo, Actg ACofS G-4 for CofS, with DCofS approval, 30 Jan
35, sub: Research and Development
Program, FY 1937, AG I I I (12-1-34) (1).
46 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 4 May 35, sub: Research and Development Program for FY 1937, G-4/29552.
47 Memo, Actg ACofS G-4 for CofS, 10 Oct 35, sub: Research and Development Program, FY 1938, G-4 /29552. For expenditure program see separate note entitled Development FY 1938, in same file.
48 Memo, Actg ACofS G-4 for CofS, 8 Feb 36, sub: Research and Development Program, FY 1938, G-4 /29552.
49 Memo, ACofS G- 4 for CofS, 30 Oct 36 sub: Research . . . for FY 1939, G-4/29552.
50 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 30 Oct 36, sub: Research and Development . . . for FY 1939, G-4/29552.
51 Memo signed "G. C. M." for ACofS G-4, 3 Jun 40, no sub, OCS 20945-11 and G-4/29485-93. It suggested a 47-mm. gun on a self-propelled mount. The Chief of Ordnance in a Memo for G-4 on 7 June 1940 discouraged thought of a 47, and advocated a 75 or, better, an adaptation of the 3-inch antiaircraft gun. G-4/29485-93. Maj. Gen. Lesley J. McNair discouraged a self-propelled type, save in armored divisions. Undated Memo on a slip of paper bearing a "G. C. M." request for advice, attached to a 2 Jul 40 disposition Slip to G-4/29485-93. The next month brought a policy decision to use antiaircraft artillery against mechanized targets. Memo, G-4 for TAG, 12 Aug 40, G-4/29485-93.
52 Memo (with incls), ACofS G-4 for CofS, to Mar 37, sub: War Department Research and Development Program, FY 1939, G-4/29552.
53 Ibid.
54 Memo, Acts ACofS G-4 for CofS, 6 Apr 37, sub: Additional Funds for Research and Development for the Ordnance Department, G-4/29552.
55 (1) Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 14 Jun 37, sub: Research and Development . . . FY 1939, G-4/29552. (2) Memo, same, to Aug 37, sub: Signal Corps Research . . . FY 1939 (Project 113), G-4/29552.
56 (1) Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 1 Nov 37, sub: Increase in Research and Development . . , for the Ordnance Department, G-4/29552. (2) Memo, DCofS for ACofS G-4, 3 Nov 37, sub: Increase in Research . . ., G-4/29552.
57 See n. 22, above.
58 See n. 2, above.
59 (1) Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 27 Jul 38, Sub: Research . . . FY 1939, G-4/29552. (2) Memo, ACofS G-4 (Brig Gen George P. Tyner) for TAG, 29 Oct 38, sub: Expenditure Program . . . Cabin Bomber, G-4/29552 or AG 112-04.
60 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 8 Feb 39, sub: Army Research and Development. G-4/29552.
61 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 18 Nov 37, sub: Estimates for Research . . . FY 1940, G-4/29552.
62 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 2 Mar 38, sub: War Department Research . . . 1940, G-4/29552.
63 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 8 Feb 39, sub: Army Research and Development, G-4/29552.
64 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 8 Jul 39, sub: Revised Research and Development Program (Air Corps) for FY 1940, G-4/29552.
65 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 15 Nov 39, sub: War Department Research . . . FY 1942, G-4/29552.
66 Memo, OCS for G-2 (in collaboration with G-3), 7 Sep 39, no sub, signed by SGS (Lt Col (later Mai Gen) Orlando Ward) at CofS's direction, OCS 21090-2. Attached is a 15 Feb 40 memo, similarly addressed and signed, stating; that the CofS was "interested in acing these questions." Same file.
67 Examples are: (1) Memo, OCS for G-2, G-3, G-4, WPD, Chiefs of Infantry, Field Artillery, Air Corps, 17 Mar 41, no subject formally stated; it deals with the intensive use of German observation aviation, both airplanes and balloons, for getting information to aid artillery fire and dive bombers, and is filed in OCS 21090-18. (2) Memo, CofS for WPD, 22 Mar 41, signed by General Marshall, reporting useful information on General Sir Archibald Wavell's organization of bases and administration, which had been gathered by Col. (later Maj. Gen.) William J. Donovan, and instructing; WPD to get in touch with Colonel Donovan. OCS 21090-19. See also Memo, OCS for ASW, 24 Sep 41, sub: Radio Land Mines, OCS 21179-3.
68 Chart drawn up by G-4 dated 12-5-41 in G-4/29552. See also Memo, B&LP Br for CofS, 25 Jul 41, sub: Research and Development FY 1943. Approved by CofS, 26 Jul 41. OCS 17304-54.
69 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 8 Feb 39, sub: Army Research and Development, G-4/29552.
70 Memo, SGS for ACofS G-4, 18 Feb 39, G-4/29552.
71 Ltr, CofS to Dir BofB, 26 Dec 39, G-4/29552.
72 Memo, CSO for CofS, 20 Feb 40, G-4/29552-17.
73 Memo, CofS for CSO, 7 Sep 40, OCS 16281-6. It should be noted that delay in standardizing a piece of equipment did not necessarily mean that none of this equipment was procured. Its acquisition in small lots was sometimes informally provided for by a shift of funds, and thus a new device could be acquired for trial without being adopted as standard.
74 Signal Corps Development of United States Army Radar Equipment, Pt. III, Hist Div 4-11 RA.
75 Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 3 Jan 39, sub: Research and Development Policy of the Chemical Warfare Service, G-4/29552 or AG 441.2 (12-5-38).
76 Memo (with incl), Ex Off Military Div of OCofEngrs for ACofS WPD, 6 Apr 39, sub: Basic Research for National Defense, WPD 4127-3.
77 Memo, Actg CofEngrs for ACofS WPD, 31 Oct 39, sub: Basic Research, WPD 4127-2.
78 The committee was designated by the Council of National Defense, President Roosevelt approving on 27 June 1940. See OCS 16253. See aso James P. Baxter, Scientists Against Time (Boston: Little Brown, 1946), and WPD 4127. For detail of basic research discussion in early 1940, see AG 381 Natl Defense (12-10-38).
79 (1) Memo, OCS for G-4, 28 Feb 40, sub: Approval of Military Characteristics (signed by SGS), OCS 18235-50. (2) Memo, OCS for G-4, 18 Feb 41, sub: 3-inch Gun Motor Carriage (signed by SGS), OCS 16787-20.
80 In 1949 Maj. Gen. Wilton B. Persons recalled that just before World War II, when he was a liaison officer at the Capitol, he was instructed by the Secretary of War (Woodring) and the Chief of Staff (Craig) to see that interested Congressmen had an opportunity to observe the highly secret work in radar then under way at the Signal Corps laboratories in Fort Monmouth. The result was an unexplained but unopposed addition of $150,000 to the Budget, actually used for more work in radar. He also recalled that General Marshall in turn held frequent private conferences to stimulate more intensive work in development of new weapons.
81 Memo, OCS for G-4, 18 Feb 41, no sub. OCS 21230-1, signed by SGS by direction of DCofS.
82 Memo, CofS for USW, 25 Apr 41, sub: Adequacy of Antitank and Antiaircraft Weapons, OCS 20945-16.
83 Memo, CofS for WPD, 25 Jan 40, no sub, OCS 14440-273.
84 Memo, OCS for CofAC, 16 May 41, sub: Development of an Air-borne Tank, signed by SGS at direction of DCofS, OCS 17868-130.
85 Memo, G-4 for CofS, 13 Aug 41, sub: Modification . . . in Light Tank, appd by DCofS (Moore), 12 Sep 41, G-4/29365-34, copy in OCS 17868-152.
86 Rad, Col Fellers, Cairo, to China Mil Miss, 2 Dec 41, copies to SGS and others. That in OCS 17868-165 bears inked marking "G.C.M." Memo, DCofS for Liaison Officer, Armored Force, no sub, OCS 17868-178.
87 Memo, OSC for ACofS WPD, 6 Oct 41, sub: Effect of General Staff Action on Types of Mil Aircraft, signed by SGS, OCS 17840-293.
88 Personal Ltr, Gen Borden to Lt Col L. M. Harris, Hist Div, 20 May 49, in Hist Div files pertaining to this volume.
89 (1) Memo, SGS for Gen McNair, 17 Aug 40, OCS 21157-3. (2) Memo, SGS for ACofS G-3, 20 Aug 40, OCS 21157-1; see also AG 320.2 (9-10-40). (3) Memo, SGS for ACofS G-4, 20 Aug 40, OCS 21157-2 or G-4/31955.
90 Memo, Actg ACofS G-4 for CofS, 23 Aug 40, sub: Development of Arms, G-4/31955.
91 Memo, CofS for ACofS G-4, 29 Aug 40, AG 320.2 (9-10-40) or CofS 21157-4.
92 Memo, SGS for TAG, 10 Sep 40, sub: Co-ordination of Research . . ., OCS 21157-4. Sec also AG 320.2 (9-10-40) and G-4/32048.
93 Memo, SGS for CofOrd, 24 Sep 40, OCS 21157-5 or AG 320.2 (9-10-40).
94 These several Memos from SGS to the various branch chiefs, all dated 2 Dec 40, are found in OCS 21157, items 6 to 11. Without attempting to explore the whole field of the Chief of Staffs interest in all details of the development of new weapons and techniques, as shown in prewar days, one may cite also the following; inquiries and directives: on the organization of the rifle company, Memo, OCS for G-3, 2 Feb 40, OCS 20117-107; on speeding development and production of better signal equipment, Memo, CofS for CSO, 7 Sep 40, no sub, OCS 16281-61; on reconsidering methods of providing antitank and antiaircraft protection for artillery elements, Memo, DCofS for G-3, 17 Aug 40, sub: Tables of Organization, OCS 20065-39; on improving; reconnaissance, Memo, OCS for TAG, 24 Apr 40, no sub, OCS 20150-140; on experimental changes in divisional organizations, Memo, OCS for CofS GHQ, 14 Apr 41, no sub, OCS 20117-117; on triangularizing square divisions, Memo, OCS for G-3, 8 Oct 41, no sub, OCS 20117-122; on proper spacing of convoys exposed to attack, Memo, OCS for G-2, 9 Sep 40, no sub, OCS 21164-1; on new scrutiny of Bofors as substitute for 37-mm. gun, Memo, CofS for Gen Charles M. Wesson, CofOrd, 13 Jan 41, no sub, OCS 16367-73 on redesign of 90-mm. gun to permit fire below horizontal, Memo, DCofS for CofOrd, 8 Jul 41, sub: 90-mm . . ., OCS 16367-89; on speeding development of self-propelled Bofors, same for same, 21 Aug 41, no sub, OCS 16367-89; on simplifying procedures to hasten production, Memo, OCS for G-4, 26 May 41, sub: AR 850-25, Devt . . . of Equipt, OCS 19666-11; on brining; via Washington Keymen Returning from Overseas Duties in order to Utilize their Knowledge, Memo, OCS for WPD, 20 Sep 40, no sub, OCS 20055-86. Personal letters were written now and then when the Chief of Staff apparently thought the principle more important than the item itself appeared to be. Thus, a letter to Private Alber, Fort Devens, Mass., 23 Ape 41, in OCS 19693-68, commending him for writing to a news magazine a letter correcting an inaccurate statement critical of the Army. There is also a three-page letter, Marshall to Hogg, 12 Dec 40, in OCS 19696-64, setting him aright on the Army's reason for selecting a certain we-,pou. At the end in ink is this: "Incidentally, Mr. Hogs, the preparation of replies such as this takes so much of my time and that of my staff that it very seriously interferes with the discharge of pressing duties."
95 Sec series of discussions in CofS files, Miscellaneous Notes on Conf Emergency Period.
96 (1) Memo, OCS for G-3, no sub, 4 Apr 41, OCS 15310-24. (2) Memo, OCS for Gen Barnes, 15 Aug 41, sub: Rockets, OCS 21308-4; also Memo, ACofS G-4 for SGS, 17 Sep 41, sub: Development of Rockets, G-4/33455 copy to OCS 21308-4: also Memo, DCofS for H. H. Bundy, Spec Asst for SW, 19 Sep 41, same sub and files. (3) G-3 disposition form to G-2 through OCS, 10 Sep 41, sub: Final Report . . . as Military Observer, G-3 40911, filed with OCS 21316-4. (4) Memo, ACofS G-4 for CofS, 28 Jul 41, sub: Development of Anti-tank Airplane, G-4/27277-106, copy in OCS 21304-1. (5) Memo, DCofS for Air (Maj Gen Henry II. Arnold) for ASW (John J. McCloy), 1 Dec 41, sub: Rocket airplanes, OCS 21308-7. (6) Memo, OCS for G-3, 3 Feb 42, no sub. OCS 21347-70; also Memo, OCS for Chief of Army Air Forces, 4 Mar 42, sub: Study of Proceedings of Roberts Commission . . ., same file; same for G-3, same daft, sub, and file; same for WPD same date, sub, and file; and same for G-2, same date, sub, and file.
97 Memo, Acts ACofS G-4 for CofS, 20 Aug 41, sub: Revision of Procedure for the Development of Materiel, G-4/28541.
98 Detailed information on the intensive research of this period must be sought in histories of the arms and branches concerned. Sources readily available includs G-4 records, notably G-4/29552, and the AG 580 series.
99 Page 42 of this volume.
page created 12 December 2002